Over at Small Pond Science, there is a thought provoking post about how to truly ‘diversify STEM fields.
If you want to truly diversify, then we need to stop trying to fill in the holes based on perceived deficiencies. Instead, we need to focus on training complete scientists. We need to fundamentally change our mindset about what a successful student looks like in a way that doesn’t reflect systemic inequities — and then enact a training and recruitment agenda based on that mindset. We can continue investing our time and resources trying to get URM students to look more competitive against white students from private universities.”
Interested? Read more here.
The March for Science has gained scorn, ridicule, and enthusiasm since the inauguration. Confused? Concerned? Want to help anyway?
Check out Science for the People, a new organization who’s primary goal is :
- Growing an international organization of STEM workers, educators, and activists who work to serve the people — especially in poor, oppressed, and marginalized communities
They give an excellent overview of the controversy and go into lots of interesting detail about the march, and what their goals are specifically.
During the Women’s March on Washington, a group formed called 500 women scientists. Their mission statement is to promote minorities and women in science and to make the inequality inherent in this system known. Read about them here.
Along those same lines, for international women’s day, a few female scientists (Krista Bywater, Kristy L. Duran, Rukmani Vijayaraghavan, Claire Horner-Devine, Kelly Ramirez, Jane Zelikova) posted this excellent post on Scientific American about how as women and minorities we are never just scientists.
Please read the post, and consider marching (as a woman, as a minority, or as a white male ally) in the March for Science on April 22.
While this is not a politics blog, the incoming administration poses a unique threat to scientific in the United States.
Hundreds of thousands of women will be marching on Washington tomorrow to raise awareness on a host of issues.
And at Scientific American, here’s a guest post explaining why Joan E. Strassmann will be marching.
I love Tenure She Wrote.
And SquirrelyRed‘s latest post about deadlines and how they impact female scientists is riveting.
Read about it here.
I had someone tell me the other day that if women were less extreme as feminists then people might not write them off as quickly. If we were quieter then things might change.
I so completely disagree with this statement that I will continue writing about the problems facing women in science indefinitely.
So, there is another new article about how women in science face consistent, ingrained, societally approved sexism and harassment in the workplace. Enjoy!
Margret Kosmala over at Ecology Bits has written one of the best work-life balance posts I have read in awhile.
The post titled “I am unwilling to relocate again (and it will probably cost me my academic “career”” presents the problems of the constant moving around that is expected in academia, and how we are expected to foot the bill.
While we have all heard about the two-body problem, and I have previously written about the one-body problem (one near and dear to my heart), she mentions the three or more body problem. The problem of finding affordable childcare, or moving away from family and playmates to help care for your children.
Importantly, she ends with the comment about how moving is expensive. In other professions, this is also true. But in most other industries, the company who wants you to move pays for it. In academia we are often (too often) left to foot the very expensive bill of moving all by ourselves.
Well worth a read, head over to Ecology Bits!