If you grab table 33, you ostensibly have the number of computer science degrees awarded between 1966 and 2010. If you grab the xls, hey, you can add them up. Between 1966 and 1985, there were ~195,000 bachelors degrees awarded in computer science fields (exactly what fields would depend on the NSF methodology). About 61,000 went to women.
You have an article talking about keypunching requiring minimal training, with about 324,000 data entry keyers working in the U.S. in 1984.
I have trouble believing the narrative that the women earning CS degrees in the 70s were, as a group, ignorant of the opportunity to just go directly to data entry (which was obviously there, there were more people doing data entry than had university CS degrees).
The specific concern I was addressing in the first part of my post was the drop in female CS majors that occurred in the mid 1980s. I was only addressing the difference in graduates between then and now (not all female CS graduates by any means) and only what I believe to be the largest factor (as there were certainly other economic and social factors that affected the situation).
Considering 1985 and 2007 (1985 having the largest amount of female graduates in math and CS), we see women going from 38.8% to 25.4% of the labor force. All we need to show is that the difference in female math and CS graduates in 1985 were primarily mainframe operators and/or keypunch operators (although the number of graduates in math could affect the CS numbers). In addition, I nowhere stated that women of that period were ignorant of the requirements of keypunching.
My mother's earnings as a mainframe operator and keypunch operator with a degree in CS far outstripped the earning potential of someone with just a keypunching certificate. If others were aware of this difference, then getting the degree would be worth the extra work (keeping in mind that a degree also carries the possibility for promotion). This is not much different from women getting bachelors degrees only to work at secretarial positions today or pursuing a masters in Nursing when an associates degree suffices for all non-management jobs.
The second part of my post was focused on the overall numbers (that remaining 25% of women who have always worked in CS) and a potential reason for the relative stability of that number over time (presuming the peak and decline in the 1970-80s can be accounted for independently).
You spent a whole paragraph saying As the 80s progressed, computer jobs shifted. Data entry no longer required a CS degree, so although the number of women doing that job increased, they were relegated to other non-CS degrees (and weren't really interested in CS to start with). but now are talking about "keypunching certificates".
Which is it?
Note that the Tribune article discusses a woman who learned keypunching at a commercial high school in 1972.
All we need to show is that the difference in female math and CS graduates in 1985 were primarily mainframe operators and/or keypunch operators
The NSF study has an appendix showing the degrees which are lumped under "Computer Science".
One such degree is indeed "Data Processing, Data Processing Technician".
Unfortunately the breakdown of exact degrees isn't available, but given this information it's entirely possible that a shift away from such fields plays a factor in the number of women with "Computer Science" degrees.
It's not at all an unreasonable theory to consider it may be a factor.
I wonder how many data processing bachelor degrees were awarded by the subset of postsecondary institutions that were accredited at the college level by an agency recognized by the Secretary, U.S. Department of Education. prior to 1990? Thousands seems unlikely, but I don't have any data.
Comments
This story links Planet Money, which leaned on NSF statistics, I guess the ones published here:
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf13327/content.cfm?pub_id=42...
If you grab table 33, you ostensibly have the number of computer science degrees awarded between 1966 and 2010. If you grab the xls, hey, you can add them up. Between 1966 and 1985, there were ~195,000 bachelors degrees awarded in computer science fields (exactly what fields would depend on the NSF methodology). About 61,000 went to women.
If you look here:
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1987-08-02/news/870226065...
You have an article talking about keypunching requiring minimal training, with about 324,000 data entry keyers working in the U.S. in 1984.
I have trouble believing the narrative that the women earning CS degrees in the 70s were, as a group, ignorant of the opportunity to just go directly to data entry (which was obviously there, there were more people doing data entry than had university CS degrees).
The specific concern I was addressing in the first part of my post was the drop in female CS majors that occurred in the mid 1980s. I was only addressing the difference in graduates between then and now (not all female CS graduates by any means) and only what I believe to be the largest factor (as there were certainly other economic and social factors that affected the situation).
Considering 1985 and 2007 (1985 having the largest amount of female graduates in math and CS), we see women going from 38.8% to 25.4% of the labor force. All we need to show is that the difference in female math and CS graduates in 1985 were primarily mainframe operators and/or keypunch operators (although the number of graduates in math could affect the CS numbers). In addition, I nowhere stated that women of that period were ignorant of the requirements of keypunching.
My mother's earnings as a mainframe operator and keypunch operator with a degree in CS far outstripped the earning potential of someone with just a keypunching certificate. If others were aware of this difference, then getting the degree would be worth the extra work (keeping in mind that a degree also carries the possibility for promotion). This is not much different from women getting bachelors degrees only to work at secretarial positions today or pursuing a masters in Nursing when an associates degree suffices for all non-management jobs.
The second part of my post was focused on the overall numbers (that remaining 25% of women who have always worked in CS) and a potential reason for the relative stability of that number over time (presuming the peak and decline in the 1970-80s can be accounted for independently).
You spent a whole paragraph saying As the 80s progressed, computer jobs shifted. Data entry no longer required a CS degree, so although the number of women doing that job increased, they were relegated to other non-CS degrees (and weren't really interested in CS to start with). but now are talking about "keypunching certificates".
Which is it?
Note that the Tribune article discusses a woman who learned keypunching at a commercial high school in 1972.
All we need to show is that the difference in female math and CS graduates in 1985 were primarily mainframe operators and/or keypunch operators
So get to it.
The NSF study has an appendix showing the degrees which are lumped under "Computer Science".
One such degree is indeed "Data Processing, Data Processing Technician".
Unfortunately the breakdown of exact degrees isn't available, but given this information it's entirely possible that a shift away from such fields plays a factor in the number of women with "Computer Science" degrees.
It's not at all an unreasonable theory to consider it may be a factor.
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf13327/content.cfm?pub_id=42...
I wonder how many data processing bachelor degrees were awarded by the subset of postsecondary institutions that were accredited at the college level by an agency recognized by the Secretary, U.S. Department of Education. prior to 1990? Thousands seems unlikely, but I don't have any data.