Notes from
mentoring group (Rose Reynolds)
- Can’t convince women to
become scientists because of the images; therefore women pull themselves out
of the pipeline initially.
- Difficult for women to find mentors.
- Male mentors have more impact
on outcome variables.
- Finding someone who is willing
to dedicate time and care, sensitive to issues, possibly outside liaison.
- Bias to focus on men more than
women in communication.
- Women are adopting speech patterns
that are detrimental to professional development (Valley Girl speech, rising
intonation patterns at end of sentence).
- Hard to inspire women to widen
the possible career spectrum.
- Myths of harshness of being a
scientist, stereotypes of the work and rigor that is required for the field
which points to not having a "real" life.
- Materialism keeping women out
of science.
- Not knowing what they are getting
into, expectations are for "helping people" Expectations fail them
for academia. Students drawn to helping professions like counseling, social
work, etc.
- How to make psychology more exciting?
Provide more opportunities for personal 1-on-1 research-oriented partnerships.
- Present the career opportunities
publicly.
- Mentoring functions are "really
learning the rules, politics, culture, climate and requirements of program.
- Mentor-net: mentors provided
government, industrial, and non-academic profession.
- Establish informal mentoring
networks.
- Female mentors are detrimental
for advancement.
Action Items:
- Subtlety in the language of letters
of recommendation for women, less stress on the importance of their work and
skills.
- Assemble letters of recommendation
and categorize comments on different dimensions. Look also at letters coming
in from writers for undergraduates.
- Contact letter writers to get
a release of letters under circumstances which would not breach confidentiality.
Need for a mentor to write letters of recommendation for several years.
<<
Back to the Previous Page