SCIENCE CAREERS AND WOMEN: MIND SETS THAT MATTER

Dr. Rukhsana Chowdhury
Indian Institute of Chemical Biology
Kolkata 700 032

Although hard facts on the crucial stages of a women's career in science is  unavailable or at best fragmentary, it would appear that there are serious  leakages in the pipeline from college to university to scientific careers.  These dropouts are a costly loss of talent especially when women leave  science careers after substantial investments of time, funding and other  resources have been dedicated for them and by them. This has prompted  several studies world wide to gain insights into the obstacles to entry,  retention and progress of women in science and factors contributing to the  attrition that provoke women to abandon science careers midway. As is  readily appreciated the issue of family commitments, particularly child  rearing is perceived as the foremost and major barrier and as such has  received considerable attention. Suggestions to resolve the problem have  included more family friendly work environments, compulsory equal sharing of  leave by both parents during child birth, training boys to make them more  competent to look after their future families etc. However, gradually an  appreciation has evolved of the more subtle factors that influence the issue. Among these are certain preconceived notions and stereotyping that  are instrumental in discouraging young women from taking up a career in  science. Even for women in professional scientific careers, some attitudes  and values of the traditional male bastion retard progress. I would like to  enumerate the mind-sets that unconsciously discriminate against women and  are potential barriers to the entry and progress of women in the sciences.  

First consider the entry level, that is high school and college. The  mismatch between cultural stereotypes of women and scientists make many  bright young girls summarily reject the option of selecting a career in  science. This happens even more frequently due to the dearth of female role  models who can inspire girls and with whom girls can identify. It is thus important to actively demonstrate to young girls in schools and colleges  that there is a cadre of excellent women scientists all over the world. The  recent increase in young women aspiring to a career in biosciences can  probably be attributed to an increase in successful women scientist in this  particular field as opposed to the physical sciences. Fundamentally girls  need to see that science can serve their interests in life and contribute  fundamentally to wealth creation, quality of life and sustained development.  Realization of this fundamental aspect may account for the increase of women  in the engineering profession, breaking the potentially inhibitory image of  engineering as a non-feminine male occupation.  

In the professional world of science there are some preconceptions,  assumptions and values that are disadvantageous to women. Certain qualities  are selected for that are at best very indirectly related to being a good  scientist and that clash with cultural pressures on women.  

First and most common is the assumption that one has to work long hours to  demonstrate commitment. Women who cannot or do not spend as much time in  their work places as their male colleagues are automatically regarded as  less dedicated. This assumption however is not always true. It is now  realized that women tend to give better 'quality time' to their work that  compensates for their shorter working hours. Their time management in terms  of output, is   believed to be better than men.  

Secondly, very prevalent is the preconceived notion that family commitments  are incompatible with scientific competence. Single minded ness, that is  absorption in science to the exclusion of all else in life is perceived as  an essential quality for a successful scientist. This probably stems from  the image of scientists as eccentric, unworldly and even scatterbrained  people, fueled by various anecdotes illustrating these aspects in the  characters of famous scientists. These images however, are not consistent  with the orderly, organized, well-planned comprehensive approaches that are  necessary to solve complicated scientific problems. In my opinion it is not  single minded ness but perseverance and dedication that are required in a  good scientist.  

Thirdly, in science as in other areas, men tend to regard assertiveness as a  quality essential for leadership. Strong cultural biases tend to make women  less assertive than men, which automatically excludes them from leadership  positions. But is assertiveness really an essential quality for a leader. In  my opinion it is not, at least in science. What is needed is not  assertiveness, but thoughtfulness, tolerance and nurturing to realize fully  the potential of ones team.  

Finally, I wish to mention a survey carried out by Sheila Widnall, president  AAAS as reported in Science. Female graduate students at MIT, Cambridge,  asked about their experience, replied that they had no problem in competing  intellectually with their male counterparts, but found the experience  uncomfortable. They wanted a co-operative environment where interactions were intended to be supportive rather than confrontational. The competitive  culture was also commented on by another group of women chemists in a survey  in the U.K. Women were more interested in exploring how to reach a solution and in learning from the process, rather than in arriving at a result and  rushing to publish. Whereas men stresses the importance of gaining public  recognition none of the women mentioned it. These surveys give useful  insight into the attitudes and differences between men and women and may  account for the fact that women are outraced by men as publications and  public recognition are a visible and quantifiable measure of productivity.