..reads the title of a terrific post by Jamie Vernon–one of the few men who attended the packed event I moderated last week on Capitol Hill about Advancing Women in Science sponsored by L’Oreal and Discover Magazine. Jamie did an excellent job summarizing many of the key points discussed and adds his own perspective as well. Here’s an excerpt:
As the women panelists discussed the topics on the agenda, I began to realize that the success of women in science is not just a women’s issue. It’s an American issue. It became apparent that America is surely missing out on some significant scientific minds. These minds and their potential contributions to the world of science belong to women who have been driven out of science simply because they wish to fulfill the duty that only women can fulfill: motherhood. Seemingly, the most significant distinction between women and men is woman’s ability to bring life into this world. And, unfortunately, the demands of that job can be just too much for today’s scientific lifestyle. So, for the sake of humanity, many women are forced to make the choice to leave the field of science. And when you consider the women sitting on this panel; Pr. Sara Seager, Ellen Swallow Richards, Professor of Planetary Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Pr. Joan Steitz, Sterling Professor of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University, Dr. Shirley Malcom, Head of Education and Human Resources, American Association for Advancement of Science (AAAS), Russlynn Ali, Assistant Secretary, Office of Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education, it quickly becomes evident that when a woman chooses to leave the field of science, she takes with her all the potential for solving scientific problems that make her such an asset to the profession. It is not simply an issue of losing brain power. It is also a problem of losing diversity within the problem-solving community. Dr. Steitz emphasized that women bring diverse points of view to science. Not retaining that diversity diminishes our potential for curing diseases, developing new technologies and ending global climate change.
Among the statistics presented by Russlynn Ali that demonstrated a pattern of female attrition from science was the clear message that women just don’t feel comfortable enough in our current scientific community. Not only, is this an issue of fairness, it is also an issue of global competitiveness. In a world in which China and India are creating many more scientists and engineers yearly than America, we will eventually fall behind. One way we can increase our ability to compete is to encourage women to participate in the sciences. Dr. Seager proposed the first solution to these problems, stating that this is not an issue of competency for girls, but confidence. Young girls are capable of learning science and thinking scientifically, but they are discouraged from pursuing science at the earliest ages. Something must be done to turn this around. This will require changes that invite women into the sciences. Dr. Seager’s solution is to develop mentorships that support young women as they make the decision to become scientists. It will require understanding and guidance to build within them the confidence they need to join with the boys.
It’s a long and thoughtful recap with a lot of important ideas taken further than we had time to explore last Thursday. I encourage everyone to go read Jamie’s full post…
I’m interested in highlighting the positive aspects of new media on science writing, so this morning I began exploring the topic on the popular social networking site Facebook (to reach beyond the science blogosphere) before moving the discussion here. Read the insightful thread that has emerged and please join the conversation in comments:
Filmmaker Davis Guggenheim reminds us that education “statistics” have names: Anthony, Francisco, Bianca, Daisy, and Emily, whose stories make up the engrossing foundation of Waiting For Superman. As he follows a handful of promising kids through a system that inhibits, rather than encourages, academic growth, Guggenheim undertakes an exhaustive review of public education, surveying “drop-out factories” and “academic sinkholes,” methodically dissecting the system and its seemingly intractable problems.
I’m delighted to announce a Congressional briefing I’ll be moderating in three weeks that’s been co-organized by Discover Magazine and L’Oréal USA on a topic I care deeply about: Women in Science
For Women in Science: 21st Century Policy & Politics will explore issues and opportunities for the advancement of women in science, as well as the public policies that work to address them. Our panel is sponsored by Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) will take place Sept. 23 on Capitol Hill. Look at the speakers:
Russlynn Ali, Assistant Secretary, Office of Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education
Dr. Shirley Malcom, Head of Education and Human Resources, American Association for Advancement of Science (AAAS)
Pr. Joan Steitz, Sterling Professor of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University
Pr. Sara Seager, Ellen Swallow Richards, Professor of Planetary Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Sheril Kirshenbaum, Research Associate at University of Texas at Austin’s Center for International Energy and Environmental Policy, Author, and Blogger for Discovermagazine.com (Moderator)
We’ll discuss state and federal public policies that may be promoting or hindering the advancement of female scientists, Title IX and how it has influenced women pursuing science education and careers, and gender diversity in the workplace. We will also explore opportunities for government, the private sector and academia to address the barriers facing women in scientific disciplines.
You can bet I’ll have a lot more to say as the date approaches and will share further details soon. In the mean time, I encourage those interested in the DC area to mark your calendars for this timely event!
This book review is by my husband, David Lowry, a plant evolutionary geneticist in the Department of Integrative Biology at the University of Texas at Austin. We recently read Higher Education? How Colleges Are Wasting Our Money and Failing Our Kids—and What We Can Do About It by Andrew Hacker and Claudia Dreifus. I highly recommend this book to readers and hope it’s widely circulated in and out of academia. I decided David should compose the review to offer the perspective of a postdoc currently in the system.
Higher Education? How colleges are wasting our money and failing our kids-and what we can do about it by Andrew Hacker and Claudia Dreifus is an enthralling report on the state of higher education in the early 21st century. As the title suggests, the main goal of the book is to guide colleges and universities toward a future where education of undergraduate students is once again at the forefront, and not an afterthought of research, athletics, and bloated administrations, as it has become in recent years.
Early in “Higher Education,” Hacker and Dreifus lay out their core beliefs in the approach that should be taken:
Higher education should be open to every young person, and this is an option we can well afford. We confess to being born-again Jeffersonians: we believe everyone has a mind, the capacity to use it, and is entitled to encouragement. Of course, students have to do their share. But the adults who have chosen higher education as their profession have even greater obligations, which we’re not convinced they’re fulfilling.
The professors who have chosen higher education as a career are the subjects of the first chapter. It is here that the reader realizes that the gloves are off and Hacker and Dreifus aren’t going hold back in their critiques of the sacred cows of the ivory tower. To them the contemporary professoriate is composed of a group of tenured six-figure paychecks, who focus far too much time on their questionably meaningful research, while constantly trying to dodge any interactions with undergraduate students (i.e. teaching). Academics are likely to curse under their breath while reading this scathing report, while those who have always questioned the value of the professoriate may find themselves pumping their fists in the air. Regardless, you are not putting the book down now, Hacker and Dreifus have a lot of blame to spread around. (more…)
I regularly receive emails about breaking into the policy realm, becoming a science writer, or career advice in general. Recently, the volume of these has gone way up.Perhaps it’s the economy, hiring freezes at major institutions, and the overproduction of talented, newly-minted PhDs on the market contributing to a tough job environment. Maybe there’s also renewed interest in becoming a Renaissance scientist–the type of individual combining her or his scientific expertise with writing, communication, art, and more to help broaden public understanding of science and its influence in society.
I’d like to remind readers of my list of Policy Fellowships For Scientists & Engineers and encourage those seeking opportunities beyond and within the ivory towers of academia to take a look and consider applying. In 2009 I realized there was no comprehensive clearinghouse of what’s available, so I worked with a group of terrific staffers and interns at American Association for the Advancement of Science to come up with this list. I also hope students, professors, and industry members will kindly add any fellowships they know of that are not currently here in comments below as I update this regularly.
Stop, wherever you are. Quick, grab your phone or closest camera and take a picture of what’s in front of you. Send it to hbenson at researchamerica.org to enter the Mystery Lab contest.
What is the Mystery Lab contest? A chance to show off your research. Monday through Thursday next week the most creative four images submitted will be posted in the order they were received. New Voices readers will be asked to guess what field of research is being represented in the photo (biology, chemistry, marine science, physics, mathematics, etc.)
How to participate: Send an image of your work with the general field you work in as the subject to hbenson at researchamerica.org or via Twitter @NV4Research. Then encourage your friends to guess each day next week.
How to win: The winning entry will be determined using the following formula:
Number of guesses x total daily visitors
Tuition charges at both public and private colleges have more than doubled—in real dollars—compared with a generation ago.
For most Americans, educating their offspring will be the largest financial outlay, after their home mortgage, they’ll ever make. And if parents can’t or won’t pay, young people often find themselves burdened with staggering loans. Graduating with six figures’ worth of debt is becoming increasingly common.
So are colleges giving good value for those investments? What are families buying? What are individuals—and our society as a whole—gaining from higher education?
So after years of interviews with policymakers, students, and university leaders… Their conclusion? (more…)
Ever since joining an listserv before the 2008 election, I’ve been receiving emails from all sorts of folks across levels of government. Last night a note came from a candidate running for Senate in a state I’ve never resided in. Since the topic being discussed was the oil spill, I read on. I agreed with much of the sentiment–that the devastation in the Gulf is sad, that we need to protect the marine realm, and that better policies should be instituted to make sure it never happens again. But then I looked for substance. I wanted to read his positions on the critical issues at hand related to oil, energy, national security, and so on. “We need an energy policy” it said. That was all. There was a pretty photo of him looking at the ocean too.
It’s not that I discourage good intentions, but real leaders in government need to show us how they have thought through the complexities on subjects like energy. On reading that email, my take home was that this person didn’t have much to bring to the table. Candidacy usually involves a lot of lip service to be elected, and if that occurs, much time in office must be spent maintaining the position for the next cycle. An email that says a candidate wants “an energy policy” tells me nothing. I need to find out how he plans to work (as a freshman Senator no less) to achieve that end and what his ideas for what better policies would sound like.
Lately we’ve been discussing the growing rift between science and the American public. Perhaps the best place to begin bridging the divide is to get more of those with scientific expertise working in political positions of influence. (more…)
