Congratulations to the Academic Women's Network that turns 10 this year. In honor of our own birthday, the Board is planning a celebration scheduled for Fall 2001. A committee has been formed to oversee the various events that are planned. The AWN10 Committee consists of: Linda Pike, Karen O'Malley, Diana Gray and Barbara Zehnbauer.

Dean Peck has given approval for us to sponsor an Academic Women's Week this Fall. The goal of this week will be to highlight the accomplishments of AWN and women faculty at Washington University. Events currently being planned include a symposium featuring the work of women faculty at Washington University; brown bag lunches on women's health issues and a gala dinner. An issue of Outlook Magazine focussing on the School of Medicine's women is also planned. Finally, we are working with the Public Affairs Office at the School of Medicine to develop other ideas that will increase the visibility of AWN in the greater St. Louis community.

Planning is just getting underway and suggestions for additional activities are welcome. Volunteers would be particularly appreciated. Contact Linda Pike at 362-9502 or pike@biochem.wustl.edu to get involved with this BIG EVENT!!

It should be immediately apparent to former readers of AWNings that the newsletter has a new look. This is due to the efforts of the Board of Directors, led by President Joan Downey and ably assisted by Diana Gray.

One of Joan Downey's goals for AWN for this year was to increase the visibility of the organization and increase membership. As part of that effort, the Board agreed that it was time to develop a formal logo for the organization. Donna Hagerty-Payne, a commercial artist was commissioned by the Board to generate potential designs. Initial designs were screened by the Board in November and finalized at the January meeting.

The logo (see below) consists of the AWN acronym with the words "Academic Women's Network at Washington University School of Medicine" beneath it. The A and N of AWN are in burgundy. The W is gold and consists of many small W's to represent the many women that make up the organization. Stationery and envelopes bearing the new logo are in production as is a Special Events sheet which will be used to announce AWN-sponsored events.

The new AWNings masthead incorporates the AWN graphic in its design while maintaining the mix of capital 'AWN' and small 'ings' that has become the trademark of AWNings.

As part of AWN's 10^th anniversary make-over, the Board also voted to establish an Honorary Board of Directors. This is a mechanism to acknowledge the support that AWN has received from these individuals in the past and thank them for their contributions to the success of this organization. The Honorary Board also represents a resource from whom the AWN Board of Directors can seek advice on issues as they arise.

Members of the AWN Honorary Board of Directors include: Linda Nicholson, the Stiritz Endowed Professor of Women's Studies, Washington University; William A. Peck, M.D., Executive Vice Chancellor and Dean, Washington University School of Medicine, Jessie Ternberg, M.D., Professor Emeritus, Washington University School of Medicine; and, Mark S. Wrighton, Ph.D., Chancellor of Washington University.

Despite the increased numbers of women receiving Ph.D.'s, the percentage of tenured women faculty in U.S. colleges and universities has increased at a snail's pace, but a proposal for a half-time tenure track might not only allow more women to compete, but also provide an equitable solution for all untenured faculty with work/family issues, according to a Penn State researcher. "Women have failed to rise in academics because traditionally, the ideal professional worker is someone who works for 40 years with no career interruptions, taking no time off for childbearing or child-rearing," says Dr. Robert Drago, professor of labor studies in Penn State's College of the Liberal Arts.

However, the childbearing years coincide with the tenure track years. Although women enter graduate programs in roughly equal proportions with men, they hold fewer than 15 percent of all tenured academic posts," says Dr. Joan Williams, professor of law, American University. "Women are much less likely than men to receive tenure. The rate for women receiving tenure in 1995 matched that of women in 1975, but the rate for men increased from 46 to 72 percent in the same time period."

Recently, some institutions have implemented policies to aid childbearing couples. These policies may include parental leave policies, reduced workloads for new parents, or temporary stoppage of the tenure clock. "However, raising a child takes 20 years, not one semester," says Drago. "American women, who still do the vast majority of child care, will not achieve equality in academia so long as the ideal academic is defined as someone who takes no time off for child rearing."

In the November issue of Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, Drago and Williams propose a redefinition of the ideal academic worker. Their proposal offers proportional pay, benefits and advancement for part-time work. In essence, a part-time tenure track. They suggest, "Any tenure-track faculty member with care-giving responsibilities for children, elderly or ill family members of partners could, with sufficient notice, request that he or she be placed on half-time status for a period of one to twelve years. Workload, including teaching, research, advising and committee work, would also decline by half." The tenure clock would run at half-time, but so would salary, benefits and advancement.

"Given the financial penalty involved, we expect that most academics would use the part-time policy for between two and six years," says Drago. A faculty member who went half-time for two years would have a tenure decision at the end of seven years rather than six, and the maximum time for a tenure decision would be a set number of years. The researchers suggest 12, but admit that if individual institutions thought that was too long it could easily be altered.

The researchers believe that restrictions need to be placed on those wishing to use the part-time track to deter researchers from going part-time simply to accrue more research time. However, they do think that health or personal circumstances that limit an individual's ability to work full time during the tenure years should be considered reasonable grounds for the part-time track.

From the university viewpoint, the proposed half-time tenure track poses no additional costs, especially if the cost-savings are returned to the departments to provide teaching coverage. The half-time track would also eliminate under-the-table practices that offer child-rearing time at full pay to women but not to men under the guise of maternal disability pay.

According to Drago and Williams, children are better viewed as a long-term commitment than as a disease. They also note that recent surveys show that fathers are increasing their expectations and desire to be active parents. "At present, academics have only two alternatives: work long hours and, with luck, get tenure, or refuse to work those hours and take the consequences," says Williams. If both parents could reduce hours without the penalties that now accompany part-time work, more families would choose a slower career path, rather than have one spouse work time and a half while the other drops off the career path.

"A half-time tenure proposal would also benefit colleges and universities," says Drago. "Current practices artificially reduce the talent pool by eliminating a hefty percentage of qualified candidates - most mothers - from reaching for or achieving tenure."

TOMORROW'S PROFESSOR LISTSERV is a shared mission partnership with the American Association for Higher Education (AAHE) http://www.aahe.org/ The National Teaching and Learning Forum (NT&LF) http://www.ntlf.com

Keep Politics out of Scientific Research

Research and transplantation with fetal tissue shows great promise for potentially lifesaving treatments of many incurable, debilitating, and life threatening illnesses. However, a recent editorial in the Post Dispatch stated, "this research that could benefit so many has been slowed by a few."

"Federal and state laws have been specifically written to ensure that a woman's choice to donate her fetus to medical research is made in an informed and ethical manner. First, she is legally required to give her written consent to have an abortion. Only after she has consented to have an abortion can she provide the necessary written consent to donate the fetus. She cannot be paid for the donation. She cannot know or designate the recipient."

"There are two principal laws and numerous state laws that apply to the use of fetal tissue for medical transplantation and research. The National Organ Transplant Act (NOTA) adopted by Congress in 1984, provides for research or transplantation." The NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 specifically authorizes federal support for research on the transplantation of human fetal tissue for therapeutic purposes, whether the tissue is obtained after a spontaneous or induced abortion or a stillbirth. Congress passed this act after President Clinton's executive order lifting the ban on federal funding for fetal tissue research that was put in place during the Reagan administration." (The above information comes from a Planned Parenthood fact sheet.)

However, Medical research with fetal tissue--regardless of its funding source--is still embattled. In its latest attack of research using fetal tissue, the anti-choice organization, Life Dynamics Incorporated, accused abortion providers of performing abortions to profit from the sale of fetal parts. Subsequently, the House of Representatives passed a resolution calling for Congressional hearings to investigate so-called "trafficking in baby body parts for profit."

In February 2000, a Congressional hearing probing allegations of illegal profiteering in the sale of fetal tissue to biomedical researchers appeared to lose steam when one witness recanted his charges and another failed to show up. Meanwhile, a panel that included a patient advocate and 3 scientists stressed the medical benefits of fetal tissue research and said they know of no researchers who are not scrupulously adhering to the law.

"If people are breaking the law, let's prosecute them" Rep. Henry Waxman has said.

There has been support for fetal tissue research from both political parties and from those who are pro-choice and anti-choice. "The right-to-cure debate", an editorial in the Post Dispatch wrote, "There has been support for stem cell research among some of the most adamant anti-abortion conservatives. Should the remains of a legal abortion be thrown away, or used to save lives? Eight years ago, Republican Senator Bob Dole answered this key question by saying that supporting fetal tissue research was "the true pro-life position." He had agreement then from such senators as Strom Thurmond and Connie Mack. Anti-abortion Republican former presidential candidate John McCain supports fetal tissue research, as does former Vice President Al Gore."

We cannot allow extremists to politicize medical research at the expense of potentially life-saving medical advances that could help millions of people. Stay tuned! Stay informed!

"The assumption behind mentoring - 'I'll tether myself to one person who will take care of me' -- is bankrupt. A better way is to build what I call a 'personal mosaic' of influences, experts and guides." Carol Betz, CEO, Autodesk, Inc., in Fast Company, 1999.

The challenge in mentoring is: how do I connect with mentors? This often appears a formidable task, especially for junior workers or faculty, and one they put off. Thus, they remain isolated and lacking essential knowledge about the formal and informal rules of career advancement within their school or organization.

There is a persistent myth that mentoring - beyond the student, postdoctoral fellowship or first job period - shows weakness. The fact is, mentoring is needed now more than at any time in history - employees no longer have the luxury of time to experiment and fail in this rapidly changing, productivity-oriented, very competitive environment. Whether you are at a junior or senior level assuming new and unfamiliar responsibilities, you need to get up to speed as quickly as possible. This means finding others to help you learn the written and unwritten rules of the road and new skills. Mentoring relationships thus help both individuals and organizations reach their goals.

"You don't need a single mentor who you keep throughout your career...What you need is a mind-set that allows you to learn from those around you, no matter who they are." Jean Otte, CEO WOMEN Unlimited, in Fast Company, September 1998.

To identify and develop successful, mutually beneficial mentoring relationships:

1. Clarify your needs as a mentee as crisply as possible. If you're vague about what you want, chances are you won't get it! Ask yourself questions like: Do I need a review of my curriculum vita or resume and strategic career planning? Do I need to learn skills of writing, presentations, time management, setting priorities, etc.? Do I need help in getting introduced and connected to people to enhance my visibility within my discipline, school or organization? Do I need advice on how to handle a difficult work relationship?

2. Identify possible people - they can be people above you, peers, or below you - who can help you with each of the particular needs you identified above. The functions of advisors, experts, mentors, sponsors, role models, preceptors, counselors, coaches, confidantes, etc. should not be equated. As Swazey and Anderson have said, "Although they have commonalties, they are not synonymous or interchangeable."

3. Recognize what mentors can and cannot do. They can: offer valuable advice; be a sounding board; provide a boost to your confidence; smooth your path; help you survive crises. They cannot: identify hot new trends; make your projects, experiments, teaching or clinics go well; guarantee clients, patients, publication, or grants; ensure you will be advanced rapidly; be available always on your schedule for your needs.

4. Respect the time limits available for mentoring in today's world. Some mentoring will be a one or two-time meeting to learn a specific skill. Other mentoring may persist until geographic changes make the time problematic. And a few mentoring relationships may last years, becoming truly equal partnerships.

5. And most importantly, recognize that mentoring is a mutually rewarding - not a child-parent - reciprocal relationship. Mentees have skills and an obligation to bring activities such as the following to the relationship: give mentors appreciation (how rare that is in our workplaces today!); build their reputation as a skilled and desired mentor; support each other in dealing with issues in both careers; provide trusted and confidential feedback to each other on agreed upon areas; develop mutually useful collaborations; and help each partner clarify goals.

With this in mind, how do you approach a possible mentor? The way NOT to do it is to ask: "Please be my mentor (for the rest of my career, implied)." Few will take on such expectations that can never be realistically met in today's world. The better way is to ask explicitly for what you have determined you need, and the time you estimate might be required. For example:

---"I like the way you handle conflicts among the team. Can you show me how you do it? I think it will take several meetings, with me asking you for pointers, and having you observe me with a particular situation and giving me feedback."

---"I need to learn what the promotion requirements really are here. The guidelines are pretty vague. Since you've just been promoted (or since you have just sat on the promotion committee, etc.), I'd appreciate your reviewing my curriculum vita and telling me what you think I need to attend to. And having a follow up meeting with you every six months or so to make sure I'm still on track."

---"I need help in setting priorities. I seem to be fighting fires all the time, and not getting what I know is important for my career done. Somehow you seem to be successful and serene with this. Can you coach me for the next three months or so in how to do this more successfully?"

It is also important to state (implicitly or explicitly) that as the reciprocal relationship develops, you will be available to provide whatever expertise you can. As Kreeger states, "networking [or mentoring] is first about building relationships. If approached with respect and honesty, there doesn't have to be anything exploitative, apologetic, or schmoozy about it." Remember, both parties bring value to networking and mentoring relationships!

In honor of AWN's 10th Anniversary, I thought that a written history of the organization was in order. Having been involved with AWN from the very beginning and having the benefit of all the back issues of AWNings, I decided to undertake the task.

Somehow as I sat down to write, I couldn't quite see doing it in the fashion of a scholarly history--writing down just the facts. AWN has always been more than just the sum of its parts for me. I have made many friends through AWN during the last ten years and have developed scientific collaborations with members of the group. More importantly, I have learned a lot about myself, women faculty and Washington University through my association with this organization. I wanted that to be part of the telling.

What follows, then, is not 'just the facts' but a biography of AWN from my own personal perspective. My goal is not only to recount our past but also to provide some personal thoughts and behind-the-scenes information to put the organization and its efforts into perspective. This has turned into a rather magnus opus so it will be published in several installments.

I have tried to include the names of all the individuals who have contributed to the success of AWN--and there have been many. I hope that I have not left anyone out. If so, please accept my apologies and the excuse that I was having a 'senior moment'.

Linda Pike

Editor-in-Chief

A Personal History of AWN

I. The First Year

By Linda Pike

On July 1, 1991, Rosalind Kornfeld became the first president of the Academic Women's Network at Washington University. It was not actually the beginning but rather the culmination of many months of work that started in the Fall of 1990.

In 1991, there were only 65 female faculty members at the School of Medicine out of ~600. And those 65 women were dispersed over 18 departments in two city blocks. Few departments had more than one woman and there was no mechanism for meeting women in other departments.

On a sunny afternoon in September, Vivian Braciale, Sue Cullen, Ellen Li, Sheri Tollefsen and myself met in Roslind Kornfeld's office. Our discussion focussed on a need to promote interactions among women faculty. Everyone at the meeting expressed a feeling of isolation and a sense that few of their male colleagues could understand the difficulties faced by women faculty. At the time, all of us but Rosalind were quite junior. We were mothers of young children and struggled with making our work and family lives compatible. We had no mentors who would proffer even the slightest amount of advice on what expectations were, when to say yes, when to say no and in general, how to play the game. Needless to say, there was also no one to go to for advice on what to do if your child wakes up sick when you have to give a lecture that morning and your husband is expected at a student's thesis defense at the same time (been there; done that.)

We were all married to men who were faculty members at Washington University. We basically got by, by picking their brains and listening to what their mentors told them. It was a frustrating experience for all.

On the surface, we did not accomplish much in that first meeting, but I think we would all agree that it was cathartic and reassuring that others found themselves in the same position. What we did decide to do was to explore the possibility of organizing some type of faculty women's group at Washington University.

Over the ensuing months, we had several more meetings of what became the AWN organizing committee. We agreed that there was a strong need for a group that would promote social and professional interactions among women faculty. It was clear from our own first meeting, that there was a tremendous amount of angst among women faculty. An organization designed to assist women faculty in making connections and finding solutions to our common concerns could go a long way in improving the quality of life for women faculty at the School of Medicine.

Our first job was to choose a name for our proposed organization that was both professional and informative. We wanted to stress the idea that it was an organization of professional women and also that it was a way to make contacts--to network. We finally came up with Academic Women's Network because it fit all the requirements and the acronym, AWN, had no negative connotations.

By the time we got around to naming our fledgling organization, the organizing committee was committed to making it a reality. But were other women interested? We decided to have an informal get together to assess the interest among other women faculty.

An invitation to the "first meeting of the ACADEMIC WOMEN'S NETWORK AT WUMS" was sent out to all women faculty at WUMS. It was printed on rose-colored paper. On the front, it sported a cartoon from Science (Science 249:1494 (1990) (see center) that accompanied an article about a meeting of women primatologists to which their male colleagues were not invited. (The gist of the article was that the women got a lot more done in the absence of their argumentative male colleagues.)

Inside, the invitation read "The female academic community in the School of Medicine is thinly dispersed, and a mechanism to focus our activities is needed. The purpose of the new Academic Women's Network is to promote professional and social interactions among the female academic faculty with the intent to discover and support mutual goals, and to assist and mentor female junior faculty and trainees in the pursuit of their goals. You are invited to meet with us and consider joining in this undertaking."

This first meeting of AWN was held on Sunday, October 28, 1990 at Rosalind Kornfeld's house. It was an afternoon tea. Every member of the organizing committee brought some type of cookie. I recall this vividly because it was the first of many instances in which AWN had a major influence on my life. Ellen Li brought chocolate chip meringue cookies. I had never had them before but instantly fell in love with them. Later that winter, I tried to replicate Ellen's cookies for my Christmas baking. While mine never seem to live up to my memory of Ellen's, chocolate chip meringue cookies are now a family tradition at Christmas.

About 30 women showed up for the affair, which was a great turnout given the low number of women faculty at the time. The overwhelming feeling was that the time was ripe for a women's organization and that there were enough women interested in joining to make this a worthwhile endeavor.

After that October meeting, the organizing committee went to work--designing a constitution and identifying a Board of Directors and a slate of officers to run the organization. A major push was made to identify women faculty and invite them to join our organization. We hit upon the idea of having a Spring recruitment dinner to which we could invite all women faculty. It would be an opportunity to meet women faculty from other departments and to hear a speaker talk on issues relevant to the concerns of women faculty. This is a tradition that has been retained to this day.

The first AWN spring dinner was held in May of 1991. It was held at Andre's Patisserie on Brentwood Blvd. (now long gone--miss those Sacher tortes). Our speaker was a visiting professor from Hilltop campus who was a historian with a particular interest in women's issues. We had provided her with a copy of our Constitution and our mission statement. Her talk at the dinner was memorable as she used this material to tell us how much these simple items told her about us, i.e. about AWN. I remember her particularly commenting on the fact that a part of our Constitution that deals with what is to be done with any monies in our treasury if the organization disbands. The section indicates that any such money is to be donated to St. Louis Children's Hospital. She thought that was an indication that even as we strove to improve the professional standing of women at WUMS, we still wished to retain something of the other side of our female identity.

By late spring, we had signed up about 50 members and we held our first election which included a ratification of our Constitution as well as an election of officers. Rosalind Kornfeld was duly elected as the first president of the Academic Women's Network in the Spring of 1991. Essentially everyone on the organizing committee also held a post, either as an officer or a counselor. We were six volunteers and we all went to work

. The first year of AWN was basically spent deciding what we were about. One of the first things AWN did was to compile a directory of its members and their clinical and research interests. It was felt that this would serve as a useful resource for women trying to identify individuals with like interests and for administrators trying to identify women for positions on committees (or even for administrative positions.) The first AWN directory was published in late 1991 and continues to be published biannually to this day.

In keeping with AWN's goal of enhancing communication among women faculty, we made the establishment of an AWN newsletter a top priority for the first year. This came to pass in March 1992 when the first issue of AWNings was published. I was the editor of that first issue and have continued in that capacity ever since--putting out a total of 33 issues including this one.

The first AWNings was a two-page document that included announcements of upcoming AWN-sponsored events as well as information on the Math/Science Network of St. Louis and the Women in Science and Medicine Program that was, at the time directed by Pat Cole. (It is now under the leadership of Leslie Kahl.)

Among the events sponsored by AWN during that first year was a panel discussion entitled "The Tenure Process at Washington University School of Medicine which included Bill Peck, Sam Wells, Ron Evens, Phil Stahl and Tom Woolsey as panelists. Also announced was a symposium called "Is Your Biological Clock Ticking" which included talks by Diane Merritt, Donna O'Shea, Diana Gray and Dorothea Mostello.

Also begun that first year was work on what has now become known as the Family Resource Handbook. This guidebook was the brain child of the AWN committee on Childcare and Maternity Leave, chaired by Elaine Krul. The idea was to compile information on available daycare facilities, resources for sick child care and schools in the St. Louis area. The handbook was modeled after a similar document from Harvard which was provided to the committee by Joan Downey. Joan Downey eventually took over as chair of that committee and was instrumental in pushing through an expansion and reorganization of the daycare facilities at Washington University and Children's Hospital. (More on that later).

The second AWN Spring Dinner was held on June 15, 1992 at Agustine's Restaurant on the Hill and featured Virginia Weldon as our after dinner speaker. It was attended by over 60 women, a major fraction of the total at WUMS. Dr. Weldon's topic was "Making an Organization Accessible". It was an interesting talk, given from the perspective of someone who knew both Washington University and Monsanto well.

At the end of AWN's first year, the results of the Medical School Committee on Pay Equity were released. The study indicated significant gender-based disparities in salaries at WUMS and recommended that steps be taken to increase the salaries of those women who were deemed to be underpaid.

Following the release of this report, the AWN sent a letter of comment to Dean William Peck. In the letter, President Rosalind Kornfeld expressed support for the Pay Equity report and the decision by the Dean and Executive Faculty to accept all of the recommendations proposed by the Pay Equity Committee. In addition, Dr. Kornfeld emphasized the need to recruit more women faculty to Washington University, especially for senior level administrative positions. She also recommended that steps be taken to foster the development of the careers of current women faculty. This was the first of many occasions in which AWN has called for measures directed at enhancing the representation of women at Washington University School of Medicine, particularly at senior levels. It has become a major theme of this organization.

The following are some sites related to faculty development that may be of interest to AWN members:

http://www.med.stanford.edu/school/facultymentoring/

http://infonet.welch.jhu.edu/policy/goldbook/ (full-time faculty)

http://infonet.welch.jhu.edu/policy/bluebook/bb_contents.html (Specific to Part-Time Faculty)

http://www.vcu.edu/teaching/bestpractices/medicinementoring/

http://www.hms.harvard.edu/fa/handbook/purplebook/

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/nr/2001/gender.html

http://www4.od.nih.gov/orwh/career.html

Targeted at women associate or full professors with clear potential for advancement to a major administrative position.