| Issue 62 (WAIS 2) Contents
|
Conference Overview
Pauline Gallagher
Background to WAIS 2
Women Achieving in Science 2 (WAIS 2) was held in response
to an overwhelming demand for a second conference from attendees of the first
Women Achieving in Science, held in Melbourne in November 1999. Both WAIS
conferences were organised by a partnership of four organisations leading the
advocacy for science in Australia: the CSIRO Staff Association, the
Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies, the National
Te r tiary Education Union and the Women in Science Enquiry Network.
The first WAIS had provided a unique opportunity in
Australia for women working in all areas of science technology engineering and
mathematics (STEM) to network and meet role models outside their discipline.
They were able to come together and discuss issues to do with their gender and
careers without the pressure of having to present professional papers or focus
on the science. The attendees valued this highly. They were attracted by a
range of high profile role models – women who had succeeded in the
male-dominated field of STEM. The first WAIS was very much a celebration of
what women had already achieved.
Careers and Reasonable Expectations
WAIS 2 sought to provide more of a career development experience for women in the earlier stages of their careers. WAIS 2 worked to the aims of the first WAIS, with increased opportunity for participants to network and interact across disciplines. It also presented role models, although this time the emphasis was on less conventional career paths and the different purposes that science can be put to. Sessions were designed to present more of the social research on the issues without detracting from the success stories of the scientists. The workshop panels enabled consideration of the issues for women in STEM more deeply and brought together for the first time as much as is known about the situation in Australia for women in STEM.
Women Are Achieving in Science
A very positive view of what women were doing and achieving in STEM emerged from the conference.
Much of the time the STEM community emphasises excellence in research as the only marker of success that counts. And there are quite a few women in Australia who have been recognised as having achieved such excellence. Yet STEM women were making remarkable contributions in so many more ways – through science teaching, leadership of research and technology, management, public education and promotion of scientific endeavour, to name a few. The Conference drew out that women are also key players in making a difference to quality of life, for grassroots, rural and regional communities. The significance of this was highlighted by a recommendation to enable indigenous women better access to higher level science education and research.
There was a strong feeling that women also tend to have more of what it takes to make an effective contribution in the contemporary world of science, that women have the right balance of capabilities to deal with its drive towards multidisciplinary effort, partnerships and commercialisation. They also tend to be very good at securing commercial sponsorship for research.
It was women who tended to inspire other women more. Both Angela Delves and Lesley Rogers spoke in plenary about the women who had inspired them, as they themselves gave inspiration to the younger participants. There was a sense that the women wanted to take hold of lessons from women in the past. Pat Vickers Rich wowed the dinner audience with her personal story - many commented the following day about the impact her talk had made on them. Role models and mentors are important.
What is the problem?
It was a given at this conference that there are not enough women in STEM, particularly in the higher levels. The Minister for Science pointed this out in his opening address and the data presented from the APESMA Women in the Professions survey provided some direct evidence. The proportion of women shrinks as you go up the ladder in all areas of STEM. Women consistently get paid less than their male peers at all levels of the ladder. Australian STEM women are underrepresented in Australian and international awards and honours. From ARC data presented, women are still lagging their male counterparts in the competition for Discovery grants. Even more critically, their application rate for the grants is lower, which would suggest a relative lack of confidence among the women in their ability to compete for research funds.
So, what is holding them back?
Schools have been doing reasonably well by girls in recent
years, so much so that in 2002 women made up 53% of tertiary science
enrolments. Years of research and education policy targeted to encouraging
girls in STEM has borne fruit. The conference questioned whether the balance
will be maintained in the face of the pressures currently on STEM teachers at
all levels. It found that science teachers are undervalued,
under recognised and under supported for what they do.
The gender balance achieved with student enrolments is not anticipated to flow through to higher levels of STEM without intervention and active encouragement.
The conference put it on the table that discrimination and harassment continue to be major problems in STEM and where complaints are made, the mechanisms to resolve them are woefully inadequate. The situation is not helped by prevailing culture in STEM among both men and women that tends to deny these problems.
Women are still carrying the bulk of family responsibilities at home. If they choose to have children, it tends to be the woman’s career that suffers. Professionalism in many areas of work is still equated with long hours and a level of commitment to work that overrides all other considerations. This can flow through to a culture that makes judgements about and covertly discriminates against people with carer responsibilities, in denying them opportunities to get ahead or undervaluing their contribution. The point was well made that people who take time out for such things as travel are seen in a better light than people who take it for family reasons.
In STEM, breaks away from full employment also affect a person’s capacity to stay current in their field and in research they affect their publication rate. This can be damaging to professional standing at best and career destroying at worst, particularly in fast moving areas. It is compounded by the fact that women are having to make personal decisions about having a family at the same time as trying to establish their professional reputation. For young women the question of when to start a family was prominent. The conference in plenary had a vigorous discussion about the risk of leaving childbirth until it may be biologically too late. The older women were quick to point out that carer challenges don’t stop with childbearing.
International experience continues to be an advantage for those serious about careers in science. Being able to work in different laboratories after postgraduate study is a must. Women who have to juggle carer responsibilities and/or a partner’s career with their own are often unable to move to pursue positions and can find their careers compromised or lost. The conference did not deal with the two-body problem in any depth but chose to focus on alternative approaches to mobility.
And then there were the problems of lack of recognition for their achievements, under-valuing of their work, their contributions and their potential for new opportunities and leadership. The established culture of STEM as a whole did not come out looking too good.
It is worth noting here that while women are still less successful in standard ARC Discovery research grants, they are turning out to be equally successful as men in the new ARC Linkage Grants, a program that has much more of an emphasis on teams and co-operation with industry. This would indicate that the culture can be changed.
A statistical basis for action
Figures presented in the various workshops presented a pretty compelling case that something needs to be done in Australia on gender balance in STEM. The picture was far from comprehensive – data sets were small or limited to particular employers or parts of the sector – yet it was indicative and consistent with international findings. The conference noted that the pattern of gender imbalance was not limited to Australian science. But many countries had recognised a problem and were doing some-thing about it. They noted actions being taken on the issue at Government level overseas, most of which were driven by prior statistical analysis of the situation. They were very impressed with the effort the European Union was putting into women in science. They noted the quality of statistical reporting that the EU was requiring of member countries, as published by the Helsinki Group on Women and Science in Europe, and considered that Australia should use this report as a model for an in depth Australian study. The call from the conference was for more statistics on a range of aspects to be put together to properly assess the situation. A number of workshops put forward recommendations to progress this (Recommendations 1, 2, 8). In view of the prevailing culture in STEM, such data will be needed to convince established decision-makers that the issue is real and requires action.
Government policy and legislation
Drawing on published overseas studies, the standout example
being the Science Faculty experience at MIT, the conference concluded that
nothing will improve for women in STEM unless there are interventions. They
identified some obvious steps: affirmative action to change the make-up of the
working and decision-making environment (Recommendation 3); more defined and
enforceable anti-discrimination legislation at Federal level to help drive a
greater acceptance of carer responsibilities among
professionals (Recommendation 4). They saw a clear role for Government in
enabling a better balance of research and family in post-graduate study by
increasing the flexibility and duration of scholarships in the Research
Training Scheme funding and promoting science and the teaching profession in
the wider Australian community (Recommendations 5, 6). And they called for
recognition of the important innovation contribution women make in traditional
societies by funding research scholarships specifically targeted to indigenous
women (Recommendation 7).
Organisations and Employers
Much can be done by STEM employers to attract and retain more women without loss of productivity. On work and family, IBM’s program showed how organisational prac-tices can be modified by a change of mindset and innovative thinking. STEM work tends to be very amenable to flexible work practices and there are many varied initiatives that can be taken to assist women in their careers. For STEM women, breaks for maternity are obvious obstacles.
Even though paid maternity leave is avail-able to much of the industry, it is often not long enough. And then there is the problem of returning to work. UK programs to assist returners provide a good model of post-maternity assistance in academia and Monash University has introduced as scheme of its own to allow women to return to publishing and securing further research funds. Working part-time for a period after maternity is a frequent preference. More can be done to encourage access to and use of these options (Recommendation 8).
The conference did not emphasise how much STEM culture and both genders would benefit from better support for work and family, as much of the focus was on fitting maternity into career paths. But this was implicit in the recommendation to examine work and family across disciplines and promote work/life balance better (Recommendation 8). The focus on supports at work was towards mentoring schemes. Whether to provide a counterbalance to the isolation women in STEM tend to experience at work or whether to give them more confidence, access to mentoring was emphasised as a career must. Some organisations have well defined schemes in place – most do not. Even though the conference recognised pitfalls where mentoring arrangements are not well founded, they concluded that even informal mentoring is better than nothing.
Employing organisations could also look at whether they are making the best use of their existing staff capabilities by assessing their gender balance at different levels in the hierarchy, their reward and recognition systems, their inclusiveness in decision-making, their development opportunities and gender aspects of the criteria they use to decide all these things.
There was a strong feeling that more can be done to explore other ways to help STEM women in their life choices (Recommendation 9). But until there is a better understanding of current career paths and points of impediment, policy and strategy will continue to be hit and miss. Recommendation 10 addresses one project that WISENET could take up to provide some case studies. More extensive research projects may be possible in collaboration with university alumni associations if funding is made available.
Women can do much for themselves
Without a doubt, networking is a fundamental skill. It must be done to meet the challenge of contemporary STEM in these days of less stable employment, limited job opportunities and tight competition for funding. Women could market themselves better. They underestimate their own skills and expertise. They could look more for opportunities to show what they can do, for advancement or value-adding experience, and tailor their style more to their market. They need to promote their achievements, champion their ideas and not give up on the first rejection.
Women would do well to think differently about careers in STEM and recognise the value of what they have to offer. They tend not to recognise their advantage in the capabilities they have for collaboration, interaction and integration of ideas across disciplines.
Women tend to identify role models from whatever source is available. They could do more with the involvement and assistance of a mentor and should seek out one wherever they can.
STEM women would also do well to look to other women for mutual support and community. Part of the isolation many experience can be self-imposed, a consequence of treating any other women around as competitors rather than supports.
With a little help
All these things take time, confidence and the support of employers. Employers often need to be encouraged to provide this support. This is where the organising partners play an important role in speaking out about the issue, advocating publicly on the issue and providing opportunities such as WAIS 2. And Government can respond by taking up the issue and investing in relevant research and initiatives to enable full equal opportunity in STEM. Women have been around in science for a long time. History has shown us that women cannot make the difference by themselves.
WAIS 2 was remarkable in many ways – it inspired through ideas and new role models, it triggered networking among the participants and stimulated friendships, it encouraged thinking differently about careers and achievement. We look forward to the day when meetings of this nature are not needed, when the world of STEM treats women and men as equal contributors to a better society.
Pauline Gallagher
On behalf of the conference
organising partners