Why Science? Women Scientists and Their Pathways Along the Road Less Traveled

Davis, Kathleen S.

doi:10.1615/jwomenminorscieneng.v5.i2.30

Cited by 22 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As reported in earlier research (Davis, 1999), scientists may work around the clock when in competition with other researchers to be the first to solve a problem or answer a question. The rewards for being number one come in the form of being first author of an article, receiving the coveted Nobel Prize, and/or acquiring other awards and money (Davis, 1999;Stephan & Levin, 1992).…”

Section: Choosing New Career Pathwaysmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Educational researchers (Cullen & Luna, 1992;Delamont, 1989;Gilligan, 1990;Keller, 1983;Luke & Gore, 1992) have pointed to the paucity of supportive and mentoring networks for females within science and education contexts. In fact, science community structures and practices have often inhibited and/or blocked women's and girls' engagement in science practices instead of providing pathways (AAUW, 1992;Davis, 1999;Harding, 1991;Oakes, 1990;Sadker, Sadker, & Klein, 1990;Seymour, 1995;Vetter, 1992). Delamont (1989), Keller (1983), Rossiter (1995), Schiebinger (1989), andVetter (1992) have documented the historical exclusion of women from valuable science settings: educational programs and institutions (as students or as faculty), scientific laboratories (as researchers), and professional organizations and academies (as members and as leaders).…”

Section: Limiting Factors To Legitimate Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

“Peripheral and subversive”: Women making connections and challenging the boundaries of the science community

Davis

2001

Science Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:Researchers continue to report the underrepresentation of females in the science professions (AAUW, 1992; NSF, 1999;Vetter, 1992). Investigators have illuminated many factors that contribute to the insider status in the science community of some groups and the peripheral/outsider status of women and girls (Brickhouse, 1994;Delamont, 1989;Harding, 1991;Schiebinger, 1989). Some research has shown that supportive science networks have had a positive influence on women's participation and retention in science practices (AAUW, 1992;Keith & Keith, 1989;Kreinberg & Lewis, 1996;Varanka-Martin, 1996). In order to provide a better understanding of the role social capital plays in women's legitimate participation in science, I draw upon the findings of a qualitative study that examines the valued capital, ways, and practices of a support group for women working in the sciences at an academic research institution. Findings from this study indicate how women 1) were given little access to powerful networks in science that would provide them with opportunities to acquire the knowledge, skills, and resources necessary to be legitimate in the traditional sense, and 2) encountered many obstacles in their attempts to develop networks and make such connections between themselves and other women. Findings also indicate that, despite these impediments, the support group provided a meaningful and resourceful network through which they developed a critical perspective of legitimacy as they sought to make explicit the "culture of science." Participants not only employed the traditional methods of scientific inquiry, but also acknowledged and valued the voices and experiences of those from nondominant groups. They constructed a new discourse that was inclusive of diverse voices, created new career pathways, and developed a vision of mentoring that facilitated females' development of a critical view of the science community and their legitimate participation.

show abstract

Section: Choosing New Career Pathwaysmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Limiting Factors To Legitimate Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Peripheral and subversive”: Women making connections and challenging the boundaries of the science community

Davis

2001

Science Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a study by Bauer and Green (1996), over 60% of the women reported experiencing some form of harassment, and over 70% reported that their gender played a role on how they were treated. Others have uncovered subtle forms of discrimination such as advisors discussing science with men and social issues with women, or excluding women from collegial networking (Dresselhaus et al 1995, Scholer 1998, Davis 1999. Seagram, Gould and Pyke (1998) posit that the attrition women from graduate science programmes may be the result of 'accumulated microinequities' that women experience as graduate students (p. 320).…”

Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender issues related to graduate student attrition in two science departments

Ferreira¹

2003

International Journal of Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explored the gender issues that contributed to the differential attrition rate of men and women graduate students in two science departments (biology and chemistry) at a large research university. Departmental records were used to compute the student attrition rate while surveys from 170 students, and interviews with 32 of them, were used to explore students' perspectives on the reasons affecting the attrition of men and women graduate students in each department. Analysis of the data indicated a significantly larger student attrition rate in chemistry than in biology. In each department the attrition rate for women was also significantly larger than the attrition rate for men. The study uncovered different gender issues, in each department, related to the significantly larger attrition rate for women students.

show abstract

“…Studies show that students' satisfaction with their higher by degree research programme is directly related to satisfaction with relationships with supervisors and advisors (Bargar & Mayo-Chamberlain, 1983;Davis, 1999;Golde, 1996;Hollenshead, Younce, & Wenzel, 1994;Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel, 1996). The quality of the interpersonal relationship between graduate students and their advisors has been found to be a better predictor of success in a doctoral programme than a student's test scores and undergraduate grade point average (Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel, 1996;Sorenson & Kagan, 1967).…”

Section: Psychological and Emotional Support In Higher By Degree Resementioning

confidence: 99%

Building bridges: higher degree student retention and counselling support

Pearson

2012

Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to contribute to the discussion on increasing retention rates in higher degree students. It presents evidence from the literature on the value of increasing counselling and mentoring care for higher degree research students. The creation of, and rationale for, a designated higher degree student counsellor-mentor role is described. The role of a counselling-trained mentor is one that combines elements of counselling, mentoring, organisational and social support for both higher degree research students and supervisors. The creation of this role is proposed as a means of increasing student satisfaction and retention.

show abstract

Why Science? Women Scientists and Their Pathways Along the Road Less Traveled

Cited by 22 publications

References 0 publications

“Peripheral and subversive”: Women making connections and challenging the boundaries of the science community

“Peripheral and subversive”: Women making connections and challenging the boundaries of the science community

Gender issues related to graduate student attrition in two science departments

Building bridges: higher degree student retention and counselling support

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About