10.2190/WR.16.3-4.c E7047HG4085283W3 3 The NSF Career-Life Balance Initiative: A Critical Examination 299 313 20130308 20130308 20130308 20130308 E7047HG4085283W3.pdf http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=contribution&id=E7047HG4085283W3 3 Barbara Bonnekessen New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, Socorro, New Mexico The 2011 National Science Foundation (NSF) Career-Life Balance Initiative purports to assist women to more successfully combine career and domestic responsibilities, leading to increased retention of women in the STEM (natural and social sciences, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields. This policy is a major step toward integrating a work/home balance, but, although the policy addresses all researchers in the STEM fields, women are singled out as needing such a policy to increase their retention in these fields. However, this article argues that instead of increasing women's acceptance, such a policy will more deeply entrench the gendered expectations that hold women more than men responsible for family care, and will not lead to an overall change in sex-typed work/home expectations. Reviewing the essentialist arguments underlying these expectations, the article suggests a more sweeping reform of the interrelationship of STEM stakeholders in universities and grant-giving agencies, a reform that would integrate women more fully into the STEM disciplines while also giving men a more acceptable path to balancing home/work integration.

American Physical Society. 2011. Percentage of women in physics. Retrieved from <a target="_blank" href='http://www.aps.org/programs/education/statistics/upload/Womenall.xls'>www.aps.org/programs/education/statistics/upload/Womenall.xls</a>

Baker, B. 2011. Having a life in science. BioScience, 61: 429-433.

Baldez, L. 2004. Elected bodies: The gender quota law for legislative candidates in Mexico. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 29: 231-258.

Bart, J. 2000. Feminist theories of knowledge: The good, the bad, and the ugly. In J. Bart (Ed.), Women succeeding in the sciences: Theories and practices across disciplines: 205-220. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.

Bem, S. 1981. Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88: 354-364.

Bernstein, B. L., Jacobson, R., & Russo, N. F. 2010. Mentoring women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields. In C. A. Rayburn, F. L. Denmark, M. E. Reuder, & A. M. Austria (Eds.), A handbook for women mentors: Transcending barriers of stereotype, race, and ethnicity: 43-63. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.

Burrelli, J. 2008. Thirty-three years of women in S & E faculty positions. Retrieved from <a target="_blank" href='http://nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf08308/'>http://nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf08308/</a>

Dean, D. J., & Fleckenstein, A. 2007. Keys to success for women in science. In R. J. Burke & M. C. Mattis (Eds.), Women and minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics: Upping the numbers: 28-44. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

DeBerg, B. A. 2000. Ungodly women: Gender and the first wave of American fundamentalism. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press.

Eschrich, J. 2011. "Behold the nan!": Constructing the masculinity of Jesus of Nazareth in mainstream American film, 1961-2004. Men and Masculinities, 14: 520-541.

Fassinger, R. E., & Asay, P. A. 2006. Career counseling for women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. In W. B. Walsh & M. J. Heppner (Eds.), Handbook of career counseling for women: 427-452. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Fidell, L. S. 1970. Empirical verification of sex discrimination in hiring practices in psychology. American Psychologist, 25: 1092-1098.

Gilbert, L. A., & Kearney, L. K. 2006. Sex, gender, and dual-earner families: Implications and applications for career counseling for women. In W. B. Walsh & M. J. Heppner (Eds.), Handbook of career counseling for women: 193-217. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Glasscock, J., & Balderston, K. C. 1975. Wellesley College, 1875-1975: A century of women. Wellesley, MA: Wellesley College.

Goldin, C., & Rouse, C. 2000. Orchestrating impartiality: The impact of "blind" auditions on female musicians. American Economic Review, 90: 715-741.

Graves, K. L. 1998. G. I. Bill. In L. Eisenmann (Ed.), Historical dictionary of women's education in the United States: 163-164. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Hatchell, H., & Aveling, N. 2008. Those same old prejudices? Gendered experiences in the science workplace. Journal of Workplace Rights, 13: 355-375.

Hutchinson, E. J. 1929. Women and the Ph.D.: Facts from the experiences of 1,025 women who have taken the degree of Doctor of Philosophy since 1877. Greensboro: North Carolina College for Women.

Ivie, R., & Ray, K. N. 2005. Women in physics and astronomy, 2005. College Park, MD: American Institute of Physics.

Kanter, R. M. 1993. Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.

Lukas, C. L. 2008a. Excellence, not gender parity, should be priority for STEM faculty. Retrieved from <a target="_blank" href='http://www.iwf.org/files/fa29b18088981f2423a9ac28ee22528e.pdf'>http://www.iwf.org/files/fa29b18088981f2423a9ac28ee22528e.pdf</a>

Lukas, C. L. 2008b. Studying women and science: Why women's lower rate of participation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics courses isn't a problem for the government to solve. Retrieved from <a target="_blank" href='http://www.iwf.org/files/c8ad0624e431351222d2f7c7a21fc5af.pdf'>http://www.iwf.org/files/c8ad0624e431351222d2f7c7a21fc5af.pdf</a>

Madera, J. M., Hebl, M. R., & Martin, R. C. 2009. Gender and letters of recommendation for academia: Agentic and communal differences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 1591-1599.

Marshall, V. W. 2007. Advancing the sociology of ageism. Social Forces, 86: 257-264.

Mavriplis, C., Heller, R., Beil, C., Dam, K., Yassinskaya, N., Shaw, M., & Sorensen, C. 2010. Mind the gap: Women in STEM career breaks. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 5: 140-151.

Moser, C. O. N., & Levy, C. 1986. A theory and methodology of gender planning: Meeting women's practical and strategic gender needs. London: University College London.

Mottarella, K. E., Fritzsche, B. A., Whitten, S. N., & Bedsole, D. 2009. Exploration of "good mother" stereotypes in the college environment. Sex Roles, 60: 223-231.

Murray, M. A. M. 2000. Women becoming mathematicians: Creating a professional identity in post-World War II America. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

National Science Foundation. 2011. Balancing the scale: NSF's career-life balance initative. Retrieved from <a target="_blank" href='http://www.nsf.gov/career-life-balance/'>http://www.nsf.gov/career-life-balance/</a>

National Science Foundation. 2012. Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. Retrieved from <a target="_blank" href='http://nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/tables.cfm'>http://nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/tables.cfm</a>

Quindlen, A. 2011. The good enough mother. In R. P. Yagelski, R. K. Miller, & A. J. Crouse-Powers (Eds.), The informed argument: 305-307. Belmont, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Quota Project. 2010. About the project. Retrieved from <a target="_blank" href='http://www.quotaproject.org/aboutProject.cfm'>http://www.quotaproject.org/aboutProject.cfm</a>

Rosenberg, R. P. 1962. Eugene Schuyler's Doctor of Philosophy degree: A theory concerning the dissertation. Journal of Higher Education, 33: 381-386.

Russo, N. F. 1976. The motherhood mandate. Journal of Social Issues, 32: 143-153.

Sengers, J. L., Shanahan, B., & Castillo, S. P. 2008. Global efforts for local empowerment of women engineers. AIChE Journal, 54: 836-843.

Shaw, A. B. 1994. In defence of ageism. Journal of Medical Ethics, 20: 188-194.

Taylor, J. 2005. The decline of women in computer science from 1940-1982. M. A. thesis, Harvard University Graduate School of Education.

Zimmerman, T. S., Aberle, J. T., Krafchick, J. L., & Harvey, A. M. 2008. Deconstructing the "mommy wars": The battle over the best mom. Journal of Feminist Family Therapy, 20: 203-219.