[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: How to increase the diversity of Wikimedia technical contributors and staff?

Begin forwarded message: From: Victoria Coleman &lt;vcoleman(a)wikimedia.org&gt; Subject: Re: How to increase the diversity of Wikimedia technical contributors and staff? Date: August 9, 2017 at 2:33:03 AM GMT-4 To: Pine W &lt;wiki.pine(a)gmail.com&gt; Cc: "Addressing gender equity and exploring ways to increase the participation of women within Wikimedia projects." &lt;gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org&gt;rg>, Angel Lewis &lt;alewis(a)wikimedia.org&gt;rg>, Maggie Dennis &lt;mdennis(a)wikimedia.org&gt; Pine, thank you for bringing up this important topic. The Google internal memo certainly brought the diversity issue in sharp relief. I don’t profess to be an expert on diversity in STEM but I do want to share some thoughts based on my own professional experience as well as some academic research that I have recently come across. The first thing to note is participation of women in computer science is actually growing. For example, in 2015 Computer Science was the top major for women at Stanford (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-women-technology-stanford-idUSKCN0S32F020… <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-women-technology-stanford-idUSKCN0S32F020151009>). I serve on the Advisory Board of the Computer Engineering Department at Santa Clara University and although the numbers are not as striking, the proportion of women has been steadily increasing. Of course women represent only one dimension of the diversity issue but perhaps the patterns here may be instructive for other groups. So I don’t think this is a “pipeline” issue any more. I am sure it once was (certainly it was when I started my career) but it is not so now. So if more women and minorities enter STEM professions why is it that we have so little representation of these groups in mid and senior levels? Well, the answer seems to be that people in these groups leave STEM careers in much greater numbers than other groups. So it seems to be a problem of retention vs intake. Academic research that I have recently come across from UC Irvine, MIT, Rice and McGill makes for interesting reading as we try to unpack why this is the case. In [1], the authors make a shocking (to me) statement: “The field of engineering is a particularly robust site for understanding gendered processes of professional socialization because it remains the most gender-segregated field among STEM occupations at all career stages” Why this is the case is certainly a topic that merits both research, analysis and action. In [2] the researchers found that unfairness drives turnover and that unfairness is most pronounced in the tech industry especially in women of all backgrounds and underrepresented men of color. [3] argues that professional role confidence, in other words an individual’s confidence in their ability to successfully fulfill the roles, competencies, and identity features of a profession, and women’s lack of this confidence , compared to men, reduces their likelihood of remaining in engineering majors and careers. These are my thoughts and I warmly welcome those of others in the community. We have a lot of work to do to understand the diversity dynamics in our communities. The Foundation is committed and actively engaged in understanding the diversity challenges within staff and the volunteer community. Some of our initiatives are captured in https://office.wikimedia.org/wiki/Diversity_and_Inclusion <https://office.wikimedia.org/wiki/Diversity_and_Inclusion> but I am sure there is lot more that can and should be done. Best regards, Victoria [1] C. Seron, S.S. Silbey, E. Cech, B. Rubineau, Persistence Is Cultural: Professional Socialization and the Reproduction of Sex Segregation, Work and Occupations, Vol. 43(2) 178-214, 2016 [2] Tech Leavers Study: A first-of-its-kind analysis of why people voluntarily left jobs in tech, Ford Foundation, Kapor Center for Social Impact, April 27, 2017 [3] E. Cech, B. Rubineau, S. Silbey, C. Serron, Professional Role Confidence and Gendered Persistence in Engineering, American Sociological Review, Vol 76(5), 641-666, 2011