09.01.2023 International Scientific Journal "Science and Innovation". Series B. Volume 2 Issue 1
Abstract. The role of Uzbek women has proliferated sharply during last years. Much of the future job growth is projected in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Yet the scarcity of women in STEM careers remains stark. This article describes about what kind of issues face women in Uzbekistan and women scientists in Uzbekistan and importance of encouraging young scientists.
Keywords: women scientists, STEM, research.
1. 20.08.2002, Ulmas Gafurov, Women in physics in Uzbekistan 2. 2018 Profiles of women scientists in Asia 3. 2008 Frehill, Di Fabio, Hill, Trager, & Buono 4. 2014 Nilanjana Dasgupta1 and Jane G. Stout Girls and Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: STEMing the Tide and Broadening Participation in STEM Careers 5. Ates, G., Holländer, K., Koltcheva, N., Krstic, S., & Parada, F. (2011). Eurodoc Survey I: The First Eurodoc Survey on Doctoral Candidates in Twelve European Countries. Brussels: Eurodoc. 6. Byrne, J., Jørgensen, T., & Loukkola, T. (2013). Quality Assurance in Doctoral Education – results of the ARDE project. Brussels: European University Association. 7. ENQA. (2015). Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG). Brussels: EURASHE. 8. EUA. (2010a). Salzburg II recommendations. European Universities Achievements Since 2005 in Implementing the Salzburg Principles. Brussels: European University Association. 9. EUA. (2010b). Trends 2010: A decade of change in European Higher Education. Brussels: European University Association. 10. European Commission. (2008). The European Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning (EQF). 11. European Commission. (2011). Principles for Innovative Doctoral Training. Brussels. 12. European University Association. (2006). Quality Culture in European Universities: A Bottom-Up Approach. 13. Naqvi, N. H., & Kheyfets, I. (2014). Uzbekistan: Modernizing Tertiary Education. 14. UNESCO. (2013). The International Standard Classification of Education 2011. Comparative Social Research. 15. http://doi.org/10.1108/S0195-6310(2013)0000030017 16. Wan Endut, W. J., Abdullah, M., & Husain, N. (2000). Benchmarking institutions of higher education. Total Quality Management, 11(4–6), 796–799. http://doi.org/10.1080/09544120050008237 17. World Bank, World Development Report 2012: Gender Equality and Development (World Bank, Washington, DC, 2011); http://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/book/10.1596/ 978-0-8213- 8810-5. 18. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, The State of Food and Agriculture 2010-2011: Women in Agriculture: Closing the Gender Gap for Development. (FAO, Rome, 2011); available at www.fao.org/docrep/013/i2050e/i2050e00.htm. 19. C. M. Blackden, Q. Wodon, Eds., Gender, Time Use, and Poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa, working paper (World Bank, Washington, DC, 2006). 20. Grameen Foundation, Women, Mobile Phones, and Savings: A Grameen Foundation Case Study (Grameen Foundation USA, Washington, DC, 2012). 21. World Bank, Voice and Agency: Empowering Women and Girls for Shared Prosperity (World Bank, Washington, DC, 2014). 22. D. Thomas, in Intrahousehold Resource Allocation in Developing Countries: Models, Methods and Policy, L. Haddad, J. Hoddinott, H. Alderman, Eds. (Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, MD, 1997), pp. 142–164. 23. R. L. Blumberg, Ed., Engendering Wealth and Well-Being: Empowerment for Global Change (Latin America in Global Perspective) (Westview Press, Boulder, CO, 1995). 24. E. Duflo, “Women’s empowerment and economic development,” working paper 17702 (National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA, 2011); available at www.nber.org/papers/w17702. 25. B. K. Herz, G. B. Sperling, What Works in Girls’ Education: Evidence and Policies from the Developing World (Council on Foreign Relations, New York, 2004); available at http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=7a0W_ bqvzA0C&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=%22girls+may+seem+overwhelming,+a+strategic+mix+o f+proven+policies%22+%22the+Carnegie+Corporation+for+their+%EF%AC%81nancial+s upport+of+this%22+%22of+the%22+%22Center+for+Research+on+Women.+For+providin g+extensive+materials,%22+&ots=UdDRvUlTXe&sig=ypRBzWhCFGrNZSkWTqJ2gD0ny k8. 26. R. Levine, Center for Global Development, Girls Count: A Global Investment & Action Agenda (Center for Global Development, Washington, DC, 2009); available at www.coalitionforadolescentgirls.org/sites/default/files/Girls_Count_2009.pdf. 27. M. O’Sullivan, A. Rao, R. Banerjee, K. Gulati, M. Vinez, “Levelling the Field: Improving Opportunities for Women Farmers in Africa,” working paper 86039 (World Bank, Washington, DC, 2014); available at http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2014/01/19243625/levellingfieldimprovingopportunities-women-farmers-africa. 28. M. Corroon et al., Matern. Child Health J. 18, 307–315 (2014). 29. M. R. Shroff et al., Soc. Sci. Med. 73, 447–455 (2011). 30. L. C. Smith, F. Kahn, T. R. Frankenberger, A. Wadud, Admissible Evidence in the Court of Development Evaluation? The Impact of Care’s Shouhardo Project on Child Stunting in Bangladesh (Institute of Development Studies, Brighton, UK, 2011) 31. www.aassa.asia 32. Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261-271. 33. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497-529. 34. Buck, G. A., Leslie-Pelecky, D., & Kirby, S. K. (2002). Bringing female scientists into the elementary classroom: Confronting the strength of elementary students’ stereotypical images of scientists. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 14, 1-9. 35. Cheryan, S., Plaut, V. C., Davies, P. G., & Steele, C. M. (2009). Ambient belonging: How stereotypical cues impact gender participation in computer science. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 1045-1060. 36. Daniell, E. (2006). Every other Thursday. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 37. Dasgupta, N. (2011). Ingroup experts and peers as social vaccines who inoculate the selfconcept: The stereotype inoculation model. Psychological Inquiry, 22, 231-246. 38. Dasgupta, N., Hunsinger, M., & Scircle, M. (2014). Stereotype inoculation in adolescence: The effect of teacher gender on adolescents’ academic self-concept and beliefs about science. Unpublished manuscript, University of Massachusetts Am-herst. 39. Dasgupta, N., Scircle, M., & Hunsinger, M. (2014). The effect of peers on women in engineering. Unpublished manuscript, University of Massachusetts Amherst. 40. Diekman, A. B., Brown, E. R., Johnston, A. M., & Clark, E. K. (2010). Seeking congruity between goals and roles: A new look at why women opt out of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers. Psychological Science, 21, 1051-1057. 41. Durik, A. M., & Eccles, J. S. (2006). Classroom activities in math and reading in early, middle, and late elementary school. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 41, 33-41. 42. Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social–cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256-273. 43. Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573-598. 44. Eaton, Y. M., Mitchell, M. L., & Jolley, J. M. (1991). Gender differences in the development of relationships during late adolescence. Adolescence, 26, 565-568. 45. Eccles, J. S. (1994). Understanding women’s educational and occupational choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 585-609. 46. Eccles, J. S., Jacobs, J. E., & Harold, R. D. (1990). Gender role stereotypes, expectancy effects, and parents’ socialization of gender differences. Journal of Social Issues, 46, 183- 201. 47. Else-Quest, N. M., Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. C. (2010). Cross-national patterns of gender differences in mathematics: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 103-127. 48. Freeman, T. M., Anderman, L. H., & Jensen, J. M. (2007). Sense of belonging in college freshmen at the classroom and campus levels. Journal of Experimental Education, 75, 203- 220. 49. Frehill, L. M., Di Fabio, N., Hill, S., Trager, K., & Buono, J. (2008, summer). Women in engineering: A review of the 2007 literature. SWE Magazine, 54(3), 6-30. 50. Frome, P. M., & Eccles, J. S. (1998). Parents’ influence on children’s achievement-related perceptions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 435-452. 51. Geist, E. A., & King, M. (2008). Different, not better: Gender differences in mathematics learning and achievement. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 35, 43-52. 52. Gentry, M., & Owen, S. V. (2004). Secondary student perceptions of classroom quality: Instrumentation and differences between advanced/honors and nonhonors classes. Journal of Advanced Academics, 16, 20-29. 53. Golden, C., & Rouse, C. (2000). Orchestrating impartiality: The impact of “blind” auditions on female musicians. The American Economic Review, 90, 715-750. 54. Halpern, D. F. (2004). A cognitive-process taxonomy for sex differences in cognitive abilities. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 135-139. 55. Herbert, J., & Stipek, D. T. (2005). The emergence of gender differences in children’s perceptions of their academic competence. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 26, 276-295. 56. Hidi, S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Motivating the academically unmotivated: A critical issue for the 21st century. Review of Educational Research, 70, 151-179. 57. Hill, C., Corbett, C., & St. Rose, A. (2010). Why so few? Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: American Association of University Women. 58. Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., & Lamon, S. J. (1990). Gender differences in mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 139-155. 59. Kanter, N. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York, NY: Basic Books. 60. Konrad, A. M., Ritchie, J. E., Lieb, P., & Corrigall, E. (2000). Sex differences and similarities in job attribute preferences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 593- 641. 61. Leaper, C., Farkas, T., & Brown, C. S. (2012). Adolescent girls’ experiences and genderrelated beliefs in relation to their motivation in math/science and English. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41, 268-282. 62. Mason, M. A., & Goulden, M. (2002). Do babies matter? The effect of family formation on the lifelong careers of academic men and women. Academe, 88(6), 21-27. 63. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (1999). A study of the status of women faculty in science at MIT. Cambridge: School of Science, Committee on Women Faculty, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 64. Mavriplis, C., Heller, R., Sorensen, C., & Snyder, H. D. (2005, June). The FORWARD to professorship workshop. Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, American Society for Engineering Education. 65. Mitchell, M. (1993). Situational interest: Its multifaceted structure in the secondary school mathematics classroom. Journal of Education Psychology, 85, 424-436. 66. Miyake, A., Kost-Smith, L. E., Finkelstein, N. D., Pollock, S. J., Cohen, G. L., & Ito, T. A. (2010). Reducing the gender achievement gap in college science: A classroom study of values affirmation. Science, 330, 1234-1237. 67. Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109, 16474-16479. 68. Murphy, M., Steele, C. M., & Gross, J. (2007). Signaling threat: How situational cues affect women in math, science, and engineering settings. Psychological Science, 18, 879-885. 69. National Academies. (2010). Rising above the gathering storm, revisited: Rapidly approaching Category 5. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. 70. National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). Digest of education statistics. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_318.10.asp 71. National Research Council. (2009). Gender differences at critical transitions in the careers of science, engineering, and mathematics faculty. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. 72. National Science Foundation. (2003). New formulas for America’s workforce: Girls in science and engineering (Publication No. 03-207). Arlington, VA: Author. 73. National Science Foundation. (2013). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: Women as a percentage of full-time, full professors with science, engineering, and health doctorates, by institution of employment: 1993-2010. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/2013/digest/theme5.cfm 74. Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 44-59. 75. Patrick, H., Ryan, A. M., & Kaplan, A. (2007). Early adolescents’ perceptions of the classroom social environment, motivational beliefs, and engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 83-98. 76. Post-Kammer, P. (1987). Intrinsic and extrinsic work values and career maturity of 9th-and 11th-grade boys and girls. Journal of Counseling & Development, 65, 420-423. 77. Riegle-Crumb, C., Farkas, G., & Muller, C. (2006). The role of gender and friendship in advanced course taking. Sociology of Education, 79, 206-228. 78. Rosser, S. V. (2004). The science glass ceiling: Academic women scientists and the struggle to succeed. New York, NY: Routledge. 79. Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (2001). Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 743-762. 80. Ryan, A. M., & Patrick, H. (2001). The classroom social environment and changes in adolescents’ motivation and engagement during middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 437-460. 81. Simpkins, S. D., Davis-Kean, P. E., & Eccles, J. S. (2006). Math and science motivation: A longitudinal examination of the links between choices and beliefs. Developmental Psychology, 42, 70-83. 82. Stout, J. G., Dasgupta, N., Hunsinger, M., & McManus, M. A. (2011). STEMing the tide: Using ingroup experts to inoculate women’s self-concept in science, technology 83. Stout, J. G., Ito, T. A., Finkelstein, N. D., & Pollock, S. J. (2013, January). How women’s endorsement of gendered science stereotypes contributes to the gender gap in STEM participation. Presentation at the annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, New Orleans, LA. 84. Su, R., Rounds, J., & Armstrong, P. I. (2009). Men and things, women and people: A metaanalysis of sex differences in interests. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 859-884. 85. Trix, F., & Psenka, C. (2003). Exploring the color of glass: Letters of recommendation for female and male medical faculty. Discourse & Society, 14, 191-220. 86. Wang, M.-T. (2012). Educational and career interests in math: A longitudinal examination of the links between classroom environment, motivational beliefs, and interests. Developmental Psychology, 48, 1643-1657. 87. Wenneras, C., & Wold, A. (1997). Nepotism and sexism in peer review. Nature, 387(6631), 341-343. 88. Wolf-Wendel, L., Twombly, S., & Rice, S. (2003). The two-body problem: Dual-careercouple hiring practices in higher education. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. 89. Yee, D. K., & Eccles, J. S. (1992). Parent perceptions and attribu-tions for children’s math achievement. Sex Roles, 19, 317-333.
SCIENCE & INNOVATION