Re: How To Recruit Women to Tech and IT Classes

["Shapiro, Mark" <mshapiro@EXCHANGE.FULLERTON.EDU>]

Dear Joel et al.,

        Frankly, the notion that all one has to do to gain an understanding
of biology, chemistry, or geology is to memorize is far from true; and is
insulting to our colleagues in those disciplines.  What Herb was saying
basically was that those disciplines were more successful at attracting
women because they were not as rigorous or demanding of abstract thought as
physics (with the subtext that we all know women can't do that sort of
stuff).

        Sorry guys but I know too many women who work in the quantitative
areas of physics, chemistry, geology, and biology to let that old canard
slip by unchallenged.

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: Joel Rauber [mailto:Joel_Rauber@SDSTATE.EDU]
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2000 11:15 AM
To: PHYS-L@lists.nau.edu
Subject: Re: How To Recruit Women to Tech and IT Classes


> Herb,
>
> You mean to say that physical chemistry or quantum chemistry
> just requires
> memorization?  Nonsense.

Herb at best made a comment about chemistry and biology as a whole
(actually
didn't he only mention biology).  If women are N% all chemistry Ph.D's,
what
percentage are they of physical chemistry and quantum chemistry vs. other
sub-disciplines.  I think one must know this before you can categorically
say that Herb's comment was nonsense.  I don't know the answer about the
sub-divisions of chemistry and hesitate to speculate; something few of us,
including me, have foregone in this "discussion".

Joel Rauber
Joel_Rauber@sdstate.edu