Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (101432)	2/21/2005 4:51:34 PM
From: Volsi Mimir	Respond to of 793841

Smart people writing dumb reports: What did the paper prove-- if anything, the ability in birthing and sustaining the species is a bit more important than having a lifelong job at a college- if men gave birth there probably be the same difference. anyways the study uses data from 81-97-- 8 years ago. What is the rate of difference by the year? An improvement or static? Isn't that the most important segment that is not listed. What of data that is not sufficient or not listed-- there are a couple of notes that suggest those were included in the testing. ==================================== Read the 'Study Limitations' Doctorate recipients included in our analyses were not randomly assigned to the samples we used. They selected science or engineering as a field of study and completed requirements for a doctorate. They also must have selected and obtained a full-time position in academia rather than employment in a nonacademic job or a parttime academic position. Moreover, because we excluded nonacademic positions, the samples we used suffer from attrition in that they exclude doctorate holders who may have left academia, possibly because of failure to earn tenure or promotion. One problem is that the selection process itself may be determined in part by differences in individual preferences or by discriminatory treatment that could be related to both a person’s sex and chances for career success. Although we attempted to control for differences among individuals in our analyses, we were limited to characteristics that are measurable and available in the data we used. As is typically the case in empirical work, we could not control for remaining unobserved differences among individuals that could affect outcomes. These unobserved differences could be related to an individual’s sex and the selection process, thus raising the possibility of selection bias. Selection issues are present even within the sample of doctorates employed in academia. For example, doctorate recipients must select the kind of institution at which they seek employment and choose how to allocate their time among work activities. Given that promotion requirements vary across institutions, and chances for promotion depend on research and teaching credentials, these decisions are likely to affect chances for career success. If assignment to the samples we used were truly random, our results might have been different; thus, we do not claim that our estimates of gender differences in career success rates reflect the effects of discriminatory treatment. The same caveat applies to cases where we find no statistical differences in success rates for women and men. ==================================================== We find evidence that among scientists and engineers working in academia, women are less likely to be employed in tenure-track positions than men who are similarly situated. If, however, we allow for gender differences in the effects of family characteristics, we find that gender differences in tenure-track placements are statistically insignificant. It appears that women who are married and have children are less likely to be employed in tenure-track positions than men who are married and have children. nsf.gov ================================= My comment-- Waste of time..... Statistics in that study are like betting on human sports-- you hope they do not think or try to influence the game for their own benefit yet the stats remain as if it is written in some righteous stone to decipher in a sterile ideality fashioned to whatever POV the author intends. My experience (well not mine)-- my cuz is married to a girl who is head of her department (medical) in a big U. He is in the same field..... She's smarter, more capable and more organized, almost busted up the marriage.....till he clearly had more time with their kids and enjoys the mountains and outdoors (and gets to travel) while she slaves away long nights because of her position. They moved from one big U to another on her tenure. (he came for the ride, a two-fer) I think a study in gender bias is valid in, lets say, the military or where physical activity is a major factor or where sex as a gender based class is exclusionary such as health. It wouldn't be discriminatory,it would be just the facts, ma'm. =========================================== oh and the last paragraph of this section of study with even more qualifiers: In most cases, however, the outcome-status and work-history variables are statistically significant determinants of promotion rates. As might be expected, spending time in positions where rank is not applicable is negatively related to chances for promotion to senior ranks. The same is true for spending time in jobs that are not full-time academic positions. Being employed in either a research or a doctoral institution reduces a doctorate recipient’s chances for promotion, perhaps because promotion requirements at these kinds of institutions are more stringent than at other institutions. Finally, spending time in positions for which teaching is a primary work activity is negatively related to chances for promotion to the fullprofessor rank.20 nsf.gov ======================================== mycomment:Maybe more women like being in academia than the real world, maybe they made choices that do not get them to this pinnacle as if the pinnacle is the most desired outcome. Maybe men have a better established climbing ladder in the ranks (given)- and women are now in a position to do the same. ======================================== And like I said previously Mr.Summers is an idiot for comments in the position he holds. Goes hand in hand with the study. ========================================= The survey includes information on the recipient's degree, career outcome, and a range of personal characteristics. By analyzing this data, it was possible to "test hypotheses about whether being married or having children affects the careers of women and men differently. --Give me 10 bucks and I could of told anyone that, saved lots of money.