I really wanted to read this book because, as someone staring down my last year before defending my thesis, burnout is a very real risk in my life. Like many other graduate students and academics, I struggle with anxiety and depression. While these issues are partly determined by my genetic makeup and my life experiences thus far, they also ebb and flow with the tides of immediate external stressors in my life (#sorrynotsorry for the ocean imagery). I was hoping that Burnout would give me strategies to decrease my anxiety and be less susceptible to burnout, and I wasn’t disappointed.
Burnout is absolutely fantastic. It reads similarly to Come as You Are, with an abundance of pop culture references and tl;dr (internet speak for “too long; didn’t read”) lists at the ends of chapters to highlight the main points. It also employs a fantastic device that Emily Nagoski debuted in Come as You Are: stories from real women combined into composite characters that help the reader to connect emotionally with the science. These passages show us how the series of stressors we experience can combine to create a life that leads to burnout, and how the strategies in the book might actually be implemented, speed bumps and all. These composite characters are presented as friends of Emily and Amelia, and the narrative passages about them are complete with dialogue, jokes, and the very real way that friends tease one another. In a book about complex neuroscience, this composite character device goes a long way towards making the book easy to digest.
The series of stressors we experience can combine to create a life that leads to burnout
The book also contains plenty of worksheets to help you implement the strategies of the book in your own life. The first helps you decide if you should quit something (their examples include a job, a relationship, a diet, and substance use), there is another for identifying what is within your own control in your life, and the final one encourages you to take stock of how you spend your time—in order to find the time to get sufficient rest.
I have to admit that I didn’t take the time to stop and write out my answers to all these worksheets, but there was one activity that grabbed me by the shoulders and shook me. In the chapter on “Meaning,” the Nagoski twins ask the reader to remember times in their life that they have faced hardships, and identify the inner characteristics and the external support systems that allowed them to overcome those hardships. They ask us, as readers, to tell ourselves our origin story, and to frame the narrative around our strength and resilience. In my own life, I’ve faced a number of upheavals in my living situation and my close relationships. In nearly all of these periods, I’ve turned to reading. This prompt to write my story to myself inspired me to journal about how important reading has been to me throughout my life. It was an emotional and cathartic experience.
The authors’ approach to reframing failure is an extremely useful tool for early career scientists. They introduce the concept of a “little monitor” in our brain that has expectations about how long something should take or how rapidly we should move towards a goal. This brain system keeps us chomping at the bit to reach our goals, but can also derail us into a bottomless pit of frustration and despair when our progress isn’t fast enough. Their approach to overcoming this is to deal with the uncontrollable things in your life with “positive reappraisal.” They explain that “Positive reappraisal…means deciding that the effort, the discomfort, the frustration, the unanticipated obstacles, and even the repeated failure have value—not because they are steps toward a worthwhile goal, but because you reframe difficulties as opportunities for growth and learning.” So when you don’t get the fellowship/grant/job, or all your experimental creatures die, or your paper needs major revisions, you can see those challenges as roadblocks, or you can see them as difficult circumstances that simultaneously provide opportunities for deeper learning. To revise an old adage, many things worth doing are really, really hard.
Many things worth doing are really, really hard.
I was excited to read this book and wanted to write a book review of it for the SWMS blog, but somehow along the way, reading the book and writing the review became one more thing on my extremely long to-do list. As the seasons started to turn in Massachusetts in late March, my stress about the passage of time and how much I was getting done for my science was ticking up. My mental health was declining, so I wondered how I could even be qualified to write this book review. Well, lucky for me, I caught a nasty spring cold and was bedridden for two days. This little local maximum of burnout helped me to see the places I needed to scale back, or to simply give myself permission not to be perfect.
I stayed in bed for two days with that cold. During the first, I slept a lot and took a lot of cold medicine. During the second day, I worked from home and napped—I was completely amazed that I could get just as much done while sick as I would on a normal day at the office. And then I realized that I hadn’t gone to any meetings, and I hadn’t spent hours on email, and I felt somehow both productive and rested. Since then, I’ve struggled to find ways to preserve my energy, but I’m starting to see how important it is to take care of myself so that I can stay in this game for a long time. And now I’ve got a trusty guidebook that I can turn to for advice.
What better place to meet up with fellow scientists supporting women in marine science than at an international conference? This past winter, that very opportunity presented itself. Over 50 SWMS members attended a meet up at the Association for the Sciences of Limnology and Oceanography (ASLO)’s biennial Aquatic Sciences Meeting in San Juan, Puerto Rico. Attendees presented their research through oral talks, poster sessions, and workshops, but we made time for networking and socializing, too!
We held a SWMS meeting during the conference to bring current and new members together. It started off with an introduction to the organization’s inception in 2014 at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution from two of its founding members, Dr. Sophie Chu and Dr. Bethanie Edwards. Alexa Sterling, who started the first SWMS chapter at the University of Rhode Island, brought everyone up to speed on SWMS’s current goals and activities. Members discussed the diverse roles that SWMS plays in their communities and institutions. The organizers also solicited suggestions for directions in which to grow the SWMS network and to increase the impact of SWMS in the marine science field. Unlike chapter meetings and regional symposia, this international meeting allowed for cross-disciplinary discussion with members from all around the world.
One of our members shared her experience about the meeting, saying, “The SWMS meet up helped me realize the full potential of a female support network, and further encouraged me to become more involved with SWMS.”
Following the more formal meeting, some members continued their conversations at a nearby restaurant. They fueled their networking and discussions about their experiences in marine science with appetizers sponsored by the SWMS Steering Committee, including fried plantains. There were many new friendships formed, job opportunities shared, old friendships re-connected, and advice given across career levels. The SWMS member pool includes undergraduates, grad students, post-doctoral researchers, and faculty members, as well as people working in industry, non-profit, and government positions. This variety of perspectives allows for valuable discussions about marine science.
Hannah Morrissette, one of the leaders of the Horn Point chapter, said, “I truly enjoy being the co-chair of the UMCES Horn Point Lab chapter… SWMS is an incredible organization that fosters a supportive and encouraging environment. This group of women will no doubt change the attitude and prevalence of female researchers.”
SWMS is an incredible organization that fosters a supportive and encouraging environment.
It was great seeing so many scientists at this SWMS meet up and hearing their stories, experiences, and ideas, as well as learning about current marine science research being pioneered by women. We look forward to future international conferences and SWMS meet ups! If you are interested in seeing a SWMS meet up at a conference you’re attending or if you are a SWMS member interested in facilitating a meet up, please email us at swms.general.contact@gmail.com.
The Pod Post is a series of letters from the SWMS Steering Committee, sent out in our newsletter. You can sign up for our mailing list here. Pod = group of whales/seals/dolphins, post = letter!
Hi! I’m Chrissy Hernandez, and I am the Chair of the SWMS Steering Committee (SWMS-SC). That means that I convene and facilitate our online SWMS-SC meetings, keep us moving toward our long-term goals, and support the rest of the SWMS-SC in their specific positions (chapter engagement, mentorship program, research, communications). I’ve also helped to plan 3 fall symposiums at WHOI! We’ve realized that our lack of formal financial systems are holding us back from pursuing some of our larger goals. I’m working to figure out how we can move towards treating SWMS like a non-profit organization. This includes thinking about the income and expenses that SWMS might have over the next few years, and how to keep our financial system simple. SWMS is currently run by early career women, and we think it’s important to our mission that it stays that way. In the long run, formalizing our organization will allow us to broaden our reach and better serve our community.
On a more personal note, I’d like to share a bit more about who I am. I identify as a white Hispanic queer cisgender woman. Throughout my life, and particularly during graduate school, I’ve struggled with anxiety and depression. I love reading — I’ve already read 14 books in 2019! I’m a vegetarian and I really enjoy cooking for my friends. My PhD work focuses on larval fish, and ultimately I’d like to contribute scientifically to fisheries management and conservation. I currently live with my boyfriend, who is also a PhD student. Our favorite things to do together are bike rides and backpacking vacations.
I was born in Miami, FL, and grew up in the suburbs in northern New Jersey. My father is first-generation American; his mother came to the USA from Cuba shortly before he was born. My abuela (grandmother) still lives in Miami and doesn’t speak English. My father did his PhD when I was a kid, and my parents split up shortly after he graduated. Both of my parents are professors — my dad teaches history of Christianity at a seminary school, and my mom teaches math at a community college. I also have a younger brother who is doing his undergrad degree in philosophy at Rutgers University. I’m super proud of him and also grateful for the way he pushes me to think about the world differently.
Anyway, these are some of my influences, both in my scientific work and in SWMS. When we talk within and across identity groups, we build strength and resilience into our communities. I find community-building to be extremely rewarding, both in my graduate program, and through SWMS. And I think that a sense of community — both the feeling of being connected to others that are like us and the feeling of being valued for what makes each of us different — is what we are all looking for as SWMS members.
The first time I saw a whale, it was a sunny summer day off the coast of Gloucester, Massachusetts — the whale spotting capital of New England. Rocking gently with the boat, my eyes glued to binoculars, it took a long minute before I was confident the spray I saw was, in fact, a whale’s spout. When a whale breached a few minutes later, the other tourists on the whale-watching tour buzzed with excitement, and the tour operators exuded a palpable relief.
The naturalist Leigh Calvez also saw her first humpback whale off the coast of Gloucester, and adroitly captures the admiration and curiosity these giants can provoke in her new book, The Breath of a Whale. Part scientific exploration and part emotional narrative, Calvez weaves scientific research with her own personal journey from her days as a naturalist and science writer.
The book focuses on six species of whales — humpback whales, blue whales, gray whales, beaked whales, false killer whales, and orcas. She explores the habits and history of each species, including their complicated relationship with humans. Gray whales, as Calvez explains, were completely eliminated from the east coast, and nearly exterminated in the Pacific. Although commercial killing of whales was officially halted by the majority of countries in 1982, the practice continues—Norway and Iceland continue to allow commercial whaling, and Japan catches whales under the guise of scientific whaling. Indigenous communities in four countries, including the United States, also still hunt whales to support their families. (This type of subsistence whaling maintains indigenous cultures but specifies a catch limit, updated every six years, by the International Whaling Commission.)
But if you want to read a hard-hitting book about past and current whaling, this isn’t it. Breath of a Whale barely skirts these topics. Instead, Calvez explores newer cetacean research and our evolving human connection with them. For example, she describes research on low-frequency active (LFA) sonar tests, which disturb wintering humpback whales off the coast of Hawaii. Calvez, then a young scientist monitoring whales, recalls noticing a distressed calf, separated from its mother by underwater noise pollution during military sonar tests. The mother-calf bond is critical, and Calvez observed a total disruption in normal behavior because of the sonar tests. She reported it, but her observations were dismissed. Her feeling of helplessness ultimately led her away from science. (Further studies since then have confirmed that the US Navy’s sonar can cause whale deaths, and otherwise disrupt whale behavior.)
Throughout the book, Calvez has keen descriptions of whales’ advanced social behavior. Free Willy-fame aside, the importance of the family pod in a whale’s life is difficult to overstate. Orcas in particular have strong familial ties, living in groups with their mothers and sisters. Orca social structures are complex, with some populations remaining in a small area—known as “residents”—and some migrating. This complicates research and conservation efforts. Off the coast of British Columbia in the Salish Sea, for instance, Calvez describes how the southern resident population is in decline, with no births for over three years, while the transient population has actually increased. That’s in part because the southern residents’ preferred food, Chinook salmon, has declined drastically. The human impacts, like industrial dumping, runoff, and leaching chemicals into the ocean, also contribute to the problem. (In fact, half of the world’s orcas could disappear because of pollution.)
Some of the most striking sections in the book stem from Calvez’ remarkable ability to humanize scientific research itself. Scientists attempting to study whales can spend days, months, and even years without catching a glimpse of their study species. Remarkably difficult to study, a single whale can travel thousands of miles a year, and spend a large portion of their time under water. As a researcher studying how seabirds find food, I can appreciate the huge challenges these whale researchers face. I can walk up to a nest, pick up a bird, and attach a GPS in less than 10 minutes. Whales surface to breathe for sometimes only seconds, so scientists have to be poised and ready to attach a GPS to a whale’s back with a giant suction cup at a moment’s notice. Calvez explains how new techniques—like using GPS satellite loggers—are now helping scientists better understand whale movements, and recording the incredibly deep depths of their dives.
Though she does a good job explaining the nuts and bolts of cetacean research, equally interesting are the scenes where Calvez shows the connection between whale and human emotions. Just like elephants suffer from PTSD, Calvez argues that whales also experience distress and depression after traumatic events. Since gray whales can live as long as 70 years, she muses that gray whale calves born during the 1960s—when over 300 gray whales were killed off California—could still be alive and swimming with the trauma of those hunts. (Researchers now believe that Tilikum, the infamous Sea World orca that killed his trainer, exhibited symptoms of PTSD.)
JORGE VASCONEZ
Calvez, in fact, twines her own life story around that of Springer, an orphaned orca calf who appeared in the Puget Sound in early 2002. Springer became separated from her pod after her mother died in late 2001. (NOAA orchestrated an attempt to reunite the struggling calf with her family in summer 2002—a complicated operation that was ultimately a success.) Like Springer’s community came together to care for this orphan, Calvez chronicles how her own community cared for her when she fell into a coma on the very same day that an oil spill poisoned the Puget Sound in 2004.
Breath of a Whaleisn’t trying to be comprehensive—and I found myself wanting more information, not only on the whale species she introduces, but also on the ones she doesn’t. Right whales, for example, a species of the North Atlantic that produced no offspring in 2017, didn’t even get a mention. As a scientist, the human tendency to anthropomorphize animals is discouraged, and Calvez’ passion for whales sometimes distracts from the important science she recounts. Trained to ask questions, I double-checked Calvez’s sources as I read the book—but the facts she divulges and the scientific papers she summarizes are all accurate, leaving me eager to learn more.
Even for a skeptic like me, the book’s main success is connecting Calvez’ audience to a magnificent creature that so many of us rarely, if ever, see.
MIT/WHOI Joint Program students pushing the Corwith Cramer off the dock during the 2018 summer orientation cruise. I’m second from the bottom. [Photo Credit: Stewart Jamieson]By Henri Drake
Disclaimer: There are many high quality and comprehensive guides to allyship and I particularly encourage would-be allies to read those written by people from marginalized groups, such as this one. Nonetheless, I think it may be useful to other male scientists to read this information, as compiled by someone from their own group. Please feel free to contact me at hdrake@mit.edu or leave an anonymous comment.
Why should we care if there are women in science?
There is no evidence of gender disparities in intrinsic aptitude of science and mathematics. Despite an intrinsic equality in scientific aptitude across genders, societal pressures and expectations cause girls’ perception that women can be scientists to plummet as they age. For example, 70% of girls at age 6 drew scientists as women compared to only 25% of girls at age 16. These results suggest that women are both intrinsically capable of and interested in being scientists but that societal forces push them away.
Besides the moral argument that women should have equal representation to men in science, including women in science also means better science. Inclusion of women in science increases the scientific talent pool and leads to a more competitive and competent scientific workforce. There is evidence that diverse groups are more creative and produce higher quality work than homogeneous groups. Under-representation of groups (by gender, sexuality, ethnicity, disability, geography, wealth, etc) in science also means biased science – and it demonstrably hurts public health. Medical and environmental sciences, for example, are famously sexist and racist in focusing on the problems afflicting white men.
As ocean science becomes increasingly tied to public health through human exploitation of the ocean, diversity and inclusion will become increasingly fundamental to doing good science. Dr. Sarah Myhre referred to this in a recent Ted talk:
If we don’t have the courage to stand up for our own humanity, how will we ever have the courage to stand up for the humanity of the people that science is meant to serve?
While inclusion efforts must exist for all under-represented groups, this blog focuses on strategies for the inclusion of women in science specifically, though many of the conclusions and strategies can be generalized.
Allies recognize unearned privileges in their personal lives and in the workplace. Allies act on inequalities by taking responsibility to end patterns of injustice. Allies do this through supporting others, using their position(s) of privilege to bring visibility and tangible change to the systemic issues that differentially impact individuals, groups, and communities. Effective allies recognize their own histories of oppression and use them as a tool to empathize with others without assuming shared experience or shared oppression. Being an ally is not an identity, it is a role.
How to be an effective ally
1. Listen to women
Efforts to improve inclusion of women in science must be centered around women. Men have no way of understanding the barriers facing women in science nor of knowing effective strategies to overcome them without listening with purpose to the experiences of women. Being an effective listener involves three tasks: 1) actively listening to and processing what women say, 2) believing what women say, and 3) shutting up – except to confirm that you understand through rephrasing, clarifying questions, or other active listening techniques. Listening to lived experiences is not like listening to a scientific talk, when you consider flaws in the methodology or room for improvement – experiences are someone’s individual truth and thus inherently valuable. The simple act of listening to and acknowledging the barriers women face in science is validating and makes a community more supportive and inclusive. If your department’s women’s group (e.g., mine) has open meetings or your conference has a plenary talk about diversity and inclusion, I encourage you to attend, listen, and reflect.
Hi #Goldschmidt2018 if you aren’t at the plenary rn then don’t tell me you care about diversity and equity 😚
— Dr. Phoebe Cohen is pro-abortion (@PhoebeFossil) August 15, 2018
Listening also includes reading, and the onus is on men to actively search out and read about the experiences and recommendations of women. A good start is to read the National Academies’ 2018 report on Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
2. Don’t harass women
Sexual harassment leads to a variety of negative consequences for victims, creates a hostile work environment, and slows the scientific productivity of harassed scientists. Many organizations now recognize the harmful effects of sexual harassment on science and include scientific harassment as a harm of scientific misconduct. One way to be part of the solution of sexual harassment is to stop personally being part of the problem. For this purpose, it is convenient to separate sexual harassment into A) unwanted sexual attention and touching, and B) gender discrimination, although the separation is not always clear.
A) Unwanted sexual attention and touching (Come-ons)
Unwanted sexual attention (and the less common sexual coercion) includes everything from insidious verbal remarks to physical sexual assault. It should not need to be said, but all of these are unacceptable behavior and illegal under federal civil rights law (Title IX). Sexual encounters between unequal parties (e.g., professor and student or teaching assistant and student) are always inappropriate due to the inherent hierarchical power structures in academia, even if superficially “consensual”. Comments about a women’s appearance or sexually-explicit jokes do not belong in the workplace. Allies should gauge their women colleagues’ comfort levels in response to such remarks and be prepared to step in as active bystanders (see Section 3).
Prevalence and characteristics of sexual harassment
According to a recent survey (N=324), 65% of female graduate students experience sexual harassment during graduate school (of which faculty/staff perpetrate one-third and students perpetrate two-thirds). Contrary to public perception, sexual harassment is not all about sex; gender discrimination accounts for the overwhelming majority of sexual harassment. Unwanted sexual advances are also more often verbal than physical. Gender discrimination represents 65% of these sexual harassment incidents, compared to 15% for unwanted sexual attention and 9% for unwanted touching. The survey also links sexual harassment to harm: sexual harassment by both faculty/staff and students is associated with decreased perceptions of safety and sexual harassment by faculty/staff in particular is associated with perceptions of institutional betrayal.
3. Be an active bystander
Being an ally involves not only acknowledging your own mistakes and their consequences, but also those of others in your privileged group. An ally is an active bystander, someone who witnesses harassment or discrimination and actively steps in to diffuse the situation and support the targeted party. Harassers should be directly confronted or called out so long as victims are not put in more danger by these actions. The priority of an active bystander is always to support the targeted party and ensure their safety rather than punish the perpetrator. This can be as simple as asking them if they are okay or if there’s anything you can do to help. Everyone should take an active bystander training course to learn specific strategies for both diffusing situations and supporting targeted parties.
Active bystanders constantly pay attention to social interactions around them and step in when someone is uncomfortable or in danger. For example, an active bystander might interrupt an aggressive conference questioner by suggesting to move on to another question “in the interest of time” or they might make up an excuse for a friend to leave a room to stop a potential sexual assault before it occurs.
Being an active bystander also means knowing the relevant resources so that you can adequately provide help. Every ally should at the very least be able to refer a victim to the Rape, Abuse, & Incest National Network (RAINN) and be able to provide the number 1-800-656-4673 for the National Sexual Assault Telephone Hotline. Another good resource is an Ombuds’ office, which is an independent, confidential, neutral party tasked with resolving disputes within an institution.
4. Support women-led inclusion efforts
Allyship is inherently a supportive role rather than a leadership role. Men should work jointly with women when shaping inclusion efforts. While women often emerge as natural leaders of such efforts, such leadership roles are often time-intensive and can act as further drag on the scientific productivity of women, which is counter-productive. This is where male allies can step in and share the burden of the behind-the-scenes, time-intensive, and unglamorous grunt work that underpins all inclusion efforts.
I hope you can persuade white men to attend; only when "diversity" events are not just women and under-represented minorities will things actually start to change!
5. Engage with and promote the science of women scientists
It is past time to break up the “Old Boys Club” that leads to men (both explicitly and implicitly) amplifying the science of other men in an endless cycle that excludes equally competent – or more competent – women. Not only is this unfair to women and hurts their career advancement, but it also means that both scientists and the public are missing out on the science of brilliant women. Too often are there high-profile studies that are authored, edited, reviewed, and commented on in the media exclusively by men.
Thankfully, women have done some of the hard work in addressing the last of these categories for us by compiling a list of women scientists across all fields who have volunteered for media comments (follow the link to sign yourself up). Some male allies have also set a precedent by making and, crucially, measuring efforts to diversify their sources. Over a two-year period, Ed Yong increased the proportion of women quoted in his articles at The Atlantic from 25% to 50% by making a conscious effort to correct his implicit bias towards quoting men. Similarly, Michael White has made a conscious effort to keep the proportion of women he assigns as reviewers at Nature and the proportion of women guests on his podcast near 50%. Recent twitter threads of scientists tallying their coauthor gender balance and recognizing room for improvement are similarly encouraging.
Academics in #STEM : take a look at your CVs. What is your ratio of female vs male collaborators/co-authors? Is it the ratio of women:men in your field today, 20 years ago, or what you want the ratio to be like in the future?
6. Exercise your power to implement policies that support women in science
Positions of power in science are overwhelmingly held by men. As of 2004, women represent less than 10% of STEM department heads. The responsibility of implementing policies to support women in science thus rests predominantly on men. Based on the findings of the National Academies’ report on Sexual Harassment of Women and their recommendations for government policies, I recommend the following concrete policies for leaders at academic institutions to implement:
A) Prioritize the reintegration of harassment victims over the rehabilitation of perpetrators
Institutions must abandon their habit of protecting male sexual harassers over their women victims. It is absurd that victims are often forced out of their institutions and science in general while their harassers keep their jobs or are simply allowed move to another institution. Men must work with women to implement policies at both the governmental and institutional levels that protect and reintegrate victims first and then punish harassers. More concretely, institutions should develop clear, accessible, and consistent policies on sexual harassment. Sexual harassment policies should include clear and appropriate consequences for perpetrators found to have violated sexual harassment policies and / or law. Consequences should escalate based on the frequency and severity of harassment and should not be potentially beneficial, such as being given paid leave or a reduced teaching load.
B) Incentivize diversity and inclusion work
Women in science spend countless hours working making science more diverse and inclusive, often without tangible reward. These efforts contribute to the growth and improvement of departments in a similar manner to mentoring and teaching, both of which are already rewarded. Institutions should incentivize this diversity and inclusion work by acknowledging it as a positive contribution in tenure packages and by creating awards specifically for diversity and inclusion efforts. For example, institutions can participate in the STEM Equity Achievement (SEA) Change program, which provides metrics to evaluate institutional efforts to increase diversity and inclusion.
C) Require face-to-face active bystander training
Evidence shows that online sexual harassment trainings not only do not work, they can actually backfire and lead to more workplace harassment. Instead, experts recommend face-to-face active bystander trainings.
7. Nominate, hire, appoint, and elect women in science
Finally, the only way to make lasting progress is to make science equitable at all levels. While women are now the majority of undergraduates and graduate students in science, they still lag significantly behind men among tenured faculty, note data is for all fields and probably even worse for STEM, but I had trouble finding recent numbers). Similarly, awards and leadership positions are increasingly skewed towards men as the prestige of the award and influence of the position increases. Men must join women in making conscious efforts to nominate women for awards, hire them for their departments, appoint them to prestigious panels and committees, and elect them to positions of power.
It's not too late to nominate a woman for @theAGU Fellow or Macelwane Medal. I'm involved in 5 packages. And you? https://t.co/0U2DqD8WCc deadline 3/15
Allyship means constantly exercising all of the above and more, while asking nothing in return besides the benefit of improving the experiences of women in science and the scientific process as a whole. It means supporting the women scientists around you and relishing in their success. It means having no tolerance for men who harass, belittle, or exclude women. I joined the SWMS symposium planning committee in order to both contribute to the actual planning of the symposium and to signal to other men that they should participate in, contribute to, and register for the SWMS symposium and similar efforts to include and support women in science.
I hope you can persuade white men to attend; only when "diversity" events are not just women and under-represented minorities will things actually start to change!
At the end of the day, women just want to be able to do science and men need to stop holding them back and start helping.
I want future female deckhands, technicians, captains and other professionals to expect without hesitation that they, too, can embrace science and the sea. – Dr. Julia O’Hern
By Melanie Jackson, Lexy McCarty, Hannah Morrissette, and Emily Brownlee
After learning about SWMS at the Ocean Sciences Meeting in Portland, OR and hearing from mid-Atlantic universities in Delaware and Virginia that a Maryland SWMS chapter would be a welcomed addition, we decided that our Horn Point Laboratory (HPL) community would benefit from a chapter. From a quick look at the HPL online directory, you may notice that the majority of the graduate students at HPL are women (~60%), whereas the majority of the faculty are men. This dichotomy between students and faculty motivates one of our primary goals, which is to help increase retention of women in higher levels of the marine sciences.
Although we are a relatively small laboratory, we were thrilled to receive interest from 28 people on campus. Other than graduate students, we have a large number of women on campus, such as faculty, research assistants, and employees of local nonprofits who partner with the laboratory. During our first meeting, we went around the room and addressed what everyone wanted to get out of SWMS. Some common themes included showcasing women at the community level, providing professional development and networking, interacting more with our faculty, and creating an open space for women’s issues. The discussion helped identify topics that we have since focused on during our past meetings, and that we plan to address in the future, such as unconscious bias training and tips on how to boost confidence levels.
This slideshow requires JavaScript.
Last week was our first large event, where we invited Shelby Byrd from University of Maryland Human Resources to give us a half-day crash course workshop on leadership and crucial conversation. During the workshop, we practiced introducing ourselves briefly using the three P’s (Professional, Passion, and Personal). Although we are comfortable delivering our science-related elevator pitches, this introduction format was challenging. It forced us to think about ourselves beyond the scope of science and gave us some exposure to a new introduction template we could utilize at different types of networking events.
The three P’s: Professional, Passion, and Personal
Next, we practiced and discussed conflict resolution tools that could help us manage hypothetical and/or real-life conflicts. This involved learning lots of different models, and their acronyms, that could be employed for various types of conflicts. One such model was Crucial Conversations: Work on me first, confront with safety, and move into action. Most importantly, and arguably everyone’s favorite, was the BEER model: Behavior, Emotion, Effect, Request.
Once we learned an arsenal of tools and models, we successfully practiced using the Crucial Conversation model in simulated conversations. After practicing with each other, we followed with a discussion on what we did well and how we could have handled the situation differently.
This training provided us with the confidence to deal with potentially tricky situations, as well as created a great bonding opportunity. Overall, the positive response that we’ve received from our HPL community encourages us to support each other.
Monterey Bay is a unique location found on the central coast of California. This area is known for its abundant marine life and diverse habitats. Just a short boat ride out from the shallow and murky Elkhorn Slough and you’ll find yourself at the head of the Monterey Bay Submarine Canyon. The rich kelp forests are filled with all sorts of creatures and make for world-renowned dive sites. Not only is Monterey Bay a hotspot for marine life, but it is also a hub for numerous marine science institutions. As a graduate student at Moss Landing Marine Labs (MLML), I am very fortunate to live in such an extraordinary place.
Sunset overlooking Monterey Bay from MLML (photo by Kim Elson)
Students that enter the MLML program work towards a Masters of Science in Marine Science, focusing on a variety of biological and oceanographic disciplines. Once upon a time, MLML was a male-dominated school. The student body was comprised of around 80% men. Now, women represent that 80%, yet the faculty is only 20% female. When an e-mail popped into our inbox about the Society for Women in Marine Science (SWMS), several of us MLML students were excited to create a chapter for the Monterey Bay area. Specifically, we wanted to address the obstacles and stereotypes that female scientists face.
Monterey Bay SWMS Planning Committee (photo by Maria Vila Dupla)
The Monterey Bay SWMS Chapter would like to create a welcoming community where everyone can work together to increase visibility of women and other under-represented groups in marine science. Our mission is to facilitate outreach to local schools, promote opportunities for mentorship, and to acknowledge and address the challenges women face in marine science.
Thinking back to my younger years, I wish that I had a mentor in the marine science field to help guide me. Wouldn’t it have been nice if I had the resources readily available to pursue marine science starting at an early age? Providing that type of mentorship to local students, and creating networking opportunities to early career scientists are extremely valuable components that I look forward to see flourish with the Monterey Bay SWMS Chapter.
I used to think that we needed to get more young girls interested in science but I see now that that was never the problem. We are here, we love science. The problem is creating an environment where we are supported, recognized, and rewarded for our work. – Lauren M. Seyler, Ph.D
At my university, the Federal University of Technology Akure, in Nigeria, we currently have 19 smart women and over 220 men studying for a Bachelor’s degree in Marine Science and Technology.
Beyond the observed gender disparity, there is a quiet, almost unnoticeable challenge that my fellow young women and I face: our education and career-decision space is usually difficult to navigate. The limited diversity and support in our degree program has a real connection to why some of us, especially female students, often feel uninspired to push through anything we put our mind to, to have lofty goals, and not settle for less in the marine science field. We needed a platform to be recognized, heard and engaged.
So when my friend and faculty mate, Oghenechovwen Oghenekevwe, returned from the 2018 Ocean Sciences Meeting and told us about SWMS, we knew we had found that desired platform. He shared the SWMS website with us, and we were excited that we could start a chapter here in Nigeria. At last, we get to have and join a society that does not only support women in marine science, but also provides opportunities for our voices and work to be promoted and reflected upon in conversations on new horizons of scientific knowledge.
Reviewing the challenges we face has allowed us to put words to the vision that has always lived in the hearts of fellow future-oriented ladies. Our mission is to foster communication and inspire breakthroughs in the way Nigeria treats women in the marine science community and create immediate and lasting change in their lives.
Our mission is to foster communication and inspire breakthroughs in the way Nigeria treats women in the marine science community and create immediate and lasting change in their lives.
Our SWMS chapter will inspire lifelong learning, advance knowledge production, drive capacity development through workshops and public debates, as well as strengthen the Nigerian community by collaboratively addressing women issues in marine science.
As the first SWMS chapter outside of the US, we are also keen on spreading the vision of SWMS to women and men, regardless of academic and career level, in marine science across other Nigerian institutions – step by step, and with the help of our faculty advisors.
Let’s do it, SWMS!
Amaku Nancy Chioma is one founders of the Federal University of Technology Akure chapter of the Society for Women in Marine Science. You can contact her via email.
When my mentor gave me this great advice, she wasn’t recommending I take up skydiving — she was encouraging me to push beyond my comfort zone to grow personally and professionally.
Science conferences are great places to terrify yourself a little in the name of professional development. But you’ve got to have a plan to make the most of them. It’s too easy for introverts to tell themselves that browsing posters is the best use of their free time. Extroverts may tell themselves that working the room at happy hour is enough. A better way to make the most of a conference is to set personal challenge goals and develop a plan for before, during and after the conference. Even after almost two decades of science conferences, networking happy hours still terrify me, so I make myself attend at least one every meeting.
What’s your goal?
Before you even submit your abstract, think about how this conference fits in with your career development. Too often, we fall back on the basic, obvious answer: “I’m going to present my new research project.” While that’s a good reason to go, and will certainly justify spending grant money, think about why this conference is the best choice. Whom do you expect to see there? What do you want to learn? Work on some “SMART” goals for the meeting. Honing in on something specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, time-bound will take you from “I’m going to line up a postdoc” to something like, “I’m going to introduce myself to Dr. A and Dr. B and ask if we could write proposals together this fall that would provide me postdoc support in one of their labs by next July.”
Preparing to succeed
Preparing for the conference involves more than putting together (and practicing!) an awesome talk or poster. It’s more than remembering your lucky socks.
Photo credit: Maddie McKowan
Figure out who’s going to be there and make a wish list of presentations you want to see, and people you want to meet. Get in touch with key contacts ahead of the meeting and schedule a time to meet one-on-one. You’ll probably have to chase people down a little, and you might have to settle for a phone call after the meeting. Remember, they’re networking too.
Before you go, work with communications professionals at your institution before and during the conference to identify any press opportunities. Promote your presentation on social media and use the conference’s official hashtag so they can share your posts. This approach is particularly effective for Twitter but could also be effective for other platforms. Plan on attending side events hosted by your institution, professional groups or activities related to your expertise.
Wash your hands a lot in the week before the conference and during the event, too. Travel-wrecking viruses are real and vicious, and they will flatten you.
Putting your best foot forward
Consider yourself on the job the whole time you’re at the conference, even if your presentation is over. If you don’t know many people, find even one person who’s better connected than you and ask them to introduce you to some key people. Participate in, and take full advantage of, mentoring programs. Pass out your business card like confetti. Get others’ cards in return, and jot a note on the back about when/where you met them and what they’re interested in.
Treat every interaction you have as a “job talk”—you could be laying the foundation for future funding, inspiring a recent graduate or making a good impression on your next employer.
On appearances – present yourself in the way that you want to be perceived. First impressions are important so be deliberate in your choice of attire and accessories.
Panel discussion during the 2016 Symposium. Image credit: Julie van der Hoop.
Cultivate your online impression by reminding people to attend your presentation on social media. Be an active participant in the social media conversation during the meeting as best you can. Use pictures and video to increase shares and likes. Ask a colleague or friend to live-tweet your talk. Consider including your social media handle on your materials with your contact information. Participate in the social media conversation around the meeting beyond your own presentation.
Building on success
When you get home, you’re not quite done. Go back to the SMART goals you wrote down before the meeting, and note your progress. Take the next step towards achieving those goals, or set new ones. Think about what was terrifying before the conference that seems easier now, and where you still need to challenge yourself next time. Write it all down – by the next conference, you’ll be able to look back and see how far you’ve come.
Follow up with the people you met, even just by sending a quick one-line “nice to have met you” email or an invitation to connect on social media that reminds them who you are. Pass along contacts you made that could help out other colleagues. Thank the session or conference organizer for having you, and offer to make your materials publicly available.
Put any big lessons learned into a personal blog post or offer it as a guest post for an organization (like SWMS!). Update your peers and colleagues, and spend a little focused time thinking about how you’ll use your new knowledge and ideas. After all that, you can really put your feet up—you will have made the absolute most of this opportunity.
A big thank you is in order to Trishna Gurung, Michelle Frey, and Amanda Creekmore at Ocean Conservancy, who recently compiled many of these ideas for an internal memo. That list, plus some of my own experiences, brought you this blog post today.
Sarah Cooley, Ph.D. is the director of Ocean Conservancy’s Ocean Acidification Program. Before that, she was a research scientist at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. She’s attended and hosted countless big and small conferences, learning something new about the process each time.
Swimming Lessons is a spinoff of Six Questions with SWMS, a series of interviews with women across marine science with a wide range of career paths, degrees, and experiences.
By Gabi Serrato Marks
Between preparing to defend her master’s thesis, giving award-winning public lectures, and making accurate illustrations of oysters, Lauren Huey is certainly busy. When I found out that she was the artist behind the CERF 2017 Snapchat geofilter, I reached out to her about her art, research, and career plans.
Huey is a master’s candidate and self-described “oyster enthusiast” at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS). She uses her scientific knowledge to inform her art, which often focuses on marine life. She received a Virginia Sea Grant graduate research fellowship that funds her research, stipend, and tuition. The fellowship also required her to have an outreach plan, which worked well with her art interests. She decided to make infographics and digital images of different species and put them into a free image library. “I am lucky that I am in a program that encourages me to do art as well as science,” Lauren told me. “My advisor knows that I have to be making these infographics, and when I give talks or design posters, I am able to use a lot of things I made.”
She also does some freelance illustration for other scientists’ research. “The biggest need that I have seen is for illustrations of a specific species. In scientific work, [the illustration] isn’t just a shrimp or a crab, it is a specific species that needs to look accurate.” That’s where Huey’s research skills come in handy, but she didn’t always want to focus on marine life. She started her undergraduate career as an animal science major, not a marine scientist.
“My family enjoys the ocean and I spent a lot of time on the beach as a kid. My older sister majored in marine biology, but I wanted to do something different than her,” she said. She couldn’t stay away from marine science for long, and she ended up changing her major to marine biology. When she immersed herself in marine biology, she received some push back. “A lot of people told me it wasn’t the best way to get a job, and I wouldn’t make a lot of money. But ultimately, I was more passionate about marine biology than animal science.”
That passion shows in her willingness to participate in tons of outreach activities, both online and in person. “One of the things I was most excited about this past year is that I got tweeted at in French, which meant that I was reaching people in other countries, to the point where I had to use google translate to communicate!” Huey likes using her illustrations to connect with people, especially because art is a universal language. She hosts events where kids color in barnacles and crabs to teach them about the habitats that oysters provide.
Events like those have made her want to pursue a career in science communication, not research. “My ultimate goal is to change the way that scientists interact with the public. I want to help shatter the “egghead” stereotype about us,” she told me. She wants to find a career that allows her to give scientists the tools we need to get our points across. “The research we do is so important, but it can be hard to communicate it.”
Huey’s illustrations are both accurate and beautiful, so chances are high that you will be seeing them in upcoming research papers, posters, and activities!
