midlifemom

One thing being considered is having students view past simulations and reflecting on them. I’d love to hear other ideas.

From the same article: Gilligan’s (1982) argument that women speak in a different moral “voice” than men is a well-known example of the differences model. Women, according to Gilligan, speak in a moral voice of caring, whereas men speak in a voice of justice. Despite the fact that meta-analyses discon- firm her arguments for large gender differences (Jaffee & Hyde, 2000; Thoma, 1986; Walker, 1984), Gilligan’s ideas have permeated American culture. One consequence of this overinflated claim of gender differences is that it reifies the stereotype of women as caring and nurturant and men as lacking in nurturance. One cost to men is that they may believe that they cannot be nurturant, even in their role as father. For women, the cost in the workplace can be enormous. Women who violate the stereotype of being nurturant and nice can be penalized in hiring and evaluations. Rudman and Glick (1999), for example, found that female job applicants who displayed agentic qualities received considerably lower hireability ratings than agentic male applicants for a managerial job that had been “feminized” to require not only technical skills and the ability to work under pressure but also the ability to be helpful and sensitive to the needs of others. The researchers concluded that women must present themselves as competent and agentic to be hired, but they may then be viewed as interpersonally deficient and uncaring and receive biased work evaluations because of their violation of the female nurturance stereotype. A second example of the costs of unwarranted validation of the stereotype of women as caring nurturers comes from Eagly, Makhijani, and Klonsky’s (1992) meta- analysis of studies of gender and the evaluation of leaders. Overall, women leaders were evaluated as positively as men leaders. However, women leaders portrayed as uncaring autocrats were at a more substantial disadvantage than were men leaders portrayed similarly. Women who violated the caring stereotype paid for it in their evaluations. The persistence of the stereotype of women as nurturers leads to serious costs for women who violate this stereotype in the workplace.

This is pretty relevant: he gender similarities hypothesis stands in stark contrast to the differences model, which holds that men and women, and boys and girls, are vastly different psychologically. The gender similarities hypothesis states, instead, that males and females are alike on most—but not all—psy- chological variables. Extensive evidence from meta-analy- ses of research on gender differences supports the gender similarities hypothesis. A few notable exceptions are some motor behaviors (e.g., throwing distance) and some aspects of sexuality, which show large gender differences. Aggres- sion shows a gender difference that is moderate in magnitude. It is time to consider the costs of overinflated claims of gender differences. Arguably, they cause harm in numerous realms, including women’s opportunities in the workplace, couple conflict and communication, and analyses of self- esteem problems among adolescents. Most important, these claims are not consistent with the scientific data. http://wulv.uni-greifswald.de/2006_mw_forsch_gender/userdata/Hyde_2005.pdf

I think the issue isn't so much lightheartedly following a silly superstition. They can be fun and a way to bond. I think what people are objecting to is insisting that the superstition holds true because of anecdotal evidence when actual studies show there is absolutely no effect. That's where there is a disconnect since nurses are hopefully trained to understand that anecdotal evidence, even your own and no matter how compelling, doesn't count for much compared to a well conducted experiment. Religious beliefs are different in that you can't design a study to show that a god or gods actually exist.

I have a master in music as well! I'll be starting a direct entry Master's program in the Fall. I think it depends on the school but your science grades will likely mean more than the grades you got getting your degrees. And make sure you have other stuff to show them- leadership, volunteerism etc. Good luck!! And I have to ask, what is your instrument?

Agreed about living in the East Bay. I loved it and you could get an apt within walking distance of Kaiser. Try the Amabassador on Harrison.

Drive time from SF will be a lot more than that!! You to figure in traffic time, especially over the Bay Bridge. Definitely take BART. The BART Station on the Oakland side is a bit sketchy but I think there is a free shuttle to take you to Kaiser, which is on the edge of a really nice, fun neighborhood with great restaurants.

A week before the full moon plus the week of the full moon is half the month! The odds are pretty good. http://mblogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2007/07/31/full-moon-effect-debunked-again/

Confirmation bias.

Congrats on getting into the BSN! Sorry about the MN, but The end result will be the same. You are going to be a NURSE! :)I did get in and Im so grateful. I know everyone else who got as far as the interview was qualified as well.

Nope.

At least I can stop checking my email every 5 minutes for a couple days.

Not yet, you? I'm going crazy!!

Sometimes I think I did OK and sometimes I think I totally bombed. I can't stop obsessing over it! There are some things I wish I had said but was too nervous to think of at the time. I don't know. I'm overthinking it, going over it again and again and again in my mind.

I'm sure you did fine! Why don't you think so?