McGill University

McGill Society of Physics Students

Equity Report

January 17, 2013

Report

On the 11th of October 2012, The McGill Daily published an article entitled Fine Men, Sexist Pigs highlighting, what the author identied, as misogyny within the Physics department at McGill University. The article, written by a third year Physics major, was inammatory enough to catch the attention of individuals both within and beyond the department. In the month prior to the publication of the article, events such as the shooting of Malala Yousafzai in Pakistan drew attention of the public eye to female inequality. Following this paradigm shift, students of McGill University responded with several positive initiatives over the course of the Fall 2012 semester. This included, but was not limited to, the campus wide event Who Needs Feminism which sought to increase awareness of this issue to both genders; the event had an overwhelming response. For the readers reference, the initiatives website can be found at the following url: http://wnfmcgill.tumblr.com/. Interdepartmental initiatives have included an event organized by Amina Hussein (U3 Honours Physics Student) entitled Physical Sciences Career Paths: A series of Women Speakers, which occurred on October 29th. Additionally, a Women in Physics Mentoring Program is currently in development to provide a venue for female role models under the direction of Professor Sabrina Leslie and Professor Tracy Webb. In response to the article, the McGill Society of Physics Students (hereafter referred to as MSPS) conducted a survey, as suggested by the department, to identify the consensus on the subject among undergraduate students in the Physics Department. This report will attempt to present the results in a relevant fashion. Proceeding the analysis of said results, the corrective measures for which the MSPS considers appropriate will be summarized. For the purpose of brevity, the survey contents, construction and results can be found respectively in Appendix A and B. To preface the following discussion of the survey results, the MSPS would like to clarify that it has not made any rigorous statistical analysis but will instead present generalized conclusions. The rst statistic considered upon closure of the survey was the demographic of the respondents. It was completed by 96 undergraduate students: 28 female and 68 males an equal proportion of which were Majors and Honours students. Both the closed form and written response questions identied the general sentiment that gender equality in the undergraduate physics programs was a social concern as opposed to academic one. Students hypothesized several possible explanations for the low female representation within the McGill undergraduate physics programs. Students did not, however, attribute accountability to the Physics department for this imbalance. There were three main reasons identied in the survey: socio-cultural conditioning at a young age, innate dierences in interest, and an underlying belief that there is a dierence in intellectual capacity between genders. Several students referenced the hypothesis of Harvard University President, Lawrence Summers, that there is an innate dierence in mathematical and computational ability between genders. This was also recognized in the survey responses where a small percentage of both male and female students believe in this innate dierence. The majority of survey questions were answered uniformly between genders. More notably, the only question that had a signicant dierence between male and female respondents was Do you think males and females have a dierent capacity of intelligence? A larger proportion of male respondents identied a dierence in intellectual capacity. Nevertheless, Do you believe that your gender limits you academically or occupationally? was answered uniformly in the negative by both genders. Considering now the social implications, the question Has a sexual or gender directed comment led to a decrease in your self-condence at school? revealed that students did not feel that gender related remarks aected their capabilities or more importantly self condence in their studies. The survey results do, however, identify several instances of uncomfortable and termed obnoxious 1

behaviour encountered in common areas such as the Physics Lounge (Rutherford Physics bldg room 117). Although the article Fine Men, Sexist Pigs seems to identify a rather exaggerated instance, the sentiment is shared by several other female students in reference to the common areas. The MSPS identies the current issue of gender equality in the McGill Physics Department as a social societal issue among the physical sciences and intends on addressing it as such. The MSPS has discussed several tactics in order to encourage and support the female demography within the Physics department. The MSPS aims to assist with and publicize initiatives that encourage and support females that are currently enrolled in an undergraduate physics program. Further, when organizing events the MSPS will consider the male to female representation. This may include the partnership with other departments to increase student ratios or in the academic frame seeking both male and female speakers for academic lectures. The MSPS hopes that this will increase the comfort and condence of the departments female students and provide them with successful female role models within the physical sciences. In reference to derogatory language and gender specic comments in common areas, the MSPS believes it can be addressed by increasing the awareness of acceptable conduct followed by peer reinforcement. Although this is an ongoing concern that must be revisited, the MSPS believes there are no ocial actions required by the Physics Department or the McGill Society of Physics Students in response to the article Fine Men, Sexist Pigs.

Survey Contents

The survey consisted of the following questions: 1. What motivated you to enroll in a degree in physics? 2. How much gender equality do you think there is in the world now? 1 (Very Little) 5 (Complete Equality) 3. Do you think males and females have a dierent capacity of intelligence? 4. Do you think gender equality can ever be achieved? 5. There is currently 21.9% female enrollment in undergraduate physics. Do you think that there will ever be an equal ratio of males to females in the department? 6. Which gender do you feel is the cause of sexism? 1 (Male) 5 (Female) 7. Have you ever felt uncomfortable about a remark directed at a particular sex? 8. Do you believe that your gender limits you academically or occupationally? 9. Do you think that gender specic remarks are acceptable if they are intended jokingly? 10. Has a sexual or gender directed comment led to a decrease in your self-condence at school? 11. How long do you spend in the Physics Lounge (RPHYS room 117) on average per week? 12. If you do not visit the lounge frequently, do you have a specic reason? 13. Do you believe there is a specic cause for the signicant dierence between male and female representation in the physics department? 14. What are your reasons for your above responses?

Survey Construction

The MSPS modelled its survey on human resources questionnaires. The survey was conducted anonymously and was available on the Google Surveys platform. A point was made to disassociate the survey from McGill branding to encourage students to respond without fearing academic consequence. The society distributed the survey via the LISTSERV application to all students enrolled in an undergraduate physics program. The respondents were required to specify their gender, current enrollment year and program, such that demographic statistics could be considered. The survey was open for seventy-two hours at which point response rate plateaued. During this period, the survey was completed by 96 students, 28 of which were female. It is also noted that there was an equal response rate from Majors, Honours, and Joint Honours students. Minor students were not surveyed. The initial questions, second to fourth inclusive, intended to identify any underlying bias the respondent may possess. The remainder of the survey related to the respondents perception of equality within the department and quality of experience in common areas. The common areas were specically addressed due to comments in the article Fine Men, Sexist Pigs; where, the lounge was depicted as a female-unfriendly area. Finally, the respondent was given the opportunity to further explain the responses to the questions and additional insights they had on the topic.