All News & Events
Turning Point: Dr. Roberta Bondar 
Seeing Earth from space gave astronaut Roberta Bondar an intense appreciation for the need to protect all that our planet has to offer
It took a trip many miles into space for Roberta Bondar to really get perspective on the planet she had known all her life. There, amid the light-sucking black and lifeless stars, Canada`s first female astronaut realized, Às much as we romanticize going into space, the reality is that this planet gives us all we need to nurture ourselves.`From space, that little turquoise orb was a life-changing sight. Àt that moment, it meant more to me to be able to go back to the Earth ^than it did to go to space¸, because beyond is just a dark, cold void.`
At the time that Roberta took that trip on the Discovery space shuttle, she was 46. With multiple degrees in science, she had a wealth of knowledge about the Earth and its ecosystems. But seeing the planet from space, she got the bigger picture. `This is it. This is what we have, and we should be focusing our energies on preserving it.`
Though Roberta has continued to study the planet, she no longer views it as just a scientific entity. She photographs the amazing world around her to pass on her profound appreciation for our Earth. And in April, her Roberta Bondar Foundation is launching seminars and exhibitions to pique curiosity and inspire imaginations about the environment. She hopes to get others involved in both learning about and taking care of the planet.
For Roberta, teaching is a key part of conservation, because lifelong learning makes people one of the most valuable resources on Earth. “It’s a resource that we cannot replace.”
Homemakers April 2011, p. 82
New video highlights Canadian women excelling in science
The video, posted by InnovationCanada.ca, the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI)’s online magazine, focuses on five accomplished Canadian researchers at various stages of their careers. With humour and candor, the women reflect on their formative experiences, their views on combining family and work, and their assessment of how far women have come in research in Canada. They also discuss what women bring to the scientific process and what needs to be done to attract more females into research careers. The video can be found at http://www.innovationcanada.ca/.
People-centred science will attract more women to field
By Claire Cupples, Vancouver Sun, March 15, 2011
For more than 20 years I have encouraged young women in my research lab and in my science lectures to consider a career in science. Almost to a woman, they have expressed their disinterest, sometimes when they are still undergraduates and sometimes when they are close to finishing PhDs. The reason that they all give, in one form or another, is that they “want to work with people.” Science, in their minds, does not offer them that opportunity.
It is certainly true that, of all the academic disciplines, science is the only one that is not human-centric. Medicine, law, the arts and humanities, even engineering, are all concerned with people: our health, the structure of the societies we live in, the many creative ways in which we express our views of the world, the infrastructure that we create to sustain our lives and lifestyles.
In contrast, the stuff of science, from atoms to solar systems, is independent of us.
However, I suggest this lack of human focus in the sciences is not what young women find unappealing. Many are as fascinated as the young men are by the beauties of the natural world, both animate and inanimate, and by the experimental approaches and intellectual creativity that scientists use to understand how the world works. The lucky ones have experienced the magic, gender-neutral moment when all the learning and observation finally fall into place, and a scientific puzzle is solved. Students of science can see the link between scientific discovery and the quality of human life. Women in particular, though, find the long time delay between discovery and application frustrating.
A career in science is certainly not lacking in human contact. The image of the solitary scientist spending a lifetime in a windowless lab making endless minute measurements is no longer accurate, if indeed it ever was. Today’s scientist is almost always part of a team, the members of which may be in the same lab, just down the hall, across the campus or around the world. Scientific collaborators meet in person over coffee and at annual conferences, or through email and the Web. Friendships develop. University scientists are particularly fortunate in that they get the chance to meet and mentor thousands of students in the course of their careers.
So what is it that differentiates a career in science from one in most other academic disciplines or professions?
I suspect it is the culture of science. The message in graduate school is loud and clear: If you don’t do science almost to the exclusion of all else, you cannot be taken seriously. Indeed, to succeed as an academic scientist, research must take priority at all times, even over teaching and administration. Those who change their focus, even temporarily, risk being regarded as failed scientists, not worth funding with scarce research dollars. Family, friends, hobbies, other professional aspirations must take second place. This single-minded focus on science is almost monastic. Many women and a significant number of men find the lifestyle unappealing.
Science is intensely competitive. In contrast to other disciplines there is often a right answer in scientific research because the laws of the universe are independent of human observation and interpretation. There are no prizes, literally, for getting the wrong answers to such central questions as what causes cancer, what is the origin of the universe, what controls the Earth’s climate.
Big science requires big money. Thus, a certain level of self-promotion is a prerequisite for success in science. Even as team science becomes more common, the emphasis on individual excellence remains. In my experience, many women are not as interested in, or as comfortable with, intellectual posturing as men are.
The culture of university science is changing as teaching, a people-centred activity, regains some of its status. One could argue about the impact that will have on science, but it may result in more women building careers in the discipline.
Claire Cupples is professor of molecular biology and biochemistry and dean of science at Simon Fraser University.
SCWIST Member Dr. Judith Hall to receive 2011 LifeSciences BC Lifetime Achievement Award
Dr. Judith Hall, Children’s & Women’s Health Centre of BC & The University of British Columbia will receive the Dr. Don Rix Award for Lifetime Achievement at the 2011 LifeSciences British Columbia Awards.
These awards are presented annually by LifeSciences British Columbia to recognize individuals and organizations that have made outstanding contributions to the development of British Columbia’s life sciences industry across all sub-sectors, from biopharmaceuticals and medical devices to bioproducts and bioenergy – sectors which are critical to the economic future of the province and country.
This year’s theme, From Curiosity to Discovery, reflects the fact that the smallest ideas can blossom into major innovations that have an enormous impact on our lives. “As we celebrate the Year of Science here in BC, and work to instill an appreciation of the contribution science makes in our society, it is particularly timely that we acknowledge our top innovators and their achievements,” commented Don Enns, President of LifeSciences British Columbia. “We need to celebrate the fact that British Columbia is continually on the global forefront of science and technology development, as exemplified through the work of this year’s Award recipients.”
The LifeSciences British Columbia Awards will be presented at a gala ceremony on Thursday, April 14th, 2011 in front of an audience of approximately 600 biopharmaceutical, medical device, bioproducts, bioenergy and greater life sciences community and public policy leaders at the Vancouver Convention Centre.
The 2011 LSBC Awards are presented by Farris, Vaughan, Wills & Murphy, LLP; Genome British Columbia; and Rx&D (Canada’s Research-Based Pharmaceutical Companies), media sponsor Business in Vancouver Magazines, and is an official event of the British Columbia Year of Science.
On International Women’s Day Vancouver Sun Op Ed Highlights Need for Women in Science
Lack of women in science needs to be addressed
The Newspaper’s View – March 8, 2011, p. A12
Each year, International Women’s Day provides the world with an opportunity to review how women are doing on a variety of measures, and to assess where things have improved and where improvement is still sorely needed. So we typically hear about important topics such as women’s health, employment and education.
But while education is emphasized, the focus tends to be on the percentage of girls who attend and graduate from primary and secondary schools rather than on advanced education. This is understandable, since girls who don’t finish primary or high school have little chance of completing university.
Yet advanced education is also an important matter, since it is essential for ensuring a solid future in the knowledge economy, and since those possessed of it produce much of the knowledge that moves society forward. So for this reason, the United Nations chose “Equal access to education, training and science and technology: Pathway to decent work for women” as its theme for International Women’s Day 2011.
In recent years, the matter of women in science has received some attention given that women were -and are -under-represented in science faculties. While much of the attention has focused on the Western world, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s 2006 document, Women In Science, provides a worldwide snapshot of how women are doing in science and technology.
Although UNESCO did not have data from many countries, including Canada and the United States, its assessment of 89 countries with available data found that women constitute slightly more than one-quarter of all researchers. By 2006, only 18 per cent of countries had achieved gender parity in research, which is defined as having women make up between 45 and 55 per cent of all researchers.
Latin America did surprisingly well, as 46 per cent of its researchers are women, but in Asia, women constituted just 15 per cent. Perhaps surprisingly, only 32 per cent of European researchers are women, almost the same as in Africa, where women constitute 29 per cent of the research workforce.
There are likely multiple reasons for this under-representation of women, but one is certainly the fact that significantly fewer women than men complete doctoral degrees, especially in the sciences. This is particularly troubling given that more women attend universities and complete undergraduate degrees. Indeed, while 22 per cent of countries reported gender parity, more than half (54 per cent) reported that women represent more than 55 per cent of their undergrad degree recipients. Women are also (slightly) more likely to complete a second degree, yet in only 20 per cent of countries are women more likely than men to graduate from doctoral programs. For one reason or another, then, the gender gap intensifies at increasingly advanced levels of education.
The disparity between men and women is even more dramatic in the sciences, where just eight per cent of countries found women more likely to complete a doctorate. But then men tend to outnumber women in sciences even at the undergrad level.
If we look a little deeper, we find that women do dominate some scientific fields, such as medicine, but are grossly under-represented in other fields, such as engineering and computing.
The reasons for this are not entirely clear, though many have been suggested: In addition to outright discrimination, the under-representation of women has been attributed to an unwelcoming climate in some science faculties, the lack of an acceptable work/life balance in the sciences, the lack of female role models in the sciences, and the failure of science faculties and scientific enterprises to actively recruit women.
On International Women’s Day 2011, it’s worth discussing how we can dismantle those factors that exclude half the population from the future of Canada and the world.
Why more women aren’t becoming engineers
by Jennifer Myers
Globe and Mail – Tuesday, Nov. 09, 2010 5:29PM EST
Winnie Lai never really had any doubts about what she would study after high school. “I love to take things apart. I like science and math. I knew early on that I wanted to study engineering.”
A top physics student, Ms. Lai said that her high school physics teacher, who was also an engineer, nudged her dream along, providing support and encouragement. “I spent a lot of time talking with her and she prepared me, helped me understand what to expect at university.”
The two kept in touch while Ms. Lai pursued her undergraduate degree in engineering physics at the University of British Columbia. And when she graduated last spring, it was that same high school teacher who presented her with her iron ring. “It’s custom that the ring is presented by a fellow engineer, so that was quite special.”
Ms. Lai was fortunate to find a female mentor to guide her through her science and engineering studies. In what’s still largely a male-dominated field, such role models are hard to find.
In fact, the number of women getting into engineering in Canada has been on the decline, despite a decade of efforts to encourage more girls to think of technical careers. Even though women currently make up more than half of the undergraduate populations across Canada, the number of women enrolled in engineering programs dropped from a high of 21 per cent in 2001 to 17 per cent in 2009. The portion of licensed engineers in Canada who are women has grown from 7 per cent in 2000, but the figure still sits at only 10 per cent, according to Ottawa-based Engineers Canada.
Why don’t more young women take an interest in science and engineering? It’s certainly not for lack of efforts at motivation. In the past five years, industry and academics alike have introduced myriad initiatives designed to attract more women to the field.
Tyseer Aboulnasr, dean of the faculty of applied science and a professor of electrical engineering at the University of British Columbia, said the decline rests squarely on the shoulders of engineers themselves.
“Collectively, we have focused too much on the technology side, on building things,” Dr. Aboulnasr said. Women tend to want to help people and choose careers that allow them to make a meaningful contribution to society, and may not see how engineering can have such an impact, she said. “Somehow we lost the message that engineering can improve people’s lives.”
That is reflected by the fact that women are a significant presence in certain engineering disciplines (biosystems, environmental, chemical), in which they can clearly see how their work makes a difference.
Valerie Davidson, an engineering professor at the University of Guelph who is also the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council/RIM chair for women in science and engineering, said there is still an overall lack of awareness of what engineers do.
Ms. Lai agrees that misconceptions about engineering abound. When she first embarked on her engineering degree, she recalled, even her friends thought it was “dirty work, something that a tradesperson would do.”
A 2009 Engineers Canada survey of young women in high school found that many had negative perceptions of engineering and technology occupations. According to the report: “Most equate engineering and technology (but especially engineering) with construction work, outdoor work, working in a cubicle, and relating primarily to computers and machines, rather than people.”
The result is that women attribute lower status to engineering and technology occupations compared with, for example, health and social sciences.
That’s not surprising, Dr. Davidson said. “There’s high prestige for the medical profession. From a very early age it’s seen as important work and a privilege,” she noted, adding it’s the sort of message the engineering community has failed to leverage.
The study also pointed to another deterrent: discomfort with a male-dominated environment and the consequent need to adapt.
“It’s still a difficult place for women to be,” agrees Kerry Black, who is currently finishing her thesis for her master’s degree in civil engineering at UBC. Ms. Black, who completed her undergraduate degree at the University of Toronto in 2007, said she learned that lesson even before she began studying engineering.
While attending a Toronto-based university fair in 2002, she asked a Queen’s University representative about the admission requirements for the engineering program. “The gentleman looked at me and said, ‘You have to have good marks, perhaps you might want to consider other programs,’ ” she recalled. “I asked him four or five different times what marks I needed, and couldn’t get a straight answer.”
Incensed by his response, Ms. Black, a top high school student who excelled in sciences and math, enrolled at U of T. Once there, she said, she struggled, largely because she didn’t fit the image of a traditional engineer: “I like makeup, I like to dress up and wear high heels and that made me a target. There were comments made in the classroom and that did bother me.” It wasn’t until she was connected with a female engineering professor, who became her mentor, that she really felt on track. Without that support, Ms. Black said she likely would not have stayed in the field.
Some schools are increasing the number of female faculty to provide more role models that will in turn help attract more young women to the profession. Meanwhile, much of the emphasis of both universities and industry associations is getting out the message that engineering is a helping profession.
At UBC, Dr. Aboulnasr said the focus is on “bringing back the idea that through engineering you can make people’s lives better.” To highlight the connections between engineering, solutions and society, UBC has introduced community service learning into its curriculum. Last year, for example, fourth-year students worked with community partners to develop shoes for a woman who had difficulty walking, Dr. Aboulnasr said.
University of Toronto and Queen’s University each report modest increases in the number of female engineering students this year. And the number of women registered in Engineer in Training programs across Canada (a mandatory prelicensing phase), is now equal to the number of female engineering graduates, Guelph’s Dr. Davidson said.
Initiatives designed to reach high school girls are also showing promise. Go Eng Girl!, an annual event supported by Ontario’s 15 faculties of engineering and the Ontario Network of Women in Engineering, is aimed at promoting engineering to girls in grades seven to 10. It has grown steadily since it began in 2005. This year’s event attracted more than 1,000 girls, up from about 600 participants in 2009.
Although much still needs to be done to change the negative perceptions that discourage women from becoming engineers, Ms. Black is cautiously optimistic. “It’s a profession steeped in tradition. It is changing, but at a glacial pace.”
Geologist shines a light on career paths for women
By James Kwantes – Vancouver Sun – November 12, 2010, p. C4
Geologist ‘Lyn Anglin enjoyed delving into the world of rocks and minerals as a child, but was planning a career as a phys-ed teacher through high school.
Her path shifted at university when a Queen’s geology professor—who had lived nearby when she was growing up and whose children she had played with—cultivated Anglin’s interest in mining and mentored her toward a successful career in mineral exploration.
“Also, I met a bunch of students who had been out working in the field, for good pay, living in a tent for the summer, hiking around all day and hammering rocks, that was it,” she said. “I thought, ‘Oh my goodness, that’s what I really want to do.’”
Today it’s Anglin—the president and CEO of Geoscience BC—who is mentoring young students, particularly women, who are considering jobs in mining and other non-traditional fields. At a Dec. 1 luncheon, she will be honoured by the Minerva Foundation for BC Women for community leadership and excellence in natural resources.
While working on her Ph. D at Carleton University, Anglin joined a mentoring group and discovered the rewards of broadening female students’ horizons on alternative career options such as mining.
“That instilled in me a desire to always be encouraging women to look at their options, that you didn’t have to follow a traditional path,” she said in a phone interview. “I just would like to see more women realize that there’s an option there, and I think more are.”
Women had a fairly solid presence in the Queen’s geology program, Anglin said. One of her professors was a female mineralogist and about 30 per cent of students were women. Things changed dramatically, however, when she entered the workforce.
“Anytime I went to a conference or on a mine tour there was never a lineup for the ladies’ room,” Anglin said with a laugh. “It certainly kind of bugged me that there just weren’t that many women out there.”
Progress is being made, Anglin said, as companies facing a labour crunch realize that half their potential workforce is female. She said she has been impressed by the calibre of the young women receiving Geoscience BC scholarship money.
Anglin, a former president of the Geological Association of Canada, is also on the boards of the Resources North Association and the Association for Mineral Exploration BC.
Government accused of manipulating science news
Wednesday, September 29, 2010 | 4:38 PM ET CBC News
The federal government engages in “unacceptable political interference”
in the communication of government science, says the head of a group
that represents both government press officers and science journalists.
“Openness is being held ransom to media messages that serve the
government’s political agenda,” wrote Kathryn O’Hara, president of the
Canadian Science Writers’ Association, in an opinion published online
Wednesday in the international scientific journal Nature.
The article comes during Right to Know Week in Canada, a celebration of
open information that “ironically … comes on the back of new evidence of
unacceptable political interference in the public statements of federal
government researchers,” said O’Hara, who is also the CTV chair in
science broadcast journalism at Carleton University.
“This message manipulation shows a disregard for both the values and
virtues of journalism and science,” she said.
O’Hara, whose group represents more than 450 media professionals,
communications officers, technical writers and educators, including
government press officers, referred to a case detailed recently by
PostmediaNews journalist Margaret Munro.
Documents obtained by Munro through access to information showed
several communications managers, policy advisers, political staff and
senior officials were involved drafting and vetting “media lines” for
Natural Resources Canada geoscientist Scott Dallimore.
Consequently, it took a week for him to get clearance to talk to the
media about his study on a flood in northern Canada 13,000 years ago,
which was published in Nature on April 1.
O’Hara wrote that when scientists are muzzled, it is hard to maintain
public trust in taxpayer-funded research. Journalists need to talk to
scientists to avoid misinterpreting research, she added.
Her article called for a return to a procedure “that has served us well
in the past.”
It used to be, O’Hara said in an interview, that journalists could
simply phone a federal scientist and talk to him or her.
And there was a period of time not long ago when departments such as
Health Canada were becoming more and more accessible, she said.
“After this government came in,” O’Hara said, “it was like the door
shut again.”
Problem not acknowledged
The science writers’ association began talks with at least one deputy
minister after its members, including both journalists and press
officers, voiced their frustrations at the group’s annual meeting June.
However, O’Hara said that so far the government hasn’t acknowledged
there is a problem, and that is a big challenge.
Natural Resources Canada spokeswoman Patti Robson told CBC News in an
email earlier in September that it “has adhered and continues to adhere
to the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, which has been
in effect for years.”
The statement was in response to Munro’s piece, which showed new rules
went into force in March requiring Natural Resources Canada scientists
to get “pre-approval” from minister Christian Paradis’s office to speak
with journalists and to get ministerial approval for all their “media
lines.”
Robson said it is the “obligation” of the office of the natural
resources minister to “review the coming and going of all information
related to the department.”
Environment Canada was accused of being “in lockdown mode” on an
opinion piece in the Montreal Gazette Saturday by environmental
journalist Glen Blouin.
The department has publicly maintained that for the past two years it
has followed a media relations policy consistent with those used by many
private and public sector organizations and designed to ensure media
requests get quick, accurate, and consistent responses.
Press officers frustrated
Despite the official lines, during this year’s Canadian Science
Writers’ Association, it was government press officers who expressed the
most frustration about recent changes to rules for communicating with
the media, which extend well beyond interview requests.
Among them was Carolyn Brown, who left her job as the manager of
journals at the National Research Council Research Press in to pursue a
freelance career in June, around the time the federal publishing house
was privatized.
Many scientific journals routinely issue press releases about articles
that are of public interest. Brown did that to generate media interest
when articles in the NRC Research Press’s 15 journals were relevant to
Canadian communities or public policy issues – “because these are
academic journals not usually read by non-scientists,” she told CBC News
in a recent interview.
However, two years ago, new rules began requiring the press releases to
get approval from the Privy Council Office.
The first time Brown went through the new procedure, her press release
was not approved. She was told someone in Parks Canada objected to the
independent research about rivers in Banff National Park. The second
time, the press release was delayed until months after the article it
described was published.
“After a couple of these experiences, we decided it was not worth our
time and trouble to put out press releases anymore about articles
appearing in our journals,” she said.
Colleagues at other departments recounted similar experiences, she
said: “Delays to the point that the press release wasn’t relevant. Press
releases being completely stopped. And press releases being rewritten to
put the focus on the MP in the riding.”
The Canadian Science Writers’ Association put out a call to members in
August asking them to submit reports about such incidents from both
journalists’ and government press officers’ perspectives to present
during the group’s talks with government officials.
SCWIST member Dr. Judy Illes discusses popular Body Worlds exhibit
Body of evidence demonstrates human frailty
Immensely explicit, fantastically popular corpse exhibit returns to Science World
By Pamela Fayerman – Vancouver Sun – September 16, 2010, p. A1, A12
A pregnant women with a five-month-old fetus exposed through her opened uterus is among the preserved human bodies in an exhibition that opens today at Science World in Vancouver.
The display may be controversial, but that’s not the point of the Body Worlds exhibition, which set attendance records when it was last in Vancouver in 2006, says the show’s creative designer.
Dr. Angelina Whalley said cadavers like the pregnant specimen or those posed in intercourse positions—which aren’t included in the Vancouver show—are meant to be educational, not sensational, and to show “how life starts.”
Whalley is married to Dr. Gunther von Hagens, a German pathologist who invented the plastination technique in which human body fluids are replaced with a liquid plastic. A process then “cures” the corpses into human mannequins.
Dr. Judy Illes, a University of B.C. neurology professor who is also the Canada Research Chair in neuroethics, said although the exhibit is unquestionably explicit, “every art and science initiative has its strengths and its limitations.”
“The strengths of this exhibit are, unequivocally, in the educational potential,” said Illes, a member of a community advisory group set up by Science World a few months ago to get feedback on ways to present the material in a respectful manner.
Julie Robillard, a UBC post-doctoral fellow in neuroethics who helped Illes develop educational materials for Science World, said she thinks people will be compelled to “think about human fragility [and] contemplate death so that we can learn about our finite existence.”
“Contemplating life is a big goal of the exhibit. Learning about anatomy and comparing health and sickness is a worthy educational goal. There’s a lot of evidence to show that public understanding of science can significantly improve health outcomes. Comparing a healthy lung and sick lung is very educational.”
The only clues about the death of the pregnant woman who donated her body for exhibit purposes are her black lungs, which suggests she may have died from lung cancer.
An introductory video, along with other materials that viewers can see before entering the exhibit, will help prepare them for what they’ll see.
To help engage those who attend the exhibit, Science World is for the first time hosting an interactive online open forum involving Illes, Robillard and other experts in various medical fields.
The web link, accessed from the Science World website ( http://www.science-world.ca),will enable members of the public to ask questions of medical experts or make comments to stimulate discussion.
“They can pose questions and we will be available at the helm to answer, in a very dynamic, rapid way,” said Illes. “It’s not a live web chat, since it’s not in real time, but it will be monitored regularly.
“We think it’s a fantastic opportunity to further educate public and to give them a voice.”
She said she expects people will want to discuss their experience, but noted the exhibit “is not a source of medical information, nor are we. I don’t think this exhibition is geared to provide medical advice or counselling. It’s there to show what the body and brain looks like in health and disease.”
Whalley said 11,000 living humans, including nearly 100 Canadians, have indicated they would like to donate their bodies upon death to the Body Worlds enterprise, which now has exhibitions on tour in six cities around the world.
Although some Catholic leaders have criticized the display of fetuses and humans in athletic poses as offensive and even “ghoulish,” more than 30 million people have bought tickets to see the show since it first started touring in 1995. Critics have called the exhibit “pornography of the dead” or a kind of “human taxidermy.”
But Bryan Tisdall, president of Science World, said it would be next to impossible to imagine “a more fitting, engrossing topic” for a Science World exhibition.
“I can’t fathom another show ever bringing in more people. There is nothing with as much appeal as the body we all live in.”
The Science World exhibition, which runs to January 2011, features 200 plastinated specimens—including 25 human cadavers and several brains, including one affected by stroke and another by Alzheimer’s disease.
The previous Body Worlds exhibition at Science World drew nearly 350,000 people.
Science World (Telus World of Science) managers are hoping for the same attendance levels, but expect construction on the building’s exterior may deter some visitors. The interior exhibition space is largely unaffected, except for lots of noise.
Tisdall is particularly proud of the statistics from the 2006 show, when 74 per cent of those who attended were adults ( “very different from our usual demographic”) and 68 per cent of ticket buyers had never before been to Science World.
Ticket prices range from $8 to $25 and advance purchase—by phone (604-443-7530) or online—is recommended.
SCWIST Member Elizabeth Croft new chair for Women in Science and Technology
SCWIST member and University of British Columbia Mechanical Engineering professor Elizabeth Croft has been appointed the NSERC Chair for Women in Science and Engineering for the BC and Yukon region.
Male graduates had higher earnings than female graduates, at all levels of education
From the National Graduates Survey Class of 2005, published by StatsCan
The difference in annual earnings by level of education differed for males and females who were working full-time (Chart 2.6). For females, the median earnings increased by level of education. For males, the median earnings increased from the college to bachelor level and from the bachelor to master level but stayed the same between the master and doctorate levels.
Across all levels of education, males typically earned more than females (Chart 2.6). Furthermore, as the earnings level (percentile) increased, the gap between the genders increased as well – at least among college, bachelor and master graduates. At the doctorate level, the difference between male and female earnings still existed at the median and the 75th percentile, but was narrower than at other levels of education. At the 25th percentile, however, earnings of female doctorate graduates actually exceeded those of males by $2,400. The largest earnings gap between the genders was at the master level, at the 75th percentile, where gross earnings for males exceeded those of women by $13,000. This pattern did not change from five years before.
Earnings distribution of 2005 graduates working full-time in 2007, by gender and level of study
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/81-595-m/2009074/activ-eng.htm
Male faculty out-earn females at universities
By Allison Cross – Vancouver Sun – August 11, 2010, p. B2
Male professors at Canadian universities on average earn higher salaries than their female colleagues—with the discrepancy reaching more than $20,000 at some institutions, according to Statistics Canada.
The average salary of a full-time, male teaching-staff member at the University of Toronto, excluding medical and dental faculty, is $20,362 higher than a full-time, female teaching-staff member, data from 2008 and 2009 show.
The University of Calgary has the second-largest gap, with male teaching staff earning $20,147 more than female professors.
Other schools reported similar discrepancies: Dalhousie University ($16,162) and McGill University ($15,082) are two examples.
University officials say these pay discrepancies aren’t a sign of modern bias but the result of former hiring practices that favoured men, the age and rank of professors and the distribution of men and women in different disciplines.
“When you actually factor in all those variables then, in fact, the gender differences in salary largely disappear,” said Edith Hillan, vice-provost, faculty and academic life, at the University of Toronto.
Fields such as business, computer science and engineering tend to pay more and are dominated by men, while female-dominated fields, such as social sciences and the humanities, pay less.
“In general, when you look at the data, unfortunately, I think it’s probably only about 18 to 20 per cent of all full professors [are] women across Canada,” Hillan said. “In a sense … a lot of it is the result of hiring practices in the past.
“At [the University of Toronto] we’re doing pretty well. Over the last few years, through a very proactive recruitment process, we’ve got up to the 50-per-cent mark in terms of woman hires. But most of them are going to be at junior ranks, because that’s the way the bulk of our professors come in.”
Pay gap
How the gender gap plays out in major B.C. universities.
University of B.C.: $16,559
Simon Fraser University: $13,095
University of Victoria: $11,526
University of Northern B.C.: $7,590
Wed Feb 01
