What Are the Most Serious Issues for Women in Science Now?
Dear friends of women in science,
Danny Kramer recently taped an interview with me for the Harvard radio station and his final question was about what issues still remain, what are the must urgent needs of women in science now?
We've been up and down about the work of Ceci and Williams on this forum, but they are right in saying postdocs and grad students do NOT have enough support for childbirth/childcare, at the very moment of fertility and need to reproduce, and that can impact people's career decisions and convince them to leave science. So that's one of my top two.
The other one is respect for established women. That encompasses unfair lack of invitations to speak, conference awards, and major recognitions and prizes, as well as lack of simple inclusion in networks. Women partly have little idea how to keep scientific networking going, with some notable exceptions. But there are AWIS and other workshops on the how-tos of networking now and I highly recommend taking one. Daniel Moynihan once said benign neglect was needed in a situation, but I think neglect is almost never benign. It isn't malicious, but it can be devastating, leading to loss of outstanding associate professors and early full professors as women in science, who feel like no one respects and appreciates them. They aren't part of the network and it hurts. Sometimes they focus on their own associates, students, postdocs and try to forget the lack of notice by others. But science is a collaborative construction of understanding, and lack of connection makes the brilliant woman's contributions count for less than they should, contribute less to the overall clarity and insight.
Those are my picks, but I'd love to hear yours!
best,
Laura
Laura,
Hear hear. You are absolutely spot on, regarding the effects of exclusion on established women.
We have a facile assumption that younger women "opt out" of academe because they have no positive role models. But I wonder how many "opt out" because they see the experience of women at a higher level....and they don't want that for themselves.
Dear Cathy,
Thanks for the good information. I guess it's good news that post-PhD, women grit their teeth and stay around. I'd be happier if I didn't frequently hear from some of them how unhappy and unsupported they feel, but it's something that they don't drop out more than men do at that level.
cheers,
Laura
The research of Anne Preston suggests that, on average, career constraints operate differently for women with PhDs than for women whose highest S&E degree is a BA or MA. She examined survey data collected between 1982 and 1999. Rates of leaving science for men and women with S&E PhDs and were the same (see Table 2, p. 7 of 2006 working paper).
In contrast, women whose terminal S&E degrees were BAs or MAs had higher exit rates than did men.
Preston's interview study suggests that PhDs often have a more flexible work environment than MAs and BAs. Anne-Marie Slaughter's situation illustrates why (even if she isn't a natural scientist or engineer): in academe, one often has more control over one's schedule than elsewhere (e.g., at the State Department). So, this is one reason to encourage women (and men) not to stop with a BA or MA--and to publicize workplaces for S&E BAs and MAs that do allow flexibility.
Preston also found:
"The relatively small number of women in the interview sample who leave science because of family concerns does not mean that family issues were easily solved by women who were balancing work and family. Rather almost every woman was grappling with these issues so that it was not a factor that could differentiate many stayers from leavers. Similarly, perceptions by women of sex discrimination and double standards were prevalent among the interviewed women. However sex discrimination and double standards were only secondary factors in exit decisions as they contributed to low levels of mentoring, a mismatch of interests, and difficulties in shouldering
the double burdens of family and career. Furthermore many of these women had dealt with perceived sex discrimination since high school and had found strategies to persist in science in spite of unequal treatment." (2006 working paper, p. 13)
Although Ceci and Williams cite the work of Preston, some aspects of these findings may come as a surprise.
Preston's working paper is here: http://www4.gsb.columbia.edu/rt/null?&exclusive=filemgr.download&file_id=29107&rtcontentdisposition=filename%3DAnnePreston_Columbia_conference_paper.pdf
Hi Livi,
Yes, that's important too, I agree. And Carol, I am very worried we may lose a lot of middle level faculty women in science for this reason. AWIS is working hard to make people aware of the issues re society awards, the middle layer of these problems. But what the woman feels "at home" where her colleagues never invite her to lunch or ask her to speak at their meetings, that is harder to address.
cheers,
Laura
Dear Laura,
The respect one is right per my experience. I hear that all the time from my friends, how some field they are now considering would applaud them more, would be glad to have them, not treat them as grudgingly accepted people.
CR
Dear Laura,
Apropos of that study in PNAS, maybe we also need to focus on the messages faculty are sending to our prospective new generation of scientists. Some kind of workshops or something is needed to address making both men and women aware of this problem and helping them learn to send more encouraging messages to girls.
LM
