The Success of Life Julius Erving once said, “The key to success is to keep growing in all areas of life - mental, emotional, spiritual, as well as physical.” Success in one’s life is extremely important to them and those of the surrounding environment. A person’s success changes constantly, depending on many factors like outside forces and events that occur during their lifetime, starting from the day they were born into the world. Everyone is destined to fail at some point in life, but it is how one will react to failure that really matters. The obstacles a person faces, whether they are mental, physical, or social, will impact the outcome of their success. Success can differ because of someone’s mental state of health and mentality towards …show more content…
In recent years, studies have shown that the STEM (Science -Technology- Engineering- Math) field has an uneven balance of men and women due to bias and incorrect beliefs. The article “New UNESCO report sheds light on gender inequality in STEM education”, it is written that “Girls’ disadvantage in STEM is a result of multiple and overlapping factors embedded in both the socialisation and learning processes. These include social, cultural and gender norms, which influence the way girls and boys are brought up, learn and interact with parents, family, friends, teachers and the wider community” (UNESCO 1). Although it has since been proven wrong, women were once banned from STEM fields because they were ‘inferior’ to men. Unfortunately, some people still believe this and become a large obstacle standing in the way of gender equality in general. Their bias makes it hard for women to be successful, or to pursue their career in the fields of either science or math. In their article, “The effect of gender on research staff success in life sciences in the Spanish National Research Council,” authors Elba Mauleón, María Bordons and Charles Oppenheim write of women’s inequality: “Two main ways of action were recommended. On the one hand, the need to collect precise and reliable data regarding the situation of women in science, education and technology; on the other, the need for proper identification and further elimination of barriers and inequalities that tie women to certain scientific fields and also limit women’s access to the top ranks in the scientific career,” (Mauleón, Bordons, and Oppenheim 213). Here, the authors are suggesting that in order to help women overcome their disadvantage, more evidence should be collected regarding the situation before taking any action. If this were to happen, more would
Retrieved October 19, 2015, from Educational Research Complete. Summary: In Putting the “Her” in Science Hero Susan Wentworth tackles the misconception that only men can be scientists. Exposing children, especially girls, to scientists who are female is important because girls may not necessarily realize that a scientific field is an open option. In her plan of attack, Wentworth created a unit to allow student to gain exposure to a women in the field of science with Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence in mind.
Those who achieve success do in fact work hard; however, there are also countless other factors that play a role in one’s success. Therefore, reading this book opened by eyes to the complexity of success. It is not simply one thing that can lead a person to success. Instead, it is a culmination of many factors that can allow a person to have a successful
Success is something you attract by the person you become. For things to improve, you have to improve. For things to get better, you have to get better. For things to change, you have to change. When you change, everything changes for you.”
The underrepresentation of women in the academic fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, henceforth referred to as STEM, has piqued a momentous debate in which scholars have labored to explain the disparity. In exploring this debate, I attempt to identify the location of the truth, if there is one to be found from existing evidence, between the view that men are inherently better at STEM and the view that societal discrimination fabricates the disparity in STEM. My approach will be to evaluate the arguments of Dr. Steven Pinker, an advocate of the intrinsic aptitude and motivations theory, in contrast to those of Dr. Elizabeth Spelke, an advocate of the societal discrimination theory. Both Dr. Pinker and Dr. Spelke are Harvard cognitive scientists. In examining the two academic juggernauts’ arguments, as well as evaluating the scientific studies from which Pinker and Spelke draw their evidence, this paper attempts to show that Pinker’s case is altogether more compelling than Spelke’s.
Point out the main reason to why there is such a small amount of woman in these fields and what holds a woman back from achieving her goals in the science fields. The main reasons are Fear, society’s norms, starting a family, women’s role in a marriage and in a home, competition in the workplace and no encouragement from peers, teachers, family and co-workers and salary differences between men and woman. Pollack shares her own experience as a woman who has a science degree in physics and also the experiences of other woman in the science fields. Pollack shares the different ways men and women are treated during the time they attend school, university and
Most people believe the hypotheses is right, and teachers also follow this rule to educate their students. However, in the article, “Does Gender Matter”, Michael Kimmel explains the hypotheses is wrong. The society assume that women are innately less able than men, but there is no scientific support. Women are repeatedly told they are less good, their self-confidence falls and their ambitions dim. Kimmel believes that the confidence is the most important issue for a man to be successful whereas
Success presents itself as the individual ability a person holds, but those who are successful follow similar patterns that are greatly affected by opportunities, parentage, and cultural heritage. Gladwell explains that we owe our accomplishments in life to the Passion, talent, and hard work are important to create a successful life, but with that the need for a spontaneous opportunity allows for an extreme head start. In the Outliers, Gladwell showcases an opportunity that gave hockey players an advantage that could potentially lead to a major career. He states, “ Hockey players who make it to the professional level are more talented than you or me. But they also got a big head start, an opportunity that they neither deserved or earned
In conclusion, without failure and staying enthusiastic when we fail, there would be no success. Therefore, I agree with Winston Churchill that failure is a key part of success. If you keep your enthusiasm high even when you fail multiple times you will eventually have success.
In a community filled with male scientists, Jahren was cast out as unworthy and dense. “[P]asty middle-aged men … regarded me as they would a mangy stray that had slipped in through an open basement window” (Jahren 129). Because of her gender, the other scientists treated her as though she did not and was not a real scientist. Despite being discriminated against, Jahren still continued with her work. She did not let others’ opinions discourage her.
During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in Europe, many women were not only actively participating in scientific research, but they were making extraordinary breakthroughs that men before them had not been able to accomplish. This resulted in many different reactions and responses towards women scientists. First, many men thought that women had no place in science at all, and that women should be restricted to work in the household. Secondly, many women had to go against the societal norms at the time, and take part in higher education. Thirdly, many heated arguments took place between people who disagreed.
For example, young women aren’t often pushed towards subjects such as science, instead seeing roles like scientists in the hands of men. This is shown in media, such as television, and it shows in our actual society. According to Forbes, 60% of Bachelor's degrees are given to women, only 27% of computer scientists are women with Bachelor’s degrees. These statistics show that A Raisin in the Sun’s sexism is still relevant to
From Marie Curie to Rosalind Franklin, women throughout history have made some of the most ground breaking discoveries in science. From discovering the molecular structure of the DNA to understanding radioactivity, women have pioneered outstanding revelations despite having to deal with the oppression and sexism of decades. With so much capability and potential, women are still severely underrepresented in the science community— with more than half of its degree-holders being men. However, the question still remains: Why is the gender gap in American society so large in science and engineering fields?
When I was young, I never thought that I would want to have anything to do with a STEM career. I always thought that it wasn’t something that women did, and therefore I couldn’t do it. It wasn’t until I was in high school started learning more about science and hearing encouragement from my teachers that I realized that pursuing a career in science would be possible. Just like how Chimamanda Adichie says in her Ted Talk, “The single story creates stereotypes, and the problem with stereotypes is not that they are untrue, but that they are incomplete. They make one story become the only story.”
This brings domestic females in STEM fields extra stress and negative academic performance in the United States. In the article, Why Are There Still So Few Women in Science? (Written by Eileen Pollack, published at New York Times Magazine October 3, 2013), the writer illustrates the sex bias in the science field by providing the examples of female scientists in STEM fields. Meg Urry is a professor of Physics and astronomy at Yale University.
One of the most profound and incredible rewarding experiences for me about writing reflective journals is that it invokes in me the ‘ahaa moment’, the moment of Newton’s apple or even perhaps, the eureka moment of Archimedes. Increasingly, I have realized, with excitement that each time I engage in a deeper reflection I always have a sudden awareness and an insight about the readings vis-à-vis my own experience which I have never thought about. Such is the case when I read Enloe’s Chapter on Crafting a Global Feminist Curiosity. After my third reading of the chapter and upon reflecting on it, I suddenly said to myself ‘ ahaa, so, all the masculine design of agricultural tools, equipment, manufacturing factories, jobs, science laboratory equipment, and science experiments that we often take for granted are indirectly reinforcing the masculine hegemony. On further reflections, the question that came to my mind is: if we want to get more women and girls into Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM), what have we done to ensure that the tools and equipment used in those places are not designed with a male user in mind?