Skip to main content

Not Just for the Boys - Athene Donald ****

Physicist and Cambridge college Master Athene Donald takes on the complex and important issue of the gender balance in the sciences. We get plenty on the problem and the vast difference there is between the stats in the biological sciences, where there are more female than males entering the profession, and subjects such as maths, physics and computing, where females remain significantly in the minority. We also see how career progression, even for the biological sciences, seems biassed against female scientists.

What is less clear is the solutions. One of the essential contributory factors, for instance, how science is taught in secondary schools doesn't get as much coverage as it deserves. Donald mentions the important aspect of hands on - how taking part in experiments is an important introduction, but health and safety has made it far less part of the curriculum - but not how to overcome this. And there's no real mention of the way that school science, particularly physics, focuses on the boring stuff. For example, the physics of special relativity, with its implications of time travel, could easily be taught at GCSE level - far more exciting and interesting than the usual stuff.

Elsewhere we get a lot on role models - I've never really had a role model and am not convinced they make a big difference to life choices. But it could be just that I'm not the right kind of personality for that to be the case - reflecting that no one size fits all approach will work. Again, I think we could have had more about solutions than is provided. Where the book really comes alive is when Donald talks about her own work and experience - I suppose this is a kind of role modelling, but I think you already have to have got the science bug before this becomes of interest.

It is certainly true we still have a long way to go in some subjects, but I think there could have been some recognition of how far we've already come. When I did Part II experimental physics at the Cavendish, a couple of years behind Donald, there were only about half a dozen women in the cohort. Things have moved on. In the science Twitter I follow, female scientists and their work get lots of coverage. And though Donald says (without evidence) 'female scientists as talking heads on TV are still rare', I'd say (also without data) that's just not true anymore. Interestingly, when Donald mentions black hole imaging, it's female talking heads that were featured.

One thing that isn't explored is the impact of science fiction (and gaming for IT). When I talk to scientists, male and female, they often mention science fiction as an early stimulus of interest, and many computer scientists began their interest in the field as gamers. It would have been interesting to see how much the gendered attitude towards these areas leads through to those taking STEM degrees, and how this could be encouraged in female readers and technology users.

This is a really important topic than needs addressing. Donald does so effectively, though the book might have been more effective from a scientist or science writer with a bit more journalistic flair. Even so, it's a significant step in making sure the discussion remains highly visible, which may lead to some more concrete and effective solutions.

Hardback:   
Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...

The AI Paradox - Virginia Dignum ****

This is a really important book in the way that Virginia Dignum highlights various ways we can misunderstand AI and its abilities using a series of paradoxes. However, I need to say up front that I'm giving it four stars for the ideas: unfortunately the writing is not great. It reads more like a government report than anything vaguely readable - it really should have co-authored with a professional writer to make it accessible. Even so, I'm recommending it: like some government reports it's significant enough to make it necessary to wade through the bureaucrat speak. Why paradoxes? Dignum identifies two ways we can think about paradoxes (oddly I wrote about paradoxes recently , but with three definitions): a logical paradox such as 'this statement is false', or a paradoxical truth such as 'less is more' - the second of which seems a better to fit to the use here.  We are then presented with eight paradoxes, each of which gives some insights into aspects of t...

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...