My privileged postdoc: A story about a cis, heterosexual, white man in STEM

Drawing to the end of my two years at MIT it is time to look back and regard my postdoc through the lens of structure. As a researcher I am used to think in terms of individual achievements - I made this study, I taught this class, I got this grant - and forget that I work in a larger context. It's a sad fact that people are treated differently. My time as a postdoc - indeed, my entire career - has been made possible not only because my academic merits or personal capability, but by the unfair advantages I get just by being me. The least I can do is to acknowledge that. Let's count the ways.

Gender
I'm a man. This has given me an advantage in how I'm perceived and the behavior I meet. The committee that granted me my postdoc grant, the editors and reviewers that accepted my papers, students and collaborators, all have tended to see me as more credible and competent than if I had had any other gender. The only reason I could go abroad at all and leave the support network back home was that my wife agreed to stay at home with children for two years and take a break in her own career, a decision heavily influence by the gender roles both of us has grown up with. I never had to hesitate to go on a field trip, join the conference bar or otherwise limit the scope of my social interactions for fear of sexual harassment.

I'm cis. My gender is in sync with what people assume when they look at me. I didn't have to worry about getting correct medical care or if my gender would complicate my medical insurance or official documents. I have not hesitated to travel during my time her for fear of complications at the passport control. I haven't had to worry about peers and colleges "finding out" my gender status and react negatively. I have never been worried about being the victim of hate crime.

Sexuality
I'm heterosexual. My spouse and children were automatically included in my VISA and insurance. Our marriage has never been challenged, no one questioned the parentage of the child who was born in the US. I have never been worried about negative reactions to my sexuality. I have never been worried about being the victim of hate crime.

Skin color
I'm white and doesn't belong to a culture or nationality commonly discriminated against. I lived in USA during the Ferguson shooting. My very first month in Boston was during the marathon bombings and the massive manhunt that followed, yet I never feared for my safety or that of my children. My postdoc grant was awarded to me by a committee who was well aware that my name coded me as a Swede and I never had reason to debate whether I should include my picture in my CV or not. I have never been suspected of not belonging in my own department, regardless of the time of the day. I have never been worried about being the victim of hate crime.

Whenever I was overlooked or dismissed I didn't have to worry about underlying structures and could focus directly at the matter at hand. My imposter syndrom was never fueled by real discriminatory structures. The fact that I don't have had to worry about any of these factors is in itself an advantage that has saved me lots of time and energy.

There is more of course. All these factors have given me more advantages than the ones listed, many that I'm not aware of, and there are other factors as well. My age for example, which put me in the expected bracket for my career stage and doesn't exclude me from applying from grants, or my nationality that made the VISA procedure easy and made it possible for friends and family to visit, or my socioeconomic class that made my PhD possible in the first case. In fact, just about the only structures I can think of that have hindered me rather than being of benefit are the facts that I'm not a native English speaker and that I have a family to lure me away from the lab at night. But I think I have made my point.

"Privilege" is a loaded term, surrounded by controversy, but at its core there is nothing mysterious about it. It's all those little differences in how people are treated and perceived, every day, every week, every year, every stage of your career that accumulate and make a real difference. It's tangible, it's unfair and it's real.

So where do I go from here? Acknowledging my privileges is a good start but it will be of little help those who don't share them. Keeping an eye on my own behavior and biases is a good way to continue. How much time and space do I take in meetings, and on who's expense? How do I treat peers and students of different backgrounds? What structures exist at my university that reduce the opportunities for people without my background and how can I use my privileged position to change them? What do I do to challenge my own assumptions?

My postdoc has been many things. It has been a fantastic opportunity, it has been an adventure, it's been hard work and challenges - and it has been a privilege.

Some further reading.

http://conditionallyaccepted.com/2013/09/02/racism-sexism-academia/

https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~srugheimer/Women_in_STEM_Resources.html

https://tenureshewrote.wordpress.com/2014/11/13/im-not-taking-career-advice-from-old-white-dudes-anymore/

https://tenureshewrote.wordpress.com/2013/09/26/dont-be-that-dude-handy-tips-for-the-male-academic/

http://blogs.plos.org/absolutely-maybe/7-tips-for-women-at-science-conferences/

http://diversity.mit.edu/intuitively-obvious-videos/

http://harvardmagazine.com/2014/08/sexual-harassment-academic-fieldwork

http://www.reducingstereotypethreat.org/definition.html

http://smallpondscience.com/2015/02/02/a-conversation-that-can-help-protect-your-students/

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/20/opinion/science-has-a-sexual-assault-problem.html?_r=0

Teaching phylogenetics with DUPLO

I created a learning exercise for the MIT educational technique workshop. I wanted to chose a technique that activates the students and works as an introduction in an early class, and I picked the art and craft of making phylogenetic tree. I wanted to demystify what can be an abstract subject and give the students a tangible frame of reference.

My method of choice was DUPLO.

Intended learning objective: The student should be able to discuss basic principles for determining phylogenetic relationships based on quantifiable characters and be aware of the difference between core- and pan genome.

Method: The students are given photos of five DUPLO critters (or the critters themselves if you have enough pieces and they are not needed for a fire station). They work in groups with teacher available for questions to determine the phylogenetic relationship between five DUPLO critters. No additional information is given, and part of the exercise is for the students to discuss possible criteria for relatedness themselves. Hopefully they will realize that each column of blocks has two properties - color and frequency. After an hour the groups present their phylogenetic tree (for example by placing photos of the critters on a whiteboard with magnets). The results are discussed in full class.

Concepts to discuss:

Core genomes (colored blocks present in all critters)

Pan genomes (colored blocks present in only a subset of critters)

Choice of blocks to use for phylogenetics

Do order of blocks matter (chromosome rearrangement)

Construction of phylogenetic trees based on number of differences

Is there one correct tree? How do you know which tree is best?

Putting together this exercise I realized how important it is to keep your intended learning objective in mind while choosing the technique. It is easy to complicate matters, and when I put together the snails I had to restrain myself from adding levels of complexity and thereby obscuring the point I wanted to make. I also learned that education technique does not have to be high tech to be highly effective.

MIT's Diversity Summit 2015

Discrimination based on race, gender, sexuality and cultural background is a very real part of the academic culture. At the Annual Diversity Summit, MIT works to make visible both the diversity within the community and structures of discrimination. Under the banner "Hacking the community" panel debates and workshops invite to discussion and constructive problem solution. What are the problems and what can be done to address them?

I am impressed by the genuine effort MIT put into not only paying lip service to diversity issues but actually getting to the root causes and do something about them. This is a situation where MIT's can-do attitude is channeled in the right direction. It is clear that a lot of work remains to be done, but there is a real sense of increased awareness.

The most valuable part of the summit for me was the community workshop where we discussed how to construct a more respectful and aware community. We discussed how to challenge assumptions, how imposter syndrome hits harder at already marginalized members of the community, how different levels of networking- and mentoring organizations can counteract segregation and how discussion surrounding the #BlackLivesMatters movement still displays much ignorance about racial questions in the MIT community. We talked about how to be an active rather than passive bystander.

Keynote talk by institute community and equity officer Ed Bertschinger

#MITdiversity

Plickers as student activation technique

I tried Plickers for my latest virus lecture and I like it fine. It is like clickers without the need for extra hardware - a smartphone and an internet connected laptop is all you need.

You print a set of scannable cards and ask multiple choice questions. The students hold up the cards in one of four orientations and you scan it with your phone. The answers are tallied as a histogram and if you want you can keep track of individual answers.

Pros

Great activation technique, students pay attention and stay focused.

Free and easy to set up and use. Easy to control from the app without having to stay by the laptop.

Easy to train student to use.

Easy to get feedback.

A good alternative to powerpoint if you still want to show something on the screen.

Can also be used for quizzes by using personalized cards.

I've been told it is possible to use multiple devices to scan cards. I haven't tried it yet, but if it works that would make things much easier.

Cons

It's a hassle to scan all the cards. Especially if the students huddle in the back of the room like they always do. Consider having an assistant scan the cards for you.

You run the risk of punctuating your lecture with downtime while you scan the cards. Make sure you don't loose the thread. Practice.

The app lack some functions that should be pretty obvious, like the ability to rearrange the order of questions and an easy way to download the report histograms in bulk.

Tips and tricks

Make your first question for a new group "Can you figure out how to use the cards - the right answer is B or D". By the time I had walked the room to scan the cards all got it right. No further introduction of the system needed.

Wait at least a minut after displaying each question before you scan the cards. During that time I gave the background and led up to the question itself. While I scanned the cards I expanded on the subject, but without adding more vital information.

After each question, leave the answers on the screen and go through the alternatives in detail. Most of my questions were of the type ("spot the one wrong alternative") which meant that I had three true and one false bullet points to discuss.

Space the question so you spend time talking without fiddling with the app or having the students busy with the cards.

Use the last question as a summary. The question was "What confused you most this lecture" (could be expressed "What would you like to learn more about" if you're feeling less flippant). That gives you a handy way to get feedback, and ensures the students processes the main points of the lecture.

Collect and reuse the cards. You don't have to print them again for every lecture.

Plickers is not for every lecture - you would have a hard time to use them in a lecture hall sized room - but if you know your forum and want to have a handy activation tool I definitely suggest you try it out.

You are welcome here

There are many reasons why I'm proud to work at MIT. This is one of them.

http://yawh.mit.edu/

Small Stickers Make a Big Difference, Scientific American

American Society for Microbiology General Meeting 2014

ASM always reminds me of a microbial cell. Huge and complex and full of incomprehensible activity. An endless array of posters and talks and stressed scientist running to get to just that one session in time. But somehow it all works and you leave with new ideas.

This time I was in luck since the meeting was in Boston. Not being jet lagged or trying to sleep in an overcrowded hostel made wonders for my spirits. I presented my Single Cell poster the second day and had the rest of the meeting free to interact with a convention center full of microbiologists.

The Archaea session was very good with personal heroes like Christa Schleper and Sonja Albers. It is a rare opportunity to hear all available archaeal model systems presented in one session.

Opening speaker Ove Hoegh-Guldberg reminded us of the importance of our work with a status report of coral reefs in a warming ocean. Seen in his TedTalk:

Rolf Bernander (1956–2014): pioneer of the archaeal cell cycle

To say goodbye to your friend and supervisor is hard, as is losing someone you had hoped would keep contributing to the field for years to come. I will always be grateful to Rolf for teaching me not only how to run a micro array and a flow cytometer, but also how to think like a scientist. One of the first thing Rolf told me is that he is not leaving students behind. He would stand by me all the way to the PhD - and he did.

Goodbye Rolf, and thanks for introducing me to the coolest group of organisms in the world.

Obituary in Molecular Microbiology