Girls and Women in German Astronomy

Today is Girls Day in Germany, where young girls can take part in events all over Germany to learn more about jobs in science, IT and technical professions. We have a whole host of things happening here on the MPIA campus, although somehow I am missing out on the part where we make cryogenic ice cream. Darn.

What I will not be telling teenage girls about is the paper published by Heidelberg (dot-)astronomer Janine Fohlmeister and Christiane Helling of St Andrews in Astronomische Nachrichten, and posted to astro-ph today (timing: coincidence?), on the career situation of female astronomers in Germany. The results presented are based on a survey taken by 61 female astronomers, based in Germany or German but based abroad. It’s a typically bleak read: no female Max Planck directors in Astronomy, leaky pipelines etc. I have a few issues with the survey, mostly that (i) the sample is really very small, and (ii) we can only really assess how work-life issues affect women specifically if we ask men the same questions. And the authors do also state that as a limitation.

They present lists of recommendations, which are also very sensible:

a motivating, encouraging, acknowledging boss/super- visor who was a good mentor and trusted in abilities, and who helped getting hands on excellent data and who introduced into networks
finding projects as well as self-motivation and working
independently
having role models for different topics and life phases
attending and giving talks at conferences, colloquia and
seminars
successful applications for grants, observing time and
soft money
stays abroad and flexibility, and
colleagues who helped to advance.

although I’d argue these apply to both male and female PhD students alike. As a woman, you really need all the above, and a supervisor who respects you irrespective of gender and who will stick up for you when others don’t.

More salient are the anecdotes offered by women taking the survey of comments they’ve had directed at them by men. These made me laugh, but of course it’s really quite depressing.

1. General designation (unconscious or conscious prejudice):
1.1. I know you would like to work, but if all women would stay at home, we would have much less un- employment.
1.2. For a woman your seminar was good.
1.3. You must be the secretary.
1.4. Female scientists are more masculine than normal women.
1.5. Special programs for women discriminate men.
1.6. Good morning gentlemen.
1.7. Dear Sir.
1.8. Ha ha, that is the alibi/quota woman!

2. Women are not treated independently of their partner:
2.1.    The husband of this (female) applicant has a better position, so she does not need a job.
2.2.    Why you want more money? Your husband is working!
2.3.  Will you stop your PhD education now that you married?

3. Pressing into the mother-role:
3.1. You have a diploma [i.e., M.Sc. degree], why do you also want a PhD? Now you can go home and have children.
3.2. Women who give birth dont come back.
3.3. To a woman with children: The permanent position is for mister XY, he has to support his family.
3.4. She wouldn’t come anyway (for a job) due to the children.
3.5. It is better for the children if the mother stays at home.

If I had taken the survey (sorry!) I might have contributed a few classics from my own experience over the years. Sometimes these comments are meant the way they sound: nasty and prejudiced, but often they are said in good spirits or as a joke, and answering back creates more awkwardness than it’s worth. I just smile, mentally relive some noted scenes from Kill Bill, and toast my glass of wine to the morons of the world with friends later on.

But basically people: if there’s only one woman in the room, anything you say that singles her out as being different is a no-no. When in doubt, replace “woman” with “old guy”, “non-white person” or “disabled person” and if that feels wrong, just don’t go there.

 

What’s changing your game?

Segmented mirrors: a step change in astronomy (Image: TMT Observatory Corporation)

In a few weeks’ time I’m attending an EU-funded workshop in Marseille where a small group of scientists and engineers will come together to talk about new technology for observational astronomy. We’ll particularly discuss potential disruptive technologies, which are the most exciting kind: rather than just improve incrementally on the current techniques, a disruptive technology comes along and dramatically changes the way things are done.

A good recent example of a disruptive technology is data access from  mobile devices, whose potential was most beautifully and successfully captured by the iPhone. Mobile phones pre- and post-iPhone are entirely different devices. Who cares about voice anymore?

In astronomy, disruptive technologies over the centuries have repeatedly heralded big leaps in productivity from our telescopes: the introduction of the CCD in the 1970s-1980s; active optics and mirror lightweighting (and segmentation) in optical telescopes in the 1990s; the introduction of adaptive optics in the 1990s and naughties.

My own astronomy career started off with research into a disruptive technology: the fabrication of thin deformable mirrors, either for space-based active optics or ground-based adaptive optics, using lightweight carbon fibre-reinforced polymers (CFRP).  There are very particular joys and frustrations associated with this sort of work, after all it implies going against the grain and challenging an established paradigm. Also, technology is only disruptive if it actually works, so there’s a double hurdle to tackle. But working on something that you know might bring dramatic change is ultimately a lot of fun.

One thing I’ve learnt from talking to scientists and engineers from other fields is that technological innovation happens everywhere: in industry, in academia, in government, in people’s backyards and garages. It doesn’t even have to be a new gizmo: some of the most exciting innovations are new processes or methods. I’m doing a bit of reading around the web to get ideas, both from within astronomy and from other fields, at exciting technology that researchers are working on.

I wanted to pose the question here too: what is changing your game? What new technology is changing your field dramatically? What is your wish list for better productivity with your experimental facilities – be it telescopes, medical imaging devices, remote sensing cameras, or whatever thingybob I don’t even know the name of? Do you have any good reads on the subject? Please comment!

Size Matters (in a Word Cloud)

Astronomer Jim Geach at McGill in Canada put his coding skills to excellent use to create word clouds from the author lists of the top 500 astronomy papers (by citation counts) from ADS. He created clouds for each 15-year interval since 1905, I’ve shown the most recent 2 below. See his webpage for more info on how the images were created, and please complain to him if the size of your name looks smaller than your ego academic prowess.

The cloud for the last 15 years shows how the subject, or rather the citation counts, are dominated by extragalactic science. Also, not surprisingly, by men – high fives to the Drs. Kauffmann, Dunkley, Freedman, Faber, Ferrarese et al for heading up the women in the field in the last 15 years.

Author cloud, 1995-2011

 

Author cloud, 1980-1995

Kick-Off for ALMA

ESO‘s first call for proposals for the brand-new Atacama Large Millimeter Array earlier this year sparked a frenzy of proposal writing. Even though not all the antennae are in place yet, and the wavelength coverage is still limited, astronomers are hugely excited about the new millimeter facility coming online. The result of many years’ work by a huge international collaboration, ALMA is arguably one of the first of a new generation of mega-facilities in astronomy.

For the first round of observations, ESO requested short proposals rather than large programmes, particularly with some headline-grabbing potential to showcase ALMA’s capabilities to the world. With the start of observations just last month, ESO and its US and Japanese partners in ALMA, NRAO and NAOJ, organised some events for the press to welcome ALMA to the world. There’s been lots of nice media coverage of the array in its spectacular location and its first image.

I’m a little late to the story but as I keep seeing nice images and videos I thought I’d post a few things up here anyway.

Below is a video from Astronomy Now with Emily Baldwin at Chajnantor. The Guardian have this neat infographic about ALMA, and a good article-with-video. BBC also had a number of cool videos.

NOVA Lives/Utrecht Update

NOVA, the Dutch School for Research in Astronomy, has had its funding line renewed beyond 2013. The organisation announced the good news in a statement on Monday (in Dutch), with comments from Leiden professors Koen Kuijken, who’s Chair of the NOVA Board, and Ewine van Dishoeck, NOVA’s Scientific Director. The renewal is not unexpected, as NOVA last year received the highest possible rating of ‘Exemplary’ in its review. Only two research schools were awarded this grade in the Netherlands.

You’ll remember of course that Dutch astronomy was thrown into some disarray following Utrecht University’s announcement of the imminent closure of its centuries-old astronomy department. This must have made for a pretty interesting backdrop to any NOVA-related negotiations. Now that the funding renewal is official, NOVA has provided an official comment to Utrecht’s decision, calling it “extremely regrettable”. Unique expertise is in danger of disappearing and the loss of Utrecht’s Masters programme will have consequences for the entire physical sciences education at the University.

[Read more...]