Tonight, I went to the opening reception for the IYA kick-off in the US. They gave out free beer: Sierra Nevada Galileo's Astronomical Ale. "Theoretically the best beer in the universe." I got one just so I could keep the bottle.
There were speeches made, and the opening of some island in Second Life, which they showed for us on one of the screens up front. I'm too busy with my first life to want a Second Life, so I'm not following any of the Second Life stuff, but you can at secondastronomy.org.
Then followed a screening of the movie 400 Years of Galileo's Telescope, which features an awful lot of white guys, with the exception of Wendy Freedman, Claire Max, and Catherine Cesarsky. (Also, one of the white guys was my friend John D, who's in there for all of two seconds, so now I'm going to tease him mercilessly about it.) I couldn't help but feel like maybe they could have featured more women in it. And talked more other subfields of astronomy than cosmology. For instance, they went on and on about dark energy, but never once dark matter. Then they could have interviewed Vera Rubin!
Some day, I'd like to see a video on popular astronomy, filled with interviews with experts who happen to be women. I bet it could be done.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
She is an Astronomer
Speaking of the International Year of Astronomy (IYA), one of its projects is She Is An Astronomer, which has its own Facebook page. So, if you're on Facebook, join up!
Upcoming Women in Astronomy Meeting
Mark your calendars for the next Women in Astronomy Meeting! From the website:
1992 Baltimore Meeting resulted in the Baltimore Charter and the 2003 Pasadena Meeting resulted in the Pasadena Recommendations. The timing for this year's meeting is to coincide with the International Year of Astronomy.
Women in Astronomy and Space Science: Challenges of gender, generation,
and minority status in an increasingly diverse scientific work place
Oct 21-23, 2009, College Park, MD
Goddard Space Flight Center, along with co-hosts National Science Foundation, University of Maryland, AAS, STScI, NGST, and others, will be hosting a meeting October 21 - 23, 2009 at the University of Maryland Conference Center on the topic of women in astronomy and space science with a focus on not only gender, but also on generation and minorities. This meeting follows up on the "Women in Astronomy" meeting hosted by Space Telescope Science Institute in 1992 and the Pasadena meeting hosted by CalTech in 2003. The topics include: 1) statistics on the state of the field, establishing trends over the last 15 years including the "longitudinal studies" of age vs. makeup of the field and identifying areas for celebration or for concern; 2) research on the impact of gender/ generational/ cultural differences in the science workforce with a focus on practical solutions, 3) issues concerning the work environment and best practices for success of scientists in a diverse work force, and 4) special sessions on the issues of minorities in science, and women in Earth Science.
There is evidence for considerable success in increasing the percentage of women in the field of science and so we aim here to focus more on issues concerning the success of those in the field and solutions for managing a diverse workforce. This meeting will highlight best practices to help the diverse scientific work force to succeed, and will address both the junior members of the field, as well as those who mentor and manage today's diverse scientific workforce. We hope you will join us. More information will be posted on our website as it becomes available.
1992 Baltimore Meeting resulted in the Baltimore Charter and the 2003 Pasadena Meeting resulted in the Pasadena Recommendations. The timing for this year's meeting is to coincide with the International Year of Astronomy.
AAS 213th Meeting: CSWA Town Hall recap
Today's panel discussion featured six women in various stages of their careers: Virginia Trimble, Meg Urry, Jennifer Hoffman, Jane Rigby, Ginny McSwain, and Caty Pilachowski. Geoff Clayton, chair of the CSWA, started off the discussion with an interesting question: is there still a role for the CSWA these days?
On the face of it, barriers have largely been swept aside. Women can attend graduate school. Women are allowed into observatories. Women can receive tenure at Ivy League universities. There was a time when this wasn't the case. Still more promising, the percentage of women in astronomy at the undergraduate level and entering graduate school is approaching parity. However, there was a general consensus that the fight is not yet over. Women still get discriminated against in more subtle ways. Also, there are still few women at the top level, and until equity is reached at all levels, there is still room for change.
During the discussion, a number of concrete suggestions were made and I'll simply list them here:
Also, Geoff put in a plug for this blog at the beginning of the session, so now there's a whole new pile of readers, yes? What are your thoughts from the session?
On the face of it, barriers have largely been swept aside. Women can attend graduate school. Women are allowed into observatories. Women can receive tenure at Ivy League universities. There was a time when this wasn't the case. Still more promising, the percentage of women in astronomy at the undergraduate level and entering graduate school is approaching parity. However, there was a general consensus that the fight is not yet over. Women still get discriminated against in more subtle ways. Also, there are still few women at the top level, and until equity is reached at all levels, there is still room for change.
During the discussion, a number of concrete suggestions were made and I'll simply list them here:
- There is a Women in Astronomy Database, which is a useful resource for finding women to invite as speakers, ask to apply for jobs, serve on committees, etc. This database is user-maintained however, so you need to add yourself to the database and keep your entry up-to-date. I think this resource is under-utilized, so I'm posting it here in hopes that advertising it will remind people to update their listings. I just updated mine!
- Mentoring is extremely important. MentorNet is a great place to find a mentor, but you can only use it if your institution subscribes to it. But, if you join AWIS (Association for Women in Science), you can join MentorNet through them, even if your institution does not subscribe.
- The APS (American Physical Society) has a program where if your institution invites two women to give talks, APS will pay for a third one to come.
Also, Geoff put in a plug for this blog at the beginning of the session, so now there's a whole new pile of readers, yes? What are your thoughts from the session?
Monday, January 5, 2009
AAS 213th Meeting: Day 1
Today's my busy day: I'm both presenting a poster and chairing an oral session. But now that the oral session is done, I finally have a chance to go online for a bit.
Today's big news was announced both by John Huchra, AAS President, this morning, and by Meg Urry during the CSWA Town Hall. The AAS will be providing childcare at the next three winter meetings! I think this is totally awesome, even I personally won't benefit. My kids are old enough that they are in school now, so it's simpler for me to just leave them at home with my husband. Still, I think it's a great step forward. I've seen several women pushing strollers or toting infants, and it seems like every year there are more of them. So I'm sure that this will come as a great relief to many.
It sounds like the childcare will be pretty affordable: $8/hr, is what Meg said this afternoon, because it will be heavily subsidized by an industry sponsor. This program will not replace the current childcare grants program, where you can apply for $100 toward childcare at the AAS Meeting, so you can apply for the grant *and* use the on-site childcare.
The important thing is that this is a use-it-or-lose-it proposition: if they don't get enough people using the service, "it will go away for good" as Meg said. So if you're in a position to use this service, do it!
Okay, that's about all the time I have for now: I'll post a recap of the CSWA session later.
Today's big news was announced both by John Huchra, AAS President, this morning, and by Meg Urry during the CSWA Town Hall. The AAS will be providing childcare at the next three winter meetings! I think this is totally awesome, even I personally won't benefit. My kids are old enough that they are in school now, so it's simpler for me to just leave them at home with my husband. Still, I think it's a great step forward. I've seen several women pushing strollers or toting infants, and it seems like every year there are more of them. So I'm sure that this will come as a great relief to many.
It sounds like the childcare will be pretty affordable: $8/hr, is what Meg said this afternoon, because it will be heavily subsidized by an industry sponsor. This program will not replace the current childcare grants program, where you can apply for $100 toward childcare at the AAS Meeting, so you can apply for the grant *and* use the on-site childcare.
The important thing is that this is a use-it-or-lose-it proposition: if they don't get enough people using the service, "it will go away for good" as Meg said. So if you're in a position to use this service, do it!
Okay, that's about all the time I have for now: I'll post a recap of the CSWA session later.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
AAS 213th Meeting: Day 0
Well, here I am in Long Beach!
I plan to live-blog from the AAS Meeting here this week. Tomorrow should be off to a great start: the CSWA Session meets tomorrow at lunchtime. 12:45pm in Room 104B.
Also of note:
My count is 2 of 7 Prize or Named Lecture talks are by women, with the caveat that the Cannon Prize is specifically for women.
Also, 2 of the 7 invited talks are by women. Not too bad a representation. Someone has been paying attention.
I plan to live-blog from the AAS Meeting here this week. Tomorrow should be off to a great start: the CSWA Session meets tomorrow at lunchtime. 12:45pm in Room 104B.
Also of note:
- Monday at 3:40pm: Lisa Kewley -- Pierce Prize talk
- Tuesday at 11:40am: Penny Sackett -- invited talk
- Tuesday at 4:30pm: Andrea Ghez -- invited talk
- Wednesday at 3:40pm: Jenny Greene -- Cannon Prize talk
My count is 2 of 7 Prize or Named Lecture talks are by women, with the caveat that the Cannon Prize is specifically for women.
Also, 2 of the 7 invited talks are by women. Not too bad a representation. Someone has been paying attention.
Saturday, January 3, 2009
Passion and Success
There are few women in the top ranks of scientists. Often, when these highly successful women are interviewed, they talk about their passion for their work, and how that passion enabled them to overcome the sexism, both blatant and subtle, that they had to fight on their way to the top. They and their interviewers probably think it's inspiring to hear about this passion, because it shows that if you truly love what you do, you can succeed at it, despite the odds set against you.
Well.
Passion is a good starting point. I don't believe anyone pursues a career in science without being passionate about the subject, whether you're male or female. Also, I don't want to diminish the achievements of those who have reached the pinnacles of success, whether it be election to the National Academies or a Nobel Prize or just achieving tenure. But I think talking about passion is misleading.
Passion as a requisite for success reinforces the idea that being a scientist is an all or nothing deal. It implies that your rewards are directly proportional to the work you put in. It's the kind of thinking that leads to boasting about how many hours a week you spend at work. It's the same attitude that hurts women who decide to take time off from their careers to have a family.
At the 3rd IUPAP Conference on Women in Physics (ICWIP), there were several plenary sessions to devoted to science talks by prominent women physcists from around the world. And on one level, they were inspiring. But on the other hand, it was discouraging to realize how hard they had to work to get where they were.
I would like to hear more from other voices: women who have successfully juggled the demands of a family and a career without giving up themselves to do it. I am also coming to realize that many of these voices are women who have redefined success for themselves. They aren't going for the National Academies or a Nobel Prize, or even a tenured professorship. In astronomy, we might say that they have "leaked from the pipeline," because unlike many other branches of physics, there is no industry counterpart to academia.
It's for this reason that Motherhood: the Elephant in the Laboratory is on my reading list. (I have a copy somewhere, but I seem to have misplaced it at the moment.) It's a collection of essays by women scientists who have had children, and how it affected their careers. I went to a panel discussion about the book last fall. The room was packed and the discussion was thoughtful and interesting and inspiring in a different way than those talks at the ICWIP meeting.
Redefining success for yourself is not easy. I seem to have it well-drilled into my head that success is defined as tenure at one of 5 or so universities in this country. It's easy for me to say, "well, she can define success however she wants, and I'm glad to see that she's so happy doing what she's doing, but it's not good enough for me." I am slowly learning to stop viewing life as a zero-sum game, that it's not about sacrificing being a good scientist to be a good mother or vice versa, but trying to be the best human being I can be.
Well.
Passion is a good starting point. I don't believe anyone pursues a career in science without being passionate about the subject, whether you're male or female. Also, I don't want to diminish the achievements of those who have reached the pinnacles of success, whether it be election to the National Academies or a Nobel Prize or just achieving tenure. But I think talking about passion is misleading.
Passion as a requisite for success reinforces the idea that being a scientist is an all or nothing deal. It implies that your rewards are directly proportional to the work you put in. It's the kind of thinking that leads to boasting about how many hours a week you spend at work. It's the same attitude that hurts women who decide to take time off from their careers to have a family.
At the 3rd IUPAP Conference on Women in Physics (ICWIP), there were several plenary sessions to devoted to science talks by prominent women physcists from around the world. And on one level, they were inspiring. But on the other hand, it was discouraging to realize how hard they had to work to get where they were.
I would like to hear more from other voices: women who have successfully juggled the demands of a family and a career without giving up themselves to do it. I am also coming to realize that many of these voices are women who have redefined success for themselves. They aren't going for the National Academies or a Nobel Prize, or even a tenured professorship. In astronomy, we might say that they have "leaked from the pipeline," because unlike many other branches of physics, there is no industry counterpart to academia.
It's for this reason that Motherhood: the Elephant in the Laboratory is on my reading list. (I have a copy somewhere, but I seem to have misplaced it at the moment.) It's a collection of essays by women scientists who have had children, and how it affected their careers. I went to a panel discussion about the book last fall. The room was packed and the discussion was thoughtful and interesting and inspiring in a different way than those talks at the ICWIP meeting.
Redefining success for yourself is not easy. I seem to have it well-drilled into my head that success is defined as tenure at one of 5 or so universities in this country. It's easy for me to say, "well, she can define success however she wants, and I'm glad to see that she's so happy doing what she's doing, but it's not good enough for me." I am slowly learning to stop viewing life as a zero-sum game, that it's not about sacrificing being a good scientist to be a good mother or vice versa, but trying to be the best human being I can be.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)