Heather Jamieson:" I wonder if an all-girls school makes a difference."

None of the initial advocacy group participants were scientists; many had dropped their math or chemistry in school. There's also a friend of mine who's an authority on alternate energy and energy pricing, and who appeared before the National Energy Board in very technical debates. She is a woman who has taught history at high schools all her life. So the notion that the bus to science comes only around once, and if you don't get math by the age of thirteen you will never be able to understand it, is mistaken. There has to be more motivation for girls in school than to pass their math and science courses "just in case..."

Jan: Do you think some of the women who are active as environmental advocates could be helpful within the school system, as far as giving girls a different view of science and technology?

Ursula: Yes. But that still reinforces the notion that you have to do it in school. I really doubt that anybody remembers anything they learned in grade ten. Do you remember?

Jan: No, I don't think so.

Heather: But, the bus schedule is not that convenient if you are a motivated person who wants to learn as an adult. You can't do a science or engineering degree at Queen's by taking evening courses and it's very hard to do part-time study at all because there are few evening courses in advanced science. That means a restricted education for women who want to return to university to study science as mature students, but who also have other responsibilities such as a family, a job, or both.

Ursula: But our reaction ought to be to say, "School isn't the one and only place to learn science." What you learn in school may, in fact, be out of date by the time you want to use it. Why not open a large number of opportunities for women so they can acquire the knowledge they would like in a given area? We must not treat them as little kids by saying, "You first have to do your long additions before we'll talk to you about science." I have always felt that one should, in every setting, encourage kids to learn as much as they can, but avoid the Aunt Good-For-You attitude. In my generation this approach was still used to advocate such things as learning Latin, as a way to make learning other languages easier. Latin would sharpen our minds.

Jan: What do you suggest to avoid the Aunt Good-For-You attitude?

Ursula: The pleasure of math! The pleasure of playing with numbers. Teachers might bring in more of the human element, such as the story of the German mathematician Gauss, who was a child at a time when a slate and chalk were used. The teacher tried to keep his class of students occupied for an hour or so by asking them to add up all the numbers from one to hundred. Gauss, reportedly a somewhat sullen and grumpy child, came to the teacher after a short time with the right answer. At which point he got a sound spanking because the teacher thought he had asked his older friends for the answer beforehand.

But Gauss persisted he hadn't done that. Eventually the teacher asked him to explain and, of course, what Gauss had done was added 99+1, 98+2, 97+3, etc., to quickly arrive at the correct number of hundreds. Any child you tell this story to, at the right stage in their learning, will say "Isn't that neat. I wish I'd thought of that." The pleasure of playing with numbers, that's what kids often miss in encounters with math.