Research Methods.htm

What Works?

Home

Introduction

Research Methods

Results

Conclusions and Recommendations

Research Methods

Site visits to nine schools

Undergraduate physics major, but no graduate program in physics

Mixed demographics within this constraint (see Table 1)

Five “successful” schools chosen from a list of schools with a high percentage of female majors, typically about 40% (Ivie and Stowe, 2000).

Four “typical” schools chosen to have a percentage of female majors near the national average, typically about 16%.

All institutions and individuals are confidential.

Table 1. Characteristics of Schools

High		5
Typical		4
Branch Campuses of State Universities 2
Independent Universities		3
Liberal Arts Colleges		4
Private		5
Public		4
Historically Black		2
Predominantly White		7
Secular		7
Religious *		2
Admision Criteria**
	Most Difficult	2
	Very Difficult	2
	Moderately Difficult	3
	Minimally Difficult	1
	Non-competitive	1
Expense***
	Very Expensive (>$30k) 1
	Expensive ($20-30k)	3
	Moderately Expensive ($10-20k) 1
	Inexpensive (<$10k)	4

* we include here only school where religious affiliation had a significant impact on the campus life
** Criteria according to Peterson (College Blue Book, 2003)
***Comprehensive fee for instate students

Site visit team of 2 – 3 woman physicists

One team member varied from one site visit to another, two participated in all visits

One team member recently received her BA in physics, and was viewed by the students as a contemporary.

Site visit structure

Demographic and curricular information collected from each school prior to visit

Two day visit to each school

Individual interviews with Dean and Department Chair

Group interviews with male and female faculty members by faculty team members. Men and women usually interviewed separately

Group interviews with male and female physics majors by BA-level team member

Department tour to view lab, classroom and informal students space

Observations of introductory and advanced classes and labs

Data Analysis

Qualitative analysis trades rich and multilayered experience of a small sample for simpler results from large sample.

Previous experience with site visits (Dresselhaus, et al., 1995; Whitten, 2000) shows that they are an excellent way to get the “feel” of a department.

Data consists of

Daily debriefing meetings of site visit team during a visit.

Notes and taped interviews

Data analysis performed by NUD*IST (Miles & Weitzman, 1995) to cross reference information