http://michaelsiegel.net/?p=3040 Missing Sleep Since June 2007 (Blogging Since 2005) Thu, 04 Apr 2013 16:22:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 http://michaelsiegel.net/?p=3040&cpage=1#comment-1050 Mike Sat, 19 Jun 2010 01:56:40 +0000 http://michaelsiegel.net/?p=3040#comment-1050 I’m somewhat perturbed to find out that you read my blog! But I agree that Tierney tends to be too glib on this subject (and a few others as well).

]]> http://michaelsiegel.net/?p=3040&cpage=1#comment-1049 caryl Fri, 18 Jun 2010 22:49:28 +0000 http://michaelsiegel.net/?p=3040#comment-1049 That Tierney article in the NY Times is just nuts and has set off a quite predictable storm of outrage in the women in science blog-o-sphere. Tierney seems to have a “thing” about the whole women in science issue, he’s published multiple articles on the topic including two in the past two weeks. While there may indeed be an interest-limited regime for women in physics (or all the sciences), we’re nowhere near that point yet. Case in point — the fraction of currently enrolled female astronomy PhD students (30%) is nowhere near the fraction of women faculty in astronomy (17%) and the pipeline is still leaking at every step. The numbers are substantially worse in physics and downright terrible in engineering. There’s a great response to Tierney from Ed Bertschinger at MIT here: http://diversity.mit.edu/blog/gender-equity-misbegotten-gender-bias-myth

]]>