Girls on the Value of a Girls School

Last week, I analyzed the hypotheses set forth in an article entitled “Pseudoscience of Single Sex Schooling” in Science magazine. I tried to refute the article’s key arguments, including the fact that there is no definitive research on the value of single sex education. I promised that I would share with you our Upper School students’ perspectives on the issues raised by the article. To that end, I asked the for their personal views on the advantages and disadvantages of girls schools. While they identified some disadvantages, they outlined many more advantages.

On the negative side, they primarily cited lack of experience with boys, making them awkward or silly when they come in contact with the opposite sex. One suggested that the reading choices in English could be more varied, and one senior felt that girls were more likely to stereotype males when boys were not present.

On the positive side, they repeatedly extolled the self-confidence they gain, the freedom they feel to be themselves, the way they develop their voices and feel comfortable expressing their opinions, and the lack of distractions that allow them to focus on academics. As one junior observed:

There are many more distractions in coed schools and girls are afraid to be themselves and be intelligent. Simple things like getting dressed in the morning turn into wearing the right clothes, putting makeup on, and looking pretty every morning because boys are at your school. . . . At Holton, and many similar all-girls schools, I believe girls are not afraid to be themselves, ask questions, speak up in class, and they are able to participate to their full potential.

Like this student, many girls compared their experience in a coed school with their Holton experience, and they all echoed this girl’s opinion. A tenth grader who attended a local independent school before Holton said, “The academic environment is much more focused [at Holton]. At the coed school I went to before Holton, the guys in my class were very distracting and didn't really care about school or learning.” A new ninth grader took the lack of focus on academics in a coed environment a step farther arguing that, “most of the boys didn't value school as much as I did. They didn't take school seriously and in turn, neither did any of the girls (even the ones who really did like school, like me).” A senior described the advantage from a different angle, saying, “for me, learning at this age is more comfortable without boys. That's not to say I'm not challenging myself; being in the comfort zone socially lets me push myself academically.”

Unconcern about how they look and how they behave also recurred as a theme. A junior observed,

[W]e're all very casual about how we act and look outside of class. I haven't worn makeup to school since I came to Holton, except for perhaps a dozen occasions. We aren't afraid to sit all over each other in the nooks and lounges and people, when they need to, will cry on each other's shoulders without caring because they don't worry about people judging them all the time.

Similarly, a sophomore commented,

I also really like the fact that I don't have to really care about what I'm wearing (ignoring the uniforms) or how I look. I can eat what I want, say what I want, etc. without caring about what some guy thinks about me. This concept has also followed me out in public situations (don't worry, I'm still polite!). 

And the same from a senior:

Holton has helped me build my confidence and become my own person without worrying about what other people think. I feel I'm under less peer pressure here than I would be at a coed school because there's no one to impress on a daily basis. I think it's funny how for the first two weeks of school, the new freshman wear makeup, until they realize that no one cares how they look on the outside. They learn to focus on things that really make a difference. 

These girls believe that being at Holton has encouraged them to develop their own voices, and not having boys around has made that easier. As one of the juniors explained,

I feel like if there were boys in our classes, I would say very little in class discussions. I think that everyone watches what their "role" is more when there are boys there—they don't want to seem too outgoing, too shy, too nerdy, too ditzy, etc....

A new freshman said,

I also don't dumb myself down anymore, for fear of looking "too smart." In the classroom, I feel like it's okay to ask questions because I know that the other girls in the room are as curious as I am and are probably wondering the same thing.

Likewise, a senior attested to a similar experience. “At Holton you can say anything in class, answer questions, and give input without the worry of people mocking or judging you,” offered the senior.

Another junior highlighted the growth in her confidence that derives from feeling valued:

I certainly believe that a single-sex school has definitely helped me gain confidence and a voice (which I believe is MOST important in the society we live in today). . . . Holton has really showed me that my opinion counts and no one can take it away from me. 

A senior recounted similar development:

Coming from a coed middle school, it [i]s amazing how much I have grown in Holton's environment, not only as a student, but also as a person. Holton has made me realize that I don't need to be quiet and that I must seize every opportunity to voice my opinion that I can—and I'm not wrong. 

This sense of being comfortable both at school and in who they are permeates their lives. Another new freshman, who previously attended both all-girls and coed schools, declared, “Personally, having tried both coed and all-girls, I like all girls better. It's a more comfortable and open environment. At a coed school there's a lot more drama.” A sophomore put an even more positive spin on the all girls’ experience:

I love being at an all-girls school. I think we are not only more comfortable in the classroom, but also outside the classroom; we are able to act more like ourselves when we are separated from boys. I don’t think I would have nearly as much fun at school if I went to a coed school.

Our students strongly refuted the notion that girls schools exacerbate gender bias. Indeed, in general, their experience suggests the opposite. As a senior posited, "In a classroom setting, girls are allowed to voice their opinions openly because there isn't constant male presence reminding them about the stereotypical gender differences and biases.” One of the new freshmen had a different, but equally definitive, take on the issue:

As for gender stereotypes, I think this is totally false! I have met girls here with all types of interests, passions, and hobbies that do not fit those usually associated with girls. I think that people that have not, or do not, attend a single-sex school assume (like I did) that students in an all-girls school are all alike and act just like girls and all wear pink on free dress days. Maybe there are schools like that, but Holton is not one of them. 

A senior drew on her experience to address this question at some length:

I definitely don't think that Holton has reinforced gender differences or encouraged gender biases in any way. If anything, Holton has taught me to challenge stereotypes and "Find a way or make one." The school doesn't offer home ec[onomics] or knitting classes; it offers forensics and engineering. I remember when I took Intro to Engineering in 10^th grade, our class was featured in a Washington Post article on women in engineering. Some of the online comments supported women in a male-dominated field, but others were quite degrading, suggesting essentially that girls should stay at home and have children. Seeing these comments gave me a new perspective on gender bias. I had never been discriminated against because of my sex, and, at first, was a little shocked that someone would say something like that. But, because I was confident in myself and my abilities, I didn't give the nasty comments a second thought. Holton taught me to value my own opinion more than someone else's, something I'm not sure would have happened had I gone to a coed school.

We would expect that these Holton girls would be thoughtful about their experience here, examining the pros and cons. However, their responses make it clear that, regardless of definitive proof, the single sex environment provides for them important advantages that they recognize and treasure. 

The Value of All-Girls Schools Denied and Affirmed

Some of you may have read an article in The New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/education/23single.html?_r=1&emc=eta1) a couple of weeks ago about a new study refuting that any advantage exists for single sex education.   The group of psychologists, led by Dr. Diane F. Halpern of Claremont McKenna College, who conducted the study entitled, “The Pseudoscience of Single Sex Schooling,” published in Science magazine, argue that contrary to the findings of some other studies, including one by the U.S. Department of Education, as the subtitle says, “Single-sex schooling lacks scientific support and may exaggerate sexism and gender stereotyping.”[i]  Their thesis states the argument even more strongly:

We argue that one change in particular— sex-segregated education—is deeply misguided, and often justified by weak, cherrypicked, or misconstrued scientific claims rather than by valid scientific evidence.  There is no well-designed research showing that single-sex (SS) education improves students’ academic performance, but there is evidence that sex segregation increases gender stereotyping and legitimizes institutional sexism.[ii]

So this is another volley in the battle over educational reform, specifically the value of single-sex education.  What should we make of this study?  Let’s first look at what they have to say.

First, they argue that once all factors, such as socio-economic background and test scores upon entering a school, are taken into consideration, studies have not proved any advantage to single sex schooling.  Indeed, some positive results during the early stages of a reform or a new approach may be attributed to the fact that “people are motivated by novelty and belief in the innovation” which leads to “a short-term gain.”  Summarizing, they say:

In short, although excellent public [single-sex] schools clearly exist, there is no empirical evidence that their success stems from their [single-sex] organization, as opposed to the quality of the student body, demanding curricula, and many other features also known to promote achievement at coeducational schools.[iii]

They go on to debunk the brain research, particularly that sited by Dr. Leonard Sax whose book Gender Matters has been widely read (some of you have probably read it).  They state, “Neuroscientists have found few sex differences in children’s brains beyond the larger volume of boys’ brains and the earlier completion of girls’ brain growth, neither of which is known to relate to learning.”[iv]

Having dispensed with the research, they go on to claim that single sex education actually negatively affects students.  They argue that by definition segregating sexes leads to an increased sensibility to gender and therefore to gender bias.  Basically they are using the Brown v. Board of Education argument that separate cannot be equal.  They also posit that single sex classrooms “limit[s] children’s opportunities to develop a broader range of behaviors and attitudes.”  Finally, because there is no evidence to support the value of single-sex education, the public sector should not waste its resources on single gender classrooms or schools.[v]

Now let’s examine their assertions.  As far as the brain research is concerned, I actually largely agree with the authors.  While Sax’s book initially resonated with me, subsequently I have heard his work debunked by prominent researchers.  Plus I have long had misgivings about brain research supporting gender differences.  Historically, scientific research has often justified limiting women.  Think of 19^th c doctors who claimed that education would harm women because their brains couldn’t handle the strain; some even posited that too much education could cause infertility.  In addition, while current brain research is very convincing with its clear imagery of synapses at work, I imagine earlier generations were equally convinced by such scientific theories as phrenology (the study of lumps on the skull).  This is not to discredit all brain research by any means.  Indeed, we have much to learn from such research with regard to effective learning.  However, I don’t believe that it is definitive enough with regard to gender differences.

However, to argue that there is no proof for the value of single sex education, at least as it applies to girls, is not actually true.  The National Coalition of Girls Schools commissioned Dr. Linda J. Sax (no relation to Leonard Sax), Associate Professor of Education and a 2007-08 fellow at The Sudikoff Family Institute for Education & New Media at the UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies, to examine the impact of girls schools.  Like the authors of “The Pseudoscience of Single Sex Schooling,” Dr. Sax acknowledges the research on the effects of single gender education offers no conclusive answers, largely because it is so difficult to control for the various other factors that might equally well explain positive outcomes for students who have attended single-sex schools.  Using the Freshman Survey, a national survey of college freshmen from across the country conducted annually since 1966 by UCLA’s Higher Education Research Institute, Dr. Sax addressed this shortcoming in previous research.  She was able to mine a large set of data while controlling for factors such as family income, race, parental education, and high school academic programs.  The resulting study, “Women Graduates of Single- Sex and Coeducational High Schools: Differences in their Characteristics and their Transition to College,” “compares the backgrounds, behaviors, attitudes, and aspirations of 6,552 women graduates of 225 private single-sex high schools with 14,684 women who graduated from 1,169 private co-educational high schools.”[vi] 

Sax finds that even controlling for critical factors like family income, parental education levels, and the rigor of students’ high school curriculum, single sex education, particularly in a non-sectarian independent school (as opposed to a Catholic school), does make at least some difference in a number of key areas:

·         Greater academic engagement

·         Higher confidence in mathematical ability and computer skills

·         Greater interest in engineering careers

·         Stronger disposition towards co-curricular engagement, including participation in both student clubs and student government (but not including sororities)

·         Greater political engagement[vii]

Most of these characteristics are self-explanatory, but both academic and political engagement bear some explanation.  Based on the survey questions, Sax defines academic engagement as “time spent on studying/homework, studying with other students, talking with teachers outside of class, and tutoring other students.”  Before controlling for other factors, 62% of independent single-sex alumnae reported devoting eleven or more hours per week studying or doing homework in high school versus only 42% of their coeducational female peers; this distinction remained when individual and school backgrounds were taken into account. [viii] Those girls rated as politically engaged checked “very important” or “essential” with regard to keeping current politically.  They also indicated that they discussed politics with family or friends or in class occasionally or frequently.  In terms of the first question, 57.9% of graduates of girls schools qualified as politically engaged as compared with 47.7% of female coed alumnae, and again this difference persisted even after controlling for background factors.[ix]  Sax’s analysis does prove some positive effects of all-girls education.

Sax’s work should also put to rest the argument that single sex schools exacerbate gender biases.  In fact, her research suggests that by developing confidence in math and computer skills and encouraging girls to express interest in engineering, both at disproportionate levels, all-girls schools do the opposite; they counter prevailing gender expectations.  As Sax, whose research has all focused on women’s experiences in higher education, observes,

It is worth noting that most of these apparent benefits of single-sex education are in areas that have historically witnessed gender gaps favoring men. In fact, decades of research have shown first-year college women to consistently rate themselves lower than men on their academic abilities, especially when it comes to math and science, and to show less interest in politics (Sax, 2008). Thus, this study highlights areas in which single-sex education may help to mitigate longstanding gender gaps.

So much for negative gender stereotyping.

Finally, single-sex education in the independent school sector hardly qualifies as a novel idea.  While the last twenty years have witnessed the founding of a number of new girls schools, most enjoy histories like Holton dating back 100 years or more.  Certainly the nature of the education offered in these schools has varied over time and even today varies among us, today we universally embrace the goal of empowering women, or to use our phraseology, inspiring our girls to lead lives of influence.

I told the Upper School girls about this article and solicited their thoughts about the advantages and disadvantages of all-girls education based on their own experience.  Not surprisingly, I received a number of articulate, thoughtful responses.  I’ll share those with you next week.

---

[i] Diane F. Halpern, Lise Eliot, Rebecca S. Bigler, Richard A. Fabes, Laura D. Hanish, Janet Hyde, Lynn S. Liben, Carol Lynn Martin, “The Pseudoscience of Single-Sex Schooling, Science, 23 September 2011, Vol. 333, 1706.

[ii] Halpern et al, 1706

[iii] Halpern et al, 1706

[iv] Halpern et al, 1706

[v] Halpern et al, 1707

[vi] Linda J. Sax, Ph.D., “Women Graduates of Single- Sex and Coeducational High Schools: Differences in their Characteristics and their Transition to College” (Los Angeles: The Sudikoff Family Institute for Education & New Media, UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies, 2009), 6.

[vii] Sax, 52

[viii] Sax, 32

[ix] Sax, 40

How We Could Honor the Memory of 9/11 Victims

By the time you read this, you may have justifiably wearied of 9/11 observances.  However, I ask your indulgence.  Each of us who is old enough, everyone over the age of 14, probably, remembers where we were when we first learned of the attacks.  I was sitting at my desk in my office in bucolic Simsbury, CT.  My sister-in-law who lives in Washington called (very uncharacteristically) to report that a plane had flown into the World Trade Center.  Then I talked to my mother (I think she called me).  I felt sure that it was pilot error – sometimes planes flew into the Empire State Building, after all.  But, of course, it became clear all too soon that something very different, something completely inexplicable at the time, was happening.  Soon we called an administrative team meeting.  Some faculty were watching TV, but we asked that students not do so.  We decided to call an all-school meeting and tell the students what we knew, which was very little.  I remember not even being able to pronounce Osama Bin Laden’s name.  I reassured the students that we were very safe (the school even had its own water supply).  We resumed classes, while quickly determining whether anyone had family members who might be affected.  As it turned out, the only true possible casualty was a father who worked in the Pentagon.  We learned within hours that he was fine.  Meanwhile, my husband had flown on an American Airlines flight to LA the night before; I was quite sure he was fine, but I hadn’t talked to him since he had arrived.  I was also worried about my sister who works in Manhattan.  I don’t know when I learned that she was alright, but I do know I was in pretty regular contact with my mother.  I did eventually talk to my husband.  All this while trying, along with the rest of the country, to figure out what was going on.  Plus I had to decide how to move forward with a school of approximately 200 students, about 60% of whom were boarders, and a number of those international students.

In the weeks and months that followed the attacks, as the leader of a school, I felt that it was critical to balance, sometime precariously, between the surge of patriotism and the impulse to focus on relationships over materialism and consumerism on the one hand, and the need to try to understand what could have motivated the terrorists – while holding true to our American value of religious tolerance.   In many ways, the patriotism, the determination to defy the terrorists, to prove to the world that even a horrific attack could not bring us to our knees, was exhilarating.  As a New Yorker, my heart went out to that great city, and I knew if anyone could rise above the devastation and extraordinary loss, they could.  I applauded my students as they raised considerable sums for the families of the New York City firefighters who had died saving others.  I wore my American flag pins with pride.

At the same time, I made sure that as a community and as individuals we avoided condemning all Muslims for the attacks.  Our students naturally understood the importance of reaching across cultural and religious boundaries, and we all certainly learned more about Islam than we had known before.  A student from Kuwait offered immeasurable help on that journey, both by actively educating us and by providing for us a moderate, human face of Islam.

I think this was the response of most liberal educational institutions at the time. The effort offered promise in the midst of such stunned sadness and loss.

As we look back ten years, many commentators asked the question, “Has America changed since 9/11?”  Obviously, there are ways in which we have.  Probably increased airport security stands out as the most commonly experienced result of 9/11.  There have been changes in the structure of the government, in the way some agencies operate; we have been waging war for ten years, with wide ranging ramifications for the US military, for Iraq and Afghanistan, for the media and medicine, and most of all for the servicemen and women and their families, especially those who have died in those conflicts.  Nor will the lives of families who lost loved ones on that day or of those who were seriously injured ever be the same.   In no way do I want to minimize the impact of those changes, most especially for those families directly affected.  However, for most of us, I don’t think much has changed. 

In all the reflection and remembrance surrounding the 10^th anniversary, it was Georgetown President Jack DeGioia’s remarks that rang most true for me.  After remembering our losses as a nation and those  specific to Georgetown,  he recalled efforts similar to those we had made in a small Connecticut girls school: 

We remember our collective recognition -- across university campuses, in churches, in synagogues, and in mosques -- of the urgent need to know each other better. We recall the religious services and the interfaith vigils that followed September 11, 2001, and the renewed commitment made by so many to interfaith dialogue and to sharing knowledge across all religious traditions. 

It was in this knowledge -- with a deep respect for difference, yet a true understanding of the common goal among our faiths to create a world of justice, of peace, of freedom and of possibility -- that we began to take the first steps in the process of rebuilding. 

Ten years later, we live in a world where a Florida pastor threatens to burn a Koran; where activists from outside New York City, the community that suffered the most at the hands of the terrorists, protested the building of a Mosque and cultural center a few blocks from the World Trade Center site; where a presidential candidate has to defend his Christianity in the face of persistent claims that he is a Muslim.  To be sure, there were opposing voices in all these situations, but it was intolerance that dominated the airwaves. 

In the ten years since that beautiful and horrifying September day, we have mourned the dead, both from the attacks and from the wars, we have erected monuments, chapels, and memorials.  People have stitched their lives back together.  We have learned to put our toiletries into a quart size Ziploc bags.  We have also experienced the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, an event that may, according to one commentator, have more long lasting effects than the terrorist attacks. 

We have endured, but no more.  We have not been able to sustain the heady commitment to a common purpose that galvanized us immediately after the attacks.  We have not remained true to our immediate instinct to cherish our family and friends, to value relationships over things.  And we have not met “the urgent need to know each other better.” 

In fact, as a nation, we are mired in a culture of incivility, partisanship, and even intolerance that has been rare in our history.  As has been true during other periods of extreme divisiveness, such as the period before the Civil War, we are prevented from moving forward, from realizing the great potential that is this extraordinary nation.   This anniversary gives us an opportunity to reclaim the promise that the American spirit wrenched from those awful events, a promise we have since squandered, but which rests latent, waiting for our resolve, for our best selves to find. 

As President DeGioia concluded,  “… we are confident that by returning to the spirit of togetherness awakened in us that day, we will go forward as we did ten years ago: united in our remembrance, undivided in our respect, in our compassion and in our love.” 

That would do some justice for all the lives lost.   

Children Helping

I have vivid childhood memories of sitting on the damp concrete steps leading down to the kitchen door with a paper bag full of peas, lima beans or corn and a metal bowl.  It was my job to husk the corn or shell the peas or beans.  I remember learning to break the backs of the pods and scrape out the peas, along with the satisfaction of the perfect split of the pod and anticipation of the size and number of peas hiding inside.  Peas were fun (in the scheme of things -- being a child I didn't like these chores), but lima beans were really hard.  Even as I child, I loved lima beans, so it wasn't about the vegetable, but about how difficult it is to get lima beans out of their tough shells.  They don't break open neatly like peas.  I also learned how to iron a pillow case when I was six, was expected to make my bed every day, set the table, even sometimes help with dusting, weeding, washing the car, mowing the lawn, or sweeping the terrace.  I imagine these expectations were pretty typical for children in my baby boomer generation.  But they are not what we expect of our child and, while there are some parents whose resolve I admire enormously, I don't think that my husband and I are unusual in our relative lack of expectations.

There are a lot of reasons for this.  At least in my household, we have a wonderful woman who cleans and does laundry, relieving us family members of duties that my mother primarily, with some help from my siblings and me, performed.  It's also because as parents we have less time and patience for enforcing unpleasant responsibilities.  And I should be very clear -- I did not like doing chores and like any normal kid I resisted, procrastinated, employed avoidance tactics, so while I may have nostalgic recollections of shelling peas, I was none too happy at the time.

Over the last eighteen months or so, I have decided that we need to demand more from our now 15 year-old son in the chore domain.  I'm sure you'll say this is a little late to get started, but it's still better than never.  He has always had to set the table for dinner, but there is much more he could do.  It would be good for him -- he would learn how to do things that would be useful to him and helpful to me.  Plus there's the possibility that he could feel accomplished.

So several weeks ago, I was making pesto.  I love pesto, but pinching all those leaves off the stems can only be described as tedious.  Suddenly, I thought, my son loves pesto, too, so why doesn't he come help me.  He did so reluctantly, but we got through the process much faster and had time to chat while we worked.  It was a much pleasanter experience that working alone.  While he wouldn't admit it, I would like to believe that when he ate the pesto (which he puts on everything imaginable from pasta to hamburgers to sandwiches), that felt a small sense of satisfaction.

As my campaign has progressed, he has gotten to be a reasonably good dishwasher which means his father and I can relax a little after dinner.   He even took laundry off the line and folded it quite well the other day, saving it from an afternoon squall.  Now, if I can only get him to pick his clothes up off the floor. . . .

4th of July Parades

I grew up in a town where no one would have considered the 4th of July properly celebrated without the parade.  This was quite a formal event with high school marching bands, the volunteer firemen (we had two competing brigades) and police in dress uniforms, veterans groups, and  fraternal organizations all marching in step.  Then we moved to the next town east, and there the parade was a community affair.  Everyone dressed in red, white and blue, children decorated their bicycles with streamers, and dogs were expected.  The leisurely walk through winding lanes allowed for plenty of conversation among neighbors and friends.  The parade spilled onto a large lawn where the Good Humor truck failed to entertain squirmy children while a local dignitary gave an appropriately patriotic address. 

As an adult, I have lived in New York City, Southern California, north central Connecticut, and suburban Maryland, and I can tell you that a good 4th of July parade is hard to find.  However, I can happily report that on Block Island, they have a 4th of July parade that perfectly combines the two  versions I grew up with.  Anyone can create a float for the parade and entries range from a very professional looking replica of the ferry that transports people and goods to and from the mainland to vintage cars and trucks to a distinctly home decorated trailer whose intended theme was obscure.  This being the 350th anniversary of European settlement on Block Island, historical and birthday themes prevailed.  The entries are judged, with the Grand Prize awarded to a large group amusingly depicting important events in the Island's history: the cows who came off the ship at Cow's Cove in 1661, the Native American who greeted the cows, the arrival of tourists two hundred years later, and finally the 1994 founding of Froozies, the smoothie shop which sponsored the clever float.

The parade started at 10:30, but people claimed prime viewing spots with beach chairs as early as 8:00AM.  The assembled crowd, many waving flags and dressed in red, white and blue, cheered as the floats slowly progressed along the parade route led by, yes, the trucks belonging to the volunteer fire company.  Bagpipers in kilts, a fife and drum group  in shorts, the Norwich (CT) Free Academy marching band, a motley rock band, and a drum circle interspersed among the floats, members of the local American Legion post, and a very small contingent from the Rhode Island National Guard, played appropriately rousing music.  And don't forget the requisite unicyclist whom we saw arrive on the first ferry. 

This was a community event, wholeheartedly enjoyed by all generations, tourists, summer people, and Islanders alike.  When we stopped by a nearby bait and tackle shop later in the day, John Swienton asked me where we were watching the parade -- as it turned out, just a few hundred feet from where the Sweintons "always" watch the parade.  Likewise, friends from Dallas, renting a house for a week made sure they came to watch.  We legitimately worry about a disintegrating sense of community in the US.  But no one was "bowling alone" on Block Island this morning as we joined together to celebrate our nation's birthday with creativity, humor, and a little solemnity.  Maybe we should have more parades.

Lean In

Last week, I mentioned that while I was writing about Lisa Belkin’s thinking, I came across Sheryl Sandberg’s commencement address to the Barnard College class of 2011.  Currently, the COO at Facebook, Sandberg is married with two children.  She began her career at the World Bank, did a year’s stint at McKinsey, and then became Chief of Staff for then Secretary of the Treasury Larry Summers who had been her professor while she was an undergraduate at Harvard.  She went on to work at Google where she was Vice President of Global Online Sales and Operations before being lured to Facebook.  Sandberg, who has clearly faced the challenges of being a woman in the male dominated high tech world, exhorted the Barnard graduates to take on what she calls “this generation’s central moral problem, which is gender equality.”

Speaking to the all-female class, Sandberg declared, “we have to admit something that’s sad but true: men run the world.”  She went on to cite the litany of dismal statistics:

Of 190 heads of state, nine are women. Of all the parliaments around the world, 13% of those seats are held by women. Corporate America’s top jobs, 15% are women; numbers which have not moved at all in the past nine years. Nine years. Of full professors around the United States, only 24% are women. 

And, of course, that doesn’t include the 17% of Congress who are women and the 6 female governors. 

“You are our hope,” she proclaimed to her audience. And she was very explicit about how she wanted to the graduates to fulfill their promise.  She wanted them to “lean way into” their careers because, “We need women at all levels, including the top, to change the dynamic, reshape the conversation, to make sure women’s voices are heard and heeded, not overlooked and ignored.”  And this is my point about Belkin.  She certainly aids the cause by writing about these issues, but if change is going to occur so that her “emotional and economic tug-of-war” will not remain the “central story” for another generation, I agree with Sandberg that we must have women as part of the conversation. 

Sandberg offered some very pointed advice to her audience.  First, she asked them to shoot high, to aim for top level positions as their male counterparts would.  She makes that point citing studies indicating that “in the college-educated part of the population, men are more ambitious than women” from the time they graduate from college and throughout their careers.  In my favorite sentence from her speech, she pronounced, “We will never close the achievement gap until we close the ambition gap.” In a call to action, she challenged the graduates, “But if all young women start to lean in, we can close the ambition gap right here, right now, if every single one of you leans in. Leadership belongs to those who take it. Leadership starts with you.”

She went on to urge that the women not underestimate themselves, as we so well know girls and women are wont to do, giving credit to others or luck when they do well, blaming themselves when they don’t.  “Women,” she declared, need to “own their own success.” 

She’s not naïve.  She admits that career success is difficult for women.  As she learned firsthand, people still display hostility towards female successes.  And then there is the whole issue of the “second shift” that I talked about last week.  Her advice about equity at home so a woman can succeed at work is this:

the most important career decision you’re going to make is whether or not you have a life partner and who that partner is. If you pick someone who’s willing to share the burdens and the joys of your personal life, you’re going to go further.

Sandberg honors those women who have made the choice to raise their children full-time, work part-time, or work in a less demanding job (though, I have to say she’s not very convincing).  But she wants to make sure that the young women in her audience make those choices consciously.  With a thought-provoking angle on this issue, she observes that

Women almost never make one decision to leave the workforce. It doesn’t happen that way. They make small little decisions along the way that eventually lead them there. Maybe it’s the last year of med school when they say, I’ll take a slightly less interesting specialty because I’m going to want more balance one day. Maybe it’s the fifth year in a law firm when they say, I’m not even sure I should go for partner, because I know I’m going to want kids eventually.

She points out these women often don’t even have the responsibilities (like a partner or children) yet, but they are already “quietly leaning back” instead of leaning in. 

And if you lean back, she warns, you’ll be “bored” and soon you’ll feel “undervalued” because your full talents won’t be used.  And then you won’t really be interested in working (if you have that choice).  You also may question the whole “rat race” and someone else’s definition of success.  If that’s how you feel, she suggests that you need to question whether you are in the right field. Are you doing what you love?  You need to find work you’re passionate about (the way Belkin was about her job at The Times). “Try until you find something that stirs your passion, a job that matters to you and matters to others. It is the ultimate luxury to combine passion and contribution. It’s also a very clear path to happiness.”

So she pleads, “Do not lean back; lean in. Put your foot on that gas pedal and keep it there until the day you have to make a decision, and then make a decision. That’s the only way, when that day comes, you’ll even have a decision to make.”

I think Sandberg has great advice.  What she leaves out is that once her listeners are in a position to influence policy, they need to do so.  They need not just to accept the system as it is now, but they need to work to make workplaces friendlier to families, so both men and women can find more balance and more satisfaction.  They need to recruit male allies in this effort, and there’s indication that the men in their generation are willing to help.  They need to encourage revision in processes like academic tenure and law partnership.  They need to fight for better childcare and more support for parenting responsibilities.  And they need to find ways to do this that is economically and financially advantageous.  But to that I would say, at this point, because the women most able to “opt out” are the most educated, we are currently wasting a huge portion of our human resources because so much of our worklife is so unsupportive.  That seems to be a compelling economic argument right there.

However, it would be completely unfair to place all the responsibility for change on the shoulders of the next generation entering the workforce.  The Business Insider headlined Sandberg’s address, somewhat unfairly, “The Women Of My Generation Blew It, So Equality Is Up To You, Graduates.”  We need to stay in this fight, keep working towards more family friendly workplaces, and continue to provide leadership for these younger women to emulate.  As importantly, we need to mentor these younger women.  If we want them to lean into their careers, they need to feel supported, and we are the ones to support them. 

If we need a role model, we need to look no farther than French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde, Holton class of 1974.  When Lagarde visited Holton in 2007, quoting Madeleine Albright she said, “there should be a special place in hell for women who don’t support other women.”  On principle, when she has left a management position, she has replaced herself with another woman.  She believes that every woman should have the “accountability and responsibility” to do that.   Should she become the new Director of the IMF, Lagarde will have the opportunity to exercise that responsibility on an international scale.  We are keeping our fingers crossed.

The link for Sandberg’s speech:

http://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-coo-sandberg-the-women-of-my-generation-blew-it-so-equality-is-up-to-you-graduates-2011-5?utm_source=twbutton&utm_medium=social&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=sai