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
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Roger Highfield - Stephen Hawking: genius at work interview

Roger Highfield OBE is the Science Director of the Science Museum Group. Roger has visiting professorships at the Department of Chemistry, UCL, and at the Dunn School, University of Oxford, is a Fellow of the Academy of Medical Sciences, and a member of the Medical Research Council and Longitude Committee. He has written or co-authored ten popular science books, including two bestsellers. His latest title is Stephen Hawking: genius at work . Why science? There are three answers to this question, depending on context: Apollo; Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, along with the world’s worst nuclear accident at Chernobyl; and, finally, Nullius in verba . Growing up I enjoyed the sciencey side of TV programmes like Thunderbirds and The Avengers but became completely besotted when, in short trousers, I gazed up at the moon knowing that two astronauts had paid it a visit. As the Apollo programme unfolded, I became utterly obsessed. Today, more than half a century later, the moon landings are
Post a Comment
Read more

Space Oddities - Harry Cliff *****

In this delightfully readable book, Harry Cliff takes us into the anomalies that are starting to make areas of physics seems to be nearing a paradigm shift, just as occurred in the past with relativity and quantum theory. We start with, we are introduced to some past anomalies linked to changes in viewpoint, such as the precession of Mercury (explained by general relativity, though originally blamed on an undiscovered planet near the Sun), and then move on to a few examples of apparent discoveries being wrong: the BICEP2 evidence for inflation (where the result was caused by dust, not the polarisation being studied),  the disappearance of an interesting blip in LHC results, and an apparent mistake in the manipulation of numbers that resulted in alleged discovery of dark matter particles. These are used to explain how statistics plays a part, and the significance of sigmas . We go on to explore a range of anomalies in particle physics and cosmology that may indicate either a breakdown i
Post a Comment
Read more

Splinters of Infinity - Mark Wolverton ****

Many of us who read popular science regularly will be aware of the 'great debate' between American astronomers Harlow Shapley and Heber Curtis in 1920 over whether the universe was a single galaxy or many. Less familiar is the clash in the 1930s between American Nobel Prize winners Robert Millikan and Arthur Compton over the nature of cosmic rays. This not a book about the nature of cosmic rays as we now understand them, but rather explores this confrontation between heavyweight scientists. Millikan was the first in the fray, and often wrongly named in the press as discoverer of cosmic rays. He believed that this high energy radiation from above was made up of photons that ionised atoms in the atmosphere. One of the reasons he was determined that they should be photons was that this fitted with his thesis that the universe was in a constant state of creation: these photons, he thought, were produced in the birth of new atoms. This view seems to have been primarily driven by re
Post a Comment
Read more