IN2SAI - Increasing young women´s participation in Science Studies and in the Aeronautic Industry
Grant Agreement n° 2013-2936 001 - 001
Project Number: 539439-LLP-1-2013-1-ES-ERASMUS-ESIN
D7. Report on Current Situation
Author: UPM – Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
About this document
This is a formal deliverable under WP2 of the project IN2SAI (INcreasing young women’s participation
in Science Studies and in the Aeronautic Industry). This document describes the findings of thecurrent situation concerning women’s participation in scientific studies and AI jobs.
Dissemination Level
The following dissemination level is set for this report/deliverable in accordance with the contract with the Commission Services:
Public
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the
official European Commission’s view on the subject.
In2sai Consortium:
SPAIN - Promoter
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid Mr. Javier Crespo Moreno [email protected]
ITALY
University of Bologna Ms. Francesca De Crescenzio [email protected]
GERMANY
Technische Universität Dresden Chair of Air Transport Technology
and Logistics, Institute of Logistics and Aviation Ms. Stefanie Friedel
PORTUGAL – Coordinator Inova+
Ms. Candela Bravo [email protected]
ITALY
CESIE – European Centre of Studies and Initiatives Ms. Silvia Ciaperoni
AUSTRIA
E.N.T.E.R. - European Network
for Transfer and Exploitation of EU Project Results Ms. Petra Kampf
[email protected] THE NETHERLANDS
Delft University of Technology Faculty of Aerospace Engineering Section of Air Transport & Operations Prof. Warren E. Walker
539439-LLP-1-2013-1-ES-ERASMUS-ESIN This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
This publication [communication] and all its contents reflect the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
INDEX
1 PURPOSE OF THE DOCUMENT ... 12
2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ... 13
1. INTRODUCTION ... 15
2. CURRENT FRAMEWORK ... 18
2.1. European Aerospace Industry ... 18
2.2. Academic scope: European Universities ... 25
3. THE OVERALL METHODOLOGIA FOR DATA COLLECTION ... 28
3.1. Desk-Based Research ... 28
3.2. Questionnaires ... 30
4. FINDINGS AND RESULTS ... 33
4.1. Results from Desk Research ... 33
4.1.1. Universities with Aeronautic – Aerospace studies ... 33
4.1.2. Aerospace Engineering Students ... 35
4.1.3. Second Study Cycle ... 36
4.1.4. Employees Working In Aerospace Companies ... 36
4.1.5. Professors Of Aerospace Engineering ... 37
4.1.6. Doctors in Aerospace Engineering ... 37
4.1.7. Managers in Aerospace Engineering Companies ... 38
4.2. Results from the Questionnaires ... 39
4.1.1. Secondary Education Students ... 39
4.1.2. Higher Education Students ... 56
4.1.3. Higher Education Teaching Staff ... 75
4.1.4. Human Resources Managers ... 91
5.
OPEN QUESTIONS ... 104
5.1. Secondary Education Students ... 104
5.2. Higher Education Students ... 106
5.3. Higher Education Teaching Staff ... 111
5.4. Human Resources Managers ... 114
6. CONCLUSIONS ... 116
4 ANNEX ... 118
TABLES
Table 1: Aerospace Engineering Centres in Austria ... 33
Table 2: Aerospace Engineering Centres in Germany ... 33
Table 3: Aerospace Engineering Centres in Italy ... 34
Table 4: Aerospace Engineering Centres in Portugal ... 34
Table 5: Aerospace Engineering Centres in Spain ... 34
Table 6: Percentage of Aerospace Engineering Faculties ... 35
Table 7: Aerospace Engineering Students ... 35
Table 8: Second Study Cycle ... 36
Table 9: Employees working in Aerospace Companies ... 36
Table 10: Professors of Aerospace Engineering ... 37
Table 11: Doctors in Aerospace Engineering ... 37
Table 12: Managers in Aerospace Industry ... 38
Table 13: Expected number of answers. ... 39
Table 14: Secondary Education Students‘ Countries ... 40
Table 15: Secondary Education Students‘ Age ... 40
Table 16: Secondary Education Students‘ Interest in Scientific Studies ... 41
Table 17: Secondary Education Students‘ Main Scientific Studies of Interest ... 42
Table 18: Secondary Education Students‘ Main Engineering Field of Interest ... 43
Table 19: Secondary Education Students‘ Motivations to study Engineering ... 44
Table 20: Secondary Education Students‘ Knowledge about Aeronautical Engineering ... 45
Table 21: Secondary Education Students‘ Perception about the Difficulty of Aeronautical Engineering ... 46
Table 22: Secondary Education Students‘ Perception of Gender Related Jobs ... 47
Table 23: Secondary Education Students‘ Perception of Teachers and Training Material ... 51
Table 24: Secondary Education Students‘ Access to Career Counselor and Visits to Universities ... 51
Table 25: Secondary Education Students‘ Access to the Aeronautic Department or Facilities. ... 53
Table 26: Secondary Education Students‘ Perception about the Number of Employment
Opportunities in AI ... 53
Table 27: Secondary Education Students‘ Perception about Women and Technical Degrees ... 54
Table 28: Higher Education Students‘ Countries... 56
Table 29: Higher Education Students‘ Age ... 58
Table 30: Higher Education Student’s Engineering Field ... 60
Table 31: Higher Education Students‘ Motivations for their degree ... 61
Table 32: Higher Education Students‘ Satisfaction about the Degree Chosen ... 63
Table 33: Higher Education Students‘ Perception about the Difficulty of their Degree ... 64
Table 34: Higher Education Students‘ Perception about their Degree and Women ... 66
Table 35: Higher Education Students‘ Perception about the Gender Distribution in their Field... 67
Table 36: Higher Education Students‘ Perception about the Engineering Courses and Gender Equality ... 68
Table 37: Aeronautical Engineering Students‘ Perception about the Employment Opportunities in AI ... 70
Table 38: Aeronautical Engineering Students‘ Interest in the Future ... 70
Table 39: Aeronautical Engineering Students‘ Experience in the Aeronautical Industry ... 71
Table 40: Aeronautical Engineering Students‘ Perception about Possible Obstacles for Women ... 72
Table 41: Aeronautical Engineering Students‘ Perception about implementing initiatives ... 73
Table 42: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Countries ... 75
Table 43: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Age ... 77
Table 44: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Last degree ... 79
Table 45: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Engineering Field ... 80
Table 46: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Time Teaching... 81
Table 47: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Perception about the Information the Students have ... 82
Table 48: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Perception about Male and Female Students ... 83
Table 49: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Perception about the Characteristics of the Courses and
Gender Equality ... 85
Table 50: Initiatives for Attracting Female Students in Engineering ... 86
Table 51: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Experience in Industry ... 87
Table 52: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Perception of Wage Discrimination ... 89
Table 53: Human Resources Managers‘ Countries ... 91
Table 54: Human Resources Managers‘ Age ... 92
Table 55: Human Resources Managers‘ Main Business Domain ... 92
Table 56: Percentage of Women in the Human Resources Managers‘ Companies ... 94
Table 57: Gender Ratio of Women in the Human Resources Managers‘ Companies ... 94
Table 58: Recruitment in Human Resources Managers‘ Companies ... 96
Table 59: Importance of Criteria for Human Resources Managers ... 98
Table 60: Human Resources Managers‘ Perception about Women and Positions of Responsibility . 100 Table 61: Existance of Specific Female Programmes in the Human Resources Managers‘ Companies ... 101
Table 62: Human Resources Managers‘ Perception about Advances in ICT and Women ... 102
FIGURES
Figure 1: Employment and value add share of AI. ... 18
Figure 2: Production, value added and employment in AI ... 19
Figure 3: Productivity of UE27 Total Aerospace Industry inf Average (Source Eurostat) ... 19
Figure 4: Breakdown of EU Aerospace Industry turnover by product segment 2006 (Source ASD). .. 20
Figure 5: Distribution of aircraft final products in 2006 (Source ASD) ... 20
Figure 6: Skills levels of the employees in the EU Aerospace Industry in 2007 (%)(Source ASD) ... 21
Figure 7: EU 27 Average annual growth AI (2001-2006)(Source Eurostat) ... 21
Figure 8: Investment rate at AI(Source Eurostat) ... 22
Figure 9: Production Trends of main EU Aerospace Producers (Source Eurostat) ... 23
Figure 10: Production Trends of Smaller Aerospace Producer Countries (Source Eurostat) ... 23
Figure 11: Share of Aerospace value-added and employment of National Manufacturing 2006 (Source Eurostat) ... 24
Figure 12: Breakdown of Aerospace employment EU countries 2006 (Source ASD) ... 24
Figure 13: Number of companies per volume of employment 2006 (Source Eurostat) ... 25
Figure 14: Analysis of the Current Situation ... 28
Figure 15: Analysis of the Desk-Based Research ... 30
Figure 16: Analysis of the Questionnaires ... 32
Figure 17: Template for gathering data from different countries (I) ... 29
Figure 18: Template (II) ... 29
Figure 19: Secondary Education Students‘ Countries ... 40
Figure 20: Secondary Education Students‘ Age ... 41
Figure 21: Secondary Education Students‘ Interest in Scientific Studies ... 42
Figure 22: Secondary Education Students‘ Main Scientific Studies of Interest ... 43
Figure 23: Secondary Education Students‘ Main Engineering Field of Interest ... 44
Figure 24: Secondary Education Students‘ Motivations to study Engineering ... 44
Figure 25: Secondary Education Students‘ Knowledge about Aeronautical Engineering ... 46
Figure 26: Secondary Education Students‘ Perception about the Difficulty of Aeronautical Engineering ... 47
Figure 27: Secondary Education Students‘ Perception of Gender Related Jobs ... 49
Figure 28: Secondary Education Students‘ Perception of Gender Related Jobs ... 49
Figure 29: Secondary Education Students‘ Perception of Teachers and Training Material ... 51
Figure 30: Secondary Education Students‘ Access to Career Counselor ... 52
Figure 31: Secondary Education Students‘ Access to Visits to Universities ... 52
Figure 32: Secondary Education Students‘ Access to the Aeronautic Department or Facilities ... 53
Figure 33: Secondary Education Students‘ Perception about the Number of Employment Opportunities in AI ... 54
Figure 34: Secondary Education Students‘ Perception about Women and Technical Degrees ... 55
Figure 35: Higher Education Students‘ Countries (by gender) ... 57
Figure 36: Higher Education Students‘ Countries (by engineering) ... 57
Figure 37: Higher Education Students‘ Age (by gender) ... 59
Figure 38: Higher Education Students‘ Age (by engineering) ... 60
Figure 39: Higher Education Student’s Engineering Field ... 60
Figure 40: Higher Education Students‘ Motivations for their degree (by gender) ... 62
Figure 41: Higher Education Students‘ Motivations for their degree (by engineering) ... 63
Figure 42: Higher Education Students‘ Satisfaction about the Degree Chosen (by gender) ... 64
Figure 43: Higher Education Students‘ Satisfaction about the Degree Chosen (by engineering) ... 64
Figure 44: Higher Education Students‘ Perception about the Difficulty of their Degree (by gender) .. 65
Figure 45: Higher Education Students‘ Perception about the Difficulty of their Degree (by engineering) ... 65
Figure 46: Higher Education Students‘ Perception about their Degree and Women (by gender) ... 66
Figure 47: Higher Education Students‘ Perception about their Degree and Women (by engineering) 66
Figure 48: Higher Education Students‘ Perception about the Gender Distribution in their Field (by
gender) ... 67
Figure 49: Higher Education Students‘ Perception about the Gender Distribution in their Field (by
engineering) ... 68
Figure 50: Higher Education Students‘ Perception about the Engineering Courses and Gender Equality (by gender) ... 69
Figure 51: Higher Education Students‘ Perception about the Engineering Courses and Gender Equality (by engineering) ... 69
Figure 52: Aeronautical Engineering Students‘ Perception about the Employment Opportunities in AI ... 70
Figure 53: Aeronautical Engineering Students‘ Interest in the Future ... 71
Figure 54: Aeronautical Engineering Students‘ Experience in the Aeronautical Industry ... 72
Figure 55: Aeronautical Engineering Students‘ Perception about Possible Obstacles for Women ... 73
Figure 56: Aeronautical Engineering Students‘ Perception about implementing initiatives ... 74
Figure 57: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Countries (by gender) ... 76
Figure 58: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Countries (by engineering) ... 77
Figure 59: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Age (by gender) ... 78
Figure 60: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Age (by engineering) ... 78
Figure 61: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Last degree (by gender) ... 79
Figure 62: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Last degree (by engineering) ... 80
Figure 63: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Engineering Field ... 81
Figure 64: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Time Teaching (by gender) ... 81
Figure 65: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Time Teaching (by engineering) ... 82
Figure 66: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Perception about the Information the Students have (by gender) ... 83
Figure 67: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Perception about the Information the Students have (by engineering) ... 83
Figure 68: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Perception about Male and Female Students ... 84
Figure 69: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Perception about the Characteristics of the Courses and
Gender Equality (by gender) ... 85
Figure 70: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Perception about the Characteristics of the Courses and
Gender Equality (by engineering)... 86
Figure 71: Initiatives for Attracting Female Students in Engineering ... 87
Figure 72: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Experience in Industry (by gender) ... 88
Figure 73: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Experience in Industry (by engineering) ... 88
Figure 74: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Perception of Wage Discrimination (by gender) ... 89
Figure 75: Higher Education Teaching Staff’s Perception of Wage Discrimination (by engineering) ... 90
Figure 76: Human Resources Managers‘ Countries ... 91
Figure 77: Human Resources Managers‘ Age... 92
Figure 78: Human Resources Managers‘ Main Business Domain ... 93
Figure 79: Percentage of Women in the Human Resources Managers‘ Companies ... 94
Figure 80: Gender Ratio of Women in the Human Resources Managers‘ Companies ... 96
Figure 81: Recruitment in Human Resources Managers‘ Companies ... 97
Figure 82: Importance of Criteria for Human Resources Managers ... 100
Figure 83: Human Resources Managers‘ Perception about Women and Positions of Responsibility 101 Figure 84: Existance of Specific Female Programmes in the Human Resources Managers‘ Companies ... 102
Figure 85: Human Resources Managers‘ Perception about Advances in ICT and Women ... 103
PURPOSE OF THE DOCUMENT
The purpose of this document is to describe the findings from the analysis of the current situation concerning women’s participation in scientific studies and in the Aeronautic Industry, from each country included in the consurtium, i.e. Austria, Italy, Germany, Netherlands, Portugal and Spain, but also other EU countries have been considered. The findings included in this document are those gathered by means of a defined methodology described in the Deliverable 6.
This document summarizes the project objectives and describes the methodologies and instruments used for the data gatering, namely desk research and a online survey targeted to the following groups: Higher Education Professors, Higher Education Students, Secondary Education Students and Human Resources Managers. In addition, the document also provides a detailed presentation of the results and conclusions.
This report will therefore provide a comprehensive overview of the most important indicators with
respect to the European education for scientific and engineering careers and the European labour
market for engineers in the context of the countries participating in the project.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Under the motto “Bridging Women, Science & Industry” the IN2SAI project analysed the current situation of Aeronautic sector at academic and industry level. This analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the most important indicators with respect to the European education for scientific and engineering careers and the European labour market for engineers in the context of the countries participating in the project, therefore covering Spain, Portugal, Italy, the Netherlands, Germany, and Austria.
The data collection included two methods: (i) a desk-based research and (ii) a questionnaire. The desk-based research activity included information at European level and at national level (the latter focusing on the information identified by each IN2SAI partner at their country level, but also considering data from other European countries). The purpose of the desk research was to present an overview of educational aspects and how they influence in gender balance in AI and scientific studies and to understand the level of participation of young women in those studies. The data were collected from existing statistics, (national and European), academic sources (for secondary and higher education), and direct contacts with aeronautical and aerospace companies.
The desk research was complemented by the implementation of a questionnaire addressed to the 4 main target groups: Secondary Education Students, Higher Education Students and Professors, and Human Resources Managers. The questionnaire was available online from April 2014 to July 2014, and got a total 1.329 responses.
- Secondary Education Students: 481 responses;
- Higher Education Students: 640 responses;
- Higher Education Teaching staff: 162 responses;
- Human Resources Managers: 46 Responses.
Some conclusions obtained about the current situation of young women’s participation in AI, are presented as follows:
The participation of women in the aerospace industry is unbalanced, less than 15% of the workforce in AI is female.
Most women prefer to be enrolled in human, artistic and health careers instead of engineering careers.
In spite of the number of aerospace universities in Europe the number of young women enrolled in engineering studies is low (around 25% of women are enrolled in scientific and engineering studies).
The number of women in positions of high-responsibility in the aeronautic industry is lower than men.
The number of female professors and female doctors is lower compared to the number of male.
The EU is doing a big effort to motivate young women to become engineers in technical
sectors, especially in the aerospace industry (AI).
The participation of women in scientific studies, and in particular in aeronautics, has improved over
the last decades. But still it is important to develop measures and initiatives at the national and
European levels to keep engaging and motivating young women to enroll in scientific and
aeronautical careers.
1. INTRODUCTION
People working as Engineers or in scientific jobs, play an important role for the European economy.
Engineers are especially important for the economies of the European countries because of the technical progress, competitiveness, technical innovation and economic growth.
The labour market for engineers in Europe is not homogeneous, creating different conditions for engineers in the respective areas. Such differences may be motivated by educational aspects and how they influence in gender balance in AI and scientific studies.
The European Commission has established equality between women and men as one of the fundamental principles of Community law. The European Union‘s (EU) objectives on gender equality are to ensure equal opportunities and equal treatment for men and women, and to combat any form of discrimination on the grounds of gender. The EU has adopted a two-pronged approach to this issue, combining specific measures with gender mainstreaming. The issue also has a strong international dimension with regard to the fight against poverty, access to education and health services, taking part in the economy and in the decision-making process, women's rights and human rights.
The strategy of the Commission for equality between women and men between 2010 and 2015 contributes to improving the place of women in the labour market, in society, and in decision-making positions both in the European Union and the world. This strategy is built around several main lines of action:
Economic independence of women:
Although the female employment rate has increased significantly during the past decade, it is necessary to keep raising it in order to obtain a 75% employment rate (asked by the Europe 2020 strategy) and to improve the quality of jobs and work/life reconciliation policies.
Equal salaries:
The gender salary gap still exists, because of many causes like segregation in education and in the labour market. One initiative to eliminate it is to encourage women to enter non- traditional professions.
Equality in decision-making:
Despite the fact that women make up half of the workforce and more than half of new university graduates in the EU, they are under-represented in parliaments, national governments, and on management boards of large companies.
Dignity, integrity, and an end to gender-based violence:
It is estimated that 20-25% of women living in the EU have suffered physical violence at least
once.
Gender equality in external actions:
The European Commission will progress equal treatment between women and men in the candidate and potential candidate countries for accession to the EU, implement the EU Plan of Action on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in Development, conduct a regular dialogue and exchange of experience with the European Neighbourhood Policy partner countries, and integrate equal treatment considerations into humanitarian aid operations.
The Fifth Community Action Programme on Equal Opportunities, which took place between 2001 and 2006, can be seen as a precedent of the previous strategies. Its objectives were to promote and disseminate the values and practices underlying gender equality; to improve understanding of issues related to gender equality, including direct and indirect gender discrimination and multiple discrimination against women; and to develop the capacity of players to promote gender equality effectively, in particular through support for the exchange of information and good practice and networking at Community level.
The objectives pursued now are very similar and they are focused in the following areas:
Employment and the labour market:
A legal framework for equal opportunities will be structured and the reconciliation of family and working life will be improved.
Women entrepreneurs and assisting spouses in SMEs:
Women will be helped by improving flexibility at work, vocational qualifications and access to finance.
Education and training:
All the Community activities related to those topics will be designed to incorporate equal opportunities, even if it is not their specific objective.
People’s rights:
Violence against women will be combated.
Development cooperation:
The principle of gender mainstreaming, i.e., taking systematic account of the differences between the conditions, situations, and needs of women and men in all Community policies and actions, will be incorporated in development of Community policies and in the development of cooperation agreements with developing countries.
Staff policy:
The Commission has applied an equal opportunities policy to its staff for many years through
positive action programmes.
The IN2SAI project is embedded in the education and training objective, aiming at increasing the participation of female students in higher education studies in scientific fields (especially those relevant for aeronautics) and to contribute to their integration into the AI.
The project work plan foresees several activities that require the active participation of young women, as well as of other relevant stakeholders, such as professors and industry representatives.
It is composed of six different work packages:
WP1: Project Management & Coordination.
WP2: Analysis of Current Situation.
WP3: Bridging Women – Science & Industry.
WP4: Community Outreach.
WP5: Dissemination of Results.
WP6: Assessment of Results.
The present document belongs to WP2 (Analysis of Current Situation), deliverable 7: Report on current situation. It presents the analysis of the data obtained from a desk-based research and from questionnaires distributed among the following four target groups:
Secondary Education (SE) Students:
The objective is to understand which factors they consider when deciding about future studies in higher education, and their perception about following scientific courses or choosing a career in a technical field, in particular related to aeronautics.
Higher Education (HE) Students:
The objective is to understand their perception about possible paths in scientific studies/research as career opportunities in the Aerospace Industry, and to identify possible causes for lack of interest for these areas and suggestions for improving their attractiveness among females.
Higher Education (HE) Teaching Staff:
The objective is to understand this group’s perception about female´s low participation in scientific studies, particularly those related to the aeronautic sector. This group was also inquired about strategies used for attracting young women into science studies and/or research.
Human Resources (HR) Managers:
The objective is to understand which requirements for new employees are taken into account, what are the decisive factors for selecting a new employee, and their ideas for increasing the participation of females in AI.
The key findings were organized in different areas corresponding basically to the target groups of this
project.
2. CURRENT FRAMEWORK
2.1. European Aerospace Industry
The European Aerospace Industry is in political terms an important sector. However, in economic terms its relative importance is less outstanding. Nonetheless, it creates spillover effects for other high-tech-sectors in terms of innovations.
During the last decade, the industry has experienced a breakdown between the events of 11 September 2001 and the year 2004, which resulted in an explicit decline in the value-added share of the sector during that time. Nevertheless, at the same time the share of aerospace employment out of the total manufacturing employment has stayed relatively constant at around 1.2%:
Figure 1: Employment and value added share of AI.
In 2006 the total production value was at around EUR 127 billion, the value-added (difference
between production value and intermediate input) around EUR 34 billion and the sector employed
around 375.000 people. The growth of the production value has not been accompanied by an
analogous growth in value-added during the last ten years, which already indicates an outsourcing
tendency (strongly increasing the intercompany deliveries within the aerospace industry, or
outsourcing to other industries or to non-European countries), while employment has increased
slightly. The production has experienced a large volatility during this period. After a small growth
period that lasted till 2001, a decline took place from 2001 to 2003, caused by the events of
September 11, while the production grew again after that. The following figure shows the latest
trends in the value of production, value-added and employment. The value of production and value-
added have been calculated with 2008 constant prices.
Figure 2: Production, value added and employment in AI
In inflation-adjusted terms the productivity of the industry has shown a small downwards trend. The labour productivity (value-added per employee, measured in thousand EUR per head), has faced a decline according to each of the indicators as the employment and wages of the sector have been growing faster than the value-added. This development has been induced by investment in human capital (more and better educated personnel) and new products, which has a delayed effect on production and value-added, particularly in this industry with extremely long product-life-cycles and development periods.
Figure 3: Productivity of UE27 Total Aerospace Industry in Average (Source Eurostat)
Together the production of aircraft and helicopters (aircraft final products) accounted for over 50%
of total aerospace production at 2006 in the EU27 according to the Aerospace and Defence
Industries Association of Europe (ASD). In addition, maintenance and repair services accounted for
around 20%:
Figure 4: Breakdown of EU Aerospace Industry turnover by product segment 2006 (Source ASD).
Large civil aircraft and military aircraft account by far for the largest share of aircraft final productions, while helicopters account only for some 11% and regional aircraft and business jets for few percentages.
Figure 5:Distribution of aircraft final products in 2006 (Source ASD)
If the employees in the European Aerospace Industry are classified by their skill levels, around 1/3 of
the employees are highly educated (university graduates), 1/3 manual workers and 1/3 others
(including technicians, draughtsmen, craftsmen, secretaries, etc.)
Figure 6: Skills levels of the employees in the EU Aerospace Industry in 2007 (%)(Source ASD)
Compared to the other manufacturing industries, the European aerospace sector has shown lower production growth and lower value-added growth during the period from 2001 to 2006. As employment and wages in the aerospace industry has increased more than in other industries and the related employment growth has been faster than the real growth of value-added. The apparent labour productivity and wage adjusted labour productivity have decreased while in overall manufacturing industries in general the opposite occured. Similarly, the value-added per hour has decreased. The increase in the real wages compared to other manufacturing industries is reflected especially in the decrease in wage adjusted labour productivity in the aerospace industry, while the same indicator for all manufacturing industries has increased as the wages in other industries have even decreased somewhat in real terms.
Figure 7: EU 27 Average annual growth AI (2001-2006)(Source Eurostat)
The investment in aerospace has been slightly lower and more volatile than in other manufacturing industries during the period from 1998 to 2006. While the investment experienced a rise in general manufacturing from 1998 to 2001 and has been decreasing till 2006, the investment in the aerospace sector have stayed in general in a more stable range and varied in about two years intervals:
Figure 8: Investment rate at AI (Source Eurostat)
The aerospace industry in the EU27 was still highly concentrated in 2006, while decentralisation has been going on. France, UK and Germany accounted for nearly 80% of the total EU27 aerospace production and value-added and around 70% of the total employment. However, while France had by far the highest production value, it lies behind the UK (the second largest aerospace producer in the EU) in terms of value-added and employment share.
A major reason for this statistical discrepancy can be seen in the final assembly line of Airbus in
Toulouse, where the major part of Airbus aircraft is finalized and delivered. The average annual
growth rates of the aerospace production during the last decade shows that many small producer
countries are catching up. For example, Austria, Slovenia, Spain, Czech Republic and Denmark have
been growing significantly during the last decade, given the low initial position. At the same time,
value-added has declined in countries like the UK, Germany and Sweden. For instance, the
production in Spain, France, Germany and Italy has performed better than in the UK.
Figure 9: Production Trends of main EU Aerospace Producers (Source Eurostat)
Figure 10: Production Trends of Smaller Aerospace Producer Countries (Source Eurostat)
The size of the aerospace production in the large EU producer countries is not only caused by the
total size of the respective economy. The aerospace industry plays in these countries traditionally an
important role, which can be seen in a significantly higher share of aerospace in total manufacturing
value-added and employment. This is most obvious in the UK followed by France, Germany and Italy.
Also in some smaller producer countries like Sweden, Greece, Belgium and Romania the industry accounts also for a relatively high share of value-added and employment.
Figure 11: Share of Aerospace value-added and employment of National Manufacturing 2006 (Source Eurostat)
In terms of total employment, the UK, France, Germany and Italy have also the largest numbers of people employed in the sector:
Figure 12: Breakdown of Aerospace employment EU countries 2006 (Source ASD)
On the one hand, with respect to the size of the companies in the sector, the majority of them are small enterprises when measured by number of companies. However, large companies play dominant roles in the sector especially in the UK and France. On the other hand, in terms of value- added, the largest companies account also for the largest share.
Figure 13: Number of companies per volume of employment 2006 (Source Eurostat)
2.2. Academic scope: European Universities
The main European Universities offering scientific studies and particularly those offering aeronautical studies are the following:
Country Universities
France Number: Nine
Paris École centrale Paris
Toulousse
École Nationale Supérieure de l'Aéronautique et de l'Espace (SUPAERO) École Nationale Supérieure d'Ingénieurs de Constructions Aéronautiques (ENSICA)
École Nationale de l'aviation civile (ENAC)
Institut Supérieur de l'Aéronautique et de l'Espace (ISAE-SUPAERO)
Chasseneuil-du-Poitou École Nationale Supérieure de Mécanique et d'Aérotechnique (ENSMA)
Ivry-sur-Seine Institut Polytechnique des Sciences Avancées (IPSA)
Bordeaux Institut de Maintenance Aéronautique (IMA)
Country Universities
Marseille Université de la Méditerranée
Germany Number: Eight
Berlin Technical University of Berlin (TU Berlin)
München Munich University of Technology (TU München)
Aachen RWTH Aachen University
Braunscheweig Technical University of Brunswick
Stuttgart University of Stuttgart
Braunschweig Braunschweig university of technology
Dresden Dresden Universit of Technology (TU Dresden)
Worms University of Applied Sciences, Worms
Greece Number: One
Patra Universidad de Patras
Italy Number: Eight
Milano Politecnico di Milano
Torino Politecnico di Torino
Roma La Sapienza
Caserta Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli
Bologna Universidad de Bologna
Padova Università di Padova
Pisa Universidad de Pisa
Naples Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II
The Netherlands Number: One
Delft Delft University of Technology (TU Delft)
Portugal Number: Four
Lisboa Instituto Superior Tecnico (IST)
Covilhã Universidade da Beira Interior
Setúbal Instituto Politécnico de Setúbal - Escola Superior de Tecnologia de Setúbal
Sintra Academia da Força Aérea
Spain Number: Thirteen
Madrid
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid:
3. Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Aeronáuticos (ETSIA) 4. Escuela Universitaria de Ingenieros Técnicos Aeronáuticos (EUITA) 5. Escuela de Ingeniería Aeronáutica y del Espacio (EIAE)
Universidad Alfonso X el Sabio Escuela Politécnica Superior UAX Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
Escuela Politécnica Superior - Campus de Leganés Universidad Europea de Madrid
Universidad Rey Juan Carlos
Cataluña
Universidad Politécnica de Cataluña
Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería Industrial y Aeronáutica de Tarrasa (ETSEIAT)
Country Universities
Escuela de Ingeniería de Telecomunicaciones y Aeroespacial de Castelldefelds (EETAC)
Valencia
Universidad Politécnica de Valencia
Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería del Diseño
Sevilla
Universidad de Sevilla
Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros
Cádiz Escuela Superior de Ingeniería (ESI)
León Escuela de Ingenierías Industrial, Informática y Aeronáutica de León
Sweden Number: One
Stockholm Kungliga Tekniska högskolan
United Kingdom Number: Fifteen
England
University of Bristol Coventry University Cranfield University University of Hertfordshire Kingston University University of Liverpool Loughborough University University of Southampton University of Manchester University of Sheffield Imperial College London University of Cambridge
Wales University of Glamorgan
Scottland University of Glasgow
North Ireland Queens University Belfast
3. THE OVERALL METHODOLOGIA FOR DATA COLLECTION
In this section is presented the methodology in terms of what has been done in the context of the project to evaluate the current situation of young women’s participation in science and aeronautics studies and industry.
In order to gather the necessary data, two different approaches have been used: Desk-based research and Questionnaires.
Figure 14: Analysis of the Current Situation
3.1. Desk-Based Research
An initial desk-based research on the level of participation of young women in scientific studies and aeronautical industry (AI) was carried out by consortium partners with the purpose of having a first understanding about the overall context of women participation in the the aeronautic field at academic and industrial level and to assess the the type of information should be collected through the distribution of questionnaires among the target group, therefore supporting the development of questionnaires.
First, a template for conducting the Desk Research Analysis was designed by the lead partner of WP2 (Analysis of current situation), P1. UPM, and made available to all partners, with the purpose of ensuring the similarity of all the collected data. Furthermore, specific instructions were provided.
The template used for gathering data in the Desk Research is illustrated in
Figure 15
andFigure 16
below.Figure 15: Template for gathering data from different countries (I)
Figure 16: Template (II)
All the partners (including UPM) performed the research analysis by collecting relevant information using existing studies, statistics, reports, etc. in their countries (Austria, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain). Afterwards a report with the findings was sent to the lead partner.
It is necessary to mention that some difficulties were encountered in some cases to obtain all the
data, as the information was not always available for the public access and some institutions have
put some obstacles in delivering it.
Finally, the data compiled in the Desk Research is described in the following section.
Figure 17: Analysis of the Desk-Based Research
3.2. Questionnaires
The specific methodological procedures were defined in an early stage of the project as presented in the deliverable 6. The procedure has been then applied by each project partner to gather the information at national level. The methodology established the number of questionnaires to be distributed to each representative group (SE and HE students, HE professors and human resources managers) and the target of responses as specified in the DoW (see table below).
Secondary Education Students
Higher Education Students
Higher Education Teaching Staff
Human Resources Managers
200 200 200 100
The design of the questionnaires was based in a quantitative and qualitative methodology, with the purpose of gathering statistical and numerical data and to assess the real motivations and interests from the respondents´ responses, thus a scale Likert was used in some of the questions.
In order to ensure the similarity and comparability of all the data, guidelines were developed for collecting and research process. Several requirements were taken in consideration for gathering the information:
Design of questionnaires.
Free access to these questionnaires for all groups.
Design of an online tool for easy and quick answer to any user.
Develop hardcopy questionnaires for distribution through other channels (i.e. events).
Data Analysis of gathered information.
The questionnaires issued for all the groups have two types of questions:
General questions: related with the identification of the respondent, such as nationality, age, sex.
Specific questions according with the target group of the questionnaires: SE students, HE students, Teaching staff, and human resources managers.
o Secondary Education (SE) students: The questions intend to assess the interest of students for future university careers.
o Higher Education (HE) students: These questions try to gather information of students enrolled in engineering careers, regarding their motivations and expectations.
o Higher Education (HE) teaching staff: These questions address several issues related to the perception of the teaching staff about the motivations of female students to select engineering careers, the material used in teaching and how gender aspects are addressed.
o Human Resources (HR) managers: These questions addressed the relation between gender and responsibility positions in any company, the requirements for recruitment for a professional position and the obstacles and initiaves to promote the recruitment of women in technical positions.
An additional requirement considered in the design of the questionnaires was simplicity of questions and user-friendliness. The objective was to get answers from the target groups in an easy and quick way. The questions included:
Quantitative questions: This technique allows to data gathering to be converted into numeric and statistical data.
Qualitative questions: The questionnaires included questions considered as open questions.
In these questions the respondents can express their personal opinion about the particular theme of the questions.
As mentioned above the results gathered from the desk-based research were used to assess the overall context and to identifying what information/data was necessary to be collected by the partners. Therefore, after its analysis, several questions were defined for each target group (Secondary Education Students, Higher Education Students, Higher Education Teaching Staff, and Human Resources Managers).
Once the questions were defined, it was decided to use questionnaires in both paper and online formats (google forms) to be distributed them among the four target groups. In order to overcome language barriers that may compromise data collection, questionnaires were translated into Dutch, German, Italian, Portuguese, and Spanish.
Due to low rate of responses in some specific target groups a time extension was considered to allow
gathering more replyes. The final deadline for collecting questionaires was set on 30/06/2014. After
that all the data was collected and compiled for further analysis.
Figure 18: Analysis of the Questionnaires
4. FINDINGS AND RESULTS
4.1. Results from Desk Research
4.1.1. Universities with Aeronautic – Aerospace studies
The purpose of this section was to compare the total number of universities to the number of universities that specifically offer Aeronautic/Aerospace Engineering studies in each of the six countries belonging to the consortium.
It should be underlined that the total number of European Universities related to the aerospace field is 110.
Austria
There are 55 Universities in this country, 2 of which offer Aerospace Engineering and 6 of which have a focus on this degree:
Table 1: Aerospace Engineering Centres in Austria Aerospace Engineering Faculties
FH Joanneum Graz, Luftfahrt / Avionik FH Wiener Neustadt, Aeronatical engineering Faculties which focus on Aerospace Engineering
TU Wien, Institut für Konstruktionswissenschaften und Technische Logistik TU Wien, Institut für
Leichtbau und Struktur-Biomechanik
TU Wien, Institut für Werkstoffwissenschaften und Werkstofftechnologien
TU Graz, Institut für Thermische Turbomaschinen
u. Maschinendynamik TU Graz, Institut für Mechanik TU Graz, Institut für Kommunikationsnetzwerke
und Satellitenkommunikation Universität Graz, Institut für Psychologie
Germany
There are 34 Universities, 7 of which teach Aerospace Engineering:
Table 2: Aerospace Engineering Centres in Germany
FH Worms Uni Stuttgart
TU Berlin TU Dresden
TU Munchen University of Aachen
Braunschweig university of technology
Italy
There are 34 Universities, 8 of which offer Aerospace Engineering:
Table 3: Aerospace Engineering Centres in Italy
Politecnico di Milano Politecnico di Torino
Università degli Studi di Roma La Sapienza Università degli Studi Federico II di Napoli Università degli Studi di Bologna Università degli Studi di Padova
Università degli Studi di Pisa Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II
The Netherlands
There are 25 Universities, 1 of which teaches Aerospace Engineering: TU Delft.
Portugal
There are 77 Higher Education Institutions, 4 of which teach Aerospace Engineering and 3 of which have Aerospace scientific/management courses:
Table 4: Aerospace Engineering Centres in Portugal Aerospace Engineering Institutions
IST – Instituto Técnico Superior (Lisbon) UBI – Universidade da Beira Interior AFA - Academia da Força Aérea – Air Force Academy
Institutions with Aerospace scientific/management courses Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e
Tecnologias - ULHT Instituto Superior de Educação e ciências - ISEC Faculty of Engineering of Porto – FEUP Instituto Politécnico de Setúbal
Spain
There are 81 Universities in this country, 10 of which teach Aerospace Engineering:
Table 5: Aerospace Engineering Centres in Spain
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid Universidad Politécnica de Cataluña Universidad Carlos III Universidad Politécnica de Valencia Universidad Rey Juan Carlos Universidad de Sevilla Universidad Alfonso X El Sabio Universidad de Cádiz
Universidad Europea Universidad de León
Analysis of Results
The results show that a total of 61 faculties teach aerospace engineering in the context of the countries involved in the project.
Table 6: Percentage of Aerospace Engineering Faculties
Universities
Country Aerospace Engineering Total number of
faculties
Austria 8 55
Germany 4 34
Italy 8 34
The Netherlands 1 25
Portugal 7 77
Spain 10 81
4.1.2. Aerospace Engineering Students
The data on the number of students and in particular the percentage of female and male students was obtained from the gollowing sources.
Based on the desk based research, it was assessed that the percentage of female Aerospace Engineering Students is between 10-23% in the six countries.
Table 7: Aerospace Engineering Students
Aerospace Engineering Students
Country % women % men
Austria1 20 80
Germany2 13 87
Italy3 15 85
The Netherlands4 23 77
Portugal5 14 86
Spain6 22 78
1 Data obtained from Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Innovation und Technologie
2 Data obtained from the four Aerospace Universities
3 Data obtained from the “Ministero dell'Università e della Ricerca - Ufficio di Statistica. Indagine sull'Istruzione Universitaria”.
4 Data was obtained directly from TU Delft
5 Data was obtained from the three Aerospace Institutions
6 Data was obtained from Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Universidad Politécnica de Cataluña and Universidad Politécnica de Sevilla
4.1.3. Second Study Cycle
The purpose of this section is to show the second study cycle offered by universities at corresponding countries.
Table 8: Second Study Cycle
Second Study Cycle
Country % women % men
Austria7 - -
Germany8 - -
Italy9 14 86
The Netherlands10 25 75
Portugal11 15 85
Spain12 26 74
4.1.4. Employees Working In Aerospace Companies
The purpose of this section is to compare the total number of male and female workers in the aeronautical/aerospace industry in the six countries that belong to the consortium.
Table 9: Employees working in Aerospace Companies
Employees working in Aerospace Companies
Country % women % men
Austria13 21 79
Germany14 48 52
Italy15 16 84
The Netherlands16 -- --
Portugal17 24 76
Spain18 28 72
7 A Master in Aeronautics is provided by FH Joanneum Graz, Luftfahrt/Avionik FH Wiener Neustadt, Aeronautical engineering. None of these institutions were able to provide any statistics.
8 Not information available
9 Data obtained from the “Ministero dell'Università e della Ricerca - Ufficio di Statistica. Indagine sull'Istruzione Universitaria”
10 Data obtained from TU Delft
11 Data obtained from the three Aerospace Institutions
12 Data obtained from Universidad Politécnica de Cataluña
13Data obtained from the “Austrian Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology (BMVIT) – The Aeronautics Industry in Austria”.
14 Data obtained from Air Berlin group
15 Data obtained from “Labourstat (ILO Department of Statistics)”
16 It was not possible to obtain data
17 Data obtained from PGA – Companhia Portuguesa de Transportes Aéreos, S.A.
18 Data obtained from the companies Isdefe, Iberia and AENA
4.1.5. Professors Of Aerospace Engineering
The purpose of this section is to compare the total number of male and female professors of aerospace engineering in the universities six countries which belong to the consortium.
Table 10: Professors of Aerospace Engineering
Professors of Aerospace Engineering
Country % women % men
Austria19 9 91
Germany20 0 100
Italy21 13 87
The Netherlands22 16 84
Portugal23 26 74
Spain24 16 84
4.1.6. Doctors in Aerospace Engineering
The purpose of this section is to compare the total number of male and female doctors of aerospace engineering in the universities from the six countries that belong to the consortium.
Table 11: Doctors in Aerospace Engineering
Doctors in Aerospace Engineering
Country % women % men
Austria25 - -
Germany26 12 88
Italy27 22 78
The Netherlands28 - -
Portugal29 46 54
Spain30 28 72
19 Data were obtained from the 8 Universities mentioned in previous section
20 Data were obtained from the 4 Universities mentioned in previous section
21 Taking into account assistant professors, associate professors and full-time professors
22 Data were obtained from TU Delft
23 Data were obtained from the Aerospace Institutions
24 Data were obtained from Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
25No PhD in Aeronautical engineering currently offered in Austria
26 Data was obtained from the 4 Universities mentioned in previous section
27 Data was also obtained from the “Ministero dell'Università e della Ricerca - Ufficio di Statistica. Indagine sull'Istruzione Universitaria”.
28 Not possible to collect data.
29 Data obtained from the Aerospace Institutions.
30 Data obtained from the Technical University of Madrid.
4.1.7. Managers in Aerospace Engineering Companies
The purpose of this section is to compare the total number of male and female managers in companies related to the aerospace industry in the universities six countries which belong to the consortium.
Table 12: Managers in Aerospace Industry
Managers in Aerospace Industry
Country % women % men
Austria31 - -
Germany32 27 73
Italy33 24 76
The Netherlands34 - -
Portugal35 14 86
Spain36 12 88
31 Statistics not available.
32 Data obtained from AirBerlin Group.
33 Data obtained from Eurostat.
34 Not possible to collect data.
35 Data obtained from 14 companies related to the Aerospace Industry.
36 Data was obtained from 80 companies related to the Aerospace Industry.
4.2. Results from the Questionnaires
The data have been obtained through the questionnaires defined in Deliverable 6: Methodology for analysing the current situation which can be found in the Annex A of the Deliverable 7: Report on current situation document.
As previously mentioned the target number of responses, as defined in the Description of Work (DoW) were the following:
Table 13: Expected number of answers.
Secondary Education Students
Higher Education Students
Higher Education Teaching Staff
Human Resources Managers
200 200 200 100
Since the questionnaire is constituted by quantitative and qualitative questions, the quantative questions are going to be analysed in this section and the quality questions are detailed in the questions analysis section.
The questionnaire was available online from April 2014 to July 2014, and got a total 1.329 responses.
Secondary Education Students: 481 responses;
Higher Education Students: 640 responses;
Higher Education Teaching staff: 162 responses;
Human Resources Managers: 46 Responses.
4.1.1. Secondary Education Students
The objective was to understand which factors they consider when deciding about future studies in higher education and their perception about following scientific courses or choosing a career in a technical field, in particular related to aeronautics.
The group is composed by teenagers, both male and female, between the ages of 14 to 18.
Initially in the Description of Work it was envisaged to address only female students bu it was considered to also consider male students for comparison purposes.
A total of 481 questionnaires have been analysed, in six different languages, of which were:
- 6 in German - 116 in English - 218 in Spanish - 135 in Italian - 5 in Dutch - 1 in Portuguese
Countries distribution:
The responses obtained represented the following countries:
Table 14: Secondary Education Students‘ Countries
Countries
Austria Germany Italy The Netherlands
16 1 171 31
M: 1 W: 15 M: 0 W: 1 M: 85 W: 86 M: 12 W: 19
Portugal Spain Morocco US Sahara
40 218 1 1 1
M: 15 W: 25 M: 129 W: 89 M: 0 W: 1 M: 1 W: 0 M: 0 W: 1
Figure 19: Secondary Education Students’ Countries
As observed in
Table 14
andFigure 19: Secondary Education Students’ Countries
, the majority of the survey respondents (46%) are from Spain followed by Italy (36%). There were also Secondary Education Students with different nationalities than the six representing the consorium, such as US, Morocco and Sahara.Age:
The Age of the survey responders was:
Table 15: Secondary Education Students‘ Age
Age
10 11 12 13 14 15
1 11 10 0 30 63
M: 1 W: 0 M: 4 W: 7 M: 5 W: 5 M: 0 W: 0 M: 12 W: 18 M: 40 W: 23
16 17 18 19 20 21
58 97 83 19 30 17
M: 27 W: 31 M: 51 W: 46 M:32 W: 51 M: 9 W: 10 M: 17 W: 13 M: 8 W: 9
22 23 24 25 26
10 10 7 17 4
M: 3 W: 7 M: 7 W: 3 M: 7 W: 0 M: 10 W: 7 M: 2 W: 2
27 28 29 30 31
7 0 2 1 1
M: 7 W: 0 M: 0 W: 0 M: 2 W: 0 M: 0 W: 1 M: 1 W: 0
Figure 20: Secondary Education Students’ Age
As observed in
Table 15 Table 15: Secondary Education Students‘ Age
and inFigure 20
, the majority of the survey respondents were between 17 and 18 years old representing 20% and 17% respectevely.Interest in Scientific Studies Age
Survey respondents were asked if they had interest in scientific studies and their answers were:
Table 16: Secondary Education Students‘ Interest in Scientific Studies
Interest in scientific studies
Yes No Don’t know
353 43 85
M: 176 W: 177 M: 21 W: 22 M: 47 W: 38
Figure 21: Secondary education Students’ Interest in Scientific Studies
As it can be seen in
Table 16
and inFigure 21
, the majority of the survey respondents expressed interested in pursuing scientific studies after secondary Education (around 73%) from which 50% were women.Those who answered to be interested in pursuing scientific studies after secondary education were asked to choose the three main scientific studies they were interested in. The responses were the following:
Table 17: Secondary education Students‘ Main Scientific Studies of Interest
Scientific Studies
Physics Mathematics Chemistry Engineering Biology and
Earth Science Medicine
133 129 74 253 74 87
M: 91 W: 42 M: 66 W: 63 M: 40 W: 34 M:
151
W:
102 M: 26 W: 48 M: 22 W: 65 Architecture Economics and
Business Astronomy Pharmacy Psychologie
63 43 2 1 2
M: 25 W: 38 M: 17 W: 26 M: 2 W: 0 M: 0 W: 1 M: 1 W: 1
Figure 22: Secondary Education Students’ Main Scientific Studies of Interest
As it can be seen in
Table 17
and inFigure 22
, the majority of the survey respondents who expressed interest in pusuing scientific studies (both men and women) were interested studies related to Engineering (around 53% from which 40% were women).This may seem contradictory because women were supposed to prefer other kind of studies like Medicine or Pharmacy. However, a possible explanation could be that most of questionnaires were distributed among students who went to Open Days at the technical universities, so they might be have already a prior interest in Engineering. In order to obtain a more representative sample, questionnaires were also distributed in classrooms. Nevertheless, special permissions were required for that purpose, which increased the difficulty in distributing them.
Those respndentd who chose Engineering were asked two more questions concerning the Engineering field they preferred and their motivations:
Table 18: Secondary Education Students‘ Main Engineering Field of Interest
Engineering field
Electrical Mechanical Aeronautical /
Aerospace Biomedical Computer Civil
9 46 161 50 45 21
M: 7 W: 2 M: 34 W:
12 M: 96 W: 65 M: 20 W:
30 M: 32 W:
13 M: 7 W:
14 Mining Marine Telecommunication Industrial Agronomic Materials
2 21 24 41 1 1
M: 2 W: 0 M: 13 W: 8 M: 17 W: 7 M: 21 W:
20 M: 1 W: 0 M: 0 W: 1
Figure 23: Secondary Education Students‘ Main Engineering Field of Interest As observed in
Table 18
and inFigure 23
, from of those who chose Engineering, 33% have a preference for Aeronautical/Aerospace Engineering (from which around 40% were women).This can also be explained because questionnaires were distributed in the Open Days in the Aeronautical/Aerospace Engineering facilities.
Table 19: Secondary Education Students‘ Motivations to study Engineering
Motivations
1 2 3 4
223 70 36 7
M: 137 W: 86 M: 32 W: 38 M: 24 W: 12 M: 5 W: 2
5 6 7
12 45 36
M: 3 W: 9 M: 24 W: 21 M: 20 W: 16
