Mary Jane N. Shroyer
natherm at bcc.orst.edu
Sat Oct 14 03:41:44 EST 1995
On Wed, 11 Oct 1995, Meghann Douglas wrote:
> In article <45er8q$go2 at omnifest.uwm.edu> pbowne at omnifest.uwm.edu (Patricia S. Bowne) writes:
> >From: pbowne at omnifest.uwm.edu (Patricia S. Bowne)
> >Subject: interview attire
> >Date: 10 Oct 1995 17:14:50 -0500
> >In a discussion about science careers today, my students started
> >asking about appropriate clothing to wear to interview for a lab
> >job. What are your opinions? I was trained in an ecology-intensive
> >graduate school, and we hardly recognized anyone as a scientist
> >who didn't have mud on her hiking boots, but what do lab managers
> >see as professional interview attire?
> Science doesn't happen in a vacuum, therefore there will always be components
> dealing with funding agents, with teaching, and with the public. Employers
> cannot overlook these functions in their "pool" of human resources. While
> some may be large or lucky enough to have special staff to do these things,
> most do not. The result is that professional-looking dress (ie suit/business
> attire) is recommended. While it doesn't prove your scientific capabilities,
> it does create the impression of a well-rounded individual who is capable of
> carrying the ball in other territories, not just in the lab. Given a choice
> of equally capable scientists, employers look for capable spokespersons too.
Just curious.....would "professional-looking dress" mean "skirt" for a
woman? Does anyone else completely resent having to show your legs to
interview for a job? Grrr.
MJ (who hasn't worn hose in *years*)
Mary Jane N. Shroyer "Never judge a book by its movie.
Dept of Microbiology --J.W. Eagan
Oregon State University
Corvallis, OR natherm at bcc.orst.edu, natherm at ucs.orst.edu
More information about the Womenbio