Reader Paul was kind enough to send me this intriguing article from the New York Times. It concerns a panel of experts who assert that their research shows institutions are to blame for a lack of women in upper eschelons of science academia, as opposed to any inherent differences between men and women.
I haven’t had time to read through the 200+ page report yet (you can find it here), but at a glance it appears that the panel makes a very good argument based on real-world numbers and situations. The panel members themselves at least give a good impression of balance, stating that though there may in fact be innate differences, they are too slight to make a significant difference compared to rather impactful social pressures.
The panel’s chairwoman is Donna Shalala, who I mentioned a few months ago as a potential candidate for president of Harvard University (she is currently president of University of Miami). Another panelist is Ruth Simmons, who is doing great work leading Brown University as the school intensifies its focus on hardcore scientific research.
I’d like to read the full report, only because I can tell I’m eager to accept the panel’s research based on the fact that I like the panelists and the conclusion jibes with my own opinion on the matter.
Every now and again I put some random images into posts to liven them up. When I can’t think of anything immediately applicable, I’ll sometimes go to Rachel Maguire’s site, because her beautiful paintings just make me happy. So, I thought I’d give her a quick plug here, and point out that if any of you like her stuff, too, she’s selling one of her paintings on eBay for a steal.