The Window of Opportunity
As a beginning graduate student, well before I met the man I would eventually marry, I recall considering my future. I was training to become a scientist, but would I find a partner? Would my career path allow me to have a family? Although these basic personal choices had always seemed inevitable to me as a child, in the frenetic schedule of a chemical physics graduate student, they were anything but given. At that point, studies had yet to appear showing the impact of advanced education on women’s personal lives . Still, it seemed clear; the likelihood of finding a partner while spending almost all my waking hours working on science was probably pretty small.
I am indebted to many people who made it possible for me to balance career and family. First, to my parents, who have believed in me throughout my life. Second, to my lovely sons, who inspire me to be the best I can be. Finally, to my husband, who has supported me, tolerated insane schedules, listened to my problems and helped me to solve them, raised two amazing children, and loved me through thick and thin.
- 2.Valian V (1999) Why so slow? The advancement of women. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
- 4.Colorado State University2012–2013 Academic Faculty and Administrative Professional Manual, section E.10.4.1.2 Extension of the Probationary Period. http://www.facultycouncil.colostate.edu/files/manual/sectione.htm#E.10.4.1.2. Accessed 7 Jan 2014
- 6.Antecol H, Bedard K, Stearns J (2016) Equal but inequitable: who benefits from gender-neutral tenure clock stopping policies. IZA Discussion Paper, paper no. 9904Google Scholar
- 8.Monroe K, Ozyurt S, Wrigley T, Alexander A (2008) Gender equality in academia: bad news from the trenches, and some possible solutions. Persp Polit 6(2):215–233Google Scholar
- 10.Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (2007) Beyond bias and barriers: fulfilling the potential of women in academic science and engineering. National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- 12.Kahneman D (2011) Thinking, fast and slow, 1st edn. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 13.Kaatz A, Lee YG, Potvien A, Magua W, Filut A, Bhattacharya A, Leatherberry R, Zhu X, Carnes M (2016) Analysis of National Institutes of Health R01 application critiques, impact, and criteria scores: does the sex of the principal investigator make a difference? Acad Med 91:1080–1088CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 14.Magua W, Zhu X, Bhattacharya A, Filut A, Potvien A, Leatherberry R, Lee YG, Jens M, Malikireddy D, Carnes M, Kaatz A (2017) Are female applicants disadvantaged in National Institutes of Health peer review? Combining algorithmic text mining and qualitative methods to detect evaluative differences in R01 reviewers’ critiques. J Womens Health 26:560–570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Colorado State University Standing Committee on the Status of Women Faculty. http://cwge.colostate.edu/standing-committee-on-the-status-of-women-faculty/home/. Accessed 14 June 2017
- 16.Colorado State University Standing Committee on the Status of Women Faculty (2017) Experiences and perceptions of campus climate for women faculty at CSU. http://cwge.colostate.edu/standing-committee-on-the-status-of-women-faculty/scswf-report/. Accessed 14 June 2017
- 19.Ruiz DM (1997) The four agreements: a practical guide to personal freedom. Amber-Allen, San Rafael, CAGoogle Scholar