Advertisement

The Window of Opportunity

  • Nancy E. Levinger
Chapter

Abstract

As a beginning graduate student, well before I met the man I would eventually marry, I recall considering my future. I was training to become a scientist, but would I find a partner? Would my career path allow me to have a family? Although these basic personal choices had always seemed inevitable to me as a child, in the frenetic schedule of a chemical physics graduate student, they were anything but given. At that point, studies had yet to appear showing the impact of advanced education on women’s personal lives [1]. Still, it seemed clear; the likelihood of finding a partner while spending almost all my waking hours working on science was probably pretty small.

Notes

Acknowledgments

I am indebted to many people who made it possible for me to balance career and family. First, to my parents, who have believed in me throughout my life. Second, to my lovely sons, who inspire me to be the best I can be. Finally, to my husband, who has supported me, tolerated insane schedules, listened to my problems and helped me to solve them, raised two amazing children, and loved me through thick and thin.

References

  1. 1.
    Mason MA, Goulden M (2004) Marriage and baby blues: redefining gender equity in the academy. Ann Am Acad Polit S S 596:86–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Valian V (1999) Why so slow? The advancement of women. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Minerick AR, Washburn MH, Young VL (2009) Mothers on the tenure track: what engineering and technology faculty still confront. Eng Stud 1:217–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Colorado State University2012–2013 Academic Faculty and Administrative Professional Manual, section E.10.4.1.2 Extension of the Probationary Period. http://www.facultycouncil.colostate.edu/files/manual/sectione.htm#E.10.4.1.2. Accessed 7 Jan 2014
  5. 5.
    Manchester CF, Leslie LM, Kramer A (2013) Is the clock still ticking? An evaluation of the consequences of stopping the tenure clock. ILR Rev 66:3–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Antecol H, Bedard K, Stearns J (2016) Equal but inequitable: who benefits from gender-neutral tenure clock stopping policies. IZA Discussion Paper, paper no. 9904Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clance PC, Imes SA (1978) The impostor phenomenon in high achieving women - dynamics and therapeutic intervention. Psychother Theor Res Pract 15:241–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Monroe K, Ozyurt S, Wrigley T, Alexander A (2008) Gender equality in academia: bad news from the trenches, and some possible solutions. Persp Polit 6(2):215–233Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Latu IM, Stewart TL, Myers AC, Lisco CG, Estes SB (2011) What we “say” and what we “think” about female managers: explicit versus implicit associations of women with success. Psychol Women Quart 35:252–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (2007) Beyond bias and barriers: fulfilling the potential of women in academic science and engineering. National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jackson SM, Hillard AL, Schneider TR (2014) Using implicit bias training to improve attitudes toward women in STEM. J Soc Psychol Educ 17:419–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kahneman D (2011) Thinking, fast and slow, 1st edn. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kaatz A, Lee YG, Potvien A, Magua W, Filut A, Bhattacharya A, Leatherberry R, Zhu X, Carnes M (2016) Analysis of National Institutes of Health R01 application critiques, impact, and criteria scores: does the sex of the principal investigator make a difference? Acad Med 91:1080–1088CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Magua W, Zhu X, Bhattacharya A, Filut A, Potvien A, Leatherberry R, Lee YG, Jens M, Malikireddy D, Carnes M, Kaatz A (2017) Are female applicants disadvantaged in National Institutes of Health peer review? Combining algorithmic text mining and qualitative methods to detect evaluative differences in R01 reviewers’ critiques. J Womens Health 26:560–570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Colorado State University Standing Committee on the Status of Women Faculty. http://cwge.colostate.edu/standing-committee-on-the-status-of-women-faculty/home/. Accessed 14 June 2017
  16. 16.
    Colorado State University Standing Committee on the Status of Women Faculty (2017) Experiences and perceptions of campus climate for women faculty at CSU. http://cwge.colostate.edu/standing-committee-on-the-status-of-women-faculty/scswf-report/. Accessed 14 June 2017
  17. 17.
    Park B, Smith JA, Correll J (2010) The persistence of implicit behavioral associations for moms and dads. J Exp Soc Pyschol 46:809–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Misra J, Lundquist JH, Templer A (2012) Gender, work time, and care responsibilities among faculty. Sociol Forum 27:300–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ruiz DM (1997) The four agreements: a practical guide to personal freedom. Amber-Allen, San Rafael, CAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ChemistryColorado State UniversityFort CollinsUSA

Personalised recommendations