Students’ and Professionals’ Responses to Sexist Comments in Engineering

Although there is evidence that most women with long-term careers in STEM will face some form of sexism, there is little research on how to handle such behaviors. Some situations require intervention by those with authority, some can be confronted directly by individuals, and still others should be ignored. To better understand how students and faculty should respond to sexist comments made by one student to another, we interviewed engineering students, professionals, and faculty, asking them to respond to two different real-life scenarios containing sexist comments. We found that three-fourths of professionals and over one-third of students had experienced inappropriate behaviors that could be labeled as sexist. Furthermore, we found major differences in how students and others perceive particular behaviors. For instance, while close to half of professionals and faculty perceived a sexual joke as “completely inappropriate,” most students indicated that they would either ignore the comment or joke back because the speaker was not serious and had no malicious intent. By contrast, students were more inclined to confront a comment that most professionals perceived as a minor irritation and not worth the effort of responding. Our findings also indicate that faculty members were both concerned about students encountering inappropriate sexist behaviors and confused about what to do. We did find evidence, though, that sexual harassment training can help faculty respond more effectively to such situations. The faculty at one campus that mandates harassment training every two years were more likely than others to take action and were much more aware of HR policies and proper professional expectations. Introduction: Although many perceive less sexism in the workplace today than in the past—to the extent that female engineers often deny sexism exists in their field —if a reader peruses blogs or popular media, she will find many anecdotes of sexism or sexual harassment amongst engineers and scientists 3, 4, 5 In fact, a recent report found that fully 63% of women with degrees in science, engineering, and technology have experienced sexual harassment in their corporate jobs . These encounters with sexism and harassment extend to undergraduate experiences, with studies revealing sexism in engineering textbooks 8, 2 and in the culture in engineering programs. P ge 26434.2 Sexism and sexual harassment are serious issues that need to be addressed, as they are not only unprofessional, but can contribute to high attrition of female engineering students and professionals. In fact, the Committee on Women in Science and Engineering specifically cites sexual harassment as one of the barriers to women in engineering. However, despite evidence of an often sexist culture in engineering school 11, , students are eager to deny or minimize their encounters with sexism or sexual harassment. A report by WECE found that female engineering students feel that “gender-based discrimination existed in their parents’ generation all but has been eliminated” (p. 180). Moreover, Powell, Bagilhole, and Dainty found that undergraduate women “were reluctant to admit they had been discriminated against, frequently seeking ways to justify their colleagues’ actions” 13. One student they interviewed said about her male colleagues, “You get the obvious, you know, bits of perv and stuff like that, but you’ve just got to learn to take it in the spirit that it’s meant” . Is this tendency to deny or minimize sexist or sexual behaviors an appropriate—perhaps necessary—strategy for surviving in a male-dominated field? If not, how should female engineering students handle such behaviors? How should they decide which behaviors cross the line, and which ones can be ignored? And what role should faculty play in confronting sexism or harassment among students? While there seems to be a consensus that women should be prepared to handle these issues in the workplace, most research has been more focused on documenting instances of sexism than on understanding the best response for confronting these behaviors. To better understand how undergraduate engineering students should respond to sexist behaviors, we asked engineering students, faculty, and professionals about perceptions of two specific borderline scenarios involving inappropriate comments made by a male student to a female peer. The first scenario involves explicit sexual comments and can be perceived as implying sexual intimidation; the second accuses a female student of receiving special treatment because of her gender. Our ultimate goal is to help female engineering students better understand what behavior should and should not be tolerated and to formulate the most effective response to this behavior. Methods: Overview: The results in this paper come from a much larger, multi-stage study on gender and interpersonal communication in engineering, where we conducted interviews with engineering professionals, faculty, and students. These interviews averaged 75 minutes and consisted of a mix of openended questions and prompted responses to scenarios describing specific problems (see “discourse completion tasks below”). In this paper, we report on the scenarios and open-ended questions related to issues of sexual harassment. Participants: A total of 96 subjects participated in this study, although not every participant responded to every scenario. We have clarified the numbers of participants responding to each scenario in the results section. Participants consisted of engineering students (19 female; 14 male), faculty members (19 female; 14 male), and professionals (27 female; 11 male). Students and faculty P ge 26434.3 were recruited from universities ranging from research 1 to smaller, liberal arts schools. Students were predominantly sophomores and juniors, while faculty members all had 5+ years of experience. Professionals were recruited from a variety of companies and organizations across the U.S., both corporate and government, and ranging in size. Professionals had 5+ years of experience. Open-ended questions: All participants responded to open-ended questions such as, “Have you ever been judged by how you look rather than by your skills?” and “Have you noticed differences between how men and women communicate?” Discourse completion scenarios: The discourse completion tasks consisted of two scenarios that included scripted responses. Participants were asked to comment on pros and cons of the responses as well as express their own response. The discourse completion task methodology is commonly used in sociolinguistics and applied linguistics research 14, 15, , as it allows for researchers to gain insights into exact phrasings they would use to respond to a situation. The two scenarios we chose are actual situations that students mentioned in an earlier stage of our study. Accompanying these scenarios are potential responses, also based upon student comments in an earlier stage of this study. Participants were invited to comment on their overall thoughts about the scenario, describe whether they had any similar personal experiences, and comment on the appropriateness of the different potential responses. If a participant was not satisfied with any of the potential responses, we asked them to articulate the best way to respond. We chose these two scenarios because students in our earlier research seemed unclear on how they should be handled. Thus, both represent borderline situations. Moreover, these two scenarios represent different types of sexism. The “you just got that grade because you’re a girl” scenario represents a situation in which a student’s gender is being used to call her competence into question. The second “sexual joke” scenario explicitly presents the student as a sexual object and could be perceived as threatening or intimidating. Scenario 1: “You just got that grade because you’re a girl” People will just make crude comments sometimes. “Well, you just got an A because you’re a girl.” You just got an A because of something you wore, or you just got an A because you spent too much time in his office, you know, make crude comments, like, “You’re not actually smart, you’re just getting good grades because you’re a girl.” Responses: a. Just blow it off. I know what I’ve done b. Say “Listen, you don’t know me. I worked just as hard as you did, and I earned my grade. I don’t appreciate those comments.” c. Email the guy and in writing ask him to stop. d. Talk to the professor or someone else in charge and ask for their help in stopping the comments. P ge 26434.4 Scenario 2: Sexual joke We asked respondents to respond to Scenario 2 as either the student or as the student’s professor: I’m the only girl in our lab. There’s other girls in the class, but we have two days of labs, and the guys will make gang-bang jokes and be like “Oh, we have the girl on our team,” Response: As a student: a. Joke back at them. b. Talk to the lab TA and ask that he say something to the group. c. Talk to the professor and ask that he make an announcement to the whole class. Response: As the student’s professor: a. Advise the student to let it go. Explain “You will hear this kind of language from time to time in your career and you need to learn to not let it bother you. You are better than they are.” b. Advise the student to directly confront the students making the jokes, telling them that their jokes are inappropriate and to please stop. c. Ask the student for the names of the individuals who made the comments and then speak to these individuals privately about their behavior. d. Talk to the entire class, saying “It has come to my attention that there has been some inappropriate joking and sexual innuendo in the labs. I want all of you to know that this kind of behavior is very serious and will not be tolerated.” These scenarios were chosen for the discourse completion interviews because they represented striking situati