Departmental Websites and Female Student Recruitment Kristin Hanks School of Informatics Indiana University 901 E. 10th St. Bloomington, IN 47408-3912 (812) 856-1802 khanks@indiana.edu

Abstract Female recruitment and retention in technology related fields is still low, despite numerous attempts to reverse this trend. As a recruitment device, a school’s webpage may be the only visual representation a student will see before deciding whether or not to apply. Thus, understanding the possible implications of this medium is important within the larger conversation on gender equity and opportunities. This research addresses several questions: At first glance, do websites give gender cues, whether intentional or not? Is there a relationship between certain web content and the number of women recruited into technology related schools and departments? Do applied fields (Informatics, Information Science, Instructional Technology, Information Systems) differ in their online recruitment practices from more traditional Computer Science and Engineering departments? It is important to note that this research is not an attempt to find the best web practices to recruit female students or an attempt to punish or blame specific institutions regarding their recruitment practices. Introduction Women are significantly underrepresented in Information and Communication Technology (ICT) jobs as well as ICT related academic programs. Percentages of women in the professional realm actually dropped from 1996 to 2004 (Information Technology Association of America, 2005). Within academia, the numbers, while still problematic, vary widely across fields. In Computer Science (CS) and engineering, females remained at about 22% of the undergraduate population from 1999 to 2004 (Information Technology Association of America, 2005). Other departments, such as Library and Information Science (LIS) and Instructional Technology have a long history of higher female recruitment due to their affiliation with the traditionally female dominated disciplines of Library Science and Education (Quint, 1999; Wolverton, 1999). Several of the other applied IT fields such as Informatics and Information Systems have also had success recruiting females. Ahuja, Robinson, Herring, and Ogan (2004) suggest that the women-friendly culture of these applied fields, along with their focus on real world problem solving and helping others, attracts more women and encourages them to succeed. Recently, many universities are combining their computer science with their applied departments (Berghel and Sallach, 2004). There is real potential to make substantial changes in the real and perceived departmental cultures, hopefully encouraging women to apply to both Applied as well as Computer Science programs. However, the possibility that such structural changes at the college and departmental level will result in cultural changes demands that we better understand how such cultures are represented and manifested. As the gender differences study conducted by Ogan, Robinson, Ahuj, and Herring (2006) concluded, future work should explore “whether institutional policies and practices reinforce the gendering of IT to the same extent in applied disciplines as they have historically done in computer science.” This study contributes to such efforts, asking whether women might be turned off due to departments intentionally or unintentionally presenting a masculine or male dominated culture in their recruitment materials. Specifically, this study seeks to understand whether or not there are subtle gender cues on departmental websites. If so, do these cues seem to indicate a culture of inclusion or exclusion of females within the department? Is it possible that the structural elements, photographic representations, and even choice of words are different on sites in departments with more females? Finally, are there distinct differences in the departmental websites of Computer Science versus those of the Applied fields?

Scholarly efforts in the realm of gender and IT have three distinct phases to work through: proving/acknowledging there is an issue, understanding the issue, and finally making suggestions for ways to correct the issue. The fact that the number of women in IT is low and dropping is well established at this point. This work attempts to make a contribution to the next step, understanding where/why women are being turned off in the first place. It would be overly optimistic to hope that a study of just 105 web pages could definitively establish best practices to correct the issue. Understanding whether or not departmental websites are repelling women by depicting a culture that is not welcoming to them is a small piece of the much larger goal to deeply understand this complex issue Background Literature Websites as Recruitment Devices Websites are the number two recruiting device for colleges and universities, second only to an on-site visit (Abrahamson, 2000). In a 2006 study of 377 university websites, prospective students were targeted more than any other student population, “suggesting postsecondary institutions view their Web sites as a promotional or recruitment tool” (Will & Callison, 2006). Abrahamson (2000) went so far as to say that “Prospective students who find a Web site disappointing are quick to associate their e-experience with the quality and functioning of the institution itself and may terminate all inquiries about the college.” Thus, departments seeking to actively encourage female students to apply should ensure that their websites are not discouraging to those students in even subtle ways. Gender and Information Processing Research from psychology and marketing indicate specific differences in the way men and women process information. First of all, in consumer research studies of aesthetic value, women are more sensitive to visual information than men. In one experiment, men tended to follow very simple pattern matching rules while women had complex methods for choosing various fashion combinations (Holbrook, 1986). Women also appear to pick up on nonverbal cues much more accurately (Rosenthal and DePaulo, 1979) and react differently to visual images than men. This is especially true when the images are particularly suggestive. A study by Jones et al. (1998), confirmed earlier findings that women and men react differently to visual stimuli, specifically sexy photographs of males and females in product advertisements. The attitudinal difference resulting from such attempts at gender manipulation were significant, with women having adverse reactions to advertisements portraying sexy women. These findings are echoed in marketing research, where women were found to have heightened sensitivity to message claims (Meyers-Levy & Maheswaran, 1991). This study found that while males and females may be exposed to the same messages and may even encode the messages into memory in similar ways, men are less likely to be able to recognize the message. Men seem to have schema based processing, looking at the overall theme of the message that is being presented while women rely on the smaller particulars being presented, forming their own opinions about what the message means. This theory may help explain why Chang (2007) found that women are better at picking up even small manipulative attempts in advertisements. The processing of many particulars to form an overall judgment is sometimes referred to as a comprehensive processing style (Meyers-Levy, 1989; Meyers-Levy and Maheswaran, 1991). Kemph, Laczniak, and Smith (2006) found evidence of this phenomenon in their study of the way men and women differ in their processing of advertising and product trials. In this case, women were able to tell researchers not only the information that was present about a product, but also the information that was missing. It is possible that their need for more bits of information in order to form global judgments allowed them to detect such fine details. Men, on the other hand, relied on a few large observations to come to their conclusions. Researchers Meyers-Levy and Sternthal looked further into the gender differences in processing message cues (1991). They found that men and women actually exhibit similar processing of message cues that are very obvious as well as those that prompt very little attention. However, the message cues that are between these polar opposites are much more carefully scrutinized by women. Women have a tendency to elaborate on these messages, forming opinions using subtle cues. The work attributes these differences to the

psychological orientations of men and women documented in many psychology and development studies. This theory posits that men strive to assume agency, which is self-focused and assertive. Women, on the other hand, strive to gain communion, attempting to align themselves with others in their surroundings. This necessitates them being extremely observant to many forms of subtle cues, especially those interpersonal in nature. Such findings may also have biological roots. Much research has been done on the right hemisphere of the brain, with its strong ability to process holistic and visual stimuli (Hansen 1981,cited in Meyers-Levy, 1989), and the left hemisphere of the brain, with its ability to focus on linguistic stimuli (Kimura and Durnford 1974, cited in Meyers-Levy, 1989). While men tend to use their left hemisphere more, it is suggested that women use both sides, potential making them naturally better at picking up a variety of message cues. Physical structure differences between men and women are sometimes attributed for this discrepancy (De LaCoste-Utamsing and Holloway, 1982 cited in Meyers-Levy, 1989). Using information processing and message recognition literature as guiding principles in the creation of promotional material has several implications for the present study. First, when attempting to present a department as “diverse” or “female friendly,” the use of canned photographs representing all races, abilities, and genders will immediately be ignored by both males and females when making culture based judgments about a department. This obvious message that “diversity is valued” is too easily recognized on a conscious level. Instead, it is the more subtle cues that might make a difference in a woman’s opinion of the department. Given women’s sensitivity to visual stimuli, comprehensive information processing style, and ability to pick up on message cues, it is important to recognize that the content on web pages potentially affects female recruitment. Gender and Workplace Preference Additional research also finds gender differences in the characteristics women consider when searching for jobs. When looking for employment opportunities, women are more interested in interpersonal relationship possibilities such as working with others and making friends (Konrad et al., 2000.) In 1999 Maier (cited in Freeman, 2003) went so far as to suggest that there are “feminine” organizational attributes. Some of these included: prioritizing life-work integration; inclusiveness, intimacy and caring among core values; “service” as the main motivator; empowerment; and empathy. Freeman’s work tested whether female undergraduates also valued these “feminine” attributes. She found that women valued an informal and friendly culture and a place that really cared about them as individuals. In addition, these undergraduates desired a workplace where they could find things in common with others. Measuring such characteristics on websites is difficult. However, observing the intimacy level of a department might be possible by looking at photographs and asking questions such as: are people looking at one another or even touching? Are the photographs candid or posed? Measuring opportunities for interaction with other females is possible by counting the number of female based organizations listed, counting the number of clicks to get to these organizations, and observing if mentorship programs are available. Diversity in general was found to be important to young women looking for a job (Freeman, 2003). Noting whether or not departments have a policy or even a message about diversity can determine the level of priority this holds for the department. Gender and Technology There have also been studies within the Information Technology communities regarding gender differences in technology usage. In general, the web has been found to be less hospitable to women than to men (Herring, 2000). Simon (2001) found that men and women varied greatly in their preference regarding websites. Women preferred “sites that are less cluttered, with minimal use of graphics and sites which avoid multiple levels of sub-pages to drill through.” Men wanted extensive graphics and animated objects. A study by Venkatesh and Morris (2000) found that women value ease of use while men value perceived usefulness. Some additional research suggests that women and men differ in their color and graphic preferences and are more opinionated about such issues (Gassaway, Davis, and Gregory cited in Huang, 2005). All of this research, taken together, has led some to conclude that websites dedicated specifically to each gender are necessary to ensure that information-seeking needs are met (Marcella, 2002; Simon, 2001).

However, such effort might be difficult to justify for many departments and companies. In addition, it is possible that a more inclusive web environment can be achieved not by segregating, but by integrating features that appeal to both genders. This research hopes to uncover whether or not major differences in site features actually correspond with higher or lower recruitment of female students within departments. If so, perhaps these features should be redesigned in a more equitable way. Methods As a part of an ongoing study of 19 different departments at 5 Universities, the websites for all departments were studied for structural, graphic, and semantic differences. Pages were archived between September of 2006 and May of 2007, ensuring that they all came from the same academic year. Content analysis was performed on 105 different web pages from 16 of these departments. A subset of the websites was coded by multiple people in order to ensure inner-coder reliability. As with the Ogan, Robinson, Ahuja, and Herring (2006) study, the sample was split into two department types, with computer science (CS) in one and all of the applied information technology disciplines in another (Applied). The applied departments included Informatics, Information Science, Instructional Technology, and Information Systems. For each department, between 7 and 9 different pages were coded. These pages were those most likely to be visited by prospective students considering a program, including: Home, About Us/Mission, Contact Us, Prospective Student, Admissions/Applying, Current Student, People or Find People, Diversity, Other (for schools with very few of the above categories, other pages were substituted such as “Research Projects” or “Academics”). Over 90 variables/elements were recorded for every page. Some of these were: Accomplishments (the number listed, whether they include full names, gender ratio of accomplishments posted), quotes (count by gender), navigation elements (presence or absence of search boxes, physical addresses, headers, navigation bar, site maps, contact information), word usage, gender-related organizations (number of female organizations listed, number of clicks to arrive at a female organization’s website), photographs (number, size, position on page), and photograph content (focus of picture, individual vs. group photo, interaction between people (touching, eye contact), gender count). These elements can be combined into three categories: Photographs, Text, and Navigation. Within each, more specific questions might be answered about the gender cues being given by the websites. In addition, demographic data from the larger study was incorporated to provide the gender makeup of the student and faculty population for each school and department. This information was obtained from the university’s published statistics as well as phone interviews of departmental representatives. Using these data, it was possible to determine if female depiction in photographs and accomplishment lists were proportional to the ratio of males to females at the school. Finally, qualitative notes were also taken on each site. For inner-coder reliability, Krippendor’s Alpha was calculated. A value of .93 was achieved, which is considered appropriate for social science research. All data from the code sheets was then uploaded into SPSS for correlation evaluation between variables. Findings - Demographic Trends Although the small sample size of only 15 different departments prohibits the use of advanced statistics for analysis purposes, it is possible to look at simple percentages of female faculty members among the departments. It turns out that all of the CS departments coded in this study have a low percentage of female faculty members (less than 15% of their faculty members are female) and that the Applied departments tend to have a higher percentage (almost 70% of the departments had at least 25% female faculty membership). The trend was mirrored in their female student populations, with 75% of the CS departments having “very low” percentages (0-15%). 66.7% of Applied departments, conversely, were made up of “extremely high” percentages (above 40%) of females. Findings - Photographs Gender Representation in Individual Photographs - Although no major conclusions can be drawn from a total of only 58 photographs of individual people, it is interesting to note that overall the departments tended to

represent females in similar proportion to their student enrollment statistics. Photos found on Applied websites were more evenly male and female while those found on CS websites typically had more males.

Table 1. Gender Representation in Individual Photographs

Male Female Total Applied 20 20 40 Department

Type CS 13 5 18 Total 33 25 58

Frequency of Group Photo composition - While there are very few group photographs exclusively composed of women, Applied pages clearly have a higher percentage of females represented in group photographs. In fact, the largest sample of photos actually has higher female representation (51-79% female). Males are prominently represented in group photographs in Computer Science, with over half of these photos being predominantly male (80% or more of the people in the photo are clearly male).

Table 2. Gender Representation in Group Photographs Predominantly

male More male

Equal More female

Predominantly female

Total

Applied 2 6 8 10 1 27 Department Type CS 10 4 1 2 1 18 Total 12 10 9 12 2 45

Intimacy Level - Posed and Candid Photographs - Intimacy level was another item to consider in photographs. As stated earlier, women prefer friendlier, intimate cultures. One way to measure the intimacy level of the website is to determine whether or not the photographs used are obviously posed (portrait style or a group all smiling and staring into the camera) or more candid in nature. When candid photographs are used, it can be assumed that these are representations of typical/regular happenings within the department. Interestingly, the computer science departments had almost twice as many candid photos as posed. The trend is reversed on the Applied pages. Given women’s stronger preference for informal and friendly environments, it is worth exploring further the possible implications of these data.

Table 3. Count of Posed Versus Candid Photographs Posed Candid Total

Applied 45 26 71 Department Type CS 12 20 32 Total 57 46 103

Intimacy Level – Subject of Photographs - The two department types were remarkably similar in their choice of subjects for their photographs. Neither CS nor the Applied departments focused exclusively on one type of subject for their photographs, but both predominantly used people as the focus rather than buildings, classrooms, or objects (including technologies). Intimacy Level – Touching in Photographs - Another way to show intimacy in a photograph is to portray people intentionally touching one another. For instance, people shaking hands, putting an arm around another person’s shoulder, or even giving a “high five” are all intimate acts. This sort of behavior is universally unrepresented on all but one of the departmental websites coded. Thus, no conclusions can be drawn from this variable. Intimacy Level – Eye Contact in Photographs - One final measure of intimacy is whether or not people are making eye contact. This might indicate higher levels of interpersonal communication within the department. While only 11 of the photographs studied depicted people making eye contact, almost half (5) of them were found on the Computer Science pages. Considering that only 32 of the 104 photographs were from Computer

Science in the first place, this finding is interesting. It shows a fairly strong level of intimacy within this subset of photographs. Findings – Text There are several ways that text might send subtle gender cues. These include using gendered words, listing the names or giving credit to only one gender, or quoting only one gender. Gendered terms - Most departments avoid the use of gender specific words. Only 11 of the 94 pages had even a “he” or “she,” and none of them made gender insensitive statements such as “when a student enters our program he should expect ….” Accomplishments Listed - The listing of accomplishments can be interpreted in many ways. To some it may be viewed as ego-centric and self aggrandizing, while to others it may seem an appropriate way to focus more on the individuals rather than the department as a whole. Regardless, Computer Science was significantly more likely to have longer lists of accomplishments than the Applied pages did (Kendall’s tau-c=.438, p=.029). Accomplishments by Gender, Department-specific- Because this study was attempting to understand first impressions, gender of the names was assessed based on the experience and personal knowledge of the coders. Names which were questionable were excluded from the tallies. Thus, the coding scheme is potentially biased toward the first impression that Western students might have, as both coders were from the United States. However, tally exclusions were extremely rare. When the gender of the person who is credited with an accomplishment is categorized, the sample size becomes too small for statistical analysis. However, simply looking at the counts (above) shows that the two departments do not tend to give more credit to males or females, when names are used. There are two interesting findings here, however. The largest category of gender proportion for the Computer Science pages was “all female,” even though the proportion of students and faculty in Computer Science who are female is extremely small. In addition, on many of the Applied pages the gender was not known because first names were not used. Whether or not this is an intentional design decision is unknown.

Table 4. Gender Proportion of Accomplishments Listed

No accomplish-ment listed

All male

Mostly male Equal

All female

Gender is never apparent

Total

Department Type

Applied 51 2 1 1 2 14 71

CS 22 2 3 0 4 3 34

Total 73 4 4 1 6 17 105 Accomplishments by Gender, Combined Departments - When the data from both Applied as well as CS are merged together, we can see the broader picture of accomplishment listings for women in IT. While the majority of pages had either “all male” or “more male” accomplishments listed (54.4%), the largest single category was pages listing only female accomplishments (40%) listed only female accomplishments. Considering only one department has more than 40% female faculty members, these results may indicate intentional efforts to highlight achievements of female faculty.

Table 5. Accomplishments by Gender, Combined Departments

Frequency Percent Valid

Percent Cumulative

Percent All male 4 3.8 26.7 26.7 More male 4 3.8 26.7 53.3 Equal 1 1.0 6.7 60.0 More females 0 0 0 60.0

All female 6 5.7 40.0 100.0 Total 15 14.3 100.0

Quotes - Quotes were another form of text studied. Inline quotes are those embedded in the larger blocks of text on a document. They are sometimes in stories or in mission statements. However, only two out of 105 coded pages contained inline quotes. Pull out quotes are slightly more common. Of the 11 examples found, 8 of them were from the Applied pages. Males were quoted 100% of the time on Applied pages and 66% of the time on Computer Science pages. The sample size are not large enough to make any broad conclusions. But, it is interesting that even in departments with higher percentages of both female faculty members and students that only men were quoted. Findings - Navigation Being able to find information on a page is the main reason a prospective student visits a department’s website. As noted earlier, research indicates that males and females have very different information processing strategies. Thus, it is possible that the layout of information can be more beneficial to one gender than another. Search Boxes - Applied departments use search boxes significantly more frequently than CS (Phi=.267, p=.006). Sitemaps - The Applied departments are also more likely to have sitemaps on their pages (Phi=.278, p=.004). Because women are comprehensive information processors, this feature may be more inviting to them. Contact Us link - The Applied departments are significantly more likely to provide a “contact us” link on the page, without having to scroll to see the link (Phi=.208, p=.033). Females strongly prefer interpersonal contact. While no data were found suggesting that women use this form of communication more frequently than men, even the presence of this as an option may signal to prospective students that the department values such interpersonal contact. Physical Address Listed - In contrast, the Computer Science departments were more likely to provide a physical address (Phi=-.214, p=.029). Sending inquiries via mail is an asynchronous, unidirectional, and thus less interpersonal form of communication. It is possible that the presence of a physical address, rather than a “contact us” link is part of a departmental decision to limit the posting of email addresses and direct links spamming methods might manipulate. However, such decisions should be weighed against the potential for sending subtle cues of an impersonal environment. School-Wide Template - It is important to question whether such navigation decisions are made on the part of the department or the school as a whole. If the department is simply following some form of school-wide template, it is difficult to say that they are sending department-specific cues. However, the Computer Science departments in this study were much less likely to be using such a template (Cramer’s V=.440, p=<.001). So, their navigation decisions (not putting “contact us” or “sitemap” or a search box on every page) is typically their own decision, not one dictated by the school. Visual Layout - Because women are comprehensive information processors, maintaining a consistent layout from one page to another is important to lower processing time and minimize distraction. While men can easily ignore changes in page features, women attempt to integrate such changes into their overall impression of the site. Thus, extreme changes can be very frustrating for women. The Computer Science pages coded were significantly more likely to consist of many different layouts throughout the site (Kendall’s tau-b=.260, p=.010). These sorts of design decisions may be due to varying priorities within departments. Applied fields, especially those which focus on design skills, may consider the look and feel of the page to be a very high priority. Other departments may choose to showcase their research and downloadable project examples, focusing less on presentation and more on content.

Connecting Women to Other Women – Number of Women’s Organizations - With interpersonal communication, a friendly and informal culture, and opportunities to meet other people like themselves as some of the top characteristics desired by women, providing links to women’s organizations on campus is a good way to achieve several of these goals at once. Of the 105 pages coded, 66 had no links to any women’s organizations. Of the remaining 39, it is clear that the Computer Science pages linked to more organizations more frequently. The trend, although not as strong, is similar for links to minority organizations.

Tables 6. Number of Women’s Organizations Linked To 0 1 2 3 Total Department Type Applied 58 13 0 0 71 CS 8 0 18 8 34Total 66 13 18 8 105

Table 7. Number of Minority Organizations Linked To

0 1 3 4 Total Department Type Applied 57 7 0 7 71 CS 13 6 8 7 34Total 70 13 8 14 105

Qualitative Findings Mentoring opportunities On several of the CS, mentorship was mentioned. One linked to information about a camp they hosted which encourages girls to get involved in Computer Science and another site allowed prospective students to find an alumni mentor or talk with a student. Both of these are good examples of interpersonal communication. Diversity statements/pages Many of the departments in both CS and the applied fields had links to diversity information, often consisting of a department’s pledge to change patterns of under representation. However, very few mentioned women when stating their desire to ensure that their department was more representative of the broader population. Typically “race” or “minority” were the only defining terms used, although “disability” and “socioeconomic status” were also listed at least once. A few departments went on to list the demographics of their student population, but the proportion of males to females was very difficult to find on most. Student Groups As mentioned above, CS departments were more likely to link to female student organizations than the applied departments. However, one applied site had links for “underrepresented minorities” and another had a good deal of information about minority services. Once again, what they meant by “underrepresented” was not clear, but it is possible that women would consider these to be good possible service options. In addition, several had distribution lists for people with children. While not a formal organization, such attempts at weaving family life with academia might be perceived by prospective female students as more welcoming. Conclusions It is clear from the results of this study that neither Computer Science nor the Applied departments are significantly better at implementing female oriented features on their pages. As seen in the summary presented in Table 8, there are substantial feature differences between the websites of the Computer Science and the Applied departments. However, the overall trends are perhaps more important. The CS websites have many beneficial recruitment features. Their pages exhibit high numbers of female and minority specific organizations and more links to such groups. They post more photographs highlighting examples of the informal, interpersonal settings females are looking for in a career environment. They also have a high percentage of females represented in group photographs, considering their low overall enrollment. Finally, in addition to posting diversity statements, several of the departments go further, organizing mentorship programs to make such efforts a reality. The consistent presence of these varied female-promoting elements on the CS

websites lead us to speculate that these departments are making an effort to reverse low enrollment statistics, promoting an environment of inclusion. Table 8 - Summary of Findings. “X” represents department with more female-oriented features

Applied Neither Departmen

t

Computer Science

Gender in Individual Photos X Gender in Group Photos X Candid/Informal Photos X Eye Contact in Photographs X People-Centered Subject of Photos X

Phot

ogra

phs

Gendered Words X Quotes X Accomplishments Listed (quantity) X

Text

Accomplishments Listed (gender) X Search Box X Site Map X Contact Us X Visual Layout Consistency X

Nav

igat

ion

Links to Women’s Organizations X

Trends in the applied departments are quite different. Visually, their pages have more photographs of women in both individual portraits as well as group pictures. This is representative of their higher enrollment statistics. The applied pages were better for females in terms of information processing strategies, with consistent layout throughout sites, more sitemaps, and a high use of search boxes. Finally, from an interpersonal communication standpoint, these sites were also better, with more ways to contact people. However such trends might be motivated by these departments’ overall design strategies rather than a desire to ensure female receptiveness to their sites. Many of these elements are considered best practices within the design community, which strongly influences many of the applied departments. Additionally, we should be tentative in concluding that the female supportive elements on the Computer Science websites are intentional and those on the Applied pages are simply byproducts of good design. For instance, the fact that Computer Science has more links to women’s organizations may have more to do with the fact that they have been on campus much longer, had time to create such organizations, and have formed better connections to university-level organizations such as Women in Science. It may not be a conscious decision. In addition, it is possible that the webmasters on the Applied pages made a sincere attempt to ensure that women and men were fairly represented. In addition, even if some of the applied departments have not focused on using their websites to recruit females, this does not necessarily stem from a lack of caring. The applied departments’ behavior may not be an intentional ignoring of the problem of female recruitment and retention. Their already high numbers of women, whether they stem from their association with already highly female populated departments (such as Library and Information Science or Education) or their real-world application approach, may dissuade them from giving the topic of gender in IT a high level of priority. Ultimately, enrollment trends can change over time. The most important issue is whether those trends are changing in a direction that is beneficial or not. Computer Science departments need to keep focusing on recruitment. The applied departments may need to focus more on retention and ensuring that they are providing a supportive environment throughout the academic process and that their well balanced enrollment trends continue. Evaluating the public image conveyed via departmental websites might be one way both departments can achieve their goals. While it would be helpful to create exacting heuristics for ways to avoid negative gender cues on websites, this fine level of detail is beyond the scope of the current study. A much larger sample size would be needed, incorporating longitudinal data in order to detect trends and outliers in both female recruitment and retention as well as how major changes in website characteristics might influence

the findings in this sort of study. However, even this smaller study suggests some interesting possibilities, such as: 1. Consider overall look and feel of pages regarding photograph usage. There is not a need to include both

genders in every photograph or ensure that an even number of males and females are pictured in individual portraits. However, excessive use of one gender may be viewed as a subtle gender cue.

2. Departments with diversity statement should make sure those statements are accessible via the

departments’ websites (others should consider developing such a statement). This indicates that inclusion is an important goal for the department and sends a message to anyone wondering if they will or won’t fit in.

3. Make sure that any women’s or minority organizations are linked to from the departmental page. This

shows that supportive groups are available and that such groups are supported by the department. 4. Maintain a consistent layout on pages to lower cognitive load while searching for information. This benefits

both genders and is a good overall design method. However, it is especially helpful to females who have more comprehensive search strategies.

5. Always include a way for a visitor to contact actual people within the department. The link should be visible

without the visitor needing to scroll. Interpersonal contact is highly valued by women. Many of these suggestions are easy to implement. However, simply adding photographs of women or making superficial changes while failing to work on real issues of inequality is not recommended by this study. This, coupled with the fact that females are better able to pick up on manipulative intent (Chang, 2007) and subtle cues (Meyers-Levy 1989; Meyers-Levy & Sternthal, 1991), suggests that such changes will not work. Re-evaluating the navigation and communication styles on the website, giving females an equal voice and listing their accomplishments, and representing them appropriately in must follow genuinely valuing the work and contributions of the women in the department. Limitations of this study The diverse makeup of departments grouped under the label “Applied” was not explored in this study. Given the above suggestion that differences in recruitment intentions and design approach may be related to structural features of departments, these factors may vary widely between “Applied” departments and within subfields of those departments. In addition, the pages were all evaluated on a “first impression” basis, meaning that pages were viewed only one time and then coded. Thus, if images or quotes rotated, some may have been missed. However, because an average of 7 pages per department were coded, and many of the rotating photo slots are found on every page, the likelihood that only one set of images or quotes was observed (all of the men, for instance) is not high. Finally, due to extreme differences in page sizes, only information displayed on the page without scrolling was coded. This goes into the “first impression” category, as well, assuming that subtle cues would be noticed within the first few seconds of viewing a page. It also served as a way to normalize the data, as different departments structure their pages in different ways and the code sheet for a website that is three pages long would skew the data. In addition, the actual intention of the web developers can only be determined by interviews with the actual content providers, which was beyond the feasibility of this study. Future Work It is important to note that there is no way to measure the cumulative effects of all of the elements on these websites put together. The only way to truly understand whether these elements add up to a positive or negative impression for females and/or males is to record actual human responses. To do so, one could briefly show users a website and have them rate it on various attributes, noting the first reaction of the users, and asking which features stand out to them on each page. Another possibility would be to ask users to compare two websites, finding common elements on highly rated pages and determining whether males and females rate pages differently. Finally, task analysis could be performed on each website, asking users to

learn specific facts about the school, noting information processing or navigation differences between genders and recording emotional responses to different pages and/or elements. This research is a first step in understanding which elements might deserve such further testing. Acknowledgements I gratefully acknowledge the guidance of Dr. Christine Ogan on this research project. References Abrahamson, T. (2000). Life and Death on the Internet: To Web or Not to Web is No Longer a Question. Journal of College Admission. 168, 6-11. Chang, C. (2007). The Relative Effectiveness of Comparative and Noncomparative Advertising. Journal of Advertising. 36:1, 21-35. Freeman, C. (2003). Recruiting for Diversity. Women in Management Review. 18:1/2, 68-76. Herring, S. (2000). Gender Differences in CMC: Findings and Implications. CPSR Newsletter, 18:1. Holbrook, M. (1986). Aims, Concepts, and Methods for the Presentation of Individual Differences in Esthetic Responses to Design Features. Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 337-347. Huang, E. (2005). The Acceptance of Women-Centric Websites. The Journal of Computer Information Systems. 45:4, 75-83. Jones, M.Y., Stanaland, A.J., and Gelb, B.D. (1998). "Beefcake and Cheesecake: Insights for Advertisers," Journal of Advertising, Summer. Kempf, D., Laczniak, R., & Smith, R. (2006). The effects of gender on processing advertising and product trial information. Market Lett. 17, 5-16. Konrad, A., Ritchie, J., Lieb, P., & Corrigal, E. (2000). Sex differences and similarities in job attribute preferences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin. 126, 593-641. Marcella, R. (2002). Women on the Web, a Critical Appraisal of a Sample Reflecting the Range and Content of Women’s Sites on the Internet, with Particular Reference to the Support of Women’s Interaction and Participation. Journal of Documentation. 58:1, 79-103. Meyers-Levy, J. (1989). Priming Effects on Product Judgements: A Hemispheric Interpretation. Journal of Consumer Reports. 16:1, 76-86. Meyers-Levy, J. & Maheswaran, D. (1991). Exploring Differences in Males’ and Females’ Processing Strategies. Journal of Consumer Reports. 18, 63-70. Meyers-Levy, J. & Sternthal, B. (1991). Gender Differences in the Use of Message Cues and Judgements. Journal of Marketing Reserach. 28:1, 84-96. Ogan, C., Robinson, J., Ahuj, M., and Herring, S. (2006). The More Things Change, the More they Remain the Same. In W. Aspray and J. M. Cohoon (Eds.), Women and Information Technology: Research on the Reasons for Under-representation. MIT Press.

Rosenthal, R., and DePaulo, B.M. (1979), "Sex Differences in Accommodation in Nonverbal Communication," in Skill in Nonverbal Communication: Individual Differences, Rosenthal, R. (ed.), Cambridge, MA: Oelgeschlager, Gunn and Hain, Publishers, Inc., pp. 68-103. Simon, J. (2001). The Impact of Culture and Gender on Web Sites: An Empirical Study. Dababase for Advances in Information Systems, 32:1, 18-37. Venkatesh, V. & Morris, M. (2000). Why Don’t Men Ever Stop to Ask for Directions? Gender, Social Inflluence, and Their Role in Technology Acceptance and Usage Behavior. MIS Quarterly, 24:1, 115-125. Will, E. & Callison, C. (2006). Web presence of universities: Is higher education sending the right message online? Public Relations Review. 32, 180-183.