again I worry about this being self-selecting. People who report on
surveys are .... the people who report on surveys. A code4lib survey
would be nice, but I'm really interested in "on the ground" troops. And
I think the questions would have to be specific to what one does:
- installs and fixes equipment
- runs updates/backups on ILS
- writes scripts
- writes code
- manages local network
- modifies ILS tables for local customization
- creates web pages
- makes decisions on tech purchasing
- supervises staff that runs ILS/local network
Well, that's probably a stupid list, but a smarter list could be made.
In other words, I would want what you actually do to define whether you
are a techie -- not whether you consider yourself a techie (many women
demean their own skills -- "Oh, I just push a few buttons").  I'd
like to see it be very broad, and later we can decide if we think
modifying ILS tables counts as being a "real techie."
 For painful reading: http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/28257411 The
letters of Ada Lovelace.
On 11/27/12 8:50 AM, Peter Murray wrote:
> A friend of mine is one of the principals behind "The Survey for People Who Make Websites" from A List Apart:
> Is that the sort of thing we'd like to do? If so, I can get some insights from him about how he develops, organizes, and runs the survey.
> On Nov 27, 2012, at 11:23 AM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> I would really like to see such a survey. I did one at my previous place
>> of work, the California Digital Library (nee Division of Library
>> Automation) where I worked for over 20 years. I had kept org charts and
>> phone lists, and was able to see that over that span of two decades the
>> tech staff (which was most everyone there since all we did was tech
>> development) was from 2/3 to 3/4 female. But when I said this in front
>> of a group of employees the men were startled. I'm guessing that they
>> saw themselves as techies, and the women as "helpers" -- even though the
>> DBA, the data designers, and many of the programmers were women. So it's
>> not that there aren't women in technology, it's that the women in
>> technology are often considered to be "not doing technology" because
>> they are women. 
>> So we should survey. I believe that we will find that in library
>> technology departments there are many "invisible" women. Sadly, women
>> will be more present in that environment for the wrong reasons -- mainly
>> that it's lower paying and that men are more likely to get the higher
>> paying industry jobs. (The University of California overall staff ratio
>> is 65% female -- as perhaps many government agencies are.)
>>  Must read: Joanna Russ. How to suppress women's writing.
>> http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/9392874 It's about writing but actually
>> pertains to all activities.
>> On 11/27/12 6:57 AM, Rosalyn Metz wrote:
>>> I think first we would need to do a survey of how many women are in the
>>> community. if it turns out that this community is only 17% women then
>>> we're on target. who knows, maybe we're actually 10% women and we're way
>>> above target. in which case the real question might be "how do we get more
>>> women in tech."
>>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Chad Nelson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>> Ooops. Hit the wrong key.
>>>> So, about our presenters...
>>>> Is it a problem that only 4 of our 33 presenters are women? Or that only 16
>>>> of 95 proposers were women?
>>>> Is there something this community needs to do to encourage more women to
>>>> feel like they can and should speak / propose sessions?
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net