Is Harvard President's View on Gender and Science Justified?

[Moonbear]

Can we get a clone of this guy? His wife is one lucky lady!

I think it's worth mentioning, because the wrong impression may have been given overall, that there are plenty of open-minded men in science who are excellent mentors for women (and men). I've been fortunate to have found several of them to work with along the way. I don't want to give the impression that all male scientists are evil bigots, as that stereotype is just as unfair to the men as the stereotypes we are struggling to fight as women. The problem is more that, especially among the more senior scientists, the existence of sexism is not a rare anomaly, and it is still tolerated. To some extent, this is because the lower-ranking men are just as afraid to confront them as are the women because these are people who have a lot of influence in how departments are run, making editorial decisions for publications, nominating people for awards, etc.

One shift I have seen recently, and am very happy to see being supported, at least in my own institution, is replacing the annoying old tradition of men applying for a faculty position, and then the university finding a position for their wife. In that old tradition, the opposite rarely happened of a woman being the primary applicant and the university scrambling to find a position for her husband in order to recruit her. Often, the woman is actually the stronger scientist of the pair and departments scramble to come up with money to make her an offer, but there always carried with it the stigma that she got the job because she was just part of the package to hire her husband. What is starting to replace this now is I've seen women insisting on applying for positions independently of their husbands and we even had one husband/wife couple competing for the same position. However, it's tough for couples to both be in academics. When positions are so few and far between, usually one or the other has to sacrifice and choose a lesser position or lesser department or work in the other's lab just so they can live in the same state. It's also not uncommon for scientists to marry other scientists. Once you hit grad school, your social circle starts to get pretty limited. Traditionally, the woman has followed the man's career rather than the other way around, and that's what needs to start changing.

 

[etc]

yep grave. In Canada ( at least ), the # of girls attending University is greater than the # of males. also, science and math departments actually prefer to accept girls than boys, and regulate their acceptance policy as such.

 

[Moonbear]

has anyone on the this board even been in the class room recently? girls are much more encouraged to do well in science and math and in academics in general than their male counterparts. At my school the majority of math and chemistry majors are female, by almost 2:1. Look at ANY research experience for undergraduate (REUs) program and they ALL say that they highly encourage and prefer female applicants. I applied for the same REU programs as this girl who is in my class and is also a math major and got rejected by all, yet she was able to get accepted to more than one. Some way she was able to get into the programs even though I still had taken 5 more advanced math courses than her and have gotten all A's in every math class I have taken. Even Grad school programs all say the same thing-WOMEN AND MINORITY APPLICANTS ARE STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO APPLY. Why should I be held to a higher standard than a female or a minority just because I am a white male? This day in age white males have to perform 2x's better than a woman or a minority just to get that job or get that school acceptance because of reverse discrimination.

They all say "WOMEN AND MINORITY APPLICANTS ARE STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO APPLY" because they legally are required to include that because of equal opportunity employment laws. Most position announcements are drafted, then have to get sent through the EOE/affirmative action office, and someone there tacks it onto anything it hasn't already been included in.

I'm glad to hear that at your institution, there is a high ratio of women in the classroom; sounds like they are doing something right. I think biology has made huge strides in this regard as well, and it's probably improving even more now that the people who grew up in a culture where sexism was not only tolerated but the norm are not being asked to teach anymore, so the younger women are not being exposed to them quite so early. But, outside of the biology and chemistry classes (because the biology majors need to take chemistry as well as Calc I&II), in general, the numbers dwindle. I attended a women's college, so just having a women's college at the university helped keep the ratios of women higher in the classes.

However, on a single case basis of one woman getting accepted to programs that one man was not accepted to, that's not much to judge by. Actually, it's worth it for you to go back to those programs to which you applied and ask why you were not accepted into the program. Sometimes experience outside of grades is important, such as how one conducts themself in an interview, or the impact of an essay in the application.

I do interview students for our graduate program. Beyond that statement that we encourage women and minorities to apply, I evaluate each person on their own merits once their applications have arrived and those who will receive interviews are selected. On the interview, I can dig past the grades and find out if the applicant really knows what they're getting into with grad school, how much effort have they put into choosing the schools they've applied to, do their interests fit with the faculty we have, and do they really have an understanding of science and that spark of curiosity one needs to have. Some come in with top notch grades and top notch GREs, but cannot demonstrate they have a true interest in research or have even given that part of grad school much thought. I've also run into the situation of an extremely qualified applicant, who was incredibly interested in a research topic for which we had no faculty who could mentor them, and upon questioning how flexible they were about that topic, would they consider other somewhat related areas, etc., learned that really they were approaching grad school with a very narrow focus, so I couldn't recommend them for acceptance; it just wouldn't have made sense for them to join a program where they couldn't learn what they wanted to learn.

So, just because one woman got a position you didn't, don't belittle her ability by saying she got it just because she's a woman. There's a lot more to hiring people into research than grades alone. And there are reasons aside from grades and scores that get applications rejected. My advice to you is to ask why you were passed over for the positions. It's useful to know if there's a weak area on your application or in an interview skill or something like that which you need to strengthen before you start applying for grad school or jobs. It's also possible that you were too advanced for the experiences you were both applying for. Sometimes those programs are geared toward students at certain levels of their undergraduate career, and someone who has passed that point isn't considered.

I have a friend who works as an actuary that ran into such a problem in her career. She passed all her actuarial exams at a ridiculously rapid pace (apparently a lot of people need to take them two or three times before they pass each one, or space them out every year or two; she passed most on the first sitting and just took them every time there was a sitting). What happened is the company she was working for closed, and she had to find a new job. She was over-qualified for the lower level positions comparable to the one she was in because of the number of exams she had passed (in their field, you typically get raises with each exam passed, so more exams means you're more expensive), and under-qualified for the upper level management positions because she hadn't been in her previous job long enough to advance up and get the management experience. This made it very difficult for her to get a job despite clearly having the aptitude for the work and achieving so much so quickly in passing the exams. In the end, she had to take a major paycut in order to get a lower level job in a place willing to then get her the management training she needed to catch up to her exam level. This had nothing to do with her being a woman or anything like that, just an example of why one set of qualifications isn't always enough to determine why one person gets a job that another doesn't.

 

[Kerrie]

has anyone on the this board even been in the class room recently? girls are much more encouraged to do well in science and math and in academics in general than their male counterparts. At my school the majority of math and chemistry majors are female, by almost 2:1. Look at ANY research experience for undergraduate (REUs) program and they ALL say that they highly encourage and prefer female applicants. I applied for the same REU programs as this girl who is in my class and is also a math major and got rejected by all, yet she was able to get accepted to more than one. Some way she was able to get into the programs even though I still had taken 5 more advanced math courses than her and have gotten all A's in every math class I have taken. Even Grad school programs all say the same thing-WOMEN AND MINORITY APPLICANTS ARE STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO APPLY. Why should I be held to a higher standard than a female or a minority just because I am a white male? This day in age white males have to perform 2x's better than a woman or a minority just to get that job or get that school acceptance because of reverse discrimination.

Grave, I agree that standards are tougher for white men these days, or so it seems. There should be equal rights, not special rights. It sounds like you are in school now, but for those of us (women) who were in school 10,20, 30 years ago, we felt the same-had to work just hard to prove ourselves until the affirmative action came along. Hopefully someday, gender, race, belief system, age, marital status, etc will not be a factor any longer when it comes to education. Of course the words say "women and minority applicants strongly encouraged to apply", but it is the attitudes of specific individuals that can have a hinderance on some who hold the abilities necessary for the situation.

But believe me, I do understand your frustration.

 

[gravenewworld]

There should be equal rights, not special rights.

Finally, someone with common sense.


The fact that there are now more women in college than men, more women in medical school than men, and girls outperforming males on pretty much all standardized tests seems to beg differently that females are discriminated against. Why is that there are no special scholarships and research opportunities ONLY for white males? Women and minorities have plenty of scholarships and research opportunities available ONLY to them. What would happen to an organization that offered only special scholarships and research opportunities for white males? It would be bombarded with law suits and burnt to the ground by other organizations like NOW or the NAACP. For example, a little while ago a conservative republican group at a college (which I forget right now) had an affirmitive action bake sale. Minorities were charged 25 cents for a cookie, women 50 cents, and white males were charged 2 dollars. Not surprisingly minority and women's groups were all over them. Why? They were simply telling the truth.

Just look at this list of math REU's and quotes from their pages-

http://www.math.byu.edu/~mdorff/SummerMathInstitute/index.htm

Brigham Young University is offering a summer mathematics REU to (1) provide undergraduate, especially female students and
students from institutions with limited research opportunities, to attend
graduate school in mathematics;

http://calcnet.cst.cmich.edu/org/nsfreu/

Women and minorities are particularly encouraged to apply

http://www.rose-hulman.edu/class/ma/web/mathREU/

AND IN BIG BOLD LETTERS

Female, minority and physically disabled students are encouraged to apply.

http://www.wabash.edu/academics/math/wsia

Female, minority and disabled students are especially encouraged to apply

http://orion.math.iastate.edu/reu/

Women and minorities are particularly encouraged to apply. Women may also wish to apply to the Iowa State University Program for Women in Science and Engineering (PWSE) in addition to applying, as described here, directly o the REU. Minorities may also apply to the AGEP/Alliance program in addition to applying directly to the REU. This site describes the application process for positions funded by the Department of mathematics NSF REU site grant (direct application to the REU); PWSE and AGEP/Alliance programs offer additional sources of funding (and thus additional opportunities to be selected) for REU positions. All applicants through this site will receive full consideration of direct application independent of application to another program.

http://www.math.tulane.edu/reu2005.html

We particularly encourage qualified women and members of minority groups to apply.

http://www.msstate.edu/dept/math/reu/

The objectives are to provide the participants with meaningful research experience, to show them the enjoyment of doing research, to encourage them to pursue advanced degrees in mathematical sciences, and to increase research participation by women and underrepresented groups

http://dimacs.rutgers.edu/REU/2005/announcement.html

Women, minorities, and disabled students are encouraged to apply.

http://www.clarkson.edu/mcs/reu.html

Applications from women and minorities are strongly encouraged

http://www.math.oregonstate.edu/~math_reu/reuinfo.htm

Women and minority students are strongly encouraged to apply

http://www.math.utk.edu/Docs/reu.html

List any groups to which you belong Women, American Indians, African-Americans, Hispanics, Native Alaskans,

Now as a white male, I find this highly depressing. WHY AM I NOT STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO APPLY JUST BECAUSE OF MY RACE AND SEX? I would have no problem if these programs stated "We encourage talented students to apply." rather than blatantly stating that "Women and minorities are STRONGLY encouraged to apply." Just because I am white male doesn't mean that I have had opportunities that minorities and women don't have access too. All those website were just the math REU's, I am sure the physics, bio, and chem etc. REU's also all say the same thing. There are even REUs ONLY for women and Minorities. Why aren't there REUs ONLY for white males?

 

[franznietzsche]

Now as a white male, I find this highly depressing. WHY AM I NOT STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO APPLY JUST BECAUSE OF MY RACE AND SEX? I would have no problem if these programs stated "We encourage talented students to apply." rather than blatantly stating that "Women and minorities are STRONGLY encouraged to apply." Just because I am white male doesn't mean that I have had opportunities that minorities and women don't have access too. All those website were just the math REU's, I am sure the physics, bio, and chem etc. REU's also all say the same thing. There are even REUs ONLY for women and Minorities. Why aren't there REUs ONLY for white males?

C'est la vie.

God, and everyone else hates you. Get used to it.

 

[Andromeda321]

I've always felt guilty about applying to stuff like that and finally went around asking my male colleagues what they thought about it (I was considering not mentioning my sex in the event they didn't know what gender is typically associated with my first name or some such). They told me to stop feeling guilty because the fact of the matter is physics is still 20% no matter what the ratios are in premed and such. Didn't apply to REUs this year after all, though, so I never got around to making my decision on the subject.
But really, those little disclaimers annoy me. They mean that like it or not should I be accepted to one of those REUs there will always be a few people out there who think I got it without my own merits. And I don't understand just how I will be respected by these people in their fields: they will always consider me with the attached stigma that I only got it because I'm female. Just the way I see things in my more cynical moments anyway...

 

[gravenewworld]

Honestly if you wanted things to be TOTALLY FAIR, the applications for all REUs (as well as all school and job applications) should not ask for name, gender, and race at all. An applicant should only be required to send in transcripts with the name blotted out, recommendations from faculty where the person applying is referred to as "candidate" only, etc. No reference needs to be made to gender, race, or sex. If 100% of white males are the only ones who got accepted to REUs based solely on performance than so be it, or if 100% of applicants accepted to REUs ended up being female than so be it also. The point is that applicants, no matter, what should be accepted based on merit and achievement, not any special factors such as race, gender, economic background and other BS. This day in age there are no more excuses. If these programs truly do admit based "solely on merit" then why in the hell do they have special boxes to check off for gender and race? Of course when you asked all your male classmates they all told you not to "feel guilty about it" because if they said otherwise they would have automatically been labeled as a male chauvanist sexist @$$hole. If the field was really leveled, and applicants were accepted based only on merit than I could say with 100% certaintly that any female or minority who got accepted to an REU made it solely on merit alone. But until that box for gender and race still needs to be filled out on applicaitons, there will always be some shred of doubt. Hell, you can be much more qualified than me, but how do you know if you were just as qualified as another male yet made it over that male just because you were female? The system creates the doubt whether or not you made it on your own merit, not you.

 

[Moonbear]

gravenewworld, as I mentioned in my reply to etc., I really don't wish to turn this thread into a discussion of affirmative action. There is a thread in the Politics subforum already dedicated to that issue. It distracts from the issue at hand here. I've already answered your comment about why requests for applications have that EOE/Affirmative action statement on them. I'll repeat that. It is a legal requirement and doesn't necessarily reflect the mindset of the people reviewing those applications. I do think it's a useless statement, but it doesn't reflect anything about preference really being given to women or minorities, only a reminder that they are encouraged to apply, which is to say their applications won't be immediately tossed out because of their sex or skin color.

And, believe it or not, many of those programs geared toward women specifically are also gathering research statistics on those women. The idea of many of them is to employ different strategies for retaining women in the sciences and find out if they work. But, again, the fact remains that there are still fewer women in math and sciences than men. Your university may be an exception. Telling women to apply doesn't help if they haven't gotten that far. Have you read the discussion here? I'm getting tired of repeating myself for people who want to make broad generalizations about sexism, affirmative action, and women without having taken the time to read the entire thread here, which has already covered many of these topics.

The issue here is that of someone in a position of authority (President of Harvard University) who has made statements that undermine the progress that has been made for women in math and sciences.

 

[hitssquad]

Sex differences in g, along with sex differences in abilities

women and men, in in general excel at different sets of skills

In differential psychology, an ability is an aptitude and a skill is "a learned power of doing a thing competently" (M-W Unabr., sense 3). Perhaps you meant abilities when you wrote skills.

of which neither set makes one more "intelligent" than the other.

Helmuth Nyborg recently found an "adult raw sex difference in g" of .37σ, and favoring the male sex.
http://www.google.com/search?q=nyborg+%22sex+differences+in+g%22+%22chapter+10%22

(The book in which the above chapter by Nyborg appears is The Scientific Study of General Intelligence (2003).)

 

[Astronuc]

Gravenworld,

If you are an excellent student, then keep up the good work.

I also agree that there should be equal rights (consideration), not special rights (consideration). Hopefully, the 'system' is moving in that direction.

Please do not begrudge the good fortune of your female peers concerning the REU's. Instead try to develop a good collegial relationship. You might find some good allies in your field of study, and who knows, one might turn out to be a pretty fine wife someday.

If you are interested in a particular REU, send me a PM with some background. I might have some ideas. Also, I hire college students (usually local) as interns (with good pay), and I will write recommendations for opportunities like REUs, if the student demonstrates potential.

 

[gravenewworld]

ALAS! Astron where were you the past two years when I needed you. I am now a senior and it is too late for me to do any research experience.

 

[gravenewworld]

. But, again, the fact remains that there are still fewer women in math and sciences than men.

And what about the fact that there remains FAR fewer men than women in fields such as nursing, education, english majors etc.? Where is the outcry about that? There will supposedly be a huge shortage of nurses in the next decade, why aren't large groups actively trying to promote males to the field? Why aren't their scholarships only for male applicants to nursing schools? Its a two way street. And just to let you know, being a nurse is a damn good job. My dad is one and make close to 90 g's and works whenever he wants.

 

[hitssquad]

nurse is a ... good job. My dad is one and make close to 90 g's and works whenever he wants.

There is a variety of nurse types. Which one is he?

 

[Kerrie]

And what about the fact that there remains FAR fewer men than women in fields such as nursing, education, english majors etc.? Where is the outcry about that? There will supposedly be a huge shortage of nurses in the next decade, why aren't large groups actively trying to promote males to the field? Why aren't their scholarships only for male applicants to nursing schools? Its a two way street. And just to let you know, being a nurse is a damn good job. My dad is one and make close to 90 g's and works whenever he wants.

Grave, what is your point here? If men choose to pursue these fields, then they are free to do so, and if there is any sort of discouragement of them entering this field, then I would like to see some documentation. Men can promote themselves to be more prominent in these fields if they choose to, just as women have chosen to be more prominent in the math and sciences.

And before you cry about no scholarships for men in nursing, you should do some research on it:

AAMN

It would now seem you are just objecting just to do so rather then have an objective outlook on the situation.

 

[Moonbear]

Yes, shortages of people entering nursing and teaching are one of the consequences of women leaving those fields and entering medical school and science research fields, as well as an assortment of other professions in which they were previously underrepresented. Perhaps the same reason they are leaving those professions are the same reason men aren't flocking into fill the openings? There is a need there, and they are good and honorable professions, but if you have a passion for medicine, making $90K as a nurse seems paltry when you compare it to the $250K to $500K you'll make as an MD. Is that $90K a starting salary, or after putting 20 or 30 years into the career? I know MDs going into radiology and anesthesiology who straight out of residency are pulling $450 and $500K salaries. Considering how much more of the patient care is done by nurses and PAs than really is done by MDs, those salary scales seem a little disproportionate, don't they?

With the nursing shortage as it is, nobody is being discouraged from applying for those jobs. Anyone who goes to nursing school and is halfway qualified can get a job in nursing, there is no issue of competition because hospitals are desperately seeking anyone to fill openings. Actually, I think nursing has also benefitted from more men entering the field. Nurses don't appear quite so disrespected by doctors as they used to be (Tsu can probably comment on this more seeing what goes on in hospitals on a daily basis).

 

[gravenewworld]

Grave, what is your point here? If men choose to pursue these fields, then they are free to do so, and if there is any sort of discouragement of them entering this field, then I would like to see some documentation. Men can promote themselves to be more prominent in these fields if they choose to, just as women have chosen to be more prominent in the math and sciences.

And before you cry about no scholarships for men in nursing, you should do some research on it:

You missed the point of my posts. Sure men aren't discouraged from entering a field like nursing, but they sure as hell aren't being encouraged to the extent like women and minorities in the math and sciences. How many nursing college websites can you find that explicitly state "we strongly encourage applications from male applicants." ? I listed more than a dozen summer programs who stated that they encourage specifically women and minorities to apply. Wow congratulations you found 1 scholarship for 1,000 dollars for men who pursue nursing. For every scholarship for men who pursue nursing I can find you 50 scholarships solely for women and minorities for a lot more, even full tuition scholarships, for science and engineering programs.

 

[etc]

many, many people consider nursing a female's occupation. i'd say that's discouraging.

 

[gravenewworld]

Men can promote themselves to be more prominent in these fields if they choose to, just as women have chosen to be more prominent in the math and sciences.

Finally,someone has said what I have waited them to say. The reason there are hardly any males in the nursing profession is because of their own choice, no? If men choose not to be nurses, then there really doesn't exist a barrier for them to over come in order to be nurses. Why is it so hard to believe that the same thing applies for women in the sciences? Not as many women as men choose not to pursue science further. Everyone is wrong. There are no barriers for women to overcome when persuing science. The harvard president was wrong, genetics are not the explanation of why there are fewer women than men in science. I'll tell you the reason for fewer women than men in science--CHOICE. Choice is something that no one can ultimately control. So what who cares if more men than women chose to pursue science. More women than men chose to pursue nursing. Just don't give free handouts and lower the bar for groups of people who choose not to do something. If I choose not to go to work, should I be entitled welfare checks?

 

[Kerrie]

Why is it so hard to believe that the same thing applies for women in the sciences?

You are assuming there is/was no issue. There are many times as a female I have been snubbed simply because I am female. I work with the "good 'ol boys" in the agricultural industry. I have felt many times blown off because they connect my gender to lack of knowledge of their field. I have had to work extra hard with these customers to prove to them I am just as worthy as a male in mechanical knowledge, whereas men will be received much better. Try walking in someone's shoes who has experienced this feeling instead of negating what others may know for themselves.

 

[Astronuc]

I'll tell you the reason for fewer women than men in science--CHOICE. Choice is something that no one can ultimately control.

But one has to ask why a woman would make a choice - not to go into science. Do women choose an alternative path because they find something better or more rewarding? Or do they choose an alternative path because they are discouraged through indifference or harrassment or some other hostile attitude from male peers and/or superiors?

I have both seen positive and negative environments for women in science and technology. And I know for a fact that some organizations have allowed an environment so uncomfortable for women that the only choice for the women is to quit (although some stick it out). That is effectively 'coercion' and that is wrong. Thankfully, not all organizations are like that.

These days, the professional environment seems much better for women, but I can't be everywhere so I don't know how much better it is.

I have 'politics' in some large companies that woud make your eyes roll. All that is hidden from the public and shareholders. The best and brightest are not always promoted (and that goes for men too).