Girls Sweep Top Honors in Science Competition

[Moonbear]

While I know most of the members of this forum are sufficiently enlightened to know women can be just as good at science as men, this is a nice story to help the rest of the world catch up to seeing things that way.

Girls won top honors for the first time in the Siemens Competition in Math, Science and Technology, one of the nation’s most coveted student science awards, which were announced yesterday at New York University.

Janelle Schlossberger and Amanda Marinoff, both 17 and seniors at Plainview-Old Bethpage John F. Kennedy High School on Long Island, split the first prize — a $100,000 scholarship — in the team category for creating a molecule that helps block the reproduction of drug-resistant tuberculosis bacteria.

Isha Himani Jain, 16, a senior at Freedom High School in Bethlehem, Pa., placed first in the individual category for her studies of bone growth in zebra fish, whose tail fins grow in spurts, similar to the way children’s bones do. She will get a $100,000 scholarship.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/04/nyregion/04siemens.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Great job ladies!

I think most glass ceilings are being shattered now. I see women doing "men's work" everywhere. Heck, woman are only about a step away from doing official combat duty in the military, which one might expect to be one the last bastions of sexual discrimination.

 

[Cyrus]

How the hell does a high school student

"create a molecule that helps block the reproduction of drug-resistant tuberculosis bacteria."

I don't think I could do that after 4 years of university. Now I feel dumb.

 

[Moonbear]

I think most glass ceilings are being shattered now. I see women doing "men's work" everywhere. Heck, woman are only about a step away from doing official combat duty in the military, which one might expect to be one the last bastions of sexual discrimination.

I actually think the last barrier will be shedding the stigma for men opting to do traditionally women's jobs. Society seems to go a lot easier on a woman running a corporation than a man who stays home with the kids. Real equality has to work both ways.

 

[gravenewworld]

Once again more proof that males are really the ones being marginalized in the classroom.

Males now have lower overall acceptance rates into college, 2x's more males have learning problems, and in special ed units boys outnumber girls 6:1.

The problem goes ignored because of the stranglehold that feminism has on education. Everyone knows it, but simply doesn't have the cojones to say it because it is "politically incorrect".

From the day boys are born they are mostly raised by women at home and in the classroom. There is overwhelming evidence to support that BOTH boys and girls do much better when the classes are separated by sex. However, we aren't "allowed" to have separate but equal here in America because feminists groups will protest against it vehemently until they get their way.Also you say the glass ceiling will be shattered when men take jobs that women do? Well where are the full ride scholarships for men to enter things like grade school teaching or nursing? There are hundreds of scholarships out there for girls to pursue things like engineering where they can get a free ride to college or huge scholarship and even be guaranteed a dorm on campus for 4 years if they pursue something like engineering or science. Hardly anything like that exists for a man.

 

[Moonbear]

Do you have some evidence for your claims, or are you just on another angry rant tonight?

 

[Gokul43201]

Okay, so going down the smarties ladder, it's chimps, then girls, then guys!?

 

[Math Is Hard]

I learned about an interesting study on stereotypes this week. This study was done with Asian female undergraduates. What the researchers found is that if they primed the subjects with (made them conscious of) their gender before giving them a math test, they scored lower than average on the test. But if they primed their ethnicity, they scored higher than average. Sorry I don't have a link. This is just something my professor mentioned in lecture.

 

[Gokul43201]

And the average was computed from what sample?

 

[physicsbhelp]

That Is Amazing!

 

[Math Is Hard]

And the average was computed from what sample?

I'm assuming they had a control group of students (male, female, and various ethnicities) from the university where the study was conducted, but as I said, I don't have a link. I'll try to find more info.

But I think that even if they are comparing them against a control group of non-primed, Asian female subjects, it's still an interesting effect.

 

[russ_watters]

While I know most of the members of this forum are sufficiently enlightened to know women can be just as good at science as men, this is a nice story to help the rest of the world catch up to seeing things that way.

The sex disparity is more complicated than the 1950's version (Math is hard!), but it is still a very serious problem. There are basically two parts:

-Girls do better in school than boys do.
-Girls don't go after science/technical higher education

Both of these are serious problems and both of them are largely cultural. At face value, it implies that most of our scientists and engineers should be women and we're losing a huge number of potential sci/eng majors to art history and poly sci. Both that and the underachieving boys problems are obviously largely cultural in nature, but there still might be some biology at work (probably more in the first problem). I'm sure I've seen studies about how sex-segregated education produces different results than mixed, and whether culture shapes the behavior or not, hormones are hormones and they drive a lot of the problem.

[edit] And notice the first part is the opposite of the stereotype - yet as MiH's study example shows, stereotypes can still trigger a reaction, so as long as the stereotypes stay in our culture, we have to be careful not to trigger them (then maybe eventually they will go away).

 

[russ_watters]

I actually think the last barrier will be shedding the stigma for men opting to do traditionally women's jobs. Society seems to go a lot easier on a woman running a corporation than a man who stays home with the kids. Real equality has to work both ways.

That's a good point, and it will be a very tough problem to overcome. A woman in engineering is seen as empowered - a male nurse is seen as 'doing womans' work' (which really implies that it isn't real work). The reality is different: nursing currently pays well because it is in demand and requires some skill, hard work, and dedication. But it also doesn't require a 4 year degree which means that for some it can provide a great opportunity to get ahead with a smaller up-front financial and time (in school) commitment. Paralegals are another one (I have a male friend who is a paralegal). There are lots of men in the lower-end of society who could be going for these professions. And I'm thinking specifically of young, black men - our lost class of people. These types of jobs provide a [relatively] easy way out of a really bad situation.

[edit] This isn't quite as off-topic as it may initially seem - it is the first half of the two-part problem as I described it. The other side of the coin.

 

[Math Is Hard]

At face value, it implies that most of our scientists and engineers should be women and we're losing a huge number of potential sci/eng majors to art history and poly sci.

I think we're losing them to this (at least at the graduate studies level):

http://images.parenthood.com/baby-cry.jpg

There was a free-for-all discussion about "where we see ourselves in 5 years" in one of my classes this week. The guys were all rock solid, with definite plans about the future. The gals were more tentative with "well, I want to go to grad school/law school but I also want a family, so I'm not sure."

Seemed very telling. Why work your tail off to prepare for a career that you're not going to have?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Unfortunately, biology discriminates sexually.

 

[Moonbear]

I think we're losing them to this (at least at the graduate studies level):

http://images.parenthood.com/baby-cry.jpg

There was a free-for-all discussion about "where we see ourselves in 5 years" in one of my classes this week. The guys were all rock solid, with definite plans about the future. The gals were more tentative with "well, I want to go to grad school/law school but I also want a family, so I'm not sure."

Seemed very telling. Why work your tail off to prepare for a career that you're not going to have?

I think this also relates to the issue of valuing men equally if they choose to be the one who stays home with the kids. I still see a lot of women who drop their careers to take care of the family, but in an ideal world, this would be more of a 50/50 split in whether it's mom or dad who stays home with the kids. The women I know who continue moving ahead with careers after having kids either have enough combined income with their husband that they can afford full-time daycare/caretakers, or have husbands who run their own businesses out of the home, so can be home more with the kids without being a "house husband." But, while it's what keeps women from achieving their career goals, it's really the men who are the ones being negatively stigmatized. It's a form of discrimination that applies to and hurts both sexes.

 

[russ_watters]

There was a free-for-all discussion about "where we see ourselves in 5 years" in one of my classes this week. The guys were all rock solid, with definite plans about the future. The gals were more tentative with "well, I want to go to grad school/law school but I also want a family, so I'm not sure."

Seemed very telling. Why work your tail off to prepare for a career that you're not going to have?

Well, yes, I see that as well. I have a female friend who seems to be struggling with whether she wants to be the 'modern woman' or the 1950s woman, and it seems like there is still a good fraction of women who's main purpose for going to college is finding a husband/something to do until they find a husband. Why bother taking something difficult if you don't ever intend to use it?

 

[Integral]

I actually think the last barrier will be shedding the stigma for men opting to do traditionally women's jobs. Society seems to go a lot easier on a woman running a corporation than a man who stays home with the kids. Real equality has to work both ways.

True equality will not come until men can have babies.

 

[EnumaElish]

Positive academic stereotypes fuel student performance

I learned about an interesting study on stereotypes this week. This study was done with Asian female undergraduates. What the researchers found is that if they primed the subjects with (made them conscious of) their gender before giving them a math test, they scored lower than average on the test. But if they primed their ethnicity, they scored higher than average. Sorry I don't have a link. This is just something my professor mentioned in lecture.

A link can be found in: http://www.apa.org/monitor/apr99/fuel.html

One implication/premise seems to be "Asian ---> positive, female ---> negative."

 

[JasonRox]

I think most glass ceilings are being shattered now.

I don't see it shattering all that much. If anything the glass ceiling has a little hole in it, and if a woman is lucky enough, she can fit through.

My comments above aren't meant to offend anyone (women).

The reason why I say this is because of the psychological things going on that created the glass ceiling in the first place which will probably always remain. So that, although it may seem like the glass ceiling is gone, but honestly it will always be easier for a man to move to the top even though woman can technically make it to the top. The fact that it is easier for us tells me that there is more going on than just a "glass" ceiling. I don't see a woman making it to the top as easy as man can. As much as we would like that as a society, it just won't happen. The world just doesn't turn in perject circles.

Those are my views anyways.

 

[JasonRox]

I still see a lot of women who drop their careers to take care of the family, but in an ideal world, this would be more of a 50/50 split in whether it's mom or dad who stays home with the kids.

Even if it was a world with no stigma's attached to either a mom or father staying at home, it still wouldn't be a 50/50 split.

The relationship between mother/child and father/child can never be compared. I think the mother/child relationship has a strong influence on the mother to stay home while not as a strong for the father/child relationship. So even in the free world, the 50/50 split wouldn't happen.

 

[dst]

I don't see it shattering all that much. If anything the glass ceiling has a little hole in it, and if a woman is lucky enough, she can fit through.

My comments above aren't meant to offend anyone (women).

The reason why I say this is because of the psychological things going on that created the glass ceiling in the first place which will probably always remain. So that, although it may seem like the glass ceiling is gone, but honestly it will always be easier for a man to move to the top even though woman can technically make it to the top. The fact that it is easier for us tells me that there is more going on than just a "glass" ceiling. I don't see a woman making it to the top as easy as man can. As much as we would like that as a society, it just won't happen. The world just doesn't turn in perject circles.

Those are my views anyways.

Considering the discrepancies in things like average salaries of females vs males, I'd say it's more of a bend in the glass ceiling. Personally, I'd say a square peg in a screwhole on a 10ft thick reinforced steel partition but I'm not the liberal type.

Women as the main body of a military? French?

 

[JasonRox]

Women as the main body of a military? French?

I need to say one thing in regards to Americans bashing the French.

IT MAKES NO FREAKING SENSE!

They literally gave you the freedom you have today. They practically funded the war of independence, as well as supported it with some troops. I think Spain also played a role too. The indians too.

Without the support of those of the past, especially the FRENCH, you LITERALLY wouldn't have the freedom you have today. Be grateful and not arrogant.

Note: Keep in mind that the US also suffered the most embarrasing military defeat of all time. The war of 1812. It's amazing how much goes blank in American history books.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

I had a really nice diorama showing how the electrons spin while they cruise around the nucleus. I would've won too, if those girls hadn't come up with a cure for tuberculosis.

 

[Math Is Hard]

I had a really nice diorama showing how the electrons spin while they cruise around the nucleus. I would've won too, if those girls hadn't come up with a cure for tuberculosis.

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

 

[Math Is Hard]

A link can be found in: http://www.apa.org/monitor/apr99/fuel.html

One implication/premise seems to be "Asian ---> positive, female ---> negative."

Thanks, Enuma. That looks like the study he was talking about.

 

[dst]

I need to say one thing in regards to Americans bashing the French.

IT MAKES NO FREAKING SENSE!

They literally gave you the freedom you have today. They practically funded the war of independence, as well as supported it with some troops. I think Spain also played a role too. The indians too.

Without the support of those of the past, especially the FRENCH, you LITERALLY wouldn't have the freedom you have today. Be grateful and not arrogant.

Note: Keep in mind that the US also suffered the most embarrasing military defeat of all time. The war of 1812. It's amazing how much goes blank in American history books.

Thanks a lot.

We in the UK, however, do things differently.

 

[Math Is Hard]

True equality will not come until men can have babies.

Get to work on that, Moonbear. I'll go round up some grant money.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

True equality will not come until men can have babies.

If men alternated with women having babies, no family would have more than three children.

 

[russ_watters]

I don't see it shattering all that much. If anything the glass ceiling has a little hole in it, and if a woman is lucky enough, she can fit through.

Affirmative action can have a big impact on the government sector and have a heavy influence on the private sector. In Philly, the politicians are currently arguing about whether a new expansion of the convention center should have a quarter or half of its construction contracts earmarked for minority/female owned businesses and if a quarter should be designated specifically for blacks. Now I only have a few years in this business, but I have yet to meet a female or black engineer (at any level) or construction company owner*. So regardless of what they decide, it'll be a pretty tall order!

But that means that if you are a female or black engineer or business owner in such an environment, succeeding could scarcely be easier if you were able to crap gold nuggets.

*That's not actually quite true. We did come into contact with a front company that was black-owned and was hoping to hire us to do the engineering while they signed the contracts and took a nice fraction of the money for doing nothing. We declined.

 

[JasonRox]

In Philly, the politicians are currently arguing about whether a new expansion of the convention center should have a quarter or half of its construction contracts earmarked for minority/female owned businesses and if a quarter should be designated specifically for blacks.

Reverse-discrimination is flat out dumb! Sorry, I totally disagree with that kind of approach.

 

[scott_alexsk]

Right now I am going to Thomas Jefferson, and it actually had a girl have the best project in the entire world, in the Intel international science fair. Just to mention Jacob Steinhardt, who is also one of this year's winners, occasionally helps me w/ physics problems. I cannot believe I am at this school.

-scott

 

[BobG]

Affirmative action can have a big impact on the government sector and have a heavy influence on the private sector. In Philly, the politicians are currently arguing about whether a new expansion of the convention center should have a quarter or half of its construction contracts earmarked for minority/female owned businesses and if a quarter should be designated specifically for blacks. Now I only have a few years in this business, but I have yet to meet a female or black engineer (at any level) or construction company owner*. So regardless of what they decide, it'll be a pretty tall order!

But that means that if you are a female or black engineer or business owner in such an environment, succeeding could scarcely be easier if you were able to crap gold nuggets.

*That's not actually quite true. We did come into contact with a front company that was black-owned and was hoping to hire us to do the engineering while they signed the contracts and took a nice fraction of the money for doing nothing. We declined.

Heck, I've not only come in contact with female, minority business owners, I worked for one. http://www.rbc.edu/library/SpecialCollections/Women_history_resources/vfwposter2003_elliott.pdf
Pretty nice if you can hit about three target groups with one company (female owned, minority group, small business). Serving as a subcontractor to the bigger companies looking for government contracts really helped her company get going, although after 15 years, Arrowhead doesn't quite fit under the small business category anymore and they don't just rely on being hired as a subcontractor to bigger companies anymore.

 

[ranger]

While I know most of the members of this forum are sufficiently enlightened to know women can be just as good at science as men, this is a nice story to help the rest of the world catch up to seeing things that way.



http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/04/nyregion/04siemens.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

They're ugly.

/forgets the main point of the thread.