Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
Hi, I'm female and am not an active code4lib participant. I'm subscribed to the code4lib listserv and don't religiously read the discussion but do scan them every so often in case something in my area comes up. I didn't take the survey because I didn't think it was aimed at me. However, I noticed the survey summary indicated some distress about women not considering themselves part of the code4lib community. I don't know if it's helpful or not, but here's more about me: Why do I subscribe to the code4lib listserv? My main job in my library is to make sure the integrated library system functions as well as it can. I read many tech and library blogs and subscribe to several listservs in order to stay aware of possibilities. While I don't consider myself a coder, I enjoy watching the innovative projects various libraries have been working on. If the projects look like they might work well in my library environment, I bring them up with my manager and we discuss whether or not it fits and, if so, what the best way to proceed is. Our emphasis is on creating a stable and sustainable environment so if I get hit by a bus, the library can still function. This means we don't do a lot of customization which has both its up and down sides. I don't attend the conferences, why? I get one conference every year (or every other year? I lose track). There are other conferences that are more relevant to me so those are the ones I go to. If I had the extra time and money, I'd love to come to a code4lib conference. They sound fun but not entirely practical for my library. Why don't I present at the conference? Well, the obvious reason is that I don't go to the conference. However, to be honest, I've only done one presentation for a local users group. I don't present because most of what I do I've gotten from somewhere else. My ILS is very stable and it has some custom features but for the most part it isn't very innovative. I'm not scared of presenting, I just don't have much to say**. Do I feel intimidated being a woman in IT? No. In my undergrad computer classes I was often the only female. Occasionally there would be a female electrical engineer or two but I was the only female computer science major (though, understand, I went to a small school where class sizes ranged form 15-20 people). I understand that some (many?) women have had bad experiences and that is horrible. However, I have trouble relating because almost every person I have encountered in my professional life has a driving need to make the library the best possible experience for our users. It doesn't matter if I'm female as long as I can fix the problem. Who knows, at some point my job focus may shift and I may become more involved in this community. We are looking for a new ILS with plans to migrate in 2014 and that may open up a lot of possibilities for the future. Gem Stone-Logan High Plains Library District http://www.mylibrary.us/ *To me a coder is someone who lives, eats, and breathes code. Yes, I can code if I have to but I'm not passionate about it. I have a very strong c++ accent with whatever language I use because that was the first programming language I learned. I know enough to be able to read other people's code and have a fair idea of what's going on. The closest thing I do to coding these days is tweaking the XSL files for HIP (annoying) or running SQL reports (which are really fun). ** Well, much to say that's actually productive. I can rant for hours about the various peculiarities of our current ILS.
[CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
Well, I am (a) female and (b) a survey non-respondent and (c) do not currently consider myself a member of the code4lib community. Am I representative of these groups? I have no idea. But since Rosy is my former colleague and I still miss her, I thought I would chime in. Why do I not consider myself a member of the code4lib community? (And given that, why am I on this list?) At the time that I joined code4lib, I was working for a library vendor. Although I am an everything but code person, I worked regularly with writers of library code. I aspired to write code in the future. I wanted to maintain a vague awareness of library code trends. Many people I admired were members of code4lib. It seemed like a cool place to be. I would say that my choice to follow code4lib was aspirational. I aspire to be more like the people in code4lib ... someday. But I'm not actually a library coder. At the moment, I'm something like a sales engineer. My daily concerns are far from the daily traffic on code4lib. This is why I don't attend the conference and I would never suggest a conference presentation. I'm not sure why more women don't suggest conference presentations. If I had something to contribute, I'd be right up there. I am not the kind of person who worries about whether I have something to say nor do I care if 75% of the people at a conference are men. My guess is that it may be related to a gender gap even within library technology. Lots of women work in library technology -- as project managers, systems librarians, webmasters, support, training, and application analysts. But as the work gets more technical -- meaning -- programming, DBA, system administration, authentication, network engineering -- the workforce gets more male. The folks doing that kind of work in libraries are also the folks who are most likely to (a) have something very technical to present and (b) get funding to attend the conference. My suspicion is that there are many women working in library systems for whom code4lib is relevant but who are not primarily programmers. So, I guess I wonder how much of the code4lib gender gap is a reflection of the coding gender gap. That gap is real and the fact that fewer women have programming skills than men is (to my mind) a real problem. But it is not necessarily a code4lib problem. While I personally have no desire to become a software engineer, there all kinds of incredibly stupid things I can't get done because I lack basic skills. This is inefficient and annoying and yet ... coding leads to jobs where you continue to improve your code skills while non-coding leads to jobs like mine. At some point, you have to make the jump. For me, that point has not yet arrived b/c while I love technology, I do not quite love it enough to spend my extremely limited free time Learning Perl. I am, for better or worse, the kind of person who learns my technical skills *in context**. So far, in my work and personal life, the context for Perl has not yet arrived. (Being close friends with 3 or 4 Perl programmers who happily write me scripts whenever I need them is also not helpful.) That said, I consider myself a technical person. I spend my entire day talking to programmers, network engineers, application analysts, web services folks, LDAP geeks, and CIOs. I explain our technology and they explain their environment and together, we find a way. Then, I explain all of it again to a bunch of people who attended the call but who have no idea what happened. Without people like me, our programmers would have to talk to customers, which would detract from their work. And people like you would be even more annoyed at your vendors. Just think of me an investment in not hating your salesperson quite as much as you would otherwise. :-) So -- the reason I do not attend code4lib conferences is because (a) I do not currently work in libraries and (b) I do not yet code. Others? Why don't you attend the conference or present at the conference or consider yourself part of the code4lib community?
[CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
Hi Friends, I put together the data and a summary for the gender survey. Now that conference and hotel registration has subsided, it's a perfect time for you to kick back and read through. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Datahttps://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1Nmo0akNhZlVDTlE Gender Survey Data is the raw data for the survey. Not very interesting, but you can use it to view my Pivot Tables and charts. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Summaryhttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hbofh63-5F9MWEk8y8C83heOkNodttASWF5juqGLQ1E/edit Gender Survey Summary is easy to read version of the above -- its the summary I wrote about the results. Included is a brief intro, charts (from above), and a summary of the results. Let the discussion begin, Rosalyn P.S. Much thanks to Karen Coyle for reviewing the summary for me before I sent it out. Also if there are any typos or grammar mistakes, please blame my friend Abigail who behaved as my editor.
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
Thanks, Rosalyn for setting this up and compiling the results! While it doesn't change my default position, yes we need more diversity among Code4lib presenters!, I'm not sure, statistically speaking, that you can draw the conclusions you have based on the sample size, especially given the survey's topic (note, I am not saying that women aren't underrepresented in the Code4lib program). If 83% of the mailing didn't respond, we simply know nothing about their demographics. They could be 95% male, they could be 99% female, we have no idea. I think it is safe to say that the breakdown of the 16% is probably biased towards females simply given the subject matter and the dialogue that surrounded it. We simply cannot project that the mailing list is 57/42 from this, I don't think. What is interesting, however, is that the number roughly corresponds to the number of seats in the conference. I think it would be interesting to see how this compares to the gender breakdown at the conference. This doesn't diminish how awesome it is that you put this together, though. Thanks, again to you and Karen! -Ross. On Dec 5, 2012, at 1:28 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Friends, I put together the data and a summary for the gender survey. Now that conference and hotel registration has subsided, it's a perfect time for you to kick back and read through. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Datahttps://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1Nmo0akNhZlVDTlE Gender Survey Data is the raw data for the survey. Not very interesting, but you can use it to view my Pivot Tables and charts. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Summaryhttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hbofh63-5F9MWEk8y8C83heOkNodttASWF5juqGLQ1E/edit Gender Survey Summary is easy to read version of the above -- its the summary I wrote about the results. Included is a brief intro, charts (from above), and a summary of the results. Let the discussion begin, Rosalyn P.S. Much thanks to Karen Coyle for reviewing the summary for me before I sent it out. Also if there are any typos or grammar mistakes, please blame my friend Abigail who behaved as my editor.
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
Ross, I totally get what you're saying, I thought of all of that too, but according to everything I was reading through, the likelihood that the survey's results are a fluke is extremely low. Its actually the reason I put information in the write up about the sample size (378), population size (2,250), response rate (16.8%), confidence level (95%), and confidence interval (+/- 4.6%). Rosalyn On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Ross Singer rossfsin...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, Rosalyn for setting this up and compiling the results! While it doesn't change my default position, yes we need more diversity among Code4lib presenters!, I'm not sure, statistically speaking, that you can draw the conclusions you have based on the sample size, especially given the survey's topic (note, I am not saying that women aren't underrepresented in the Code4lib program). If 83% of the mailing didn't respond, we simply know nothing about their demographics. They could be 95% male, they could be 99% female, we have no idea. I think it is safe to say that the breakdown of the 16% is probably biased towards females simply given the subject matter and the dialogue that surrounded it. We simply cannot project that the mailing list is 57/42 from this, I don't think. What is interesting, however, is that the number roughly corresponds to the number of seats in the conference. I think it would be interesting to see how this compares to the gender breakdown at the conference. This doesn't diminish how awesome it is that you put this together, though. Thanks, again to you and Karen! -Ross. On Dec 5, 2012, at 1:28 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Friends, I put together the data and a summary for the gender survey. Now that conference and hotel registration has subsided, it's a perfect time for you to kick back and read through. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Data https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1Nmo0akNhZlVDTlE Gender Survey Data is the raw data for the survey. Not very interesting, but you can use it to view my Pivot Tables and charts. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Summary https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hbofh63-5F9MWEk8y8C83heOkNodttASWF5juqGLQ1E/edit Gender Survey Summary is easy to read version of the above -- its the summary I wrote about the results. Included is a brief intro, charts (from above), and a summary of the results. Let the discussion begin, Rosalyn P.S. Much thanks to Karen Coyle for reviewing the summary for me before I sent it out. Also if there are any typos or grammar mistakes, please blame my friend Abigail who behaved as my editor.
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
Hmm, it's quite possible you know more about statistics than me, but... Usually equations for calculating confidence level are based on the assumption of a random sample, not a volunteering self-selected sample. If you have a self-selected sample, then the equations for how likely is this to be a fluke are only accurate if your self-selected sample is representative; and there aren't really any equations that can tell you how likely your self-selected sample is to be representative, it depends on the circumstances (which is why for the statistical equations to be completely valid, you need a random sample). Is my understanding. On 12/5/2012 2:18 PM, Rosalyn Metz wrote: Ross, I totally get what you're saying, I thought of all of that too, but according to everything I was reading through, the likelihood that the survey's results are a fluke is extremely low. Its actually the reason I put information in the write up about the sample size (378), population size (2,250), response rate (16.8%), confidence level (95%), and confidence interval (+/- 4.6%). Rosalyn On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Ross Singer rossfsin...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, Rosalyn for setting this up and compiling the results! While it doesn't change my default position, yes we need more diversity among Code4lib presenters!, I'm not sure, statistically speaking, that you can draw the conclusions you have based on the sample size, especially given the survey's topic (note, I am not saying that women aren't underrepresented in the Code4lib program). If 83% of the mailing didn't respond, we simply know nothing about their demographics. They could be 95% male, they could be 99% female, we have no idea. I think it is safe to say that the breakdown of the 16% is probably biased towards females simply given the subject matter and the dialogue that surrounded it. We simply cannot project that the mailing list is 57/42 from this, I don't think. What is interesting, however, is that the number roughly corresponds to the number of seats in the conference. I think it would be interesting to see how this compares to the gender breakdown at the conference. This doesn't diminish how awesome it is that you put this together, though. Thanks, again to you and Karen! -Ross. On Dec 5, 2012, at 1:28 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Friends, I put together the data and a summary for the gender survey. Now that conference and hotel registration has subsided, it's a perfect time for you to kick back and read through. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Data https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1Nmo0akNhZlVDTlE Gender Survey Data is the raw data for the survey. Not very interesting, but you can use it to view my Pivot Tables and charts. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Summary https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hbofh63-5F9MWEk8y8C83heOkNodttASWF5juqGLQ1E/edit Gender Survey Summary is easy to read version of the above -- its the summary I wrote about the results. Included is a brief intro, charts (from above), and a summary of the results. Let the discussion begin, Rosalyn P.S. Much thanks to Karen Coyle for reviewing the summary for me before I sent it out. Also if there are any typos or grammar mistakes, please blame my friend Abigail who behaved as my editor.
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
Right, what I'm saying is that this survey is subject to response bias (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Response_bias - It also occurs in situations of voluntary response, such as phone-in polls, where the people who care enough to call are not necessarily a statistically representative sample of the actual population), which doesn't render it irrelevant, it just can't, by itself, be declared representative of the non-participating community's demographics. My point here isn't that it's not representative, it's that we can't know because the subject matter of the survey (which is about gender inequality, esp. among females) inherently produces statistical bias. -Ross. On Dec 5, 2012, at 2:23 PM, Jonathan Rochkind rochk...@jhu.edu wrote: Hmm, it's quite possible you know more about statistics than me, but... Usually equations for calculating confidence level are based on the assumption of a random sample, not a volunteering self-selected sample. If you have a self-selected sample, then the equations for how likely is this to be a fluke are only accurate if your self-selected sample is representative; and there aren't really any equations that can tell you how likely your self-selected sample is to be representative, it depends on the circumstances (which is why for the statistical equations to be completely valid, you need a random sample). Is my understanding. On 12/5/2012 2:18 PM, Rosalyn Metz wrote: Ross, I totally get what you're saying, I thought of all of that too, but according to everything I was reading through, the likelihood that the survey's results are a fluke is extremely low. Its actually the reason I put information in the write up about the sample size (378), population size (2,250), response rate (16.8%), confidence level (95%), and confidence interval (+/- 4.6%). Rosalyn On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Ross Singer rossfsin...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, Rosalyn for setting this up and compiling the results! While it doesn't change my default position, yes we need more diversity among Code4lib presenters!, I'm not sure, statistically speaking, that you can draw the conclusions you have based on the sample size, especially given the survey's topic (note, I am not saying that women aren't underrepresented in the Code4lib program). If 83% of the mailing didn't respond, we simply know nothing about their demographics. They could be 95% male, they could be 99% female, we have no idea. I think it is safe to say that the breakdown of the 16% is probably biased towards females simply given the subject matter and the dialogue that surrounded it. We simply cannot project that the mailing list is 57/42 from this, I don't think. What is interesting, however, is that the number roughly corresponds to the number of seats in the conference. I think it would be interesting to see how this compares to the gender breakdown at the conference. This doesn't diminish how awesome it is that you put this together, though. Thanks, again to you and Karen! -Ross. On Dec 5, 2012, at 1:28 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Friends, I put together the data and a summary for the gender survey. Now that conference and hotel registration has subsided, it's a perfect time for you to kick back and read through. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Data https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1Nmo0akNhZlVDTlE Gender Survey Data is the raw data for the survey. Not very interesting, but you can use it to view my Pivot Tables and charts. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Summary https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hbofh63-5F9MWEk8y8C83heOkNodttASWF5juqGLQ1E/edit Gender Survey Summary is easy to read version of the above -- its the summary I wrote about the results. Included is a brief intro, charts (from above), and a summary of the results. Let the discussion begin, Rosalyn P.S. Much thanks to Karen Coyle for reviewing the summary for me before I sent it out. Also if there are any typos or grammar mistakes, please blame my friend Abigail who behaved as my editor.
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
delurking from all the gender-related threads That was my understanding as well. I would at least like to see the limitations of the survey addressed in the document, such as response and selection biases, at least for those folks who may not be familiar with the existence of such biases. Interesting numbers, yes. Statistically significant? I think the biases need to be considered for answering this one. /delurk Thanks, Becky, survey non-respondent On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Jonathan Rochkind rochk...@jhu.edu wrote: Hmm, it's quite possible you know more about statistics than me, but... Usually equations for calculating confidence level are based on the assumption of a random sample, not a volunteering self-selected sample. If you have a self-selected sample, then the equations for how likely is this to be a fluke are only accurate if your self-selected sample is representative; and there aren't really any equations that can tell you how likely your self-selected sample is to be representative, it depends on the circumstances (which is why for the statistical equations to be completely valid, you need a random sample). Is my understanding. On 12/5/2012 2:18 PM, Rosalyn Metz wrote: Ross, I totally get what you're saying, I thought of all of that too, but according to everything I was reading through, the likelihood that the survey's results are a fluke is extremely low. Its actually the reason I put information in the write up about the sample size (378), population size (2,250), response rate (16.8%), confidence level (95%), and confidence interval (+/- 4.6%). Rosalyn On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Ross Singer rossfsin...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, Rosalyn for setting this up and compiling the results! While it doesn't change my default position, yes we need more diversity among Code4lib presenters!, I'm not sure, statistically speaking, that you can draw the conclusions you have based on the sample size, especially given the survey's topic (note, I am not saying that women aren't underrepresented in the Code4lib program). If 83% of the mailing didn't respond, we simply know nothing about their demographics. They could be 95% male, they could be 99% female, we have no idea. I think it is safe to say that the breakdown of the 16% is probably biased towards females simply given the subject matter and the dialogue that surrounded it. We simply cannot project that the mailing list is 57/42 from this, I don't think. What is interesting, however, is that the number roughly corresponds to the number of seats in the conference. I think it would be interesting to see how this compares to the gender breakdown at the conference. This doesn't diminish how awesome it is that you put this together, though. Thanks, again to you and Karen! -Ross. On Dec 5, 2012, at 1:28 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Friends, I put together the data and a summary for the gender survey. Now that conference and hotel registration has subsided, it's a perfect time for you to kick back and read through. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Data https://docs.google.com/**spreadsheet/ccc?key=** 0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1N**mo0akNhZlVDTlEhttps://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1Nmo0akNhZlVDTlE Gender Survey Data is the raw data for the survey. Not very interesting, but you can use it to view my Pivot Tables and charts. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Summary https://docs.google.com/**document/d/1Hbofh63-** 5F9MWEk8y8C83heOkNodttASWF5juq**GLQ1E/edithttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hbofh63-5F9MWEk8y8C83heOkNodttASWF5juqGLQ1E/edit Gender Survey Summary is easy to read version of the above -- its the summary I wrote about the results. Included is a brief intro, charts (from above), and a summary of the results. Let the discussion begin, Rosalyn P.S. Much thanks to Karen Coyle for reviewing the summary for me before I sent it out. Also if there are any typos or grammar mistakes, please blame my friend Abigail who behaved as my editor.
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
I just want to say BIG thanks to Rosalyn for running this survey and putting together the summary for all of us to view. The most interesting part to me was that 22 % (female) and 14. 8 % (male) of people bothered to take the survey even though they identified themselves as not a member of the community. Wondering what that really means... ~Bohyun From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] on behalf of Becky Yoose [b.yo...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 2:39 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results delurking from all the gender-related threads That was my understanding as well. I would at least like to see the limitations of the survey addressed in the document, such as response and selection biases, at least for those folks who may not be familiar with the existence of such biases. Interesting numbers, yes. Statistically significant? I think the biases need to be considered for answering this one. /delurk Thanks, Becky, survey non-respondent On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Jonathan Rochkind rochk...@jhu.edu wrote: Hmm, it's quite possible you know more about statistics than me, but... Usually equations for calculating confidence level are based on the assumption of a random sample, not a volunteering self-selected sample. If you have a self-selected sample, then the equations for how likely is this to be a fluke are only accurate if your self-selected sample is representative; and there aren't really any equations that can tell you how likely your self-selected sample is to be representative, it depends on the circumstances (which is why for the statistical equations to be completely valid, you need a random sample). Is my understanding. On 12/5/2012 2:18 PM, Rosalyn Metz wrote: Ross, I totally get what you're saying, I thought of all of that too, but according to everything I was reading through, the likelihood that the survey's results are a fluke is extremely low. Its actually the reason I put information in the write up about the sample size (378), population size (2,250), response rate (16.8%), confidence level (95%), and confidence interval (+/- 4.6%). Rosalyn On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Ross Singer rossfsin...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, Rosalyn for setting this up and compiling the results! While it doesn't change my default position, yes we need more diversity among Code4lib presenters!, I'm not sure, statistically speaking, that you can draw the conclusions you have based on the sample size, especially given the survey's topic (note, I am not saying that women aren't underrepresented in the Code4lib program). If 83% of the mailing didn't respond, we simply know nothing about their demographics. They could be 95% male, they could be 99% female, we have no idea. I think it is safe to say that the breakdown of the 16% is probably biased towards females simply given the subject matter and the dialogue that surrounded it. We simply cannot project that the mailing list is 57/42 from this, I don't think. What is interesting, however, is that the number roughly corresponds to the number of seats in the conference. I think it would be interesting to see how this compares to the gender breakdown at the conference. This doesn't diminish how awesome it is that you put this together, though. Thanks, again to you and Karen! -Ross. On Dec 5, 2012, at 1:28 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Friends, I put together the data and a summary for the gender survey. Now that conference and hotel registration has subsided, it's a perfect time for you to kick back and read through. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Data https://docs.google.com/**spreadsheet/ccc?key=** 0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1N**mo0akNhZlVDTlEhttps://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1Nmo0akNhZlVDTlE Gender Survey Data is the raw data for the survey. Not very interesting, but you can use it to view my Pivot Tables and charts. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Summary https://docs.google.com/**document/d/1Hbofh63-** 5F9MWEk8y8C83heOkNodttASWF5juq**GLQ1E/edithttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hbofh63-5F9MWEk8y8C83heOkNodttASWF5juqGLQ1E/edit Gender Survey Summary is easy to read version of the above -- its the summary I wrote about the results. Included is a brief intro, charts (from above), and a summary of the results. Let the discussion begin, Rosalyn P.S. Much thanks to Karen Coyle for reviewing the summary for me before I sent it out. Also if there are any typos or grammar mistakes, please blame my friend Abigail who behaved as my editor.
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
Thanks Bohyun! I also thought the most revealing information was in male and female responses regarding whether or not they felt they were part of the community. Regardless of whether or not there is sampling bias, I think that its showing us some trends we shouldn't dismiss. Rosalyn On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Bohyun Kim k...@fiu.edu wrote: I just want to say BIG thanks to Rosalyn for running this survey and putting together the summary for all of us to view. The most interesting part to me was that 22 % (female) and 14. 8 % (male) of people bothered to take the survey even though they identified themselves as not a member of the community. Wondering what that really means... ~Bohyun From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] on behalf of Becky Yoose [b.yo...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 2:39 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results delurking from all the gender-related threads That was my understanding as well. I would at least like to see the limitations of the survey addressed in the document, such as response and selection biases, at least for those folks who may not be familiar with the existence of such biases. Interesting numbers, yes. Statistically significant? I think the biases need to be considered for answering this one. /delurk Thanks, Becky, survey non-respondent On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Jonathan Rochkind rochk...@jhu.edu wrote: Hmm, it's quite possible you know more about statistics than me, but... Usually equations for calculating confidence level are based on the assumption of a random sample, not a volunteering self-selected sample. If you have a self-selected sample, then the equations for how likely is this to be a fluke are only accurate if your self-selected sample is representative; and there aren't really any equations that can tell you how likely your self-selected sample is to be representative, it depends on the circumstances (which is why for the statistical equations to be completely valid, you need a random sample). Is my understanding. On 12/5/2012 2:18 PM, Rosalyn Metz wrote: Ross, I totally get what you're saying, I thought of all of that too, but according to everything I was reading through, the likelihood that the survey's results are a fluke is extremely low. Its actually the reason I put information in the write up about the sample size (378), population size (2,250), response rate (16.8%), confidence level (95%), and confidence interval (+/- 4.6%). Rosalyn On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Ross Singer rossfsin...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, Rosalyn for setting this up and compiling the results! While it doesn't change my default position, yes we need more diversity among Code4lib presenters!, I'm not sure, statistically speaking, that you can draw the conclusions you have based on the sample size, especially given the survey's topic (note, I am not saying that women aren't underrepresented in the Code4lib program). If 83% of the mailing didn't respond, we simply know nothing about their demographics. They could be 95% male, they could be 99% female, we have no idea. I think it is safe to say that the breakdown of the 16% is probably biased towards females simply given the subject matter and the dialogue that surrounded it. We simply cannot project that the mailing list is 57/42 from this, I don't think. What is interesting, however, is that the number roughly corresponds to the number of seats in the conference. I think it would be interesting to see how this compares to the gender breakdown at the conference. This doesn't diminish how awesome it is that you put this together, though. Thanks, again to you and Karen! -Ross. On Dec 5, 2012, at 1:28 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Friends, I put together the data and a summary for the gender survey. Now that conference and hotel registration has subsided, it's a perfect time for you to kick back and read through. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Data https://docs.google.com/**spreadsheet/ccc?key=** 0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1N**mo0akNhZlVDTlE https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1Nmo0akNhZlVDTlE Gender Survey Data is the raw data for the survey. Not very interesting, but you can use it to view my Pivot Tables and charts. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Summary https://docs.google.com/**document/d/1Hbofh63-** 5F9MWEk8y8C83heOkNodttASWF5juq**GLQ1E/edit https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hbofh63-5F9MWEk8y8C83heOkNodttASWF5juqGLQ1E/edit Gender Survey Summary is easy to read version of the above -- its the summary I wrote about the results. Included is a brief intro, charts (from above), and a summary
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
I'd been staying out of this discussion, but the thought occurs to me that someone with access to the list of subscribers might run that against a list of traditional boy/girl names, and be able to make some guesses…. On Dec 5, 2012, at 11:23 AM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: Hmm, it's quite possible you know more about statistics than me, but... Usually equations for calculating confidence level are based on the assumption of a random sample, not a volunteering self-selected sample. If you have a self-selected sample, then the equations for how likely is this to be a fluke are only accurate if your self-selected sample is representative; and there aren't really any equations that can tell you how likely your self-selected sample is to be representative, it depends on the circumstances (which is why for the statistical equations to be completely valid, you need a random sample). Is my understanding. On 12/5/2012 2:18 PM, Rosalyn Metz wrote: Ross, I totally get what you're saying, I thought of all of that too, but according to everything I was reading through, the likelihood that the survey's results are a fluke is extremely low. Its actually the reason I put information in the write up about the sample size (378), population size (2,250), response rate (16.8%), confidence level (95%), and confidence interval (+/- 4.6%). Rosalyn On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Ross Singer rossfsin...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, Rosalyn for setting this up and compiling the results! While it doesn't change my default position, yes we need more diversity among Code4lib presenters!, I'm not sure, statistically speaking, that you can draw the conclusions you have based on the sample size, especially given the survey's topic (note, I am not saying that women aren't underrepresented in the Code4lib program). If 83% of the mailing didn't respond, we simply know nothing about their demographics. They could be 95% male, they could be 99% female, we have no idea. I think it is safe to say that the breakdown of the 16% is probably biased towards females simply given the subject matter and the dialogue that surrounded it. We simply cannot project that the mailing list is 57/42 from this, I don't think. What is interesting, however, is that the number roughly corresponds to the number of seats in the conference. I think it would be interesting to see how this compares to the gender breakdown at the conference. This doesn't diminish how awesome it is that you put this together, though. Thanks, again to you and Karen! -Ross. On Dec 5, 2012, at 1:28 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Friends, I put together the data and a summary for the gender survey. Now that conference and hotel registration has subsided, it's a perfect time for you to kick back and read through. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Data https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1Nmo0akNhZlVDTlE Gender Survey Data is the raw data for the survey. Not very interesting, but you can use it to view my Pivot Tables and charts. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Summary https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hbofh63-5F9MWEk8y8C83heOkNodttASWF5juqGLQ1E/edit Gender Survey Summary is easy to read version of the above -- its the summary I wrote about the results. Included is a brief intro, charts (from above), and a summary of the results. Let the discussion begin, Rosalyn P.S. Much thanks to Karen Coyle for reviewing the summary for me before I sent it out. Also if there are any typos or grammar mistakes, please blame my friend Abigail who behaved as my editor.
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
Which, if I read you right, Ross, is you're saying the results were overly optimistic in terms of % of women on c4l list. I, too, thought it sounded higher than I would have expected. I looked to see if the subscriber list is available, but couldn't find it. That would have its own problems, of course, but could be a way to get a second opinion on the numbers. However, I think if we can get over the need to quantify we can probably agree that quality-wise, more participation from women is a good thing. More participation from women would be more representative of the field of librarianship and also of the general population. I saw a report recently that said that more than 60% of library users (and I think this was US public libraries) are women, which is higher than the general population. And unless we believe that there are no differences between men and women, that would lead one to conclude that it's important for library services to be both male and female friendly. Which to me means that we need to have men and women working together to design all aspects of the library's public face. kc p.s. Like Bohyun, I found the number of respondents that do NOT consider themselves part of the community to be intriguing. On 12/5/12 11:31 AM, Ross Singer wrote: Right, what I'm saying is that this survey is subject to response bias (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Response_bias - It also occurs in situations of voluntary response, such as phone-in polls, where the people who care enough to call are not necessarily a statistically representative sample of the actual population), which doesn't render it irrelevant, it just can't, by itself, be declared representative of the non-participating community's demographics. My point here isn't that it's not representative, it's that we can't know because the subject matter of the survey (which is about gender inequality, esp. among females) inherently produces statistical bias. -Ross. On Dec 5, 2012, at 2:23 PM, Jonathan Rochkind rochk...@jhu.edu wrote: Hmm, it's quite possible you know more about statistics than me, but... Usually equations for calculating confidence level are based on the assumption of a random sample, not a volunteering self-selected sample. If you have a self-selected sample, then the equations for how likely is this to be a fluke are only accurate if your self-selected sample is representative; and there aren't really any equations that can tell you how likely your self-selected sample is to be representative, it depends on the circumstances (which is why for the statistical equations to be completely valid, you need a random sample). Is my understanding. On 12/5/2012 2:18 PM, Rosalyn Metz wrote: Ross, I totally get what you're saying, I thought of all of that too, but according to everything I was reading through, the likelihood that the survey's results are a fluke is extremely low. Its actually the reason I put information in the write up about the sample size (378), population size (2,250), response rate (16.8%), confidence level (95%), and confidence interval (+/- 4.6%). Rosalyn On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Ross Singer rossfsin...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, Rosalyn for setting this up and compiling the results! While it doesn't change my default position, yes we need more diversity among Code4lib presenters!, I'm not sure, statistically speaking, that you can draw the conclusions you have based on the sample size, especially given the survey's topic (note, I am not saying that women aren't underrepresented in the Code4lib program). If 83% of the mailing didn't respond, we simply know nothing about their demographics. They could be 95% male, they could be 99% female, we have no idea. I think it is safe to say that the breakdown of the 16% is probably biased towards females simply given the subject matter and the dialogue that surrounded it. We simply cannot project that the mailing list is 57/42 from this, I don't think. What is interesting, however, is that the number roughly corresponds to the number of seats in the conference. I think it would be interesting to see how this compares to the gender breakdown at the conference. This doesn't diminish how awesome it is that you put this together, though. Thanks, again to you and Karen! -Ross. On Dec 5, 2012, at 1:28 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Friends, I put together the data and a summary for the gender survey. Now that conference and hotel registration has subsided, it's a perfect time for you to kick back and read through. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Data https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1Nmo0akNhZlVDTlE Gender Survey Data is the raw data for the survey. Not very interesting, but you can use it to view my Pivot Tables and charts. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Summary https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hbofh63-5F9MWEk8y8C83heOkNodttASWF5juqGLQ1E/edit Gender Survey Summary
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
For me this unofficially confirms what many unofficially suspect, which is the gender distribution of presenters at Code4LibCon does not reflect the gender distribution of the community. The interesting thing is that the Code4Lib community is (unofficially) more balanced than most tech communities (code in name = tech), which is, to me, a very good thing. Cary On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Bohyun Kim k...@fiu.edu wrote: I just want to say BIG thanks to Rosalyn for running this survey and putting together the summary for all of us to view. The most interesting part to me was that 22 % (female) and 14. 8 % (male) of people bothered to take the survey even though they identified themselves as not a member of the community. Wondering what that really means... ~Bohyun From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] on behalf of Becky Yoose [b.yo...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 2:39 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results delurking from all the gender-related threads That was my understanding as well. I would at least like to see the limitations of the survey addressed in the document, such as response and selection biases, at least for those folks who may not be familiar with the existence of such biases. Interesting numbers, yes. Statistically significant? I think the biases need to be considered for answering this one. /delurk Thanks, Becky, survey non-respondent On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Jonathan Rochkind rochk...@jhu.edu wrote: Hmm, it's quite possible you know more about statistics than me, but... Usually equations for calculating confidence level are based on the assumption of a random sample, not a volunteering self-selected sample. If you have a self-selected sample, then the equations for how likely is this to be a fluke are only accurate if your self-selected sample is representative; and there aren't really any equations that can tell you how likely your self-selected sample is to be representative, it depends on the circumstances (which is why for the statistical equations to be completely valid, you need a random sample). Is my understanding. On 12/5/2012 2:18 PM, Rosalyn Metz wrote: Ross, I totally get what you're saying, I thought of all of that too, but according to everything I was reading through, the likelihood that the survey's results are a fluke is extremely low. Its actually the reason I put information in the write up about the sample size (378), population size (2,250), response rate (16.8%), confidence level (95%), and confidence interval (+/- 4.6%). Rosalyn On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Ross Singer rossfsin...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, Rosalyn for setting this up and compiling the results! While it doesn't change my default position, yes we need more diversity among Code4lib presenters!, I'm not sure, statistically speaking, that you can draw the conclusions you have based on the sample size, especially given the survey's topic (note, I am not saying that women aren't underrepresented in the Code4lib program). If 83% of the mailing didn't respond, we simply know nothing about their demographics. They could be 95% male, they could be 99% female, we have no idea. I think it is safe to say that the breakdown of the 16% is probably biased towards females simply given the subject matter and the dialogue that surrounded it. We simply cannot project that the mailing list is 57/42 from this, I don't think. What is interesting, however, is that the number roughly corresponds to the number of seats in the conference. I think it would be interesting to see how this compares to the gender breakdown at the conference. This doesn't diminish how awesome it is that you put this together, though. Thanks, again to you and Karen! -Ross. On Dec 5, 2012, at 1:28 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Friends, I put together the data and a summary for the gender survey. Now that conference and hotel registration has subsided, it's a perfect time for you to kick back and read through. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Data https://docs.google.com/**spreadsheet/ccc?key=** 0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1N**mo0akNhZlVDTlEhttps://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1Nmo0akNhZlVDTlE Gender Survey Data is the raw data for the survey. Not very interesting, but you can use it to view my Pivot Tables and charts. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Summary https://docs.google.com/**document/d/1Hbofh63-** 5F9MWEk8y8C83heOkNodttASWF5juq**GLQ1E/edithttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hbofh63-5F9MWEk8y8C83heOkNodttASWF5juqGLQ1E/edit Gender Survey Summary is easy to read version of the above -- its the summary I wrote about the results. Included is a brief intro, charts (from above), and a summary of the results. Let the discussion begin
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
I filled out the form and submitted my answers (male, not part of the community) before seeing I can call myself part of the community according to Ross's example Are you part of the community questions. But that's just me :) On 5-12-2012 20:56, Bohyun Kim wrote: I just want to say BIG thanks to Rosalyn for running this survey and putting together the summary for all of us to view. The most interesting part to me was that 22 % (female) and 14. 8 % (male) of people bothered to take the survey even though they identified themselves as not a member of the community. Wondering what that really means... ~Bohyun
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
i think ross only brought up this point to see if i could still maintain the pretty formatting in addition to adding something extra to the summary. well ross challenge accepted and met. so :P On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Ross Singer rossfsin...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, Rosalyn for setting this up and compiling the results! While it doesn't change my default position, yes we need more diversity among Code4lib presenters!, I'm not sure, statistically speaking, that you can draw the conclusions you have based on the sample size, especially given the survey's topic (note, I am not saying that women aren't underrepresented in the Code4lib program). If 83% of the mailing didn't respond, we simply know nothing about their demographics. They could be 95% male, they could be 99% female, we have no idea. I think it is safe to say that the breakdown of the 16% is probably biased towards females simply given the subject matter and the dialogue that surrounded it. We simply cannot project that the mailing list is 57/42 from this, I don't think. What is interesting, however, is that the number roughly corresponds to the number of seats in the conference. I think it would be interesting to see how this compares to the gender breakdown at the conference. This doesn't diminish how awesome it is that you put this together, though. Thanks, again to you and Karen! -Ross. On Dec 5, 2012, at 1:28 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Friends, I put together the data and a summary for the gender survey. Now that conference and hotel registration has subsided, it's a perfect time for you to kick back and read through. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Data https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1Nmo0akNhZlVDTlE Gender Survey Data is the raw data for the survey. Not very interesting, but you can use it to view my Pivot Tables and charts. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Summary https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hbofh63-5F9MWEk8y8C83heOkNodttASWF5juqGLQ1E/edit Gender Survey Summary is easy to read version of the above -- its the summary I wrote about the results. Included is a brief intro, charts (from above), and a summary of the results. Let the discussion begin, Rosalyn P.S. Much thanks to Karen Coyle for reviewing the summary for me before I sent it out. Also if there are any typos or grammar mistakes, please blame my friend Abigail who behaved as my editor.
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
Sara Amato sam...@willamette.edu On Dec 5, 2012, at 11:23 AM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: Hmm, it's quite possible you know more about statistics than me, but... Usually equations for calculating confidence level are based on the assumption of a random sample, not a volunteering self-selected sample. I'd been staying out of this discussion, but the thought occurs to me that someone with access to the list of subscribers might run that against a list of traditional boy/girl names, and be able to make some guesses…. With my (rather dusty through lack of formal use) stats grad hat on, I'd say Jonathan Rochkind is correct: the assumptions behind those calculations are violated. http://www.jerrydallal.com/LHSP/ci.htm explains more about confidence intervals, but the usual calculations require independent random sampling. (LHSP was a good web book and may be worth a read if you want help with stats, but it seems that there won't be any more web editions for now, thanks to the evil Kindle system. If only it were FOSS.) What happened here is sometimes called a Self-selected Listener Online Poll, like the radio stations or newspapers do, and it's not random. It may still be informative, but I'd not suggest the calculated confidence intervals are valid. Guessing from the names may be informative - especially about how many people use forms that aren't easily identifiable in that way - but I think the usual approach would be to use random numbers to draw a sample from the subscribers and just ask those the detailed questions. Then you could work out a CI and so on in the usual way. Some years ago, I wrote more about surveying at http://people.debian.org/~mjr/surveys.html#advice if you want overkill. Some links are stale at the moment. Hope that helps, -- MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op. http://koha-community.org supporter, web and library systems developer. In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Available for hire (including development) at http://www.software.coop/
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
On 06/12/12 09:05, Sara Amato wrote: I'd been staying out of this discussion, but the thought occurs to me that someone with access to the list of subscribers might run that against a list of traditional boy/girl names, and be able to make some guesses…. That idea runs into problems both with non-western names (there is more than one kind of diversity) and those people whose experience of gender in the workplace have led them to use non-gender-specific identifiers. cheers stuart -- Stuart Yeates Library Technology Services http://www.victoria.ac.nz/library/
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
So rather than focusing on statistics and math, I'd like to steer the conversation in a different direction. Let's say Ross is right and more women chose to take the survey based on the topic -- maybe that's a way to get women involved in Code4Lib. Karen had the idea of creating a women Code4Lib IRC channel, maybe that can be a place to start. Or maybe we have a few women that are willing to step up and be a Code4Lib mentor to other women -- similar to what we do for the new member event at the conference. I'd even be willing to step up and organize that if people like the idea. Thoughts? On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:00 PM, stuart yeates stuart.yea...@vuw.ac.nzwrote: On 06/12/12 09:05, Sara Amato wrote: I'd been staying out of this discussion, but the thought occurs to me that someone with access to the list of subscribers might run that against a list of traditional boy/girl names, and be able to make some guesses…. That idea runs into problems both with non-western names (there is more than one kind of diversity) and those people whose experience of gender in the workplace have led them to use non-gender-specific identifiers. cheers stuart -- Stuart Yeates Library Technology Services http://www.victoria.ac.nz/**library/http://www.victoria.ac.nz/library/
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
Oh well, I'll bite: despite the Are you part of the community questions, I just couldn't bring myself to feel that having had an article published in the Code4Lib journal made me part of a community rather than part of a table of contents. :-) Certainly lurking doesn't qualify for my personal definition (I've lurked in all *sorts* of places); I felt community requires (among other things) a modicum of two-way communication. Such as if, for example, I should ever feel myself called to answer an email on the listserv Deborah -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Bohyun Kim Sent: Thursday, 6 December 2012 8:56 a.m. To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results I just want to say BIG thanks to Rosalyn for running this survey and putting together the summary for all of us to view. The most interesting part to me was that 22 % (female) and 14. 8 % (male) of people bothered to take the survey even though they identified themselves as not a member of the community. Wondering what that really means... ~Bohyun From: Code for Libraries [CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] on behalf of Becky Yoose [b.yo...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 2:39 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results delurking from all the gender-related threads That was my understanding as well. I would at least like to see the limitations of the survey addressed in the document, such as response and selection biases, at least for those folks who may not be familiar with the existence of such biases. Interesting numbers, yes. Statistically significant? I think the biases need to be considered for answering this one. /delurk Thanks, Becky, survey non-respondent On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Jonathan Rochkind rochk...@jhu.edu wrote: Hmm, it's quite possible you know more about statistics than me, but... Usually equations for calculating confidence level are based on the assumption of a random sample, not a volunteering self-selected sample. If you have a self-selected sample, then the equations for how likely is this to be a fluke are only accurate if your self-selected sample is representative; and there aren't really any equations that can tell you how likely your self-selected sample is to be representative, it depends on the circumstances (which is why for the statistical equations to be completely valid, you need a random sample). Is my understanding. On 12/5/2012 2:18 PM, Rosalyn Metz wrote: Ross, I totally get what you're saying, I thought of all of that too, but according to everything I was reading through, the likelihood that the survey's results are a fluke is extremely low. Its actually the reason I put information in the write up about the sample size (378), population size (2,250), response rate (16.8%), confidence level (95%), and confidence interval (+/- 4.6%). Rosalyn On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Ross Singer rossfsin...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, Rosalyn for setting this up and compiling the results! While it doesn't change my default position, yes we need more diversity among Code4lib presenters!, I'm not sure, statistically speaking, that you can draw the conclusions you have based on the sample size, especially given the survey's topic (note, I am not saying that women aren't underrepresented in the Code4lib program). If 83% of the mailing didn't respond, we simply know nothing about their demographics. They could be 95% male, they could be 99% female, we have no idea. I think it is safe to say that the breakdown of the 16% is probably biased towards females simply given the subject matter and the dialogue that surrounded it. We simply cannot project that the mailing list is 57/42 from this, I don't think. What is interesting, however, is that the number roughly corresponds to the number of seats in the conference. I think it would be interesting to see how this compares to the gender breakdown at the conference. This doesn't diminish how awesome it is that you put this together, though. Thanks, again to you and Karen! -Ross. On Dec 5, 2012, at 1:28 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Friends, I put together the data and a summary for the gender survey. Now that conference and hotel registration has subsided, it's a perfect time for you to kick back and read through. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Data https://docs.google.com/**spreadsheet/ccc?key=** 0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1N**mo0akNhZlVDTlEhttps://docs.google.c om/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqfFxMd8RTVhdFVQSWlPaFJ2UTh1Nmo0akNhZlVDTlE Gender Survey Data is the raw data for the survey. Not very interesting, but you can use it to view my Pivot Tables and charts. [Code4Lib] Gender Survey Summary https://docs.google.com/**document/d
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote: Karen had the idea of creating a women Code4Lib IRC channel, maybe that can be a place to start. I understand the motivation to create a safe space for women, but please let's not do this. Separate but equal has never been shown to make progress toward equality, and I doubt this situation would be any different. I believe it would instead make things worse, by balkanizing the community rather than encouraging good behavior within a unified group. In other words, the solution will never be reached without active participation by men. Roy
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
I second this, in its entirety. Michele -Original Message- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Roy Tennant Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 4:35 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote: Karen had the idea of creating a women Code4Lib IRC channel, maybe that can be a place to start. I understand the motivation to create a safe space for women, but please let's not do this. Separate but equal has never been shown to make progress toward equality, and I doubt this situation would be any different. I believe it would instead make things worse, by balkanizing the community rather than encouraging good behavior within a unified group. In other words, the solution will never be reached without active participation by men. Roy
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
I think a coed group would be great. It might be nice to have a separate IRC channel for testing things out where people wouldn't have to worry about bothering people or looking foolish. I think an intro to IRC and quick rundown of all the zoia commands would be a great thing to do in the Open space pre-conf. -Esme -- Esme Cowles escow...@ucsd.edu Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. -- J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring On 12/5/2012, at 4:45 PM, Karen Coyle li...@kcoyle.net wrote: Roy, It wasn't for safety -- it was for training. Some of us haven't spent much time on IRC -- I never know what to do when I get there -- can't remember commands, even with a decent GUI. So I was trying to think of places (e.g. Github, IRC) where we'd like to have more women participating and how we could give them a chance to learn.* Lots of people are afraid of making mistakes in front of others, and we know that women/girls take fewer chances in mixed classrooms. Once they get adept at the environment they can participate in the group list with more confidence. Training, mentoring -- it all blends together. In fact, I'm thinking that at c4l we could put up some big pieces of paper (I love the giant post-it paper) and have people make lists of their favorite tools, hangouts, etc. Then we could use those lists as ways to figure out what people need to learn to feel more like part of the community and to feel more confident about participating. kc * Look at the list of edits on the anti-harassment policy -- not many women there. I suspect it's unfamiliarity with Git. If we're going to use a tool as a community, then I want more women to be familiar with it. If someone else wants to train men or a coed group, that's fine. On 12/5/12 1:35 PM, Roy Tennant wrote: On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote: Karen had the idea of creating a women Code4Lib IRC channel, maybe that can be a place to start. I understand the motivation to create a safe space for women, but please let's not do this. Separate but equal has never been shown to make progress toward equality, and I doubt this situation would be any different. I believe it would instead make things worse, by balkanizing the community rather than encouraging good behavior within a unified group. In other words, the solution will never be reached without active participation by men. Roy -- Karen Coyle kco...@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
I'm fine with naming it code4lib-learning or whatever. It must be clear that it is an area for testing, hanging out, learning (we could even schedule learning times to meet there -- following Esme's suggestion of having a time at Chicago, and could include folks who aren't at c4l13). And, as you say, anyone can create any channel they want, and if some folks want a channel, there's no reason why they can't have one. You know, it might even turn out that there's room for more than one c4l channel, based on interests and activities. I honestly don't care if it turns out that men are predominantly in one and women are predominantly in the other. The point is that people should gather in the space that is most useful to them. My interest is in making sure that the under-represented women on the list learn enough about the available tools to decide what works for them. If it turns out not to be useful it will fade away as all unused social spaces do. kc On 12/5/12 2:49 PM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: That makes sense, but I predict that if you create such a channel, even if the intention is for training (in recognition that many women are more comfortable training in a single gender environment, as kcoyle says) -- people (mainly women people) will end up 'hanging out' in there instead of in #code4lib, resulting in fewer women hanging out in #code4lib. Which I guess you could think is a fine thing, or could think is an unfortunate thing. I agree with royt that it would be an unfortunate thing, for a bunch of different reasons. Of course, like most any other project or venue of code4lib, we don't all need to agree on this, and no approval needs to be had -- if someone wants to create an IRC channel for 'code4lib women' or something, they can do so on freenode. But I agree with royt it'd be unfortunate. If the intent really is just for 'training', then maybe call it #code4lib_learning_irc or something, to try and reduce the chances of it vacuuming women's participation out of main #code4lib, even if that wasn't the original intent. On 12/5/2012 4:45 PM, Karen Coyle wrote: Roy, It wasn't for safety -- it was for training. Some of us haven't spent much time on IRC -- I never know what to do when I get there -- can't remember commands, even with a decent GUI. So I was trying to think of places (e.g. Github, IRC) where we'd like to have more women participating and how we could give them a chance to learn.* Lots of people are afraid of making mistakes in front of others, and we know that women/girls take fewer chances in mixed classrooms. Once they get adept at the environment they can participate in the group list with more confidence. Training, mentoring -- it all blends together. In fact, I'm thinking that at c4l we could put up some big pieces of paper (I love the giant post-it paper) and have people make lists of their favorite tools, hangouts, etc. Then we could use those lists as ways to figure out what people need to learn to feel more like part of the community and to feel more confident about participating. kc * Look at the list of edits on the anti-harassment policy -- not many women there. I suspect it's unfamiliarity with Git. If we're going to use a tool as a community, then I want more women to be familiar with it. If someone else wants to train men or a coed group, that's fine. On 12/5/12 1:35 PM, Roy Tennant wrote: On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote: Karen had the idea of creating a women Code4Lib IRC channel, maybe that can be a place to start. I understand the motivation to create a safe space for women, but please let's not do this. Separate but equal has never been shown to make progress toward equality, and I doubt this situation would be any different. I believe it would instead make things worse, by balkanizing the community rather than encouraging good behavior within a unified group. In other words, the solution will never be reached without active participation by men. Roy -- Karen Coyle kco...@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender Survey Summary and Results
And it's not like there is some limitation to the number of rooms you can hang out in. Someone could hang out in #code4lib and #code4lib-something-else just as easily (perhaps participating in different ways in the different spaces). I wouldn't see a second room as pulling away participants from the first. Two IRC spaces are different than two mailing lists, imho. Kevin On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Karen Coyle li...@kcoyle.net wrote: I'm fine with naming it code4lib-learning or whatever. It must be clear that it is an area for testing, hanging out, learning (we could even schedule learning times to meet there -- following Esme's suggestion of having a time at Chicago, and could include folks who aren't at c4l13). And, as you say, anyone can create any channel they want, and if some folks want a channel, there's no reason why they can't have one. You know, it might even turn out that there's room for more than one c4l channel, based on interests and activities. I honestly don't care if it turns out that men are predominantly in one and women are predominantly in the other. The point is that people should gather in the space that is most useful to them. My interest is in making sure that the under-represented women on the list learn enough about the available tools to decide what works for them. If it turns out not to be useful it will fade away as all unused social spaces do. kc On 12/5/12 2:49 PM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: That makes sense, but I predict that if you create such a channel, even if the intention is for training (in recognition that many women are more comfortable training in a single gender environment, as kcoyle says) -- people (mainly women people) will end up 'hanging out' in there instead of in #code4lib, resulting in fewer women hanging out in #code4lib. Which I guess you could think is a fine thing, or could think is an unfortunate thing. I agree with royt that it would be an unfortunate thing, for a bunch of different reasons. Of course, like most any other project or venue of code4lib, we don't all need to agree on this, and no approval needs to be had -- if someone wants to create an IRC channel for 'code4lib women' or something, they can do so on freenode. But I agree with royt it'd be unfortunate. If the intent really is just for 'training', then maybe call it #code4lib_learning_irc or something, to try and reduce the chances of it vacuuming women's participation out of main #code4lib, even if that wasn't the original intent. On 12/5/2012 4:45 PM, Karen Coyle wrote: Roy, It wasn't for safety -- it was for training. Some of us haven't spent much time on IRC -- I never know what to do when I get there -- can't remember commands, even with a decent GUI. So I was trying to think of places (e.g. Github, IRC) where we'd like to have more women participating and how we could give them a chance to learn.* Lots of people are afraid of making mistakes in front of others, and we know that women/girls take fewer chances in mixed classrooms. Once they get adept at the environment they can participate in the group list with more confidence. Training, mentoring -- it all blends together. In fact, I'm thinking that at c4l we could put up some big pieces of paper (I love the giant post-it paper) and have people make lists of their favorite tools, hangouts, etc. Then we could use those lists as ways to figure out what people need to learn to feel more like part of the community and to feel more confident about participating. kc * Look at the list of edits on the anti-harassment policy -- not many women there. I suspect it's unfamiliarity with Git. If we're going to use a tool as a community, then I want more women to be familiar with it. If someone else wants to train men or a coed group, that's fine. On 12/5/12 1:35 PM, Roy Tennant wrote: On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Rosalyn Metz rosalynm...@gmail.com wrote: Karen had the idea of creating a women Code4Lib IRC channel, maybe that can be a place to start. I understand the motivation to create a safe space for women, but please let's not do this. Separate but equal has never been shown to make progress toward equality, and I doubt this situation would be any different. I believe it would instead make things worse, by balkanizing the community rather than encouraging good behavior within a unified group. In other words, the solution will never be reached without active participation by men. Roy -- Karen Coyle kco...@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
