Open AccessReply [to “Comment on ‘Academic specialties in U.S. are shifting: Hiring of women geoscientists is stagnating’” by John C. Steinmetz]
Author(s) -
Holmes Mary Anne,
O'Connell Suzanne
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
eos, transactions american geophysical union
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.316
H-Index - 86
eISSN - 2324-9250
pISSN - 0096-3941
DOI - 10.1029/2004eo060005
Subject(s) - position (finance) , institution , government (linguistics) , academic institution , pipeline (software) , public relations , demographic economics , political science , operations research , management , law , economics , engineering , mechanical engineering , finance , linguistics , philosophy
We appreciate John C. Steinmetz's comments and would like to add that we reported numbers of women at different types of institutions, but offered no explanations for the numbers. We still lack critical data that would enable geoscientists to explain the numbers, but we do hope that the numbers generate discussion, self‐examination, and more (and appropriate) data collection on this issue. Missing data that might help explain the numbers include, “How many women are in the applicant pool for a given academic/survey/industry/government position?” If an applicant pool does reflect the degree recipient pool appropriate to the position, but hiring rates are lower, then the kink in the pipeline is occurring at hiring. Is this due to low numbers of offers being made to women, or to women turning offers down? Each institution can collect and examine this data to find its unique answers and appropriate solutions.