Research paper on Progress of Women

Concerning educations some females would learn to write and read. When the husbands were away, they would be expected to manage business, gather taxes, keep records and pay bills. They would have required a capability to do math and to read and write, and, thus, an educated wife was treated as a precious asset. In spite of so difficult circumstances female scientists managed to successfully work even in the Middle Ages. One good example is Héloïse d’Argenteuil. Héloïse was a French scholar and also nun, writer and abbess. She was a famous scholar of Latin, Greek and Hebrew, and had a reputation for her cleverness and insight. By some point in the living, maybe as a teenager, Héloïse was recognized in Western Europe for her scholarship, and she became the student of Pierre Abélard (Peter Abelard), who was one of the most admired educators and philosophers in France. Abélard writes she was “most renowned” for her gift in writing and reading (Gornick, 39-112).

The Roles Played by Females in France in the 20^th and 21^st Centuries

In the 20^th and 21^st centuries France keeps presenting prominent scientists to the globe. For instance, Irene Joliot-Curie was a French scientist, a daughter of Pierre Curie and Marie Skłodowska-Curie and a wife of Frederic Joliot-Curie. Together with her husband she was awarded a Nobel Prize for chemistry for the breakthrough in artificial radioactivity. This made the family with most Nobel laureates to date. Both kids of Irene and Frederic are esteemed scientists as well.

Curie was born in France. After one year of customary education that started when a girl was ten years old, her parents noticed her clear mathematical talent and made a decision that Irene’s academic capabilities required more challenging environment. The girl joined forces with many well-known French scholars, counting French physicist Paul Langevin to create “The Cooperative,” a private assembly of the most eminent academics in France.

As Irene neared the finale of the doctorate she was asked to teach the specific laboratory techniques required for radiochemical research to chemical engineer Frédéric Joliot whom a girl would later come to wed. From 1928 Joliot-Curie and her husband Frédéric united the research interests on the investigation of atomic nuclei. Though numerous experiments they failed to translate the meaning of the discoveries, which were claimed by C.D. Ultimately, in 1934 they made the investigation, which sealed their spot in the history. Working on a work of Irene’s parents, who had isolated appearing radioactive parts, Joliot-Curies realized a dream of turning an element into another, making radioactive nitrogen from the boron and isotopes of phosphorus from aluminum and also silicon from the magnesium. The Nobel Prize brought with it fame and recognition from the STEM community and Joliot-Curie was awarded a professorship at the Faculty of Science (Des Jardins, 288-315).

The Barriers for Women in Science

In spite of the amazing accomplishments of current female scientists, even in the 21^st century ladies are really underrepresented on STEM fields’ faculties due to the mix of “not deliberate” biases and outmoded institutional policies. Generally speaking, numerous researches haven’t discovered any important biological dissimilarity between males and females in performing science that may account for the lower representation of ladies in scientific leadership positions in STEM fields (Wyer, 1-16).

Though females fall out of academic science at practically every degree of the pipeline, ladies are underrepresented on faculties even in spheres in which they have attained comparative equality. They make up just 15% of full professors in sciences and 14% in the life sciences, in spite of having earned more than 30% and 20% of the doctorates in those spheres more than thirty years (Schmidt, A24).  Females are likely to experience discrimination – rarely deliberately but usually unintentionally in practically each sphere of science. And minority ladies often experience a double discrimination. It results from a blend of built-in biases, which make them less likely to hire a female than a male with the same accomplishments, of evaluation criteria, which include random and subjective ingredients that disadvantage females.