Holly's Journal

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

I was browsing my usual christianity today website and clicked on a blog that linked to another, and then a listing of a woman of interest and her contributions to science. Then it lead me to another study of women in science - which really piqued my interest. This woman in particular is an assistant director for the Kavli institute for cosmological physics at the University of Chicago and author of the book 'Einsteins Telescope: The Hunt for Dark Matter and Dark Energy in the Universe' Not only is she a physics professor, but a mom of three to boot. In one of her speaking engagements, she addresses the age old issue of women in science - in particular physics. She contends that this problem is still around because of the general lack of scientists' will to put the scientific method toward the problem. There is a collective 'this is out of our hands' mentality and some cultural bias sprinkled in with some general hardheadedness of the issue at hand. Her justification is as follows......

Because we want to create and work

within a system that identifies,

encourages, and supports the brightest

and most motivated scientists and

science students

She began her talk with evidence from the Carnegie Mellon Computer Science program. The data shows that from '95 to '01 the retention rate for women there had not only improved, but doubled even as the admissions criteria and SAT scores for admission to the program increased.

Now I take this to mean if the pool includes a larger number of women, scratch that---scientists - then why wouldn't we afford a second look at the dilemma?

Ok, this is great and all, but we know that women are absolutely by no means equivalent to men in science. Take that controversial Harvard professor's statement several years ago..... Well, lets go to a publication by the Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy, who apparently puts creedence to the issue by putting forth this publication,

Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering (2007)

Here are some of the beliefs that are still held firm today:

Belief

Evidence

Where Discussed

Women are not as good in mathematics as men.

Female performance in high school mathematics now matches that of males.

Chapter 2

The matter of “under-representation” on faculties is only a matter of time; it is a function of how many women are qualified to enter these positions.

Women’s representation decreases with each step up the tenure-track and academic leadership hierarchy, even in fields that have had al arge proportion of women doctorates for 30 years.

Chapter 3

Women are not as competitive as men. Women don’t want jobs in academe.

Similar proportions of men and women science and engineering doctorates plan to enter postdoctoral study or academic employment.

Chapter 3

Behavioral research is qualitative; why pay attention to the data in this report?

The data are from multiple sources, were obtained using well-recognized techniques, and have been replicated in several settings.

Chapters2-5

Women and minorities are recipients of favoritism through affirmative-action programs.

Affirmative action is meant to broaden searches to include more women and minority-group members, but not to select candidates on the basis of race or sex, which is illegal.

Chapter 4

Academe is a meritocracy.

Although scientists like to believe that they “choose the best” based on objective criteria, decisions are influenced by factors—including biases about race, sex, geographic location of a university, and age—that have nothing to do with the quality of the person or work being evaluated.

Chapter 4

Changing the rules means that standards of excellence will be deleteriously affected.

Throughout a scientific career, advancement depends upon judgments of one’s performance by more senior scientists and engineers. This process does not optimally select and advance the best scientists and engineers, because of implicit bias and disproportionate weighting of qualities that are stereotypically male. Reducing these sources of bias will foster excellence in science and engineering fields.

Women faculty are less productive than men.	The publication productivity of women science and engineering faculty has increased over the last 30 years and is now comparable to men’s. The critical factor affecting publication productivity is access to institutional resources; marriage, children, and elder care responsibilities have minimal effects.	Chapter 4
	Women are more interested in family than in careers.	Many women scientists and engineers persist in their pursuit of academic careers despite severe conflicts between their roles as parents and as scientists and engineers. These efforts, however, are often not recognized as representing the high level of dedication to their careers they represent.	Chapter 5
	Women take more time off due to childbearing, so they are a bad investment.	On the average, women take more time off during their early careers to meet their caregiving responsibilities, which fall disproportionately to women. But, by middle age, a man is likely to take more sick leave than a woman.

The findings conclude...

The consequences of not acting will be detrimental to the nation’scompetitiveness. Women and minority-group members make up an increasing proportion of the labor force. They also are an increasing proportion of postsecondary students. To capture and capitalize on this talent will require revising policies adopted when the workplace was more homogeneous and creating new organizational structures that manage a diverse workforce effectively. Effective programs have three key components: commitment to take corrective action, analysis and utilization of data for organizational change, and a campus framework for monitoring progress.

This straight from the mouths of the committee, and I would have to agree...what would this country have to lose in efforts to change the existing stagnation of science in our culture? I think the infusion of more females in science would be a definite shot in the arm to our already lagging progress in this area.

// posted by HKB @ 8:37 PM

Comments:

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering (2007)

Post a Comment