No abstract

No abstract

BOOK REVIEWSgain independent funding from programs such as the current NSF ADVANCE program that replaced POWRE.So who has come a long way, and in what way? The large sample size coupled with lack of disciplinary bias provides data about women of comparable caliber in research, but some questions remain. Do we accept the generalizations derived from this sample population of women, or is this a weakness in the study? What about women scientists who did not seek and receive POWRE and CBL awards? Are they of the same research caliber, or higher or lower? Would their responses fit the patterns established here? Is this a representative sample of women from all universities and colleges? The thorough and systematic approach Rosser uses in this study is certainly repeatable with another population of women scientists and engineers. However, do we need more convincing data? Do women with other sources of funding differ? "The tremendous love for science and technology and extreme dedication to their research and profession strongly characterized the responses of the overwhelming majority of POWRE and CBL awardees. Most seek to have the barriers removed so they can be productive researchers who take creative approaches to the physical, natural world" (p. 147). Perhaps this description fits the majority of women scientists, but this remains to be seen.Both the convinced and doubters will find Rosser's quantitative and qualitative approach useful, sample size adequate, conclusions supported with evidence, and writing style eloquent. Women have, indeed, come a long way to achieve success in their academic science careers. Now the call is for institutions to actively maintain the momentum started by dedicated individuals so that the hopes and dreams of a diverse and talented science and engineering community are achieved in the future.