Archive for the 'women in science' category

Losing by Speaking Up

May 02 2012 Published by under faculty, women in science

A reader wonders, based in part on this discussion (on Bob Sutton's blog), about differences in how much men and women talk in professional settings, and how they are perceived as a result. In a nutshell, some studies have shown that talking a lot seems to benefit men but may be detrimental to women; for example, in the context of whether someone is considered to have leadership potential and/or in how seriously their ideas are considered.

A specific question is whether women who want to talk more hold back -- consciously or unconsciously -- and try to find effective "backdoor" ways to get their ideas across to a group.

Regarding that question, I can't speak much from personal experience (<-- that was an attempt at a joke) because personality does play some role in this. When in a meeting or other group, I do not hold back because I am worried that I will be less "likeable" or less respected. I am just not a talkative person, particularly in groups. If I have something I want/need to say, I say it, but (typically) no more than that. In my experience, this is an effective way to be listened to in some settings, but not in others (see the cartoon in the linked post above; I think many women will be able to relate to the experience illustrated).

In academic departments, there may also be an effect of seniority (and tenure status) on talkativeness (for both men and women), although some of the studies cited compare "powerful" men with "powerful" women (such as certain politicians), so this aspect is taken into account. Nevertheless, owing to the seniority imbalance in many STEM fields, it is quite common for, say, a conference to have many female grad students, postdocs, and untenured faculty participants but very few women at more senior levels. I think this will have an effect on who talks and how much they talk, and the results will break down on gender lines to some extent.

Questions for readers:

1. Have you ever "held back" your comments in a meeting (whether a professional conference or an institutional committee) because you were worried about being perceived as too talkative?

2. What is your gender and career stage (if you are willing to share this information)?

3. If you answered yes to #1, what made you think that being talkative would be a bad thing, other than being aware of the routine hatred that some of us have for people who prolong committee meetings?

4. Are you a naturally talkative person?

 

 

 

 

21 responses so far

Token Award

Apr 17 2012 Published by under women in science

This week, let's talk about the rewards of diversity:

Some departments, schools, professional organizations, and so on have awards that are specifically for women, such as an award by one of the societies in my field for an outstanding female PhD student. As far as I can tell, these are not very prestigious awards and don't come with a lot of money. I guess there are some awards for women at the national level that are better in these terms but most are not. My university also has awards for outstanding minority students (anyone not white or Asian-American). These also are not prestigious and they come with less money than some other awards that are for anyone. I am offended by all these token awards but at the same time I am glad they are there, if that makes any sense. I am considering nominating one of my students for one of these awards but I can't get over the feeling that I may be setting her up for a humiliating experience, not if she doesn't get the award but if she does. Should I go ahead with the nomination anyway?

I have very mixed feelings about these awards too. I think they were set up with the best of intentions, but they do have the effect of relegating women and underrepresented minorities to a category of awards that are lower in value ($) and lower in prestige than other awards because these awards are not based on "merit". In some cases, the existence of these awards seem to free an organization (or whatever) from having to make an effort to consider women for other (merit-based) awards. I have written about this before and am not going to repeat the main philosophical arguments for and against these awards, but will focus today only on the practical aspect: should you nominate your students for such awards?

I would, and I do. However conflicted I feel about these awards, I take the practical approach in cases involving students. If there is a fellowship or award for which one of my students is eligible for whatever reason, I nominate them. Fellowships funds for students are scarce, and if such things exist, I want all of my students to have as much chance for success as possible, and these fellowships can help a lot.

If, however, I were in a position in which I could influence the existence and purpose of some of these awards -- the ones that really are "token" in all respects -- I would try to get the award changed or eliminated. (I have only done this in one case so far). In some cases, this can mean getting rid of the special designation of certain awards as only for women, such as in a department or subfield in which there is a strong (in number and/or achievement level) contingent of women who will receive awards based on merit as a natural outcome of the awards evaluation process. Maybe those situations are still rare, but they exist. In those case, there is no need for these 'special' awards.

For now, though, some of these awards are necessary and I nominate female students and colleagues for them. Of course, that doesn't mean I don't also nominate them for other awards -- the ones that are not specifically for women or underrepresented minorities -- but if there is an additional opportunity, I go for it. It would be a mistake to assume that because an award has a special designation that seems to involve an irrelevant factor (gender, ethnicity) that the recipients aren't truly outstanding in terms of intellectual merit, or whatever would be considered a "relevant" criterion.

Is there anyone reading this who would not nominate a student (for example) for a fellowship or award that was specifically for an underrepresented group for the reason of being offended by these awards? (and if so, are you a member of this underrepresented group yourself, or not?)

 

19 responses so far

Local Mom Effect

Feb 17 2012 Published by under women in science

Most weeks, I post something here and put a link on my FSP blog to it. This week, I am reversing that practice, for no particular reason, and providing a link to a question over there regarding the impact (or lack thereof) of local role models (that is, in one's immediate academic environment) vs. statistics for the professional community at large.

No responses yet

Nothing to Prove

May 10 2011 Published by under advising, sexism, students, women in science

Here is an intriguing situation, with a question for discussion:

A female science professor is asked by a colleague to be on the examining committee of one of the colleague's doctoral students. The doctoral student has told the FSP to her face that he does not think that women are good scientists, and that women should not even do certain kinds of science (particularly those involving field studies).

What should the FSP do?

  • Agree to be on the committee, be as fair and objective as usual, and show by example that she is a talented scientist whose expertise and advice could be quite useful to the student. Serving on this committee would be a good use of the FSP's time if the student saw an example of a professional, smart FSP doing her job, just like the MSPs.
  • Refuse to be on the committee. Why should she have to deal with a student who has explicitly demonstrated prejudice against women and who is unlikely to appreciate her expertise and advice? Serving on the committee would be a waste of the FSP's time.

I deliberately removed information about the career stage of the FSP in order to present the most basic facts of the scenario, but it might matter whether the FSP is pre-tenure or tenured. I have experienced this exact scenario twice: once as an assistant professor, and once as an associate professor.

I hope the fact that I have not experienced it as a full professor means that there are fewer students who hold this view about FSPs (or at least who would state it openly), but it could mean that if you stick around long enough and acquire enough wrinkles, the student-skeptics will assume you must have learned something over all the years you've been a professor.

In the case when I was an assistant professor, I agreed to be on the committee. I did what was required of me as a committee member, and even went slightly above-and-beyond for one particular part of the student's research, but I never made any obvious progress in convincing the student that I was a 'real' scientist like his advisor. Every time we had a one-on-one meeting, the student made sure to tell me that he was only talking to me because his advisor made him do it. He was aggressive and confrontational ("What do you know that can help me?" A lot, actually..). I did not enjoy our interactions, but I fulfilled my responsibilities as a committee member.

In the case when I was an associate professor, I was inclined to refuse to be on the committee. Some of the student's research, however, was directly related to my expertise, so I sort of felt like I should be on the committee and said I'd do it. But then I found out that the student had scheduled his oral preliminary exam without consulting me about the day/time (he consulted the rest of his committee). I could have changed some things around to be available for the exam, but I decided not to, so I was replaced on the committee. Perhaps that was the student's intention all along, but it was a relief to me also to limit my interactions with him.

What happens to these people? In the first case, I never saw or heard of the student again after he got an MS and disappeared into the rest of his life. In the second case, the student got a PhD and eventually returned to his home country, where he has a job as a scientist.

I wish I had a happy-ending story of a miraculous change of mind. I wish I could say that I worked with these guys and we developed mutual respect and understanding, and they realized that women can be scientists, and in fact, it's not a big deal to work with one. Perhaps someone else can share a story like that? I can think of  a couple of mini-examples involving senior scientists, so I know such transformations can happen: FSP 1, FSP 2.

But back to the main question: What would you do: serve on the committee or refuse? And does your answer vary depending on your career stage?

 

37 responses so far

Token Help?

Apr 08 2011 Published by under colleagues, women in science

This week in the FSP blog, I described a couple of incidents involving Women As Tokens in science: something I overheard, and something I experienced. In the latter post, a male commenter wondered what he and like-minded colleagues could do to help in situations such as the one I described (in short: during a meeting of a small working group in which I am the only woman, a senior professor mentioned twice, apropos of nothing, that the only reason I had been invited to join the group ~6 years ago was because I am female).

When I find myself in these situations, I may or may not confront the person making the offensive statement, depending on the situation and my mood. If I decide to speak up, I typically employ gentle but not subtle sarcasm. In the situation I described recently, I did not say anything.

None of the men in this particular meeting said anything either. Did I want them to? In this case, it didn't matter to me. I am a senior professor, I don't need allies in this particular working group, I have just as much "power" in this group as the person who explicitly noted that I am a token, and I have confidence that my work in this group is useful. In fact, I do have an ally in the group, but he wasn't at this meeting.

Would I have minded if one of the men had stepped in and told Professor Not-A-Token that his comments were inappropriate? No, I would not have minded. In fact, there are many situations in which it is very helpful for men to speak up in these situations. It can turn the tide of a discussion from being an unconstructive one in which women are isolated and insulted into a more inclusive one. And it can show the apparently biased person that their views are not widely held, perhaps inspiring them to refrain from making obnoxious comments in the future.

Perhaps some sympathetic men stay silent because they don't know what to say. Even if they have no fear of angering the person making the obnoxious comments, these other men may not want to sound patronizing to the woman being insulted, or make it appear that a woman needs a man to rescue her.

Every situation is different, but just to take the example of my recent experience, I would not have minded if one of my senior colleagues had said something to Professor Not-A-Token, such as "That's irrelevant. I'm not sure why you are even bringing that up." Or this hypothetical ally could have alluded to the fact that our working group strives for geographic diversity by noting which group member is the token person from a particular continent.

During an incident such as this, I certainly wouldn't want us all to dwell on the issue, unless it was clearly a major problem interfering with the functioning of the group. Just a brief "You are alone in your obnoxious opinions" kind of comment or two from the rest of the group would be sufficient to get us all back on track and perhaps convince the jerk that further comments about token women were not welcome by anyone.

But that's just one example. Perhaps readers can contribute other examples of when allies stepped in with an appreciated comment or could explain what they wish someone had said during a situation of this general type.

 

31 responses so far