RUNNING HEAD: Women in STEM

Women in STEM Programs

Tanner Colyn Stallings
University of Texas at El Paso
Alison Wells Zepeda
RWS 1302
 2
Women in STEM

Many people think that Engineering is a profession that is geared more towards men and

neglects women. This is thought due to the staggering difference in women and men engineers in

the workplace. It has gotten so bad that often women engineers have the advantage when it

comes to getting jobs. This is because there are significantly less women in the field and

companies must hire women to show that they are equal opportunity employers. There are also

psychological barriers that women must get past to do as well as men on tests in math and

sciences. In this genre analysis, Why So Few? A study of why there are less women in STEM

fields will be compared to an interview with a female in the engineering program. The two

genres will be analyzed by their structure/Delivery, Audience/purpose, and Rhetorical Issues

The Structure of Why so few? Is of a scientific report. This allows for a structured

argument that is allows for the author to layout all her findings and make the best case for her

cause. The Benefits of this genre are that there are no real limitations that can hold the author

back. There is also no time limit on this genre because it is all written which allows a reader to

read whenever they choose and not have to read it all at once. This genre is very formal which

allows for the information to be taken seriously and not questioned for legitimacy. In the

interview with a female engineering student there are obvious limits in the amount of

information that can be conveyed along with an obvious time limit. The layout of a verbal

interview allows for more specialized questions to be asked. This allows for a better answer to

the questions about the students personal troubles. A draw back to this genre is that it is not as

respected as a research article. The information obtained from the interview could be skewed by

the interviewees prejudices and individual experiences. While both genres give great

information on the topic the legitimacy of the research report allows for a better source than the
 3
Women in STEM

personal interview. While the interview gives a better account of the problems faced at that

university.

The Audience for Why So Few? Is much broader than the interview. Why So Few? Is

free to anyone who wants to read into this subject on the internet. On the other hand, the

interview has an audience of one, the interviewer, unless the interviewer takes some sort of

record of the interview to share with others. The purpose for both genres is to inform the

audience of the struggle women face in the STEM fields. Both pieces also lean towards being

persuasive by trying to persuade the audience into thinking that the barriers women face are not

just mental barriers created by the student but are also barriers that the system puts in place to

hinder womens advancement. The audience for both pieces are looking at the genres to try and

persuade people to believe that women have it harder and that they should try and change the

system to cater more towards women. Most audiences for these genres are looking at these

pieces to find a supporting source to their personal view of women having more trouble than men

in STEM fields. Both genres are informational and lean towards being persuasive. The interview

may be more persuasive due to the questions being asked are loaded questions and sort of form

the interviewees answers to be both biased and persuasive. While the report should be more

neutral so that the research done cannot be discredited.

The interview with a female engineering student has decent credibility because it is an

interview with a person that is having first hand experiences with the problems women face in

the STEM field. The Report has more credibility because it is a scientific study and is done by a

woman who has a PhD in sex discrimination studies. The interview does a better job of stirring

emotion in the audience because it tells of specific troubles that a certain person faces told by the

person this will stir more feelings of empathy for the situation than a research report of the
 4
Women in STEM

situation. The Research report, Why So Few? does a good job of backing up the claims made

by showing evidence from studies and tests that show how it is harder for females to learn in

male dominant environments. On the other hand, the interview has no hard evidence just word of

mouth. Both genres are affective with their use of Ethos, Pathos, and Logos respectively. The

fact that the scientific report did not use personal experiences added to its legitimacy while the

interview used personal experiences as its main strength.

Both the personal interview and Why So Few? achieved their purpose of informing the

audience of the struggles women face in STEM fields. The interview used experiences very well

when trying to persuade the audience while also informing the audience on the struggles females

face in the engineering department at UTEP. While Why So Few? used its legitimacy of being

a scientific study to show how being a woman in a STEM field is more challenging. The fact that

Why So Few? is an actual report on a scientific study gives it the edge as a better conveyer of

information. In the bigger picture both genres will help spread awareness for women in STEM

fields if circulated right. The personal appeal from the interview can help students at UTEP see

what challenges women face in the engineering department along whit what they as other

engineering students can do to help break down some of those barriers. Why So Few? can be

used to show professors how to help female engineering students excel in the classroom through

the findings of the study.

 5
Women in STEM

REFERENCE

Hill, C. (n.d.). Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics.

Retrieved October 21, 2016, from http://www.aauw.org/research/why-so-few/