Cover story: Room at the top? Local women in science speak out about careers in a profession dominated by men Cover story: Room at the top? Local women in science speak out about careers in a profession dominated by men (March 23, 2005)

By David Boyce

Almanac Staff Writer

Back in January, Harvard University president Lawrence Summers ignited a firestorm of controversy in a speech to a group of economists by raising the intentionally provocative question: Why are women rarely found in the upper echelons of math and science departments in universities and research institutions?

In his speech, in a spirit of inquiry, Mr. Summers tried to address three broad theories: Women choose careers that lead away from powerful and influential positions; women are victims of discrimination; and women's natural aptitude is not suited for leading science and engineering positions.

Reaction to the long and inconclusive speech was swift and often furious. Many faculty members from Harvard's college of arts and sciences denounced Mr. Summers, both for his argumentative remarks and his blunt management style. Some said he should resign.

Atherton resident and Stanford University President John Hennessy -- with two other university presidents, both women -- wrote an open letter advising Mr. Summers to ask how to correct the lack of diversity rather than why it exists.

On March 16, Harvard's arts and sciences faculty approved a no-confidence vote on Mr. Summers' leadership with a vote of 218 to 185, according to the Harvard Crimson. Mr. Summers has apologized at length several times for the tone of his remarks and is expected to stay on as president. The controversy, too, shows no sign of going away.

With Menlo Park's being home to the U.S. Geological Survey, SRI International, and the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, the Almanac sought out eight women scientists at these institutions to get their views on Mr. Summers' theories and related questions.
Choosing a path

It's no secret that working women with children tend to have at least two occupations: one that earns them money, and another that begins when the working day ends and they go home to their families.

Many young working women are acutely aware of an approaching dilemma: how to have both a fulfilling career and a family. Decision time for women who happen to be scientists typically comes in their early to mid 30s, about seven years after completing a doctorate, when years of intense effort to secure a position coincide with plans to have children, says Dr. Mary Lou Zoback, a senior research scientist with the U.S. Geological Survey since 1978.

Instead of a university career with all its obligations, Ms. Zoback says, she chose USGS because she could work part time, which she did for 18 years while her two children were in school.

Part-time work is uncommon for science professors, who must teach, publish, and raise money to fund their research, say virtually all of the women interviewed for this story.

"Women kind of get fed up with positions in which they constantly have to raise money and justify their positions," says Dr. Allegra Scheirer, a 33-year-old geophysicist with the USGS. "Men are not as daunted by that. Sometimes, women just get sick of it."

Flex-time policies are essential, says Marjorie Schulz, a USGS geochemist. "Once you have children, you need a supportive husband and a supportive environment."

Dr. Marcy Berding, a computational physics expert and a program manager at SRI, says she waited until she felt secure in her job before having children. Her working hours are 5:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. "As things go, SRI was very accommodating," she says. "The (flexibility) certainly has helped."

Being a teacher at a top-notch university takes a real commitment, says USGS hydrologist Dr. Hedeff Essaid, who has worked part time for seven years. "I really did step off the track that would have taken me to a top position in science," says Ms. Essaid. "I wanted to have my time with my children and family."

In Europe, women grow up not expecting to have exclusive responsibility for managing a household, says Dr. Nora Sabelli, a chemist, former director for the National Science Foundation, and a program co-director at SRI. "There is an infrastructure to allow women to do what they want to do," she says. "If a society wants to solve a problem, (the society) has to think about how to do it."
An uphill battle

Among the scientists interviewed for this story, none would argue that things wouldn't be better were there more women in positions of influence in the scientific community.

"We've come a long way, but we certainly have a long way to go before we reach parity," says Caolionn O'Connell, a 27-year-old graduate student in physics at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center in Menlo Park. "There are steady improvements. Are they coming fast enough? No."

Of the 137 graduate students and post-doctoral research assistants at SLAC, there are 17 women -- just 12 percent.

The women consulted for this story said diversity levels seem to be slowly improving, including at the top. In recent years, the University of California elevated four scientists to executive positions, notes Ms. Zoback of USGS. Three of the women are chancellors -- essentially university presidents -- and one is provost of the UC system.

In 1970, 5 percent of law school students and 8 percent of medical school students were women. Today, it's about 50 percent in both categories, says Ms. Zoback. Still, the scarcity of women in scientific leadership positions can be a hardship.

"I never had the opportunity to work for a really inspiring woman leader," says Ms. Zoback. She recalls one meeting with a woman heading a scientific endeavor. "It was just amazing to have this interaction with her," she says. "I kind of walked away from that meeting buoyed, but I had a feeling that I've missed something."

Ms. Sabelli says barriers have begun coming down, but the lack of women at the top "has a lot to do with the fact that many of the high-level positions are filled on the basis of who do you know and who do you trust."

Dr. Kristien Mortelmans directs microbiology programs at SRI, where she has worked for 28 years. During her career, Ms. Mortelmans has served as president of a national microbiology society and isolated a key DNA molecule that was named after her. Her take on women in the top jobs in scientific fields?

It's an old boys' club, she says. "It's like everywhere else. It's no longer (based) just on merit. There's more to it."

It's almost all male at the top in the local USGS office, says Ms. Scheirer, who came to Menlo Park from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute in Massachusetts.

While at Woods Hole, she recalls, she had to ask a male colleague why a list of speakers for an upcoming seminar didn't include any women. "They don't think of women," she says. "They're actually perpetuating this imbalance. On a more subtle level, it's just invisible."

A "boys club" effect can be found in graduate school, too. Ms. Schulz of the USGS recalls her shock upon discovering that some of her male classmates didn't listen to her. "They weren't going to accept me for who I was," she says.

Ms. O'Connell says she's heard comments such as: "The bar's been lowered for you" and "You shouldn't be here." She eventually talked it over with her adviser. "I find that a lot of physicists tend to have a problem filtering what they say," she says. "It was very hurtful initially."

In her high school science classes, USGS seismologist Dr. Ruth Harris recalls, there was an atmosphere in which girls weren't expected to do well, and when they did, the reaction was surprise.

Other women interviewed for this story don't recall such incidents. Ms. Berding of SRI says she never had first-hand experience with overt discrimination. "I expect it happens," she adds.

Ms. Mortelmans of SRI and Ms. Essaid at USGS echo Ms. Berding's experience. "I've never felt that just because I was a woman, I was looked at in a certain way," says Ms. Essaid.

Ms. Essaid spent eight years in Iraq as a college student and university employee without a negative comment made. "I think the culture here discourages girls" in science and math, she says, while admitting that the comparison may be reversed when it comes to social life.

Italy is a well-known oasis for women in science. Ms. Zoback recalls a meeting on earthquakes being run by "bright young women" while "the old guys were sitting in the back saying nothing."
Aptitude or environment?

For the past two years, Ms. Scheirer has moderated a national high school oceanography quiz contest. Some teams are coed, others are not. In both years, all-boy teams won, she says, adding that on coed teams, the boys were faster hitting their buzzers, and that girls on all-girl teams performed better than girls on coed teams.

Ms. Scheirer says she believes that males and females learn differently, in part due to subtle biological differences that take on significance if teachers, however unintentionally, don't make adjustments to account for them.

"It will turn your path," she says. "It sends you messages. There could be lots and lots of more great women scientists if things were shifted a little bit."

Ms. Mortelmans agrees that environmental factors are critical. "The way that girls are treated, it becomes part of your personality and you start to believe that that is the way you should behave," she says. "Given the right environment, women will perform as well as men."

"Of course men and women are different," says Ms. Schulz of USGS. "That our brains may be wired differently means that women may think about problems and how to solve them in ways different from men. Neither way is more appropriate to science and both are needed. ... Vive le difference!"

E-mail a friend a link to this story.