As part of my spring cleaning, I decided to move my blog to wordpress.com. I will be hosting a blog now, that will be public and will focus on gender, identity and the representation of science in the media and blogosphere. This will provide context for my dissertation, and will hopefully also be interesting for folks.
Meet me there at:
www.scientistic.wordpress.com
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Action Concertee
There is another call for proposals - I'm thinking this will be my decision maker. If I can actually articulate a proposal LOI for a post-doc, then I'll give it a whirl. If, after 4 years, I cannot even come up with a decent idea for a research proposal, then I'm going to swing by the Burger King on the way home and pick up a job application.
Or at least accept the fact that writing does not come naturally to me, and perhaps I should consider a career outside of academia (even though what I really want to do is photo-voice projects with people forever and ever).
Or at least accept the fact that writing does not come naturally to me, and perhaps I should consider a career outside of academia (even though what I really want to do is photo-voice projects with people forever and ever).
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Blog is now a wiki
I have decided to move my 'research site' to a private wiki. Once I have published some of this work, it will go public. I will continue to use this blog for 'fun' stuff, but all of my writing is now private.
Monday, December 10, 2007
November Article: "Why Girls Don't Like Science"
Lessons in Learning: Gender differences in career choices: Why girls don’t like science
I guess I'll start with the obvious on this one. I'm not sure where the idea that girls don't like science comes from, but I suppose that somewhere along the line (pipeline?) the fact that there is a dearth of women in (especially physical) science, and the related concept of the patriarchal construction of scientific identities became conflated with this notion that there are gendered preferences for certain subjects.
This article goes to great pains to ensure the reader that the differences between men and women's careers in science has nothing to do with ability or some kind of innate aptitude for science, or abstract thinking or whatever, but it fails (as many studies of this genre do) to address the institutional issues of the gender imbalance in science. In doing so, it seems to still suggest that there is something inherent in men's/women's (boys'/girls') preferences towards science that are different.
The article begins by rightly suggesting that there is a gender imbalance in scientific careers and of course the gender-based wage gap, but then immediately goes on to suggest that the reason that women don't pursue scientific careers to the extent that men do is due to a number of factors "including parental attitudes, social pressures, and girls’ perceptions of and experiences with science turn girls and women away from science and engineering." Of course, the proper band-aid to this problem, is to create more programs to get women and girls interested in science.
Of interest in this article is the data presented on the gender-wage gap. Still very problematic, not showing signs of improvement. Clearly, this is a problem across disciplines and not particular to science, as the article alludes to. However, this gap doesn't become a part of the analysis of the article, except to suggest that the dearth of women causes the gap to persist. We then move to the question: what keeps women from pursuing careers in science?
By ruling out difference in aptitude, the authors suggest that "these findings suggest that cultural or environmental factors, rather than biological ones, affect girls’ interests and career choices." What are these cultural and environmental factors? In particular, what are the cultural factors of the academy that perpetuates the image of the scientist as typically male and white? What are the practices of a culture that are embedded in these assumptions of who scientists are and how they should behave?
I guess what I'm struggling with is the lack of attention to identity in considering 'preferences'. What does identity have to do with preferences? Well, I'm concerned that by suggesting that girls simply do not prefer science because they have not been socialized to do so, we still miss the cultural factor - i.e., the cultural image that, for example, physics projects is one that does not appear to include women or African-Canadians or non-gender-conforming individuals. Additionally, beyond the critical mass argument, is the fact that cultural forms of physicists (or scientists generally) may not be connected to the images and interests of those groups that are traditionally under-represented in physics. And finally, this gets really sticky when we start thinking about cultural forms and who they do and do not relate to, and it seems that when we are considering the "ideas, images and practices" (to quote Stuart Hall) associated with the teaching and production of science, that we should be careful not to essentialize those who articulate or interact with these practices, and make assumptions about their inherent preferences or abilities.
I guess I'll start with the obvious on this one. I'm not sure where the idea that girls don't like science comes from, but I suppose that somewhere along the line (pipeline?) the fact that there is a dearth of women in (especially physical) science, and the related concept of the patriarchal construction of scientific identities became conflated with this notion that there are gendered preferences for certain subjects.
This article goes to great pains to ensure the reader that the differences between men and women's careers in science has nothing to do with ability or some kind of innate aptitude for science, or abstract thinking or whatever, but it fails (as many studies of this genre do) to address the institutional issues of the gender imbalance in science. In doing so, it seems to still suggest that there is something inherent in men's/women's (boys'/girls') preferences towards science that are different.
The article begins by rightly suggesting that there is a gender imbalance in scientific careers and of course the gender-based wage gap, but then immediately goes on to suggest that the reason that women don't pursue scientific careers to the extent that men do is due to a number of factors "including parental attitudes, social pressures, and girls’ perceptions of and experiences with science turn girls and women away from science and engineering." Of course, the proper band-aid to this problem, is to create more programs to get women and girls interested in science.
Of interest in this article is the data presented on the gender-wage gap. Still very problematic, not showing signs of improvement. Clearly, this is a problem across disciplines and not particular to science, as the article alludes to. However, this gap doesn't become a part of the analysis of the article, except to suggest that the dearth of women causes the gap to persist. We then move to the question: what keeps women from pursuing careers in science?
By ruling out difference in aptitude, the authors suggest that "these findings suggest that cultural or environmental factors, rather than biological ones, affect girls’ interests and career choices." What are these cultural and environmental factors? In particular, what are the cultural factors of the academy that perpetuates the image of the scientist as typically male and white? What are the practices of a culture that are embedded in these assumptions of who scientists are and how they should behave?
I guess what I'm struggling with is the lack of attention to identity in considering 'preferences'. What does identity have to do with preferences? Well, I'm concerned that by suggesting that girls simply do not prefer science because they have not been socialized to do so, we still miss the cultural factor - i.e., the cultural image that, for example, physics projects is one that does not appear to include women or African-Canadians or non-gender-conforming individuals. Additionally, beyond the critical mass argument, is the fact that cultural forms of physicists (or scientists generally) may not be connected to the images and interests of those groups that are traditionally under-represented in physics. And finally, this gets really sticky when we start thinking about cultural forms and who they do and do not relate to, and it seems that when we are considering the "ideas, images and practices" (to quote Stuart Hall) associated with the teaching and production of science, that we should be careful not to essentialize those who articulate or interact with these practices, and make assumptions about their inherent preferences or abilities.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
25 Skills Every Man Should Know: The List, Ready for Your Debate - Popular Mechanics
25 Skills Every Man Should Know: The List, Ready for Your Debate - Popular Mechanics
Amazing. I saw this article cited on ScienceBlogs, so I thought I'd check it out and see how much of a "ManlyMan" I am. Turns out I can do about 15 out of 25, which doesn't place me in the ManlyMan category (according to the folks at Uncertain Principles) but does make me manlier than our man Prof. Orzel.
I'm not sure that this is at all important, or that I should be giving Popular Mechanics any more press than they already receive for this drivel. But today is a slow day...
Amazing. I saw this article cited on ScienceBlogs, so I thought I'd check it out and see how much of a "ManlyMan" I am. Turns out I can do about 15 out of 25, which doesn't place me in the ManlyMan category (according to the folks at Uncertain Principles) but does make me manlier than our man Prof. Orzel.
I'm not sure that this is at all important, or that I should be giving Popular Mechanics any more press than they already receive for this drivel. But today is a slow day...
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
So complicated
Right. My friend Liz told me that the biggest drain of her time in her PhD was recruiting and scheduling participants. I thought it would be a piece of cake since mine are all in the same department, but, she was right. It's going to be a scheduling nightmare, especially with this course I'm teaching, and my part-part-time job schedule, not to mention the fact that physicists seem to have erratic timetables. Late late nights, not so many early mornings. Weekends. oy.
However, the ball is rolling, I WILL begin data collection as soon as next week. So this week means organize, organize, organize; take a few theory refresher reads; and do a quick "what's the purpose of this study again?" journal entry, or something like that.
Tonight: Apparently there's a big plenary session happening in downtown Montreal: Sandra Harding, Judy Wajcman and others will be there. The title is STS in 1977, so I have no idea what this talk is going to be about, but we're supposed to be getting feminist and multicultural perspectives. I'll check it out. I wonder where the Doubletree hotel is? (isn't that the one that gives you warm cookies?)
However, the ball is rolling, I WILL begin data collection as soon as next week. So this week means organize, organize, organize; take a few theory refresher reads; and do a quick "what's the purpose of this study again?" journal entry, or something like that.
Tonight: Apparently there's a big plenary session happening in downtown Montreal: Sandra Harding, Judy Wajcman and others will be there. The title is STS in 1977, so I have no idea what this talk is going to be about, but we're supposed to be getting feminist and multicultural perspectives. I'll check it out. I wonder where the Doubletree hotel is? (isn't that the one that gives you warm cookies?)
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
Catching up
Many things have happened. I moved into my new place. I love it, but it was a lot of work. I lived here for 7 fabulous weeks with my little angel Sophie (my beautiful 16.5 year old dog that I got as a puppy when I was 16!) before she succumbed to cancer and I had to put her to sleep. She was the little light of my life, and I don't think anything in my life has been harder than making the decision to put her to sleep. To heal, I took my broken heart on a vacation for three weeks and since I've been home I have been running. I am co-teaching a science course this semester (introductory science concepts for pre-service elementary teachers) and I have started my data collection.
The data collection so far will entail:
Hanging out at the physics department;
Asking physics students to take photographs that represent what a physicist is/does and how they fit into that image of physicist;
Managing a blog that will (hopefully) provide a space for discussions about physics culture;
Interviewing participants (I have 10 so far).
I don't know if I will ever feel prepared enough for this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
