The second panelist from Saturday’s STS conference was Christine Luk from Arizona State University who’s talk was entitled: Engaging Women in Science and Technology Policy-making: Beyond the Paradox of Under-representation of Women

Instead of discussing the usual challenges women face, Christine is interested in why the gender gap persists despite enhancement of female status and social change.  She began by highlighting regular policy recommendations that support affirmative action and the development of economic incentives for women.  According to Christine, enrolling women in science and technology is not enough because it’s not merely about increasing our headcount.  Rather she suggests we need a more visible role of feminist perspectives.  I agree, yet I’m convinced this is a chicken and egg problem. We must place more bright and capable young ladies in the public eye who break the mold of what we’ve come to expect of a ‘female in S&T’.

However, what stood out for me during Christine’s talk was the Queen Bee hypothesis which suggests (if I understood correctly) that the limited number of women who do rise in these areas may actually suppress others from doing so.It’s an interesting theory, although I’m not convinced.  In my own field of marine science, ladies are quickly climbing the ranks at record pace, not to mention Jane Lubchenco now heads NOAA.  Furthermore, despite progressive social change, there will likely be a very long lag time for women to rise to visibly prominent roles across fields.  Finally, we cannot hope to achieve gender equality in the S&T workforce under the status quo parameters.  As I’ve written in the past, if we are to encourage women to stay in the system, then the system will need to undergo fundamental changes to accommodate more of us.  I’m not sure whether that’s a practical expectation, or even whether it should be.

As for the queen bee hypothesis, it’s an idea I have not come across until now.  Has anyone experienced this?  The ladies I adore offline and around the blogosphere tend to be overwhelmingly supportive of each other.  Thoughts?

Tomorrow I’m headed back to the District and delighted to be participating in the 2009 Science and Technology in Society Conference hosted by the ST Global Consortium at AAAS.  I’m on the career panel Saturday afternoon in excellent company with Alicia Jackson of the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and Debra Mathews from the Berman Institute of Bioethics at Johns Hopkins University. Earlier in the day, I’ll also be moderating a student panel on education–coincidentally the same theme of my panel at the NYAS Two Culture Conference in May. Chris and I take on this subject comprehensively in Unscientific America and I’ll have a lot to contribute to the discussion.  As for the purpose of the STS conference:

The emerging fields of Science and Technology Policy (STP) and Science and Technology Studies (STS) have become prominent disciplines in recent years.

The increasing prevalence of technology issues – in governmental policies and the public eye – demands a workforce equipped with the tools and training necessary to negotiate these complex relationships. Though often from different perspectives, STS and STP deal with many of the same issues.

Traditionally, however, there has been little communication between the two. Thus, the main purpose of the Conference is to bridge that divide and provide a forum for networking, bringing together graduate students from historically fragmented communities to learn from one another. We hope the event will add value to students’ research and writing, and contribute important new ideas to the S&T challenges of the day.

I always love the opportunity to speak with students and am really looking forward to the weekend.  The full agenda and list of speakers suggest it will be a wonderful event and I hope to see some readers there!