Gender equality a quality issue

With discrimination sadly still being an active force behind faculty composition - especially at higher career stages - and with Sweden not being an exception however much we would like it to be, it is good to remind ourselves that gender inequality is not a "women's problem"- it is a quality problem that should concern everyone. When recruitment and quality assessment procedures are clouded by well documented biases (see below for a few links) we do not make a fair judgement of scientific value. If we let mediocre science slip by because the first name author is a man, or let superb science stand by the side because the principle investigator is a women we are not doing are jobs right.

Are we really going to be OK with that?

In academia we proudly defend our right to moderate our own, to assess quality and to determine scientific value. If we are to live up to that trust we have to take an active stand against discrimination, based on gender and based on other factors. We have to do more than notice the problem - we have to take active part, starting with our own biases.

A seminar on gender equality in academia organized by Lynn Kamerlin at Uppsala University lead to an constructive discussion about how to empower women in science with several good suggestions.

Educate everyone involved in application processes in the biases involved

Train yourself to be aware of your own biases

Form mentorship programs

Provide career support

Work actively to include women in panels and conferences, but avoid getting them boggled in busywork.

Critically evaluate who does what works at the department, big and small

Highlight outstanding women

Speak up about problems you encounter

Discuss discrimination as a science quality issue

We were also reminded not to lose hope. Even if the statistics can be incredibly depressing things are getting better. And we can make a HUGE difference for ourselves and those around us.

Test your own biases

Nepotism and sexism in peer-review

The different worlds of academia: a horizontal analysis of gender equality in Swedish higher education

Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students

Women’s equality in the Scandinavian academy: a distant dream?

Motivating the motivators

"Just tell me what will come on the exam... Just tell me the pedagogic tools I should use..."

A seminar discussing THIS paper led to an interesting discussion on teaching pedagogics. Many familiar classroom situations are recognizable also among the teachers themselves when they are taught pedagogics. There will be the highly motivated squad that uses every new trick and pedagogic tool, there will be those that are stuck in their rut and there will be the ones that only do minimal effort and would most of all like to get back to their lab. And just as we can use our fancy activation techniques to catch help students forward, you should be able to do the same with their teachers.

The thing is, teachers WANT to be good at what they do. That is part of our academic self image and, as Jerome K. Jerome reminds us, every kid wants to be the one with the pointer, telling the others what to do. And just as students, teachers want to take the easy road and just learn a few tricks when what they really need is to get into a new way of thinking.

What teachers need is again the same as what students need - supervision, help to build a culture and fora to foster communication. To what extent do course supervisors create meetings between their TAs? To what extent to heads of programs have teachers exchange pedagogic expectations with each other? To what extent do the university offer pedagogic courses and seminars?

There is a persistant idea that teaching is less valued than research. I feel the university fairly easy could take the edge of. To put it bluntly - if we are to feel that time and effort spent on education is valued we actually have to value it. At Uppsala University formal education in pedagogics is a requirement to teaching positions and it is part of the evaluation criteria for new hires. That is excellent, but more can be done. How about a fund for research money with educational professioncey as the highest prioritized selection criteria? That way researchers can put in the extra hours in education and still be able to send a PhD to a conference.