Some first-hand observations

I received my PhD in chemistry in 1988 and so fall just outside the cohort reviewed in this study; however, I wanted to add some first-hand observations as a female graduate student in chemistry and, later, as the first female faculty member in chemistry at a particular research university.

During my graduate years, fully one-half of the incoming graduate classes were female; yet when the time came to hand out the doctorates, the proportion of females receiving them had decreased to one-quarter. Based on my knowledge of the quality of mind and quality of work done by my peers, this had nothing to do with whether females had the intellectual and personal fortitude to “make it” in chemistry, and a lot to do with the messages we received and the mentoring we didn’t receive (even though we tried). In my case, there was not a single female on the department staff who was not in a clerical position — no faculty members or research faculty members. And yes, it does make a difference to have someone of the same gender (or race) as an example and as someone who can communicate with you on your terms. Yes, other staff members can be helpful, but clerical staff cannot help me decide which is the best post-doc or whether I am ready to launch my academic career. Within a given lab, male students were routinely encouraged to ’shoot for the moon’ (the prestigious post-doc, staying on the doctoral track versus opting out for the master’s), whereas females were urged to play it safe. Reaons why ran from “it’s too competitive there; you’ll fit in better here” to “why don’t you look into teaching? It’s easier if you want to have a family.” Again, these comments are based on conversations I had, as well as data that I later gathered. It is not the proverbially trend of one or two.

I also encountered the same sorts of biases when as the lone female faculty member I became a de facto mentor — gladly — to many female graduate students in our department. I spent a lot of time encouraging these talented young women to ’shoot for the moon’ when that was appropriate, and to help them see the possibilities that lay beyond completing their PhD. I am happy to report that this department, of which I am no longer a member, has a number of female faculty members and that its leadership — mainly through the tenacious advocacy of a male associate chair who was my mentor — has finally “gotten it,” and the data and environment for female graduate students is much improved.

I wanted to write because so often when lack of mentoring, or the right mentoring, is cited as a reason for disparities in achievement, it is often brushed off. We think that the disadvantaged group is too soft, not aggressive enough, that if they ‘really wanted it’ they could find it. My own experience, however, suggests that there was a real difference in what was offered to male students versus female students, and that it is as much what is said and expected and by whom, and not simply whether or not one has a good mentor, that ultimately affects a student’s experience. The good news is that things do change, but it takes time, persistence, and willing champions to shepherd those changes.

Laurie, VP at Research U in NE, at 12:00 pm EST on February 28, 2008

Control variables in Science/Gender study?

I understand that no brief account of a study’s findings can be expected fully to describe itsthodology, etc. But I wish we knew more about what variables were controlled for in the reported percentages. The most obvious question is whether the reported gender differences hold up when some sort of performance or assessment ranking is controlled for. In the case of graduate students at dissertation level, this is hard, because evaluative criteria that are not well reflected in “grade point average” and the like come into play. Indeed, part of the way grad students may assess their own and their peers’ standing is to see which professors deign to be their dissertation advisors. And even for a cohort of students working under the same professor, there may be some whose work is considered important and promising, and others whose work will never make it into a prestigious journal and may even fail to qualify as a Ph.D. dissertation. We can be confident that, as a rule, students who are evaluated positively will experience more and better interactions with their evaluators than students who are evaluated less positively; we also know that there is a gender-related performance gap in the “harder” sciences, like physics; hence to see if gender is an independent, causal variable explaining all or part of gender differences in patterns of interaction among students and advisors, we should control for this gap. (Of course, many will believe that if a performance gap exists, then the evidence of gender discrimination is even more obvious. But that’s a different research question.)

Rod Bell, Adjunct Professor at College of DuPage, at 12:00 pm EST on February 28, 2008

Three cheers for the hands-off advisor

On the other hand, my thesis advisor gave me a ton of freedom and not much advice. At the time I didn’t like it, now I’m thrilled that it worked out that way. I got advice when I sought it, but that was rare. As a postdoc I often clashed with my advisor, and I think we were both happy on multiple levels when I got a faculty position. I did seek some advice from my thesis advisor when I got a faculty position, and he was helpful, but overall I mentored myself and I’m glad for it.

I won’t pretend to speak for everybody; some do need and benefit from mentoring. But for me, I was glad that I didn’t get it.

On the other side of the coin, I wonder if the most independent are also the most likely to become professors, and if that skews our ability to advise and mentor students. I won’t suggest that my students _should_ be like me, and I know there’s more than one way to do things, but I wonder if my independence impairs my ability to mentor talented people who would genuinely benefit from it.

New Asst. Prof. of Physics, at 1:35 pm EST on February 29, 2008

OK, I see your point. My advisor was always good about research resources, and he wrote good letters for me. He never did much for promoting me to people for conferences and committees and stuff, but I think part of the reason is that it took me a long time to find my feet in grad school, so for a while I didn’t have much to show. Also, my research kind of meanders. I do a little of this, a little of that, I have fun with it, I get a paper, and I move on. I haven’t really firmly planted my feet in a particular community of researchers. That would be a problem if I were at a research university and needed a lot of grant money, but I’m a theorist (so I don’t need as much money) and I’m in an undergraduate department (so publishing decent stuff is enough, I don’t have to become a star in a particular community).

Some might say that my meandering research is a sign of bad mentoring, but I’m having fun with it. I find a problem, I work on it, I get something out of it, and then I find another problem. I’m learning and contributing and having fun, I’ll produce enough to get tenure in the environment that I’m in, and some of my projects are perfectly suited to undergraduate involvement (a key factor in my department). So from my perspective, doing it my own way without much input or guidance has worked out well. Besides, while I may not be rooted in a community, I can look at problems in a variety of fields and find something to work on. That kind of intellectual versatility comes from being allowed to do my own thing.

New Asst. Prof. of Physics, at 11:45 am EST on March 2, 2008