[ECOLOG-L] Fwd: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and professional life
1. I'm linking a *New York Times* Opinion piece addressing, from several women's points of view, a number of topics being discussed in this thread: http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/04/30/motherhood-vs-feminism/lets-not-pass-judgment-on-parenting-styles 2. After careful reading and consideration of your posts, I've formed the opinion that, in the USA, it is most likely that each academic department or university will respond individually to the concerns many of you have (see Duke for one example in A&S). It seems unlikely to me that, in the USA, the issues will be addressed structurally as they have been in most W European countries. In the final analysis, there may be no strategy that serves all requirements. Anyway...TBC... clara b. jones Blog: http://vertebratesocialbehavior.blogspot.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/cbjones1943 -- Forwarded message -- From: Jacquelyn Gill Date: Tue, May 1, 2012 at 12:49 PM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and professional life To: ECOLOG-L@listserv.umd.edu Hi Karen, The problem with this framework is that you risk guilting parents (usually women) for choices they are forced to make, or even those they may genuinely want to make, especially if the parents' level of engagement doesn't match what others expect. Like I said earlier, for some people, a mother's choosing to work at all is irresponsible. Framing arguments in this way is ultimately damaging and shifts the burden away from institutions who need to step up and support parents, and instead shifts that burden to parents for whom choice may be relative and is definitely highly value-laden. I don't see the value in reminding people who are probably already very aware that that can't spend enough time with their kids that, in addition for working hard to provide their family at the expense of having a fulfilling life, they're also not really raising their kids. Those choices were probably hard to make. I also still fail to see how that is relevant to a discussion of women in academia-- the overwhelming evidence is that women are leaving academia because there aren't institutions in place to support them, not that women are abandoning their families. Best wishes, Jacquelyn -- clara b. jones
[ECOLOG-L] Fwd: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and professional life
Listserv: 1. ...i decided to take a "quick and dirty" look @female Nobel laureates in an attempt to assess how they did it and to document their numbers compared to male honorees...(see link below)... 2. ...since 1895 (when the prize was inaugurated), 44 women have received a Nobel, 17 of these (~39%) in math-based disciplines (medicine or physiology: n= 10; chemistry: n= 4; physics: n= 2; economics: n= 1)... 3. ...807 men have won the Nobel (i did not readily find a breakdown x area), 44, women...~5%... 4. ...i took a q&d look @wiki entries for several of the women...marie curie won twice (the only woman to do so); several, including curie, won with husbands; curie's daughter won a Nobel with her husband; many are theoreticians or made technical/methodological contributions; some of the recent female awardees have 1 or 2 children; one is struck that these women are "tough sisters", some having had very challenging childhoods (see, for instance, barbara mcclintock [a goldschmidt student!] and ada yonath [if i recall correctly, the first israeli woman to win a Nobel])...etc., etc. 5. ...one would like to read biographies of all of these remarkable women to get a better idea of how they did it, how they purchased control of their time, and how they maintained their focus "...without being distracted by other interesting things". 6. ...again, i'd like to recommend the biography of marie curie by francoise giroud... 7. ...clara http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_female_Nobel_laureates -- Forwarded message -- From: Kristine Callis Date: Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 3:39 PM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and professional life To: ECOLOG-L@listserv.umd.edu I think there are another interesting questions to pose: who do we want raising the next generation? Do we want to make it as easy as possible for intelligent, hard working people to becoming parents (and spend the time necessary with the children to raise productive, well adjusted people) and continue to contribute to and be successful in science or do we want to make it so difficult that they may decide not to reproduce and leave their genes, which may have contributed to their success in our society, out of the gene pool? What is the cost, and is it worth it, of not creating an environment capable of supporting a work-life balance that leads to scientists having and raising children as well as continuing to be productive scientists? What is the cost to science of having well-educated people drop out of science to raise families because they don't feel they can do both? Just some thoughts, Kris Callis PhD Candidate (and former MD) University of Florida (Mother, wife, ecologist. In that order and successful at all three) On Apr 12, 2012, at 11:52 AM, Amanda Quillen wrote: > "...however, why should the USA modify the system producing among the best and most successful scientists in the world..." > > Because maybe that isn't true and things could be better another way. After grad school, I left academia for the private sector. I make more money and get more respect from my colleagues and I have more free time than in any postdoc I've ever heard about. Now I get to have a baby at a biologically appropriate age with paid leave and excellent health coverage. Surely I'm not alone in this. Why would our brightest scientists subject themselves to the other system if they have a choice? Perhaps many of them didn't. Maybe I don't have a bunch of publications, but my research gets immediately incorporated into products and powerful people listen to what I say. That kind of impact is very rewarding. There is another way, people. > > Amanda Quillen, Ph.D. > http://www.AmandaQuillen.com/ > > On Apr 11, 2012, at 11:14 PM, "Clara B. Jones" wrote: > >> Andres: 1. ...i think i really do "hear" what you are saying, and i "get" >> that the advantages afforded to professional females (including females in >> research science careers) in some countries are beneficial to them and >> their families... >> 2. ...however, what level of Science are these females doing... >> 3. ...is their productivity, including the quality of their research, >> equivalent to that of USA men who work, say, 80+ h/week... >> 4. ...is the quality of work being done in the countries you >> cite equivalent to what would be required to achieve "senior" (i;e., >> professorship [+]) status in the US... >> 5. ...i don't think i know what the answers to the above questions are; >> however, i suspect the answers are "no"... >> 6. ...from what i do know, however, i THINK that collaborative research is >> acceptable in Europe to a degree that it is not in the USA where, it seems >> to me, females who rely on collaboration are often/usually perceived as >> "hitch(h)iking" on a senior person's research projects...though this >> strategy may, indeed, purchase senior status in the USA, it often does not >> translate to repu
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Fwd: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and professional life
Some of the email that have emerged in this threat have been the most depressing I have seen on Ecolog in a long time - with some notable bright spots. I would like to encourage all starting out graduate students and scientists - you are our future and please don't be discouraged by what you are hearing! There are now more female graduate students in college and both men and women are embracing healthier lifestyles that do not involve working 80+ or even 40+ hours per week. I know some colleagues who share a single faculty appointment and have a great family, many outside of work of work pursuits, and contribute fabulous science and teaching. Do they produce as much as someone working 80+ hours a week? Individually probably not. Is the quality there - sure! What a bunch of malarkey that our science quality suffers because we are not workaholics. As others pointed out, working too much can be counterproductive. I remember breastfeeding my baby and making notes on my blackberry about some future ideas to pursue for research - when I had the time and energy. Did I take my baby to the field - no. But she sat with me in my office while I worked on publications, had conference calls, etc. Now I have a 4 year old and I feel the biggest impediment to productivity in my life if the vastly increased administrative load that comes with supervising people and being a research team leader, federal budget cuts many of us are experiencing, and lack of visionary leadership in some parts of our agency. These issues, more than anything, will lead to poor quality science, not the fact that almost every week I take a few hours off to participate in my daughter's life. But, as my earlier post indicated, I do not think I can have it all. I cannot work 40+, 50+ etc. hours a week and have a quality life with my family (some people can though - all depends on how much down time you need). I am willing to accept that, and the fact that I might not climb the ladder as fast as someone working more... People now want much more out of life and they want to try to find a balance - whether that is having kids, rock climbing, skiing, pursuing their artistic side, etc. This will only lead to more well-rounded and perhaps more insightful and creative people. Maybe instead of having "giants" in the field who dominate our science with what can eventually become dogma we will have a variety of well-rounded voices that are being heard. Maybe it is a good thing not to have a bunch of "senior" or "giant" scientists that take over the journals, have a zillion graduate students and postdocs, and whose thinking influences a discipline for 20 years+. Ever heard of diversity??? Maybe another type of model will serve our science better...it will certainly be better for humanity... My advice to women and anyone entering the field - find an advisor, institution, supervisor etc. that will support a healthy lifestyle and your goals. Accept that you might NOT be perceived as the most productive person by some of your peers who follow the old model...but do quality science...contribute to the field...but most of all...be HAPPY! And don't give up! Becky Becky K. Kerns, Ph.D., Team Leader/Research Ecologist Ecosystem Dynamics and Environmental Change Threat Characterization and Management Program, PNW Research Station 3200 SW Jefferson Way, Corvallis, OR 97331 541.750.7497 -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of Claudia Ford Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 9:13 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Fwd.: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and professional life What a great and important conversation to have. If any of us ever said, however, that everything about any current system was fine and did not need to be questioned or challenged - and too bad for us if we want change, as we should accept the status quo and not want anything different. Well. No, I do not think that we would have become scientists. Challenging our current systems and our understandings about those systems is exactly what science, among most other things, is all about. Claudia On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 11:52 AM, David L. McNeely wrote: > ?? Clara simply said everything about the current system > as she sees it is fine, and those who find it does not provide > effectively for them to participate and contribute because they have > family responsibilities, well, too bad, they knew the system when they > started, and should not want anything different from what they saw. I > saw nothing in her post that challenges the current system. Rather, > she challenges those who find fault with it to retreat from it and > give up on the notion of participation and contribution. > > David McNeely &g
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Fwd: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and professional life
What a great and important conversation to have. If any of us ever said, however, that everything about any current system was fine and did not need to be questioned or challenged - and too bad for us if we want change, as we should accept the status quo and not want anything different. Well. No, I do not think that we would have become scientists. Challenging our current systems and our understandings about those systems is exactly what science, among most other things, is all about. Claudia On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 11:52 AM, David L. McNeely wrote: > ?? Clara simply said everything about the current system as > she sees it is fine, and those who find it does not provide effectively for > them to participate and contribute because they have family > responsibilities, well, too bad, they knew the system when they started, > and should not want anything different from what they saw. I saw nothing > in her post that challenges the current system. Rather, she challenges > those who find fault with it to retreat from it and give up on the notion > of participation and contribution. > > David McNeely > > "Williams wrote: > > It sounds like Clara is challenging the current theory and questioning > it but I don't see that she has in any way perpetuated dysfunction. > > > > Facts indicate that woman have been and are still discriminated against > but this doesn't explain all the variation we see- not by a long shot I > don't think. > > > > I am not saying I agree with Clara, but wow, your statement, Silvia, is > very dogmatic. Clara presented ideas to be considered and opinion to help > inform the collective. Silvia rather, sounds much more bombastic with the > intent to stifle her- that is unfortunate. > > > > Mark > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto: > ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of Silvia Secchi > > Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 8:43 AM > > To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU > > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Fwd: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing > your personal and professional life > > > > Men make the rules, men win the game, Clara. People like you that do not > question the system or do not try to change it perpetuate a dysfunctional > professional environment. > > > > Silvia Secchi > > Assistant Professor, Energy Economics & Policy Southern Illinois > University Carbondale > > > > > > On Apr 11, 2012, at 11:14 PM, "Clara B. Jones" > wrote: > > > > > Andres: 1. ...i think i really do "hear" what you are saying, and i > "get" > > > that the advantages afforded to professional females (including > > > females in research science careers) in some countries are beneficial > > > to them and their families... > > > 2. ...however, what level of Science are these females doing... > > > 3. ...is their productivity, including the quality of their research, > > > equivalent to that of USA men who work, say, 80+ h/week... > > > 4. ...is the quality of work being done in the countries you cite > > > equivalent to what would be required to achieve "senior" (i;e., > > > professorship [+]) status in the US... > > > 5. ...i don't think i know what the answers to the above questions > > > are; however, i suspect the answers are "no"... > > > 6. ...from what i do know, however, i THINK that collaborative > > > research is acceptable in Europe to a degree that it is not in the USA > > > where, it seems to me, females who rely on collaboration are > > > often/usually perceived as "hitch(h)iking" on a senior person's > > > research projects...though this strategy may, indeed, purchase senior > > > status in the USA, it often does not translate to reputation or > respect (indeed, there are exceptions)... > > > 7. ...following from the threads on this topic in the past few d...i > > > think i "hear" females saying that they're not competing for the sorts > > > of positions that i describe above...so be it...as one respondent put > > > it, after a baby came her "priorities changed"...again, so be > it...SORT OF... > > > 8. ...what i mean by SORT OF is that i don't see a problem with USA > > > females changing priorities UNLESS they've received funding or made > > > other commitments under the guise that they want to be senior > > > scientists *as defined in USA*... > > > 9. ...several female respondents have pointed out that female graduate >
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Fwd: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and professional life
As a 48-year old Research Associate, who began a PhD program as a non-married, childless woman, who has since married, given birth to a son, and is now widowed, I am probably in a position to comment on the challenges of balancing life as a professional scientist, colleague, parent, head of household, community member, neighbor, friend, and any number of other roles we as fellow human beings play throughout our lives. However, I think it may be more useful to pose a question to the scientific community at large:// /How well do you think we are doing in the academy, as individuals and collectively, at producing thoughtful and insightful scientific knowledge that truly serves to "advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare", which--at least for the United States Government--is outlined as a primary mission in its support of the advancement of science through the National Science Foundation? / It seems to me the old adage "as within, so without" applies here. Susan Howe Colorado State University Research Associate Civil and Environmental Engineering Fort Collins, CO 80523 On 4/12/2012 8:42 AM, Silvia Secchi wrote: Men make the rules, men win the game, Clara. People like you that do not question the system or do not try to change it perpetuate a dysfunctional professional environment. Silvia Secchi Assistant Professor, Energy Economics& Policy Southern Illinois University Carbondale On Apr 11, 2012, at 11:14 PM, "Clara B. Jones" wrote: Andres: 1. ...i think i really do "hear" what you are saying, and i "get" that the advantages afforded to professional females (including females in research science careers) in some countries are beneficial to them and their families... 2. ...however, what level of Science are these females doing... 3. ...is their productivity, including the quality of their research, equivalent to that of USA men who work, say, 80+ h/week... 4. ...is the quality of work being done in the countries you cite equivalent to what would be required to achieve "senior" (i;e., professorship [+]) status in the US... 5. ...i don't think i know what the answers to the above questions are; however, i suspect the answers are "no"... 6. ...from what i do know, however, i THINK that collaborative research is acceptable in Europe to a degree that it is not in the USA where, it seems to me, females who rely on collaboration are often/usually perceived as "hitch(h)iking" on a senior person's research projects...though this strategy may, indeed, purchase senior status in the USA, it often does not translate to reputation or respect (indeed, there are exceptions)... 7. ...following from the threads on this topic in the past few d...i think i "hear" females saying that they're not competing for the sorts of positions that i describe above...so be it...as one respondent put it, after a baby came her "priorities changed"...again, so be it...SORT OF... 8. ...what i mean by SORT OF is that i don't see a problem with USA females changing priorities UNLESS they've received funding or made other commitments under the guise that they want to be senior scientists *as defined in USA*... 9. ...several female respondents have pointed out that female graduate students, post-docs, etc. are "grown-ups" capable of making their own "rational" decisions...all good...then they should be prepared to assume responsibility for their decisions...understanding *the realities of USA science that they signed up for*... 10. ...what is the Plan B for these girls that will fulfill their commitments *(to USA science)* when they switch priorities... 11. ...what is their plan for purchasing UNDIVIDED, UNINTERRUPTED, SINGLE-FOCUSED, LONG-TERM, OFTEN UNPREDICTABLE TIME required to accomplish the sort of senior science *as defined by USA standards*... 12. ...some females& minorities assert that the structure of USA science needs to change...for a variety of reasons... 13. ...however, why should the USA modify the system producing among the best and most successful scientists in the world... 14. ...more important, in my opinion...is that "RATIONAL" grown-ups of whatever sex or sexual orientation or personal status sign up for this system& need not only to have their eyes open but need to step up by not changing the rules unilaterally in mid- or late-stream...clara -- Forwarded message -- From: Andres Lopez-Sepulcre Date: Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 4:01 PM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and professional life To: ECOLOG-L@listserv.umd.edu Andres, do you have any ideas about how we can import that Finlandian model to the U.S.? And how to get more universities and other employers in the U.S. to recognize the need to provide for professional couples? Thanks, David Ufff... this discussion may become more political than ecological... the problem, as I see it is more fundamental. How willing are we to pay higher and more progressive taxes, socialize higher educ
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Fwd: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and professional life
?? Clara simply said everything about the current system as she sees it is fine, and those who find it does not provide effectively for them to participate and contribute because they have family responsibilities, well, too bad, they knew the system when they started, and should not want anything different from what they saw. I saw nothing in her post that challenges the current system. Rather, she challenges those who find fault with it to retreat from it and give up on the notion of participation and contribution. David McNeely "Williams wrote: > It sounds like Clara is challenging the current theory and questioning it but > I don't see that she has in any way perpetuated dysfunction. > > Facts indicate that woman have been and are still discriminated against but > this doesn't explain all the variation we see- not by a long shot I don't > think. > > I am not saying I agree with Clara, but wow, your statement, Silvia, is very > dogmatic. Clara presented ideas to be considered and opinion to help inform > the collective. Silvia rather, sounds much more bombastic with the intent to > stifle her- that is unfortunate. > > Mark > > > -Original Message- > From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news > [mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of Silvia Secchi > Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 8:43 AM > To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Fwd: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your > personal and professional life > > Men make the rules, men win the game, Clara. People like you that do not > question the system or do not try to change it perpetuate a dysfunctional > professional environment. > > Silvia Secchi > Assistant Professor, Energy Economics & Policy Southern Illinois University > Carbondale > > > On Apr 11, 2012, at 11:14 PM, "Clara B. Jones" wrote: > > > Andres: 1. ...i think i really do "hear" what you are saying, and i "get" > > that the advantages afforded to professional females (including > > females in research science careers) in some countries are beneficial > > to them and their families... > > 2. ...however, what level of Science are these females doing... > > 3. ...is their productivity, including the quality of their research, > > equivalent to that of USA men who work, say, 80+ h/week... > > 4. ...is the quality of work being done in the countries you cite > > equivalent to what would be required to achieve "senior" (i;e., > > professorship [+]) status in the US... > > 5. ...i don't think i know what the answers to the above questions > > are; however, i suspect the answers are "no"... > > 6. ...from what i do know, however, i THINK that collaborative > > research is acceptable in Europe to a degree that it is not in the USA > > where, it seems to me, females who rely on collaboration are > > often/usually perceived as "hitch(h)iking" on a senior person's > > research projects...though this strategy may, indeed, purchase senior > > status in the USA, it often does not translate to reputation or respect > > (indeed, there are exceptions)... > > 7. ...following from the threads on this topic in the past few d...i > > think i "hear" females saying that they're not competing for the sorts > > of positions that i describe above...so be it...as one respondent put > > it, after a baby came her "priorities changed"...again, so be it...SORT > > OF... > > 8. ...what i mean by SORT OF is that i don't see a problem with USA > > females changing priorities UNLESS they've received funding or made > > other commitments under the guise that they want to be senior > > scientists *as defined in USA*... > > 9. ...several female respondents have pointed out that female graduate > > students, post-docs, etc. are "grown-ups" capable of making their own > > "rational" decisions...all good...then they should be prepared to > > assume responsibility for their decisions...understanding *the > > realities of USA science that they signed up for*... > > 10. ...what is the Plan B for these girls that will fulfill their > > commitments *(to USA science)* when they switch priorities... > > 11. ...what is their plan for purchasing UNDIVIDED, UNINTERRUPTED, > > SINGLE-FOCUSED, LONG-TERM, OFTEN UNPREDICTABLE TIME required to > > accomplish the sort of senior science *as defined by USA standards*... > > 12. ...some females & minorities assert that the structure of USA > > science needs to change...fo
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Fwd: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and professional life
It sounds like Clara is challenging the current theory and questioning it but I don't see that she has in any way perpetuated dysfunction. Facts indicate that woman have been and are still discriminated against but this doesn't explain all the variation we see- not by a long shot I don't think. I am not saying I agree with Clara, but wow, your statement, Silvia, is very dogmatic. Clara presented ideas to be considered and opinion to help inform the collective. Silvia rather, sounds much more bombastic with the intent to stifle her- that is unfortunate. Mark -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of Silvia Secchi Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 8:43 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Fwd: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and professional life Men make the rules, men win the game, Clara. People like you that do not question the system or do not try to change it perpetuate a dysfunctional professional environment. Silvia Secchi Assistant Professor, Energy Economics & Policy Southern Illinois University Carbondale On Apr 11, 2012, at 11:14 PM, "Clara B. Jones" wrote: > Andres: 1. ...i think i really do "hear" what you are saying, and i "get" > that the advantages afforded to professional females (including > females in research science careers) in some countries are beneficial > to them and their families... > 2. ...however, what level of Science are these females doing... > 3. ...is their productivity, including the quality of their research, > equivalent to that of USA men who work, say, 80+ h/week... > 4. ...is the quality of work being done in the countries you cite > equivalent to what would be required to achieve "senior" (i;e., > professorship [+]) status in the US... > 5. ...i don't think i know what the answers to the above questions > are; however, i suspect the answers are "no"... > 6. ...from what i do know, however, i THINK that collaborative > research is acceptable in Europe to a degree that it is not in the USA > where, it seems to me, females who rely on collaboration are > often/usually perceived as "hitch(h)iking" on a senior person's > research projects...though this strategy may, indeed, purchase senior > status in the USA, it often does not translate to reputation or respect > (indeed, there are exceptions)... > 7. ...following from the threads on this topic in the past few d...i > think i "hear" females saying that they're not competing for the sorts > of positions that i describe above...so be it...as one respondent put > it, after a baby came her "priorities changed"...again, so be it...SORT OF... > 8. ...what i mean by SORT OF is that i don't see a problem with USA > females changing priorities UNLESS they've received funding or made > other commitments under the guise that they want to be senior > scientists *as defined in USA*... > 9. ...several female respondents have pointed out that female graduate > students, post-docs, etc. are "grown-ups" capable of making their own > "rational" decisions...all good...then they should be prepared to > assume responsibility for their decisions...understanding *the > realities of USA science that they signed up for*... > 10. ...what is the Plan B for these girls that will fulfill their > commitments *(to USA science)* when they switch priorities... > 11. ...what is their plan for purchasing UNDIVIDED, UNINTERRUPTED, > SINGLE-FOCUSED, LONG-TERM, OFTEN UNPREDICTABLE TIME required to > accomplish the sort of senior science *as defined by USA standards*... > 12. ...some females & minorities assert that the structure of USA > science needs to change...for a variety of reasons... > 13. ...however, why should the USA modify the system producing among > the best and most successful scientists in the world... > 14. ...more important, in my opinion...is that "RATIONAL" grown-ups of > whatever sex or sexual orientation or personal status sign up for this > system & need not only to have their eyes open but need to step up by > not changing the rules unilaterally in mid- or late-stream...clara > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Andres Lopez-Sepulcre > Date: Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 4:01 PM > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal > and professional life > To: ECOLOG-L@listserv.umd.edu > > > Andres, do you have any ideas about how we can import that Finlandian > model >> to the U.S.? And how to get more universities and other employers in >> the U.S. to recognize the need to provide for
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Fwd: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and professional life
To David's point regarding productivity: http://www.salon.com/2012/03/14/bring_back_the_40_hour_work_week/ Don't worry if you refuse to work an 80 hour work week. You may be just as productive as those working 40 hour weeks and still have time for family and other pursuits.
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Fwd: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and professional life
Clara, I respectfully disagree with some of your points. I will not detail each point, but will simply point out that collaboration is now the norm in science. Look at the lists of authors, sometimes running to 10, on a paper nowadays. People should get respect and reputation for the contributions they make, not for whether they are an 80 hour per week workaholic. I've known plenty of those who were neither full people, nor very effective either when it came down to production. Things can change without losing quality. So far as accepting funding, that creates a responsibility to try to do one's best to accomplish the purpose of the funding, not to commit a life of 80 hour work weeks. Women are people, too. Even men are people, and can recognize the humanity in others. Respectfully, David McNeely "Clara B. Jones" wrote: > Andres: 1. ...i think i really do "hear" what you are saying, and i "get" > that the advantages afforded to professional females (including females in > research science careers) in some countries are beneficial to them and > their families... > 2. ...however, what level of Science are these females doing... > 3. ...is their productivity, including the quality of their research, > equivalent to that of USA men who work, say, 80+ h/week... > 4. ...is the quality of work being done in the countries you > cite equivalent to what would be required to achieve "senior" (i;e., > professorship [+]) status in the US... > 5. ...i don't think i know what the answers to the above questions are; > however, i suspect the answers are "no"... > 6. ...from what i do know, however, i THINK that collaborative research is > acceptable in Europe to a degree that it is not in the USA where, it seems > to me, females who rely on collaboration are often/usually perceived as > "hitch(h)iking" on a senior person's research projects...though this > strategy may, indeed, purchase senior status in the USA, it often does not > translate to reputation or respect (indeed, there are exceptions)... > 7. ...following from the threads on this topic in the past few d...i think > i "hear" females saying that they're not competing for the sorts of > positions that i describe above...so be it...as one respondent put it, > after a baby came her "priorities changed"...again, so be it...SORT OF... > 8. ...what i mean by SORT OF is that i don't see a problem with USA females > changing priorities UNLESS they've received funding or made other > commitments under the guise that they want to be senior scientists *as > defined in USA*... > 9. ...several female respondents have pointed out that female graduate > students, post-docs, etc. are "grown-ups" capable of making their own > "rational" decisions...all good...then they should be prepared to assume > responsibility for their decisions...understanding *the realities of USA > science that they signed up for*... > 10. ...what is the Plan B for these girls that will fulfill their > commitments *(to USA science)* when they switch priorities... > 11. ...what is their plan for purchasing UNDIVIDED, UNINTERRUPTED, > SINGLE-FOCUSED, LONG-TERM, OFTEN UNPREDICTABLE TIME required to accomplish > the sort of senior science *as defined by USA standards*... > 12. ...some females & minorities assert that the structure of USA science > needs to change...for a variety of reasons... > 13. ...however, why should the USA modify the system producing among the > best and most successful scientists in the world... > 14. ...more important, in my opinion...is that "RATIONAL" grown-ups of > whatever sex or sexual orientation or personal status sign up for this > system & need not only to have their eyes open but need to step up by not > changing the rules unilaterally in mid- or late-stream...clara > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Andres Lopez-Sepulcre > Date: Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 4:01 PM > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and > professional life > To: ECOLOG-L@listserv.umd.edu > > > Andres, do you have any ideas about how we can import that Finlandian model > > to the U.S.? And how to get more universities and other employers in the > > U.S. to recognize the need to provide for professional couples? Thanks, > > David > > > > Ufff... this discussion may become more political than ecological... the > problem, as I see it is more fundamental. How willing are we to pay higher > and more progressive taxes, socialize higher education (and health care), > punish job instability, remove undergraduate and graduate student fees (in > fact, undergraduates are paid in Finland!!) or increase graduate > student/post-doc salaries and benefits at the cost of reducing those of > professors...? > > > Andres Lopez-Sepulcre wrote: > > > >> In my experience, it all depends on the country and how easy funding > >> agencies, research institutions and governments make it. I have > >> experience in several countries: Spain, USA, Franc
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Fwd: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and professional life
Men make the rules, men win the game, Clara. People like you that do not question the system or do not try to change it perpetuate a dysfunctional professional environment. Silvia Secchi Assistant Professor, Energy Economics & Policy Southern Illinois University Carbondale On Apr 11, 2012, at 11:14 PM, "Clara B. Jones" wrote: > Andres: 1. ...i think i really do "hear" what you are saying, and i "get" > that the advantages afforded to professional females (including females in > research science careers) in some countries are beneficial to them and > their families... > 2. ...however, what level of Science are these females doing... > 3. ...is their productivity, including the quality of their research, > equivalent to that of USA men who work, say, 80+ h/week... > 4. ...is the quality of work being done in the countries you > cite equivalent to what would be required to achieve "senior" (i;e., > professorship [+]) status in the US... > 5. ...i don't think i know what the answers to the above questions are; > however, i suspect the answers are "no"... > 6. ...from what i do know, however, i THINK that collaborative research is > acceptable in Europe to a degree that it is not in the USA where, it seems > to me, females who rely on collaboration are often/usually perceived as > "hitch(h)iking" on a senior person's research projects...though this > strategy may, indeed, purchase senior status in the USA, it often does not > translate to reputation or respect (indeed, there are exceptions)... > 7. ...following from the threads on this topic in the past few d...i think > i "hear" females saying that they're not competing for the sorts of > positions that i describe above...so be it...as one respondent put it, > after a baby came her "priorities changed"...again, so be it...SORT OF... > 8. ...what i mean by SORT OF is that i don't see a problem with USA females > changing priorities UNLESS they've received funding or made other > commitments under the guise that they want to be senior scientists *as > defined in USA*... > 9. ...several female respondents have pointed out that female graduate > students, post-docs, etc. are "grown-ups" capable of making their own > "rational" decisions...all good...then they should be prepared to assume > responsibility for their decisions...understanding *the realities of USA > science that they signed up for*... > 10. ...what is the Plan B for these girls that will fulfill their > commitments *(to USA science)* when they switch priorities... > 11. ...what is their plan for purchasing UNDIVIDED, UNINTERRUPTED, > SINGLE-FOCUSED, LONG-TERM, OFTEN UNPREDICTABLE TIME required to accomplish > the sort of senior science *as defined by USA standards*... > 12. ...some females & minorities assert that the structure of USA science > needs to change...for a variety of reasons... > 13. ...however, why should the USA modify the system producing among the > best and most successful scientists in the world... > 14. ...more important, in my opinion...is that "RATIONAL" grown-ups of > whatever sex or sexual orientation or personal status sign up for this > system & need not only to have their eyes open but need to step up by not > changing the rules unilaterally in mid- or late-stream...clara > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Andres Lopez-Sepulcre > Date: Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 4:01 PM > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and > professional life > To: ECOLOG-L@listserv.umd.edu > > > Andres, do you have any ideas about how we can import that Finlandian model >> to the U.S.? And how to get more universities and other employers in the >> U.S. to recognize the need to provide for professional couples? Thanks, >> David >> > > Ufff... this discussion may become more political than ecological... the > problem, as I see it is more fundamental. How willing are we to pay higher > and more progressive taxes, socialize higher education (and health care), > punish job instability, remove undergraduate and graduate student fees (in > fact, undergraduates are paid in Finland!!) or increase graduate > student/post-doc salaries and benefits at the cost of reducing those of > professors...? > > > Andres Lopez-Sepulcre wrote: >> >>> In my experience, it all depends on the country and how easy funding >>> agencies, research institutions and governments make it. I have >>> experience in several countries: Spain, USA, France and Finland. They >>> each have their good and bad points on that respect. Fore example, >>> while the USA and Canada tend to be pretty good at opening jobs for >>> couples, which helps enormously the two-body problem, I find that some >>> European countries offer better conditions to be a parent. For >>> example, in Finland and Sweden the government offers paid maternity >>> and/or paternity leaves of at least 10 months. Since this is a >>> 'stipend' independent of the scientific fellowship or contract, it >>> essentially
[ECOLOG-L] Fwd: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and professional life
Andres: 1. ...i think i really do "hear" what you are saying, and i "get" that the advantages afforded to professional females (including females in research science careers) in some countries are beneficial to them and their families... 2. ...however, what level of Science are these females doing... 3. ...is their productivity, including the quality of their research, equivalent to that of USA men who work, say, 80+ h/week... 4. ...is the quality of work being done in the countries you cite equivalent to what would be required to achieve "senior" (i;e., professorship [+]) status in the US... 5. ...i don't think i know what the answers to the above questions are; however, i suspect the answers are "no"... 6. ...from what i do know, however, i THINK that collaborative research is acceptable in Europe to a degree that it is not in the USA where, it seems to me, females who rely on collaboration are often/usually perceived as "hitch(h)iking" on a senior person's research projects...though this strategy may, indeed, purchase senior status in the USA, it often does not translate to reputation or respect (indeed, there are exceptions)... 7. ...following from the threads on this topic in the past few d...i think i "hear" females saying that they're not competing for the sorts of positions that i describe above...so be it...as one respondent put it, after a baby came her "priorities changed"...again, so be it...SORT OF... 8. ...what i mean by SORT OF is that i don't see a problem with USA females changing priorities UNLESS they've received funding or made other commitments under the guise that they want to be senior scientists *as defined in USA*... 9. ...several female respondents have pointed out that female graduate students, post-docs, etc. are "grown-ups" capable of making their own "rational" decisions...all good...then they should be prepared to assume responsibility for their decisions...understanding *the realities of USA science that they signed up for*... 10. ...what is the Plan B for these girls that will fulfill their commitments *(to USA science)* when they switch priorities... 11. ...what is their plan for purchasing UNDIVIDED, UNINTERRUPTED, SINGLE-FOCUSED, LONG-TERM, OFTEN UNPREDICTABLE TIME required to accomplish the sort of senior science *as defined by USA standards*... 12. ...some females & minorities assert that the structure of USA science needs to change...for a variety of reasons... 13. ...however, why should the USA modify the system producing among the best and most successful scientists in the world... 14. ...more important, in my opinion...is that "RATIONAL" grown-ups of whatever sex or sexual orientation or personal status sign up for this system & need not only to have their eyes open but need to step up by not changing the rules unilaterally in mid- or late-stream...clara -- Forwarded message -- From: Andres Lopez-Sepulcre Date: Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 4:01 PM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Families in Science - Balancing your personal and professional life To: ECOLOG-L@listserv.umd.edu Andres, do you have any ideas about how we can import that Finlandian model > to the U.S.? And how to get more universities and other employers in the > U.S. to recognize the need to provide for professional couples? Thanks, > David > Ufff... this discussion may become more political than ecological... the problem, as I see it is more fundamental. How willing are we to pay higher and more progressive taxes, socialize higher education (and health care), punish job instability, remove undergraduate and graduate student fees (in fact, undergraduates are paid in Finland!!) or increase graduate student/post-doc salaries and benefits at the cost of reducing those of professors...? Andres Lopez-Sepulcre wrote: > >> In my experience, it all depends on the country and how easy funding >> agencies, research institutions and governments make it. I have >> experience in several countries: Spain, USA, France and Finland. They >> each have their good and bad points on that respect. Fore example, >> while the USA and Canada tend to be pretty good at opening jobs for >> couples, which helps enormously the two-body problem, I find that some >> European countries offer better conditions to be a parent. For >> example, in Finland and Sweden the government offers paid maternity >> and/or paternity leaves of at least 10 months. Since this is a >> 'stipend' independent of the scientific fellowship or contract, it >> essentially means that if they had 3-years of funding, they now will >> have that + 10 months (i.e. the grant or contract 'slides' forward). >> Moreover, there are good free or cheap daycare services and even >> sometimes, daycare or family-housing in field stations. The conditions >> are so good that I have never seen such a high rate of graduate >> students pregnant or with children as in those countries... and they >> are consequentially doing better than average at keeping women in >>
