Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:55:55 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: AASWOMEN for July 27, 2001

AAS Committee on the Status of Women
Bi-weekly issue of 7/27/01, eds. Meg Urry & Patricia Knezek

This week's issues:

1. Historical Note: Quotas for Women at Stanford, U. Chicago, and UC Berkeley
2. Salary adjustments to redress gender imbalance at U Maine
3. Great book reissued: "Nobel Prize Women in Science"
4. Yahoo site for women-in-physics discussions
5. Finding online mentoring
6. AWIS 30th Anniversary essay contest (deadline 8/31/01)
7. AAAS Lifetime Mentor Award and Mentor Award for 2001
8. Three responses to Chronicle of Higher Education article on
   career delays and supportive (or non-supportive) spouses
9. Scientists Wanted for AAAS Science and Technology Policy
   Fellowship Programs, 2002-03
10. Eleanor Roosevelt Teacher Fellowships from the AAUW
11. Jobs available at MentorNet 

1. Historical Note: Quotas for Women at Stanford, U Chicago, and UC Berkeley

(Adapted from discussion on HSS_WOMEN-LCLEMSON.EDU, in which
several historians discussed the long-standing quotas restricting
the number of women admitted to prestigious U.S. universities.
Evidently, the women who were let in were successful enough to
have been perceived as a threat, hence the quota. - Meg Urry)

Londa Schiebinger, Edwin E. Sparks Professor of History of Science,
Pennsylvania State University raised the issue of "when Mrs. Stanford 
placed the quota on women at Stanford that created the 'Stanford 500.'"

This response came from Margaret A.M. Murray, Professor of Mathematics, 
Virginia Tech:

  "In the Company of Educated Women" by Barbara Miller Solomon 
  (Yale U. Press, 1985), pp. 58-59, says:
  "The University of Chicago, originally so proud of its commitment to women,
  became a storm center of controversy in 1902. Within one decade of its
  opening, the percentage of women rose from 24 to 52 percent, and between
  1892 and 1902 women received a majority (56.3 percent) of the Phi Beta
  Kappa awards. An alarmed President Harper, speaking for the majority of
  the faculty and undoubtedly for most of the male students, sought retreat
  from full coeducation. . . ." (p. 58)
  Her discussion of events at Chicago continues into the next page. She then
  makes a transition into a discussion of Stanford:
  "A similar situation existed at Stanford, with 102 men and 98 women
  graduating in 1901. There, too, women received a higher number of awards
  and honors, which worried leaders. In 1908 President David Starr Jordan
  tried an organizational maneuver similar to that adopted at Chicago, to
  eliminate women from some liberal arts courses... Jordan's proposal
  followed earlier rulings by Jane Stanford and others that had already
  diminished women's enrollment. Jane Stanford, who controlled institutional
  policy [at Stanford University] after her husband's death, ignored the
  university statute requiring 'equal advantages in the university to both
  sexes' and set a limit of five hundred as the maximum number of women
  permitted to be enrolled at any one time. Later, in 1904, Stanford alumni
  and alumnae settled on yet another restriction --- a ratio of three males
  to each female student. This ratio was not overturned until 1933" (p. 59)

And this from Mary Singleton:

  From Maresi Nerad's book "The Academic Kitchen: a Social History of 
  Gender Stratification at the University of California, Berkeley" 
  (State University of New York Press):
  "In 1899, Stanford had established a quota of 500 women students; in
  that year Berkeley was already enrolling around 1,000 women. Wheeler,
  worried that the number would rise as women turned down by Stanford
  sought admission to Berkeley, stated in his biennial report for 1910
  through 1912, 'It must be expected that the restriction now coming to be
  exercised at Stanford University in the number of women students will
  naturally be felt in an increasing number with us.'"

2. Salary adjustments to redress gender imbalance at U Maine

After the University of Maine found evidence of gender inequities
among faculty salaries, they gave immediate raises to women whose
salaries, "taking into account relevant differences such as longevity, 
rank, discipline, and academic degree," were more than 2% below
their male counterparts. For details see Scott Smallwood's article
in the Chronicle of Higher Education, Thursday, July 19 (, 
you must be a subscriber to access archived articles). The raises
averaged $2000, and were as high as $6000.
3. Great book reissued: "Nobel Prize Women in Science"

A great book,  "Nobel Prize Women in Science: Their Lives, Struggles 
and Momentous Discoveries" (2nd edition) has just been re-released
by the Joseph Henry Press, trade imprint of the National Academy
Press (publishers for the National Academy of Sciences). Author Sharon 
Bertsch McGrayne explores the lives and achievements of fifteen women 
scientists whom either won a Nobel Prize or played a crucial role 
in a Nobel Prize-winning project. The book reveals the relentless 
discrimination these women faced both as students and as researchers. 
Their success was due to the fact that they were passionately in love 
with science. The full text of the book can be viewed, free of charge, 
at (but it's well worth owning!).

The home page for the National Academy Press is .

4. Yahoo site for women-in-physics discussions

There is a yahoo site for women in physics discussions, at 
5. Finding online mentoring

Are you looking for a guide to mentoring programs? MentorGirls has 
sections on programs for girls, women mentors, tele-mentoring, 
global efforts and much more.  They've created a guide for anyone 
interested in being mentored or being a mentor. They also feature 
a reccomended reading list for girls, their mentors and their families. 
Visit their site for more information: 

6. AWIS 30th Anniversary essay contest (deadline 8/31/01)

High school and undergraduate students are invited (and
encouraged!) to participate in an essay contest as part of the 30th
anniversary celebration of the Association of Women in Science
(AWIS). The topic of the essay should be on how you envision
science in the 21st century and women's role in the sciences.

Winners will be notified by the end of September. First, second
and third place winners will be selected from each group (high
school and undergraduate students). Recent graduates of both high
school and college are still welcome to apply and will be
considered with the group from which they just graduated. All
winners will be invited to the Leadership Conference in
Washington, DC (October 18-20, 2001), where the prizes will be
awarded. First place winners will also receive an award of $150,
second place will receive $50, and third place winners will receive
a book on women in science. All six winners will be published in
AWIS magazine and on the AWIS webpage. 

Each essay must be submitted with an application form. 
Guidelines and application forms are located at: 
Please send your essay postmarked by August 31st, 2001 to:
30th Anniversary Essay Contest
c/o Association for Women in Science
1200 New York Ave., Suite 650
Washington, DC 20005

For further information, questions, comments, or concerns, please
contact Julia Haltiwanger ( or Krishna Shah

7. AAAS Lifetime Mentor Award and Mentor Award for 2001

The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
Mentor Awards recognize an individual who has mentored and 
guided significant numbers of students from underrepresented groups to the 
completion of doctoral studies or who has impacted the climate of a 
department, college, or institution to significantly increase the 
diversity of students pursuing and completing doctoral studies.
The two categories of the AAAS Mentor Awards (Lifetime Mentor Award and 
Mentor Award) both honor individuals who during their careers demonstrate 
extraordinary leadership to increase the participation of underrepresented 
groups in science and engineering fields and careers.  These groups 
include women of all racial or ethnic groups; African American, Native 
American, and Hispanic men; and people with disabilities.

Recipients receive a monetary prize, commemorative plaque, complimentary 
registration, and reimbursement for reasonable travel and hotel expenses 
to attend the AAAS Annual Meeting.  The award is open to all regardless 
of nationality or citizenship.  Nominees must be living at the time of 
their nomination. Self-nominations will only be accepted for the AAAS 
Science Journalism Awards.

For further details, see or contact (Awards Coordinator, AAAS, 1200 New York Avenue, NW, 
Room 650, Washington, DC 20005; tel 202-326-6670, fax 202-371-9849).

8. Three responses to Chronicle of Higher Education article on
career delays and supportive (or non-supportive) spouses

i) From Margaret Meixner

  I read the article in the Chronicle for Higher education.
  It think it is certainly true that a spouse or potential
  spouse who is not supportive of a woman's career could
  certainly upset or derail it. This lack of support 
  could be benign ignorance of the academic process on the 
  woman's part or in trying to explain the process to her spouse.
  My own spouse has been very supportive of my career,
  I have have been supportive of his. We are both
  astronomers. I wonder if the fact that we both are
  academics helps. At least we do not have to explain
  the importance of attending conferences or going
  on observing runs or spending long hours at work.
  The job search problems are known to both. Of course,
  there is the dual career couple problem, but
  as this article clearly points out, the dual
  career couple problem is not just an academic couple
  problem. If both members of the couple work, then
  compromises will have to be made. My advice to
  younger women on the academic trail is if your
  career is important to you, which if you get
  a PhD it must be, then it is important to find
  a partner who values your career. Otherwise, 
  you may become bitter at giving up your hard won
  honors because your spouse doesn't appreciate them
  and is unwilling to compromise. If a couple is
  to remain together, compromises will
  have to happen, but it should be a two-way not a 
  one-way street.
ii) From Megan Donahue

  My reaction to: Women in Academe, and the Men Who Derail Them,
  Oh brother!
  I can appreciate the author's intention but I couldn't stand 
  the message or the tone.
  I don't believe the assumption that women are less
  clued in than men are about what an high level academic
  means. We are not naive little girls. We have eyes. We
  talk to people. We decide when the decision needs to
  be made. We're not signing on for the army when we
  begin grad school. We're definitely not joining the
  I also thought the author's attitude about love and
  relationships were more than a little demeaning. We're
  not going to change a culture where women tend to fall 
  in love with older, more established men. We can advise
  women to choose men who are sensitive to the woman's
  life goals, but hey, did you listen to that advice when
  *you* got it? 
  And since when does everyone plan their love life it terms of
  their five-year career goals? Sure some people do it. But
  I don't envy them their life, either. 
  Life can be very beautiful and very short. Each 
  woman chooses for herself what to make of it. The author's 
  implications that the Man a student chose is at fault for being
  self-centered, or that a woman is blissfully unaware of the
  magnitude of her choice, are off the mark. If part of increasing the
  fraction of women in science is guiding them on their
  love lives, Leave Me Out! Once a person makes the choice,
  the rest of us are better off minding our own business.
  Singling out female graduate students or female graduate applicants 
  and sitting down and scaring them about the so-called "facts
  of life" -- facts that aren't secret -- is just too
  counterproductive. This isn't the priesthood. This isn't
  a convent. Students should enter this business with their
  eyes open to the full range of opportunities they'll have
  (and not just in academia either.)
  Battling the biochemistry of love is not high on my to-do 
  list. I'd have better luck revising the U.S. Constitution. 
iii) From Cindy Taylor

  I can see why the Chronical for Higher Education article would 
  draw strong reactions from the editor.
  The writer has some good points and some bad points.
  The good points: In my own graduate school experience, I would have
  appreciated more mentoring on how to get a job and some of the realities of
  academic life. I think grad students should hear early what are the steps
  to find jobs - be it academia or industry. I think it is important that
  women have to be ready to play hardball with the boys. However, I do find
  it depressing that we have to play by the "male rules".
  Bad points: The writer assumes that a good academic job at a good
  university where you can do a lot of research is the best job there is and
  that it is the only thing that matters. It doesn't leave room for the rest
  of us who decided that our personal lives can be more important than
  science. It comes back to the "monastic" background - sacrifice the other
  areas of your life for science.
  The article makes me feel guilty again that I've "dropped out of Astronomy"
  because I choose to teach high school and to actually live with my husband
  instead of being separated. But why should I feel guilty? This spring I
  helped a young woman feel confident in science and that is more important
  than some amazing research result.
  I also disagree that women who end up accepting a less than "desirable" job
  track have wasted time and money from the school. Who knows what happens
  in 4 -7 years that it takes to do a Ph.D. thesis - I entered thinking I
  would do the "desirable" job track and then decided it wasn't desirable to
  me. And just because the women have decided to go to a less prestigious
  position, why is it wasteful? It's almost the "don't accept women because
  they'll only get married and settle down to have kids afterwards" position.
  Anyway, thanks for pointing to a thought-provoking article.
9. Scientists Wanted for AAAS Science and Technology Policy
Fellowship Programs, 2002-03

The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) invites
scientists to apply for one-year science and technology policy
fellowships in Washington, DC, beginning September 2002.
Fellows serve in the Congress, the National Science Foundation,
the Department of State, the Department of Defense, and other 
federal offices. These programs are designed to provide each 
Fellow with a unique public policy learning experience and 
to bring technical backgrounds and external perspectives to 
decision-making in the U.S. government. 

Applicants must have a Ph.D. in physics or in any physical,
biological, or social science or any relevant interdisciplinary field
by the application deadline (January 10, 2002).  Engineers with a
master's degree and at least three years of post-degree professional
experience also may apply.  Candidates must be U.S. citizens and
federal employees are not eligible.  Stipends typically begin at
$54,000.  Under-represented minorities and persons with
disabilities are encouraged to apply.

For application instructions and further information about the
AAAS Science and Technology Policy Fellowship Programs,
contact: 1200 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20005. 
Phone: 202/326-6700.  E-mail: Web:

Joe Kovacs, Marketing Manager
Fellowship Programs
American Association for the Advancement of Science
1200 New York Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20005

10. Eleanor Roosevelt Teacher Fellowships from the AAUW

Fellowships of up to $5000 are available through the American 
Association of University Women's Eleanor Roosevelt Teacher 
Fellowship program. The application POSTMARK deadline is 
Jan. 10, 2002.

"Eleanor Roosevelt Teacher Fellowships are designed to provide
professional development opportunities for women public school
teachers; improve girls' learning opportunities, especially in math,
science, and technology; and promote equity and long-term change
in classrooms, schools, and school systems."  Details at 
11. Jobs available at MentorNet 

There are several positions open at MentorNet (, 
an innovative large-scale nonprofit organization matching undergraduate 
and graduate women studying engineering and related sciences with 
professionals in industry and government for year-long, structured 
mentoring relationships conducted via email, to address the under-
representation of women in these fields. Positions available include:
   program manager to extend MentorNet internationally; 
   program manager for historically Black and Hispanic-serving institutions; 
   information technology specialist; 
   executive/administrative assistant.
Inquiries are also welcome from those who have a particular
interest in, and a strong set of experience, skills, and knowledge
that would specifically contribute to, the MentorNet program and
organization. See 
for complete job descriptions and application process.

Carol Muller