**Minding the Gap:**

***Recruiting, Retaining and Advancing Women in Science at NASA***

![](media/image1.wmf){width="4.767361111111111in"
height="3.2555555555555555in"}

**TABLE OF CONTENTS**

[1 TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT 1](#technical-management)

[1.1 Objectives and Expected Significance
1](#objectives-and-expected-significance)

[1.2 Technical Approach and Methodology:
2](#technical-approach-and-methodology)

[1.3 Perceived Impact of Proposed Work:
4](#perceived-impact-of-proposed-work)

[1.4 Relevance to NASA Programs and Strategic Framework:
11](#relevance-to-nasa-programs-and-strategic-framework)

[1.5 Plan of Work: 12](#plan-of-work)

[2 REFERENCES AND CITATIONS: 16](#references-and-citations)

# TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT

## Objectives and Expected Significance 

If there is one single scientific institution that has the ability to
capture the imagination and engage the intellect of the nation's youth,
it would undeniably be NASA. As the nation's premier science and
exploration agency, NASA is well situated to fulfill the goals of its
education mission. This proposal addresses two major goals of that
mission as outlined in the Education Strategic Framework: To attract and
retain students in scientific disciplines, and to strengthen the future
workforce of NASA and America, especially those in underrepresented
communities.

With the rise of the global knowledge economy, tapping into the
scientific talents of all sectors of society is not just a matter of
social equity, it is a national imperative. This project is aimed at
helping ensure the inclusion of a major sector of society which
continues to be under-represented in its scientific workforce---women.
The persisting gender asymmetry in science has not been found by
research to be based on innate biological differences in scientific
proclivities of the male and female brains. It is a cultural anomaly.
While the number of women showing an interest in science continues to
rise, women drop out of the field at disproportionately higher rates
than men at every transition stage in the academic pipeline. The
representation of women decreases significantly at each successively
higher level of a scientific career.

Over the last decade, NASA has made great strides in increasing the
representation of women on its scientific workforce. However, a
considerable gender gap remains. This project proposes to identify
practical measures to accelerate progress in diminishing that gap. NASA
at the vanguard of equal representation of women in science will have a
catalytic effect. Given NASA's special place in the nation's psyche,
gender equity at NASA will inspire younger women and transform cultural
norms. It will be good for NASA, good for the nation and good for
science.

![](media/image2.jpeg){width="4.75in" height="3.15625in"}

Figure 1: Dr. Laurie Leshin awes and inspires young women after her talk

\"Mars Rocks!\" for the \"Making of a Scientist\" public lecture series.
2006, GSFC.

### Objectives: 

The goal of this project is to devise practical measures to increase
recruitment, retention and advancement of women in science at NASA; it
will address both the education and the workforce portions of a career
in science at NASA. The proposing team, formed by the Office of Higher
Education in partnership with the Women's Advisory Committee at Goddard,
the NASA Center with the largest science population, is in optimum
position to achieve both portions. To accomplish this objective, we
propose to focus on:

I.  **Assessing NASA's contribution to the preparation of female
    scientists*.*** We plan to focus on women who participate in various
    research programs at NASA as undergraduates, graduate students and
    postdoctoral fellows. Given the small number of new hiring
    opportunities available at NASA, it is of critical importance that
    this experience provides women with a solid stepping stone to a
    competitive career in science at NASA and elsewhere. Using
    statistical, personal interview and survey data the immediate and
    longer term impact of their experience at NASA will be analyzed.

II. **Assessing the environment for female scientists at NASA.** By
    gathering and analyzing statistical data on past and current trends,
    and by conducting personal interviews and online surveys, we plan to
    identify those NASA practices which have been conducive, and those
    which present a barrier to the recruitment, retention and
    advancement of women in science.

It is important to emphasize that these two seemingly disparate areas of
focus of the proposed study are in fact interdependent and inseparable.
For many, if not most students, their time at NASA is their first, real
life exposure to life in the laboratory among professional scientists.
The number of female role models they see around them, the prevailing
climate for women and the level of confidence this experience at NASA
imparts to them for pursuing a career as a scientist must all make a
deep impression. First impressions are critical. So the climate for
women at NASA impacts the success of its education programs. And how
fruitful NASA's investment in these young scientists is feeds directly
into NASA's ability to recruit more women and correct the gender
imbalance in its own and the nation's scientific workforce.

## Technical Approach and Methodology: 

Issues related to recruiting, retaining and advancing women scientists
in academia have been studied in detail by several organizations such as
the National Science Foundation^1^, the American Institute of Physics^2^
(AIP), the National Academies^3^ The American Astronomical Society's
(AAS) Committee on the Status of Women in Astronomy (CSWA) publishes a
bi-yearly newsletter, entitled *STATUS*, dedicated to women astronomers.
CSWA has also convened important conferences which have led to a
community consensus on a list of recommendations: the *Baltimore
Charter*^4^ and the *Pasadena Recommendations.*^5^ While these have
provided a wealth of information on general nationwide issues and
trends, their emphases and therefore conclusions are specific to
academic institutions. We propose to extend this emphasis to NASA with
an in-depth case study of the environment for women in science at NASA.

Clearly, this is not a small undertaking. To avoid difficulties of an
unmanageably large and diffuse effort, we will focus the study in the
following fashion:

### Defining the Focus of the Project: 

-   The focus will be on ***[Goddard Space Flight
    Center]{.underline}**.* As the Center with the largest concentration
    of NASA scientists, Goddard provides a large enough sample space for
    a representative and statistically significant study. Other NASA
    Centers will be, however, invited to participate as observers from
    the beginning of the project. We will extend support in exporting
    the process and lesson learnt to interested Centers.

-   The focus will be exclusively on ***[science]{.underline}*** (as
    opposed to science *and* engineering).

-   While statistical data will be easiest to gather for scientists in
    the Civil Service, and while NASA policies and procedures for hiring
    and promotion etc. apply only to them, input from contractors and
    university affiliates is important as they are a sizable presence at
    Goddard. The investigation will thus focus on ***[Civil
    Servants]{.underline}*** and include ***[contractors and university
    affiliates]{.underline}*** to the extent possible.

-   The problem of the under-represented *minorities* is important and
    deserves a dedicated examination. While we focus the present study
    on *women in science,* we will consider applications of what we
    learn to minorities.

### Lessons Learnt from Prior Approaches: 

In 2002, the American Physical Society (APS) conducted a site visit on
the climate for women at Goddard upon the invitation of Dr. Jonathan
Ormes, then director of Goddard's Space Sciences Directorate. The teams
sent by the Committee on Minorities and the Committee on the Status of
Women chaired by Dr. Katherine Gebbie issued a report in December 2003.
The findings and recommendations of the report were based entirely on a
survey conducted by electronic mail (and some interviews). It did not
include analysis of statistics such as hiring and promotions. Moreover,
the survey was derived from the APS surveys for undergraduate and
graduate students, modified to address issues particular to the Space
Sciences Directorate at Goddard.

While the report led to greater awareness of the issues and inspired
useful dialogue at Goddard, it did not result in implementation of
concrete steps leading to noticeable impact. Dr. Ormes left Goddard
before the report was even delivered. Although some of the
recommendations of the Gebbie Report issued in December 2002 might still
be relevant, they have unfortunately faded from the institutional
memory. Moreover, significant structural change has taken place at
Goddard. The newly reorganized Sciences and Exploration Directorate now
includes both Space and Earth Science and is headed by a woman, Dr.
Laurie Leshin. From that standpoint alone, a fresh study is called for.
More important**, it is clear that a sustained effort including a
statistical aspect, with as much detail as the studies of academia cited
above, is needed**.

This project will use statistical, interview and survey data. It will
take a [sustained and iterative approach]{.underline} spanning three
phases over three years. The assessment of data collected in the first
phase will lead to initial action steps recommended in the second. The
practicality and impact of these steps will be then assessed in the
third phase and, in turn, will inform the formulation of the final list
of recommended [practical and actionable measures]{.underline}. As such,
this is a pioneering effort.

The work plan is discussed in more detail in Section 1.5. Below are key
elements::

### Key Elements of the Project: 

-   ***Statistical Analysis**:* Almost all recent reports calling for
    action on the issue of under-representation of women emphasize the
    importance of gathering and analyzing data as an indispensable first
    step. Statistical analysis is thus an essential element of this
    project. The Office of Human Capital Management (OHCM) at Goddard
    Space Flight Center will provide in-house statistical expertise (or
    recommend a contractor) to collect and process necessary data. For
    gathering tracking data on participants of Higher Education programs
    in compliance with the Privacy Act, we will use the database at
    Johnson Space Center (JSC) approved by the Office of Personnel
    Management (OPM).

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   ***An Advisory Panel:*** We plan to convene a committee consisting
    of external experts as well as individuals with relevant experience
    at NASA. The panel will guide the conduct of the entire study. In
    particular, it will perform the following critical roles:

    i.  Help design a plan for statistical, interview and survey data to
        be gathered.

    ii. Help analyze and assess the data. Recommend initial action steps
        based on this data. Identify critical areas requiring closer
        study.

    iii. Assess impact of steps recommended in Phase 2. Recalibrate and
         finally recommend concrete, practical measures with a potential
         for significant impact.

-   ***An Actionable End-Product:*** The entire project is directed
    toward *practical*, *actionable* recommendations to inform both
    education programs and as well the actions and practices of the
    community of NASA scientists, supervisors and administrators. The
    Office of Higher Education will implement recommended steps quickly.

## Perceived Impact of Proposed Work: 

This project is a pioneering effort which will shed important light on
NASA-specific issues related to the recruitment, retention and promotion
of women. This will be a first-of-a-kind in-depth assessment of the
effectiveness of NASA's role in preparing young female scientists. The
recommendations will have a potentially significant impact on the
ability of NASA's higher education programs to prepare more women for a
career in science and in helping NASA transform into a workplace that
provides women and men with an equal chance of success.

Below is an overview of the two recently published studies on women in
science cited earlier. They provide relevant data and insights. We then
provide some preliminary data on the status of women in science at
Goddard Space Flight Center and compare them with what is known in
academia. Finally, we pose a list of questions which require a more
detailed investigation.

### What Recent Studies Have Shown:

The studies by the National Academies and the American Institute of
Physics (AIP) provide a comprehensive view of women in science in
academia. The National Academies study published in 2006, entitled
"*Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in
Academic Science and Engineering*," is broad in scope and deals with all
fields of science and engineering. The second, by the American Institute
of Physics, entitled "*Women in Physics and Astronomy, 200*5" is focused
specifically on physics and astronomy.

#### Leaks in the Pipeline: 

*Science and Engineering in General:* According to the NAS study, women
who are interested in science and engineering are lost at every
transition point along the educational pipeline: From high school to
college, from college to graduate school, and from graduate school to
the first academic appointment, women opt out of science and engineering
at higher rates than men.

*Physics and Astronomy:* According to the AIP study, the only
significant leak in the physics pipeline occurs between taking physics
in high school and graduating from college. While almost fifty percent
of high school physics students are girls (although the numbers are much
smaller in Advanced Placement courses), only 25% of physics bachelor's
degrees are awarded to women.

The representation of women in physics and astronomy continues to
increase. In 2003, record high numbers of bachelor's degrees (22%) and
PhDs (18%) went to women. Astronomy, with a much higher representation
of women, has almost achieved gender parity at the bachelor degree
level, with 46% of all astronomy college degrees going to women. Women
account for 26% of all PhDs in astronomy.

-   **Representation and Advancement at the Faculty Level:**

*Science & Engineering in General:* The National Academies study notes
that the under-representation of women faculty in science and
engineering departments at universities across the nation is not simply
a problem of the pipeline. Several fields that have achieved gender

parity in the educational pipeline continue to be disproportionately
represented on faculty, especially at the full professor level.

*Physics and Astronomy:* Women in physics decrease at each higher level
in the academic career. In 2003, women constituted only 10% (while they
earned 18% of the PhDs) of the faculty. Only 5% of the full professors
of physics are women. (The AIP study, while acknowledging possible
uncertainties in analysis, attributes this to the lower rates of degree
production in the past rather than a leak in the pipeline.) In
standalone astronomy departments, women are 14% of the faculty. In both
physics and astronomy, women are relatively better represented at lower
ranks of the faculty.

-   **Hidden and Unhidden Biases in Evaluating Women**

The National Academies study reports on the vast body of research on
barriers limiting the hiring, retention and promotion of women. The
prevailing environment at academic institutions, male dominated for
years, either deliberately or more often unconsciously, continues to
favor men. Barriers are more pronounced in some fields despite a high
proportion of female doctorates.

Cognitive psychology has shown that most of us possess biases, of which
we are not aware but which play a considerable role in our judgment of
people. Results of controlled experiments show that on average, people
are "less likely to hire a woman than a man with identical
qualifications, are less likely to ascribe credit to a woman than to a
man for identical accomplishments, and when information is scarce, will
far more often give the benefit of the doubt to a man than a woman.^6^"
Research shows scientists are not free of such biases. The report points
out evaluation criteria at all points of a scientific career such as
hiring, salaries, promotion, awards etc. contain arbitrary and
subjective components that disadvantage women.

-   **Organizational Structures and Procedures**:

The organizational structures and procedures of an institution that on
the surface appear neutral may cause different outcomes for men and
women. According to the National Academies study, in the case of
academia such structures and rules are a built around the traditional
family model (which depends on a spouse who takes care of all household
responsibilities) and as such are a significant impediment to the full
participation of women in science in academia. Because women, by and
large, bear the major share of family, household and community
responsibilities, they face intense conflict between their family and
professional roles. Women quite often make compromises and choose not to
make use of available choices such as freezing the tenure clock for fear
of being stereotyped and being perceived as less productive and less
committed.

### The Status of Women at NASA Goddard: A Brief Preview

It is interesting to speculate if a photographer were to capture an
image of a meeting of Goddard scientists showing men and women present
in equal numbers, how many years in the future would we have to be to
consider it perfectly ordinary?

This project is concerned with studying the current trends and
identifying concrete steps for accelerating the progress toward such a
future. The charts below give a preliminary quantitative snapshot of the
recent trends and the current status of women in science at Goddard.

#### ![](media/image3.wmf){width="4.75in" height="3.247916666666667in"}Demographics of Science Workforce at Goddard: 

The percentage of female civil servants in Earth and Space Sciences at
Goddard has nearly doubled over the last decade from 10% in 1997 to 18%
as of March, 2007. In actual numbers, 1997 saw 35 women and 318 men in
Goddard's science civil service. Today, while the number of men has gone
down to 290, the number of women at 62 is roughly twice that of a decade
ago, certainly a positive trend. It is also encouraging that the
percentage of women scientists in the Civil Service is larger than that
of female faculty in Physics (10%) and Astronomy (14%). (The data for
Earth science related fields was not readily available for an
appropriate comparison.) However, as Figure 2 graphically depicts,
**there is still wide disparity with men highly over-represented and
women highly under-represented.**

-   **Distribution of Women and Men by Grade:**

![](media/image4.wmf){width="4.875in" height="3.33125in"}As was
discussed above, women in faculty positions decrease at each
successively higher level. How do the women at Goddard fare? The
following three graphs, Figures 3, 4 and 5, tell an interesting story.
Figure 3 shows the trend over the last decade in distribution of women
in three categories of grade levels: Grades 11, 12, and 13 (roughly
equivalent to assistant professor level); Grades 14 (\~associate prof.)
and 15 (\~full professor), and Senior Executive Service (SES,
\~department chair and above). In 1997, women were equally distributed
in Grades 11-13 and Grades 14-15. Over the years, while the number of
women in lower Grades (11-13) remained nearly constant, the number of
women in higher Grades (14-15) grew steadily. Today, there are roughly
three times as many women (44) in Grades 14 and 15 than there are in 11,
12 and 13 all

![](media/image5.wmf){width="4.875in"
height="3.3291666666666666in"}combined (15).

This is in marked contrast with the situation observed in academia and
indicates that women fare better at Goddard in terms of appointments
and/or promotions to levels of seniority. However, as can be seen in
Figure 3, only a wafer-thin slice of women is at the Senior Executive
Service level. Moreover, as Figure 4 shows, men still dominate in
numbers at Grades 11, 12 and 13; and overwhelmingly so at Grades 14 and
15.

-   **Leadership Positions:**

![](media/image6.wmf){width="5.5in" height="3.7506944444444446in"}The
disparity between men and women becomes sharply pronounced when we
compare their numbers in positions of leadership.

Figure 5 shows a plot of the number of Project Scientists, Deputy
Project Scientists, Principal Investigators (PIs), Supervisors and
Senior Executive Service (SES) (2006 data).

To fully understand the disparity implied by this graph, it is useful to
point out that the relatively smaller number of leadership positions
held by women is not explained by their smaller overall numbers at
Goddard. In the case of Project Scientists, in 2006, 100 of the 290,
i.e., 34% of the men held that position. While only 5 out of the
available 62, i.e. only 8% of women were Project Scientists.

Thus it is clear that while there are indications of a positive trend
toward an increasing representation of women in the scientific workforce
at Goddard, issues of gender disparity remain. It is the presence of
these indicators of disparity that constitutes the impetus for this
project. Although the Advisory panel will provide expert input to the
contours of the study, the discussion above suggests that issues
requiring analysis will include the following.

### Workforce Issues Requiring Investigation:

-   **Hiring Practices and Selection Procedures:** The data above, while
    showing a trend toward more women scientists at GSFC, do not shed
    sufficient light on the rate at which women are being hired. A
    closer examination, both qualitative and quantitative, is needed to
    find out how NASA's hiring practices and selection procedures affect
    recruitment of women. For instance, how has the sporadic ability to
    hire (between hiring freezes) affected the demographics? Are
    selection procedures inadvertently disadvantageous to women? Are
    selection committees aware of hidden and unhidden biases that
    research shows can creep into recommendation letters^7^ and
    evaluation of candidates?

-   **Retention:** An analysis of turnover data, i.e., losses and new
    hires is needed. As an indicator of retention, such an analysis will
    complement the interview and survey data on the climate for women in
    science at Goddard. This, along with advancement discussed below, is
    an area where effects of potential barriers implicit in
    institutional structures and rules, and sensitivity to cultural
    disparities in gender roles regarding family and community care can
    be measured. The Women's Advisory Committee at Goddard has made
    impressive strides in the installation of new facilities and
    services designed to make the balance of work and family life
    easier. This project will aid those efforts.

-   **Advancement and Awards:** A carefully designed investigation of
    possible gender differences in promotion rates would be
    illuminating. As has already been done in studies of certain science
    departments at academic institutions, data such as time in service
    at Goddard, number of publications, number of citations, and
    participation in successful proposals etc. can be used to compare
    promotion rates of similarly qualified male and female scientists.
    Other markers of evaluation such as performance ratings, and
    recognition such as cash and honor awards would be important areas
    of study.

-   **Leadership Positions:** As seen above, this is an area where
    gender disparities at Goddard are most pronounced. The framework of
    leadership positions, such as Project Scientist, Deputy Project
    Scientist, PI, Senior Fellow etc., is a completely NASA/Goddard
    specific feature. While women at Goddard fare better than their
    counterparts in academia as far as the proportion of women in Grades
    14 and 15, relative to lower Grades 11, 12 and 13 is concerned,
    their representation on positions of leadership is alarmingly low.
    This issue was raised recently by the Women's Advisory Committee. It
    is clear that a careful study of issues related to assignment to
    positions of leadership and a list of recommended practical,
    actionable steps could go a long way in correcting this imbalance.

### Programs of Higher Education:

The Office of Higher Education (OHE) manages HQ and Center programs at
Goddard Space Flight Center and develops new programs that enhance
NASA's education mission. Its programs deal with students at all stages
(past high school) of the academic pipeline leading to a career in
science. The proposed project fits squarely within the ambit of OHE's
responsibilities to students in the education pipeline and to smooth
transitions of students to the NASA workforce. Ideally it would be
funded from an Office research budget. However such budgetary
flexibility has

disappeared in the last few years with cuts, first in G&A and then CM&O,
and the need to

protect student programs.

These programs include the Undergraduate Student research Program
(USRP), the Graduate Student researcher Program (GSRP), the Harriet G.
Jenkins NASA Pre-Doctoral Fellowship Program for under-represented group
including women and the NASA Postdoctoral Program.

In addition, each summer, the Office of Higher Education hosts several
residential internship programs that bring close to 200 students to
Goddard. The students range from college freshmen to seniors as well as
graduate students. Generally the (K-12) Education Office has high school
interns. Interns are placed in laboratories at Goddard where they
participate in NASA research. In addition, some programs offer
additional educational opportunities such as lectures and field trips to
top research institutions and laboratories including NASA Centers. For
many, if not most of these students, this is their first, extended,
exposure to the life in the world of science.

Nearly half of them are women. A large number of these women are at that
critical stage in their academic career --past high school and prior to
graduation from college\-- which has been identified as the most
significant leak in the physics pipeline. For other fields, the pipeline
leaks at every academic transition point (as the National Academies
study has pointed out. Do Goddard's female interns drop out of science
at the same rates as the rest? We hope not. But we don't know. What
message do these young women take away from the time they spend in
laboratories at Goddard? Does the experience inspire confidence in their
potential as scientists and make science seem like an attractive career
option? We hope so. But we can't be sure. Are we fulfilling our mandate
to strengthen the future workforce of NASA and the nation, especially
those currently underrepresented, such as women? How will we know unless
we have a clear assessment of what works and what doesn't?

It would be extremely useful to draw on data that could inform the
Office Higher Education as to the effectiveness of its programs.
Unfortunately, at present, no such data is available. And while a lot of
work^8^ has gone into identifying specific steps academic institutions
can take to improve the environment for female undergraduate and
graduate students, little is known about the impact of research and
internship experiences such as those at Goddard and other NASA Centers.

To prepare them better and to eliminate potential barriers in their
entry, retention and advancement in a scientific career, we will seek
members of the Advisory panel with relevant expertise. Possible modes of
inquiry are discussed in the subsection below.

### Education Program Related Investigation: 

-   **Personal, entry and exit interviews** with female interns at the
    start and end of their research experience at Goddard. Interview
    women in other OHE programs.

-   **Follow-up interviews** about once each year asking briefly how
    they have done, are doing, and plan to do, since their time at
    Goddard. A three year effort at this should not only collect
    valuable data itself that does not now exist, but should be able to
    make the process sufficiently efficient that it can be continued
    into the future.

-   **Transition Point Tracking:** Three year data from these follow-up
    interviews should help us answer the question we posed earlier in
    this section: Do Goddard's female interns drop out of science at the
    same rates as the rest?

-   **Applications to K-12:** Additionally, the procedures could be
    adapted to other transition points. As mentioned above, fully half
    of the high school physics students are girls but less than a
    quarter of the bachelors degrees in physics currently go to women.
    Once the process with the post secondary interns is running well, we
    will explore the possibility of studying the transition to college
    of students in the High School Internship Program.

-   **NASA Pipeline:** Finally, we would like to measure the
    differential, if any, in the rate at which men and women who go
    through a research experience at Goddard are making it through the
    pipeline to join the scientific workforce at NASA. If such a
    differential is found to exist, it could be a call both for us to do
    better in preparing our female interns and as well for NASA to
    examine if any hidden barriers are hindering their entry into the
    NASA workforce relative to men.

## Relevance to NASA Programs and Strategic Framework:

This project is aimed at helping ensure the inclusion of a major sector
of society which continues to be under-represented in the scientific
workforce---women. The goal is to devise practical measures to increase
recruitment, retention and advancement of women in science at NASA; it
will address both the education and the workforce portion of a career in
science at NASA.

This two-pronged approach fits naturally into NASA's Education Strategic
framework:

1.  ***"Strengthening the future scientific workforce of NASA and the
    nation...especially those in traditionally underserved and
    underrepresented communities."*** The project will deal with the
    problems of a major segment of the population, women, in gaining
    full representation in the NASA scientific workforce. It will seek
    specific action steps that can aid in surmounting those problems. It
    will bring to bear the resources of the Office of Higher Education
    in the NASA Center with the largest science workforce. The effort
    will include co-investigators from the science workforce, ones in
    management positions, and ones with academic experience. It will
    include an outside committee to help ensure that its effort will
    make use of relevant work done in other venues. It will apply its
    results, where possible, to analogous problems of ethnic and other
    minorities.

2.  ***Attracting and retaining students in Science, technology,
    Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) disciplines.*** As discussed
    above, national data show that the number of women interested in
    pursuing science degrees continues to increase. However, many of
    these women choose to drop out of the field at various points along
    the educational pipeline. The information gathering processes
    developed, beginning with the follow-up surveys of interns should
    lead to recommendations for specific changes in NASA education
    programs and development of new NASA programs that can increase the
    yield to NASA of highly qualified women in science.

It should also be pointed out that the Office of Higher Education has
earlier undertaken a smaller effort, of which the present proposal is
the anticipated continuation. That effort, in fact was directed toward
the third major goal of the Strategic Education Framework, namely, that
of ***engaging students, educators, families and the general public in
NASA's missions**.*

In fall 2005, we launched a public lecture series entitled **"*Making of
a Scientist: Images and Reality*"** featuring some of the most
remarkable women in science and scientific leadership. The series
attracted students at all levels, male and female alike, educators,
scientists and members of the community. It featured Dr. Kathie Olsen,
the Deputy Director of the National Science Foundation and former NASA
Chief Scientist; Dr. Laurie Leshin, the Director of Sciences and
Exploration at Goddard, Dr. Meg Urry, the Director of the Yale Center
for Astrophysics and Astronomy and Dr. Anne Kinney, the former Director
of the Astrophyiscs Division at NASA Headquarters. In addition to their
scientific accomplishments, the speakers discussed their paths to
success, difficulties they faced along the way, and how they overcame
the obstacles. This series marked the first stage of the larger project
being proposed here.

[The project as a whole is thus aligned with the three major goals of
NASA's education mission.]{.underline}

## Plan of Work: 

This project is driven toward a single most important culminating
product: A list of *practical,* *actionable* measures to increase the
recruitment, retention and advancement of women at NASA.

It will address both the education and the workforce portion of a career
in science at NASA. We will foster support from all members of the
scientific community at NASA and solicit buy-in for these steps at all
levels of the administration.

#### Key Players: 

The effort will be coordinated by the Office of Higher Education at NASA
Goddard. The Equal Opportunity Office and Goddard's Women's Advisory
Committee (WAC) will be major partners in the effort. We will also seek
partnerships with professional and scientific societies, academic
institutions, other government agencies, and offices or individuals at
other NASA Centers and Headquarters with expertise in issues related to
women in science. We will systematically mine these organizations for
their experience, statistics, lessons learned and best practices. We
will draw on this expertise formally by recruiting especially qualified
members to the Advisory Panel---the body advising on study design and
analysis, and the list of actionable steps. The Advisory Panel will be
composed of experts external to NASA. The Office of Human Capital
Management (OHCM) at Goddard Space Flight Center will provide in-house
statistical expertise (or recommend a contractor). For student data, we
will use the OPM approved database at JSC.

#### Scope of the Project: 

-   The effort will focus on [Goddard Space Flight Center]{.underline}.
    Other Centers will be invited to appoint relevant personnel to
    participate as observers for all phases of the project. We will
    extend support in exporting the process and lessons learned to
    interested Centers.

-   The study will be limited to [scientists]{.underline} in the
    Sciences and Exploration Directorate.

-   The majority of the statistical data and actionable steps will
    relate to [Civil Servants]{.underline}. However, since [contractors
    and university affiliates]{.underline} are a significant presence at
    Goddard, they will be included in the study as much as possible.

-   While the proposed project is focused on [women]{.underline}, we
    intend to be alert to applications of this effort to the parallel
    issue of *under-represented minorities in science*.

### Key Milestones

The general plan of work consists of three phases each beginning with an
on-site meeting of the Advisory Panel. Consultation with the Panel will
continue over the year through teleconferences and other means of
communication

+------------+------------------------------------------+-------------+
| Phase I:   |                                          |             |
| First Year |                                          |             |
+------------+------------------------------------------+-------------+
| **Co       | **Action**                               |             |
| mpletion** |                                          |             |
|            |                                          |             |
| **Date**   |                                          |             |
+------------+------------------------------------------+-------------+
| Feb, 2008  | Form Advisory Panel                      | Project     |
|            |                                          | Staff       |
+------------+------------------------------------------+-------------+
|            | Invite other NASA Centers to participate |             |
|            | as observers                             |             |
+------------+------------------------------------------+-------------+
| June 2008  | Convene First Meeting of Panel at GSFC   |             |
+------------+------------------------------------------+-------------+
|            | Assess current status; interview key     | Advisory    |
|            | GSFC personnel                           | Panel       |
+------------+------------------------------------------+-------------+
|            | Recommend a study plan including         |             |
|            | statistical data, survey and interviews  |             |
+------------+------------------------------------------+-------------+
| June       | Survey female interns before and after   | Project     |
| 2008-Aug   | Summer '08 experience. Modify summer     | Staff       |
| 2008       | programs based on survey                 |             |
+------------+------------------------------------------+-------------+
| Aug 2008-  | Conduct Workforce Interviews and Survey  |             |
| May 2009   |                                          |             |
+------------+------------------------------------------+-------------+
|            | Begin a systematic process to learn from |             |
|            | other NASA Centers and HQs, federal labs |             |
|            | and other organizations with experience  |             |
|            | on the issue of women in science         |             |
+------------+------------------------------------------+-------------+
|            | Collect Statistical Data                 | OHCM/TBD    |
+------------+------------------------------------------+-------------+

+------------+-------------------------------------------+------------+
| Phase II:  |                                           |            |
| Second     |                                           |            |
| Year       |                                           |            |
+------------+-------------------------------------------+------------+
| June 2009  | Convene Second Advisory Panel Meeting     | Project    |
|            |                                           | Staff      |
+------------+-------------------------------------------+------------+
|            | -   Assess results of the Phase I         | Advisory   |
|            |     statistical, survey and interview     | Panel      |
|            |     data                                  |            |
|            |                                           |            |
|            | -   Recommend initial action steps with   |            |
|            |     potential of significant impact       |            |
|            |     workforce                             |            |
|            |                                           |            |
|            | -   Recommend new pilot programs and      |            |
|            |     modifications of existing OHE         |            |
|            |     programs                              |            |
|            |                                           |            |
|            | -   Identify areas needing closer         |            |
|            |     examination.                          |            |
+------------+-------------------------------------------+------------+
| June       | -   Brief GSFC Director's Executive       | Project    |
| 2009-June  |     Council (DEC) on Panel                | Staff      |
| 2010       |     recommendations                       |            |
|            |                                           |            |
|            | -   Implement summer '10 Higher Education |            |
|            |     programs.                             |            |
+------------+-------------------------------------------+------------+
|            | -   Track progress on implementation and  |            |
|            |     outcome of recommended action steps   |            |
+------------+-------------------------------------------+------------+
|            | -   Continue to collect information about |            |
|            |     similar efforts                       |            |
+------------+-------------------------------------------+------------+
|            | Collect statistical data                  | OHCM/TBD   |
+------------+-------------------------------------------+------------+

+-------------+--------------------------------------------+-----------+
| **Phase     |                                            |           |
| III: Third  |                                            |           |
| Year**      |                                            |           |
+-------------+--------------------------------------------+-----------+
| June 2010   | Convene Third Advisory Panel Meeting       | Project   |
|             |                                            | Staff     |
+-------------+--------------------------------------------+-----------+
|             | -   Assess new data and progress of        | Advisory  |
|             |     initial action steps.                  | Panel     |
|             |                                            |           |
|             | -   Recommend final list of concrete       |           |
|             |     action steps toward equal              |           |
|             |     representation of men and women in     |           |
|             |     science at NASA.                       |           |
+-------------+--------------------------------------------+-----------+
|             | Brief GSFC community and administration on |           |
|             | findings and the recommended measures.     |           |
+-------------+--------------------------------------------+-----------+
| June        | -   Implement final recommendations for    | Project   |
| 2           |     Higher Education programs.             | Staff     |
| 010---March |                                            |           |
| 2011        |                                            |           |
+-------------+--------------------------------------------+-----------+
|             | -   Track progress on implementation and   |           |
|             |     outcome of recommended action steps.   |           |
+-------------+--------------------------------------------+-----------+
|             | -   Write Final Report on information      |           |
|             |     gathered, steps tried and steps        |           |
|             |     recommended for the future.            |           |
+-------------+--------------------------------------------+-----------+
|             | Continue Statistical Data Collection       | OHCM/TBD  |
+-------------+--------------------------------------------+-----------+

### Management Structure: 

-   **Principal Investigator:**

Dr. Vigdor Teplitz will serve as the Principal Investigator for the
project. As the Chief of the Office of Higher Education (OHE), he will
take charge of implementing, or causing to be implemented, selected
recommendations. He will solicit both input and volunteers from among

GSFC women scientists. Dr. Teplitz\'s experience chairing Physics
departments, the recent addition to OHE of GSFC Minority University
Programs, and his marriage to a physicist, Dr. Doris Rosenbaum, have
given him a broad background in the issues to be addressed in the
proposed project

-   **Co-Investigators:**

[Ms.Mablelene Burrell]{.underline}

*[Dr. Pamela S. Millar]{.underline}* is the Science and Exploration
Directorate (SED) representative of the Women's Advisory Committee
(WAC), and has been a WAC member since 2002 and a supervisor within SED
since 2003. In this capacity, she will serve as the project liaison to
WAC and to Goddard\'s Office of Human Capital Management. The existence
of the WAC, its expertise in this area and its willingness to
participate in such efforts will be crucial assets in carrying out the
work proposed. Dr. Millar will oversee the statistical data collection
by an online survey of all female and male GSFC scientists and will head
the team responsible for one-on-one interviews of all Goddard female
scientists. Dr. Millar also runs the lactation lab in one of the newest
science buildings at Goddard used to support new mothers returning to
work. Having two small children of her own, gives Dr. Millar first hand
knowledge of some of the work-life balancing issues that pertain to
working mothers.

*[Dr. Lubna Rana]{.underline}* will assist Dr. Teplitz with all aspects
of the program. Her chief responsibility at GSFC/OHE is to design and
implement effective new programs. She has been attending conferences and
reading the literature on women in science for over a year. During that
time she has considered a variety of approaches toward increasing
participation by women in science at NASA. Her public lecture series,
\"Making of a Scientist\" of Fall 2005-Spring 2006 was a prelude to
formulating a plan for work along the lines of that in this proposal.
She herself is a woman in science. As a theoretical particle physicist
and as an instructor, she is aware of many of the issues firsthand.

[Ms. Lynne Slater]{.underline} is the director of the Equal Opportunity
Office at Goddard Space Flight Center.

# REFERENCES AND CITATIONS:

1\. See for instance the NSF website for "ADVANCE: Increasing the
Participation of Women in Academic Science and Engineering Careers,"
http://www.nsf.gov.

2\. Ivie, Rachel and Ray, K, "Women in Physics and Astronomy, 2005." AIP
pub.no. R-430.02.

The report is available online at
http://www.aip.org/statistics/trends/reports/women05.pdf

3\. "Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in
Academic Science and Engineering," Committee on Science, Engineering and
Public Policy, National Academies Press (2006). The Executive Summary is
available online at <http://books.nap.edu/execsumm_pdf/11741.pdf>.

4\. "*The Baltimore Charter for Women in Astronomy*", AAS Committee on
the Status of Women, Baltimore, Maryland, 1992. The document is
available on-line at http://www.aas.org/cswa/bc.html.

5\. "*Equity Now: The Pasadena Recommendations for Gender Equity in
Astronomy*," AAS Committee on the Status of Women in Astronomy,
Pasadena, California, 2003. This document is available online at
http://www.aas.org/cswa/.

6\. "*Beyond Bias and Barriers,"* National Academies Press (2206).

7\. Trix, Frances and Psenka, Carolyn, "Exploring the Color of Glass:
Letters of Recommendation for Female and Male Medical Faculty,"
Discourse & Society, Vol 14(2):191-220, 2003. See also Urry, Meg
"Diminished by the Discrimination We Scarcely See," Washington Post,
February 6, 2005.

8\. Whitten, Barbara, Foster, S., and Duncombe, M. "What Works for Women
in Undergraduate Physics," *STATUS,*

January 2005.