More News on Women in Science, the President of Harvard, and Education in General

Today I read of a “resignation” at Harvard that really was a “firing—” apparently a simmering issue that was swept under the rug during last year’s scrutiny of Harvard’s president after his unsupported biased remarks about women in science. Apparently, Summers is feeling less controversial these days, and therefore felt it was time to let the axe fall. While it was spun as a resignation, Harvard’s own newspaper “scooped the big boys” and revealed what they say really happened. (http://www.cjrdaily.org/behind_the_news/the_crimson_whips_the_big_bo.php)

I find it interesting that what started out last year as a fierce debate about the abilities of women in science has died down to a barely-audible whisper. In fact, the tide has turned, in some respects, with the recent revelations that boys are rapidly falling behind girls at all levels of education. It used to be that girls led the race until high school, where various forms of social pressure and discrimination helped reverse things. Today, it appears that this is no longer true. Now schools are going to be asked to examine teaching methods to see why boys are no longer succeeding in school the way they did before. (The Trouble With Boys - Newsweek Society - MSNBC.com)

What do these two stories have to do with each other? Interestingly, in a non-scientific poll at her university, my daughter and her classmates found that despite the larger percentage of women pursuing their particular major, that the amount of university teaching placements still were going, in overwhelming numbers to men. It is almost as it was happening on purpose. (Can that be?)

As I have said before, educational success should not be based on gender, and assumption about either are wrong. The fact is that, in our “one size fits all” society we are swinging from one end of the spectrum to the other, teaching-method wise, dropping methods that may have worked for some students in the past, for new methods that work for other students today. It seems logical that, eventually, someone is going to say, Let’s teach each child in the way he needs to learn!

Which brings me back to Harvard, Lawrence Summers, and his remarks about females have some sort of genetic inability to excel in the sciences. It is time to put his beliefs to rest. Not because I said so, not because girls seems to be pulling ahead of boys in school, and not because as one pundit said, our “corsets are too tight.” It is time to put this thinking aside because, not only is it counterproductive, it is wrong. Scientifically wrong. And the study has been released that shows it.

The December 2005 issue of American Psychologist contains an article entitled “Sex Difference in Intrinsic Aptitude for Math and Science?: A Critical Review.” (PsycARTICLES - American Psychologist - Vol 60, Iss 9)The abstract, verbatim:

“Are there innate cognitive differences that make males superiour to females in mathematics and science? Males superiority is not substantiated in studies of infant perception and reasoning about objects and their relationships, nor in developmental studies of numerical and geometric reasoning, nor by SAT-M scores, which have been demonstrated to overestimate the abilities of boys relative to girls. Gender imbalance on science faculties are not due to innate cognitive abilities.”
The study results are well written, with impressive references. One can only hope that it will help shift the focus away from genetic inabilities toward gaps and failures in both society and the educational system.


And here is the most interesting tidbit about this critical review – it is written by Elizabeth S. Spelke, from the Psychology Department at, you guessed it, Harvard. I certainly hope she is not next on the “resignation” list.

It's Carnival Day!

It's Sunday, and that must mean its Carnival Day! Check out fellow Garden State Bloggers at:
http://smadanek.blogspot.com/2006/01/carnival-of-new-jersey-bloggers-xxxvii.html

Even Snakes Are Developing Respect for Rodents

At the Tokyo zoo they are the true odd couple. A rat snake and a hamster are currently coexisting peacefully in a cage together. ( http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10903211/ ) Originally intended as a meal for the snake, the hamster has not only managed to survive, but looks to have bonded with its slitherly room mate. The snake has apparently switched to a diet of frozen rat-sicles and prefers snuggling up with its new furry friend. For those of you who just think this is so cute (and I am among you, so don’t write me e-mails) I do have this warning… We already know that rodents are becoming bigger, smarter and healthier. They are outsmarting humans at every turn. This may just be a odd occurrence in Tokyo, or it may be the sign of an inter-species alliance. And, I don’t know about you, but if snakes and rodents start teaming up against us, those Rutgers scientists will have a new level of fear to investigate!

quick question for other bloggers

Is it me, or is there some kind of funky glitch between Blogger and AOL? It seems like it takes forever for a new post to appear on AOL. Is it some setting I can change? Anyone know?

NJ Bloggers United

This morning, I am happy to announce that I have become part of a great source for good reading about the Garden State. the Carnival of the New Jersey Bloggers is an internet-traveling compilation of the latest from fellow New Jersey bloggers. It's great to see how many fellow Jerseyans have embraced blogging- most of them much more experienced in this "new communication form" than me. Click on the above smiling face ( you know you're from New Jersey if you know where that face is from!) and scroll down to the list of where the carnival is currently hosted, and where it has been hosted in the past. You may end up spending all day in the NJ blogosphere!

The Rutgers Mice

In November 2005, an article appeared in the Newark Star Ledger announcing the fact that at a Rutgers laboratory in Piscataway, New Jersey, a new breed of mouse was being created. As usual in these situations, this new mouse is not being bred to stay out of human habitations, garbage cans or empty urban lots. It is not even being bred to help combat some terrible disease. No, these mice are being bred to be FEARLESS.

It was not enough for this group of scientists to discover a gene for fear, but they also had to ‘tweak” this gene in the aforementioned mice, creating rodents who “crave open spaces and have an appetite for adventure.”

Those of you who have been keeping track of these things with me should feel just as much concern as I do. First of all, who knows what kind of natural balance is going to be upset by turning mice into aggressors. Cats of the world will suddenly have the tables turned on them. The sure-fire insult, “what are you, a man or a mouse?” will no longer be effective. And the book, “The Mouse That Roared” may have to be rewritten about real mice taking over the United States.

Those of you who have not been following these things with me will probably think, but these are lab mice, being kept in laboratories, under lab conditions. Of course, the bubonic plague-infected mice that somehow escaped or were “miscounted” at that lab in Newark were being kept “safe” too. For all we know, they have spread bubonic plague to half the rodents in Newark by now. Let’s not forget the record-breaking rat who eluded capture on a small island for months, despite scientists trying to recapture it using a radio collar, tracking dogs and various tricks and traps. That rat broke all records by leading the scientists on a merry chase over almost a mile of open ocean as it swam to a different island.

If these mice do get loose in New Jersey, it may be just part of the experiment. According to the Star Ledger article, these brave mice will help the scientists “better understand” why people feel fear.

I think I can assure those scientists that knowing that there are adventure seeking mice, bubonic rodents, and Olympic swimmer rats out there, is enough to strike fear in any human -- especially when you read that part of the experiment was call "Foot Shock Sensitivity." Subjecting a smart, brave, strong rodent to something like that is asking for trouble. I'm keepin my shoes on.

Read all about it here: The Star-Ledger and Rutgers Research Highlights: A Gene for the Fear Factor and here: ScienceDirect - Cell : stathmin, a Gene Enriched in the Amygdala, Controls Both Learned and Innate Fear

What "blook?"

Since I've published a "blook" does that make me a "blauthor?" Looks like I broke the first rule of shameless self promotion. Of course you all want to know just where to get this blook! I am happy to say, you can get it directly from the publisher here:Noreen Braman's Books - Lulu.com or on the too cool for words page at Amazon.com: Amazon.com: I'm 50 - Now What?: Books: Noreen Braman . Don't forget to support your local starving "blauthor!"

Of blogs, books and blooks

The books, or more specifically, the "blooks" have arrived, and I amd truly pleased with the quality, and now I can shamelessly promote and sell them. yesterday, Edie Galley of the "By, For and About Women Radio Show" called me, and will be interviewing me the first week of February about how it feels to turn a blog into a book, and share your words in print as well as on line. The show will be posted on her web page, and can be listened to at any time after it is posted. Her website is: By For and About Women Radio . I could even become a podcast!

I haven't forgotten the rodent world. I'm sure by now many of you have seen the story of the mouse tossed into a flaming pile of leaves. The burning mouse, in a last ditch effort to "get even with the man" ran into the house, caught it on fire and it burned to the ground. There has been some speculation about the truthfulness of the story, but I have a tendency to believe it. Once you hear about the mice at Rutgers, you will probably agree with me. Stay tuned.

Good Grief

Rats. Here I go again, blogging. As they say in the sign business, Watch This Space.