new blog, and gender schemas in science
First: blogs. after reading and observing a bunch of science blogs, I've decided to make a blog outside LJ for primarily science stuff: shearsensibility.blogspot.com. I noticed that theclimateblog is doing something similar. She plans to post her blogspot posts here, as well. I guess I could do that.
Second: more women in science stuff. If you aren't a member of the Association for Women Geoscientists, or if you glance at the job ads in the back and then file the newsletter, I've got a web site recommendation: Gender Schemas and Science Careers. The website is the work of Virginia Valian, a psychologist from Hunter College. She argues that women disappear from science not because of childcare issues or pipeline issues, but because of the cumulative effect of tiny biases. Essentially, people tend to see the world in the way they expect it to be, which for women means being seen as more nurturing and less scientifically competent than men. (By the way, it really galls me to contrast "nuturing" with "competent" - one of my goals as a professor is to be both, simultaneously, as best as I possibly can be. Who says that the ability to do math should mean an inability to empathize? Or that empathy is equivalent to grade inflation? Bah.)
The tutorial is essentially a powerpoint presentation with narration, which I found rather annoying - I would prefer to be able to skim, and then re-read things that are surprising or interesting. And the remedies seem a bit trite in comparison with the cumulative effects of all the little biases. And it may reinforce the sense that the only route to a successful life is to be a famous research scientist. (Not that it means to. And maybe NSF would never bother funding an outreach program that argues that male scientists should feel free to have a more complete personal life. But still, it's hard to read about the decreasing numbers of women with academic rank, especially in research institutions, and not to think: I failed.) But I think it's important stuff for anyone who writes teaching evaluations, or interprets teaching evaluations, or writes or interprets letters of recommendation.
And it explains things to me, like: why is it that the Donath (Young Scientist) medal at GSA nearly always goes to a man, while the most brilliant young women get NSF-CAREER awards - grants which, besides being restricted to women, require a major teaching/outreach component along with top-notch research.
Second: more women in science stuff. If you aren't a member of the Association for Women Geoscientists, or if you glance at the job ads in the back and then file the newsletter, I've got a web site recommendation: Gender Schemas and Science Careers. The website is the work of Virginia Valian, a psychologist from Hunter College. She argues that women disappear from science not because of childcare issues or pipeline issues, but because of the cumulative effect of tiny biases. Essentially, people tend to see the world in the way they expect it to be, which for women means being seen as more nurturing and less scientifically competent than men. (By the way, it really galls me to contrast "nuturing" with "competent" - one of my goals as a professor is to be both, simultaneously, as best as I possibly can be. Who says that the ability to do math should mean an inability to empathize? Or that empathy is equivalent to grade inflation? Bah.)
The tutorial is essentially a powerpoint presentation with narration, which I found rather annoying - I would prefer to be able to skim, and then re-read things that are surprising or interesting. And the remedies seem a bit trite in comparison with the cumulative effects of all the little biases. And it may reinforce the sense that the only route to a successful life is to be a famous research scientist. (Not that it means to. And maybe NSF would never bother funding an outreach program that argues that male scientists should feel free to have a more complete personal life. But still, it's hard to read about the decreasing numbers of women with academic rank, especially in research institutions, and not to think: I failed.) But I think it's important stuff for anyone who writes teaching evaluations, or interprets teaching evaluations, or writes or interprets letters of recommendation.
And it explains things to me, like: why is it that the Donath (Young Scientist) medal at GSA nearly always goes to a man, while the most brilliant young women get NSF-CAREER awards - grants which, besides being restricted to women, require a major teaching/outreach component along with top-notch research.