Happening against all the odds: Meet Susan Canney

Posted on June 15, 2016 by Nathalie Pettorelli

Canney in the Scottish bush_cropDr Susan Canney (@CanneySusan) is a research associate at the Department of Zoology, University of Oxford. Her research focusses on understanding the as a means to find ways for humans and nature to co-exist and thrive. Susan will be standing on one of our soapboxes at our Oxford event, where she’ll be discussing “How have Mali’s desert elephants survived and how long have they got?”

 

 

 

SS: Susan, how did you get to your current position? What or who inspired you to get a career in science?

SC: There have been two driving forces. On the one hand I have always been very curious about why things are as they are. How did this beautiful world come to be, why is it so different from other planets in the solar system and where do humans fit into the picture? (So not too challenging then.) On the other hand I loved nature, was heart-broken by its destruction and felt I had to do what I could to prevent it. People often talk about formative experiences and maybe mine was aged 3 watching a wood I loved bulldozed to make way for ugly housing. This has led to a somewhat unconventional career moving between science and conservation, because each time I find out something new, I want to do something about it. I have always had support and encouragement from my family, teachers and lecturers despite the occasional eyebrow raising choices.

 

SS: What is the most fascinating aspect of your research?

SC: There have been many fascinating things. I really enjoy the detective work of piecing together information to illuminate the real causes of a conservation problem – it gives you a window into the workings of the world, and of course solutions can only be effective when they address the underlying causes rather than the symptoms. This has been greatly facilitated by the availability of satellite imagery and digital data which allows you to find out more by looking at patterns over space and time. For example my doctorate involved trying to understand a situation in Tanzania where natural scientists and social scientists had very different analyses of a conservation issue, but these technologies enabled an analysis of local phenomena in the wider context, over space and time, and this allowed those perspectives to be reconciled.

 

Mali Elephant Project April-May 2004 Banzena Photo by: Carlton Ward Jr www.carltonward.com with Wild Foundation www.wild.org

Mali Elephant Project
April-May 2004
Banzena
Photo by: Carlton Ward Jr
www.carltonward.com
with Wild Foundation
www.wild.org

In Mali satellite imagery and GPS collar data allowed an understanding of how these elephants had survived when all others around them and across this latitude had disappeared; identify the threats and actions to ensure their future. However once I knew that action had to be taken within the next 5 years, the question became “what does it take to turn round a bad situation of ecosystem degradation and species loss”; a much more complex and long-term undertaking, but one of continual learning and new insights through engaging with many disciplines.

 

This was difficult enough before 2012 but when the conflict and jihadist insurgency occurred, the problem has been taken to new heights as we had to deal with elephant poaching despite no government presence or capacity; while at the same time putting additional efforts into promoting community reconciliation to heal the social wounds created by the conflict.

The majority of my time now involves dealing with people, both individually as a part of day-to-day work, and in creating the conditions for humans and wildlife to live together peaceably, for which training in evolutionary biology has been invaluable!

 

SS: What attracted you to soapbox science in the first place?

wallowing ele croppedSC: The opportunity to share what I think is amazing and little known, both about the elephants and how individuals can make change even with issues that seem so intractable. The security situation and threat of attack /kidnap has prevented media attention and tourism, and I hope to be able to communicate something of what is happening against all the odds.

 

SS: Sum up in one word your expectations for the day

SC: A mix …… of fear, desire to engage, anticipation and opportunity.

 

 

SS: If you could change one thing about the scientific culture right now what would it be?

SC: We need better ways to deal with real-world complexity, better understand and recognise our place in the Earth system, and communicate that understanding to everyone from decision-makers to the general public. That requires society to make it a priority in terms of funding but it also requires targets that reflect that aim.

 

SS: What would be your top recommendation to a female PhD student considering pursuing a career in academia?

SC: Follow your passion

Posted in 2016 speakers blog | Tagged | Leave a comment

Blood vessels shouldn’t be hard as teeth, and other stories: Meet Dr. Irina Velsko

Posted on June 15, 2016 by Nathalie Pettorelli

Velesko_Anaerobic_chamberIrina Velsko is a postdoc at the University of Oxford studying ancient dental calculus, how the oral microbiome has changed over time, and how this has played a role in the rise of “diseases of civilization”.  She’s passionate about promoting women in science and was an active member in the Women in Science and Engineering student group during graduate school, where she worked in outreach events showing off oral bacteria on plates and teeth tissue sections under the microscope. At our Oxford event she’ll be talking about the bacteria that live on and in us that influence health and disease, focusing on how dental plaque bacteria affect the health of your heart, joints, brain, gut and more, and why flossing actually does matter!

 

 

SS: Irina, what or who inspired you to get a career in science?

IV: In preschool I knew I was going to be a paleontologist and study dinosaurs when I grew up, which evolved into an interest in archaeology, which was run-over by a fascination with microbiology in middle school.  Learning the names of bacteria that make yoghurt sparked an interest in the world of microbes that brought me into an E. coli (bacteria that live in the gut) research lab in college.

Velesko_Cleaning_teethI knew I wanted to study bacteria for my PhD project, and I happened to land in a lab that studied how the mouth bacteria that cause periodontal disease (gum disease) also cause atherosclerosis (heart disease) – two big medical words I hadn’t heard of before.  But I really enjoy learning new things, and I sat with a mirror and a textbook on periodontics and poked my teeth and gums wile looking at the pictures as I read about the mouth and teeth and the bacteria that cause gum disease.  I started flossing regularly after processing blood vessel sections from atherosclerosis surgery patients that were so damaged, so calcified and hardened, that they couldn’t be cut with a razor blade.  I figured if flossing can help prevent that from happening to me, it’s worth the extra minute every day.

 

SS: How did you get to your current position?

 IV: Archaeology always remained a fascination for me, and I really wanted a job where I could combine both microbiology and archaeology (did you know pox viruses have been found in ancient Egyptian mummies?). When I met a professor who was combining both, I knew I wanted to do what she was doing.   I kept in touch with her and she pointed me to the job listing for the position I now have and love!

 

SS: What is the most fascinating aspect of your research?

 IV: The mouth is such a neglected part of the body, it’s easy to forget to brush your teeth, and people will ignore toothaches much longer than aches and pains in other body parts, yet unhealthy mouths can impact disease in almost every other body system!  Having bad teeth and gums increases chances of getting heart disease, diabetes, arthritis, Alzheimer’s, certain cancers, and of pre-term birth.   I love how my research shows how important it is to look at the whole body to understand disease.

 

SS: What attracted you to soapbox science in the first place?

IV: I saw an opportunity for public outreach and jumped at it.  We scientists need to make science accessible to everyone if we expect to have an educated public.  Publishing research articles in journals isn’t sharing results publicly, since no one’s going to pay $32 for a single article full of technical jargon.  Soapbox Science is open-access public outreach, so everyone can participate.  I love what I’m studying, and I want to share it and I hope it makes on impact on people’s health.

 

SS: Sum up in one word your expectations for the day

IV: Enlightening.  You never know what kind of reactions you’ll get from people, especially kids.  And I’ve never done open-access public outreach before, so I’m sure I’ll learn a lot.

 

SS: If you could change one thing about the scientific culture right now what would it be?

Hmmmmm, I’m not sure what early science education is like in the UK, but in the US it’s often non-existent.  I grew up in a town where the major employer was a national research lab, yet didn’t have any science classes in school till I was 11.  We need to expose students to science early so they’re fascinated by it, not put off by what they don’t understand.  So what we need to change is how scientists, and particularly academic scientists, value outreach and public education.  There is no formal recognition system for academics or industry professionals devoting time to outreach, although there’s a lot of time and effort involved.  This puts the scientists who do outreach at a disadvantage from their peers who don’t, and discourages scientists from participating in these kinds of events.  It’s the same problem women face with mentoring, where women tend to do more, and this puts them at a disadvantage for professional advancement.

 

SS: What would be your top recommendation to a female PhD student considering pursuing a career in academia?

IV: Same thing my mentor told me: stay in academia as long as you can, since it’s much harder to come back into it after leaving.  Also find other people at the same career stage and form a support group.  Being able to talk frankly and openly to people who really understand what you’re going through is a great help to keep yourself motivated and going.

Posted in 2016 speakers blog | Leave a comment

You don’t need a PhD to be extremely successful in science: Meet Rebecca Hemingway

Posted on June 13, 2016 by Nathalie Pettorelli

Rebecca HemingwayRebecca Hemingway (@beckyhemingway9) is a scientist at the Met Office where she carries out research and works on the development of the Hazard Impact Model.  Here she tells us about how she got into this fascinating and challenging role and why science is for everyone. Rebecca was one of our 2016 Exeter speaker. During the event, she talked about “How the weather and natural hazards affect you”

 

 

SS: Rebecca, how did you get to your current position?

RH: I started at the Met Office as a three month summer placement in 2012 never expecting to continue working there. I’d finished my Masters degree in Oceanography and the plan was to go home and look for jobs after the placement. During the placement the science admin team asked if those of us were going back to university would be willing to extend our placements to work on other projects. So I said yes. I was contacted a couple of weeks before the end of my placement about a job in the Weather Impacts Team, it sounded interesting, I was enjoying working at the Met Office and while the job was in a totally different area than what I knew I thought I might as well go for it. So I did – I filled in the application form and went for an interview. Three hours after the interview the team’s manager was at my desk offering me the job! I couldn’t believe it! I started 5 days later in my new team so it was a bit of a whirlwind, I moved to Exeter for 3 months and I’m still here, loving my job, nearly 4 years later!

 

SS: What, or who, inspired you to get a career in science?

RH: I’ve been interested in science since I was quite young. I remember watching programs and movies about severe weather like hurricanes and tornadoes and thinking they were great and so interesting. As I got older I found that I was interested in the oceans, although I still liked the weather, and originally wanted to be a marine biologist. This evolved into wanting to study Oceanography at university. At school I always found sciences interesting, especially physics, and I really liked the climate change aspect of geography. Sciences are logical, they have a methodology and (usually) an answer, I liked that, they’re objective not subjective.

 

SS: What is the most fascinating aspect of your research/work?

RH: I find the challenges I encounter while researching weather impacts fascinating. I talk to a lot of people about what I do and it’s only when I start explaining the challenges I face creating impact models that they realise the difficulties in this work. Even collecting reports of weather impacts, in order to check the models are correct, is challenging. It’s an extremely new area of science and I like that I’m doing things that haven’t been done before and also that they can help people on a day to day basis.
SB: What attracted you to Soapbox Science in the first place?

RH: I liked the idea of shouting about my work to the public and communicating in a way that I don’t usually get to do. Having no PowerPoint slides but instead having props is very exciting and a novel and unique way to communicate science.

 

SS: If you could change one thing about the scientific culture right now, what would it be?

RH: The scientific stereotypes of what scientists are and should be. Science is so vast and varied, it’s just getting the message out there that anyone can do science and it’s brilliant and fun and there is something to interest everyone at every age.

 

SS: What would be your top recommendation to a female PhD student considering pursuing a career in academia?

RH: I’m slightly different to a lot of the speakers at Soapbox Science in that I don’t have a PhD and I am not planning to get one. I work as an applied scientist so use science to help our meteorologists make decisions about the weather and the impact it may have. I feel that you don’t need a PhD to be extremely successful in science, it’s enthusiasm, grasping every opportunity and fulfilling it to the best of your ability and being interested in what you do that makes a great scientific career.

 

Posted in 2016 speakers blog | Tagged | Leave a comment

Stop misrepresenting how science works: Meet Rebecca Thompson

Posted on June 13, 2016 by Nathalie Pettorelli

rebecca_thompsonDr Rebecca Thompson (@Bex_16) is a researcher at the Astbury BioStructure Laboratory, University of Leeds, helping other scientists to use state-of-the-art electron microscopes to look at the protein machines that drive life. Rebecca will be standing on our soapbox on the 18th of June, in Newcastle, to talk about “Seeing proteins: what the most powerful microscopes in the world are telling us about how our cells work”

 

 

SS: Rebecca, how did you get to your current position?

RT: I did my undergraduate degree in molecular biology at Cardiff University, graduating in 2011. I enjoyed my degree, and especially working in the lab during my final year, and so decided for me a PhD was the natural next step. I was lucky enough to get a place on the University of Leeds Wellcome Trust PhD scheme ‘The Molecular Mechanism of Biological Processes’, which enabled me to do three rotations in different labs in my first year. This gave me the chance to try out different labs and work on different projects, using a range of methods. My second rotation was using electron microscopy to look at misfolded protein structures called amyloid fibrils. It only took me a few weeks to become completely hooked on using electron microscopes! They are such amazing machines, letting us literally see the tiny protein machines that drive our cells. I went on to do my PhD using electron microscopes to study amyloid fibrils, and how they interact with parts of the cell, as well as the structure viruses. This PhD gave me lots of experience using electron microscopes. It was then a case of ‘right place right time’, as finishing my PhD coincided with a huge investment in electron microscopy at Leeds, and the opening of a position to help support scientists to use electron microscopy in their research. I applied, and I was lucky enough to get the position! I’m only 4 months in, but so far I’m really enjoying it, working on lots of different projects at the same time keeps me on my toes!

 

SS: What, or who, inspired you to get a career in science?

RT: I am lucky to have wonderful parents who supported and encouraged me to pursue the things I find interesting. For me, this was basically always science! Aged 7 I was set on being an astrophysicist, by age 11 I wanted to be a chemist. During my early teens I discovered a whole host of excellent popular science books, such as those by Matt Ridley and Richard Dawkins, and these hooked me on genetics and evolutionary biology, and drove my choice to study Molecular Biology at university.

 

SS: What is the most fascinating aspect of your research/work?

RT: Getting to look at stuff in the electron microscope! Its amazing to look at different proteins, viruses and parts of cells.

 

SS: What attracted you to Soapbox Science in the first place?

RT: I really enjoy talking to people about science generally, and especially my research. I’ve organised and taken part in many public engagement events in museums and with school groups visiting the university, but I think Soapbox Science is going to be very different experience. Its an opportunity to take science outside of a museum, or school, or university, out into the real world!

 

SS: Sum up in one word your expectations for the day – excitement? Fear? Thrill Anticipation?

RT: Excitement, with a little trepidation!

 

SS: If you could change one thing about the scientific culture right now, what would it be?

RT: Perhaps this is not a change to scientific culture, but the media’s representation of how science works. Documentaries commonly say ‘we did a scientific experiment to test X’, when really it’s not a science experiment at all, but an anecdotal example (for example, no control groups). I think this misrepresents how science works.

On the flip side, I think many scientists need to be more willing to make the effort to make their research accessible and engage with the public, both directly and through the media. I think some scientists perhaps don’t see the value in public engagement work, perhaps because they think people wont be interested. However, my experience is that ‘the public’ are on the whole genuinely interested in understanding scientific research, and get as excited as I do about the latest science.

 

SS: What would be your top recommendation to a female PhD student considering pursuing a career in academia?

RT: I only finished my PhD a few months ago, but my advice to anyone looking to start a PhD would be to consider not only the project, but also the wider environment, including the people you will be working for and with, opportunities to pursue other interests in a supported way (such as public engagement!), and wider training. I had a fantastic experience during my PhD (despite having a project which didn’t yield as many results as I would have liked!) thanks to a great set of supervisors who were supportive throughout and opportunities to get involved in a range of activities, from public engagement, to teaching, and even a 3-month internship in science policy.

 

Posted in 2016 speakers blog | Leave a comment

Stand your ground: Meet Jessica Davies

Posted on June 13, 2016 by Nathalie Pettorelli

JessDaviesBy Dr Jessica Davies

Jessica is a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Oxford. Her research focuses on understanding the genetic risk of multiple sclerosis. Come hear Jessica’s talk – “From DNA to disease: how single letter changes in our genetic code can change our risk of disease”- June the 18th, in Oxford! 

 

 

Igniting my passion in biology: from school to university

I was truly inspired by my biology teacher at secondary school; I always loved to learn, and A level biology confirmed that I absolutely loved science. I still remember the lesson where I learnt about the inner machinery of a mammalian cell; I was so amazed by how intricate it was I literally couldn’t believe it. I felt so naïve having learnt in GCSE that cells looked pretty much like fried eggs: a blob with a rounder blob (the nucleus) in the middle of it. Oh how wrong I was…

I subsequently studied Biological Sciences (Bsc) at Warwick. I really enjoyed the practical work, and I was awarded a BBSRC grant to conduct a 6 week summer research project. This gave me first-hand experience in planning and executing my own experiments, and the opportunity confirmed that I wanted to do a PhD. I had difficulty deciding exactly what area to go into as I loved so many aspects of my degree! I was most passionate about molecular biology and neurosciences, so I started investigating different laboratories, and seeing what was available.

 

Focusing on DNA and disease: from PhD to postdoc

I obtained a PhD position in the Department of Clinical Neurosciences at the University of Cambridge, investigating the genetics of multiple sclerosis. I absolutely loved it; I found my whole time in Cambridge incredibly enriching.

Towards the end of my PhD I became increasingly interested in gene regulation – how different genes are “turned on” or “turned off”, i.e. read. Our DNA is a book of 3 billion letters which contains sequences (like sentences in a book) that code for genes; but the majority of the letters (around 98 %) are actually in between the genes. Initially people thought that these letters had no use, but accumulating research is showing us that they are fundamental and work in intricate ways to control when and where our genes are “read”. These incredibly complex control networks can be disrupted in disease, but they also naturally vary between each and every one of us and contribute to what makes us unique.

I took the opportunity prior to commencing a postdoctoral position to gain some experience in a different laboratory and do something that I wouldn’t be able to do as a postdoctoral researcher. I worked for 9 months as a research assistant in the Genomics Core facility at the Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute. During this time I learnt what it was like to work in a service environment as opposed to a research environment – I worked on samples (miniscule quantities of DNA in tiny little tubes!) from other researchers. I used technology called next generation sequencing, which has become fundamental in nearly all research laboratories. This technology reads and reports the DNA present in these samples and so could be used to identify, for example, differences in DNA sequences from cancer patients and healthy individuals.

During this time I applied for postdoctoral positions and investigated many potential laboratories whose research I was interested in. I obtained a position in at the Weatherall Institute of Molecular Medicine, University of Oxford, in Professor Fugger’s group, to work on gene regulation in multiple sclerosis – the perfect position for me! This commenced at the start of 2016, and here I am!

 

Spreading the wonders of science

I became increasingly aware of the “non-scientists’” attitude towards science as I progressed through my PhD: how some people thought that they do not and could never understand it; the presence of a so-called “divide” between the public and scientists. I was (and still am!) passionate about showing people how amazing science is and how it is accessible to everyone. I think that one of the problems is that, just like anyone who becomes immersed in a very specific field of work, there is a lot of jargon which we become overfamiliar with and sometimes forget that not everyone understands it! It is not about making science simple, just understandable, which can be done with a bit of thought and practice!

I am also acutely aware of the significant drop off in women scientists the further up the career ladder, so I am incredibly grateful for this opportunity with soapbox science, not just to engage with the public, but also to inspire women to follow their passions.

 

“Good science”

I am also passionate about the idea of “good science”. I think that a problem with the current scientific culture is that scientists are too often judged as “good” by how many articles they have published, how quick they publish, and in which journals. Academic rigour and research reproducibility should be more important.

 

Advice to women considering a career in academic research

I have developed significantly, both in what I have learnt and as a female scientist, since I began my career in science. A career in academia is difficult – expect a lot of rejection; be strong and accept criticism as a means to help you progress; you have to be passionate and determined. As a woman I find that it can be harder to be taken seriously and be listened to – make sure you stand your ground and try not to be intimidated, you have as much right as anyone else to your own ideas and opinions.

Posted in 2016 speakers blog | Tagged | Leave a comment

Identifying super-recogniser officers in Police ranks: Meet Anna Bobak

Posted on June 13, 2016 by Nathalie Pettorelli

AnnaAnna Bobak (@akbobak) is a Research Fellow in psychology based at Bournemouth University. Anna’s work focuses on face recognition, specifically in those who never forget a face:  super-recognisers. Anna will be standing on a soapbox in Oxford on the 18th June where she’ll be talking about “Face recognition-a very special super power”.

 

 

SS: Anna, how did you get to your current position? Why did you choose a career in science?

AB: It all started relatively late. I went back to uni as a mature student at the age of 24, a couple of years after moving to the UK from Poland. I had worked in hospitality in the beautiful Scottish Highlands first, but when I moved to Edinburgh and immersed myself in the academic culture there (there are four universities and several colleges), I decided it was time to fill in an UCAS application and psychology was always going to be the obvious choice. I was very lucky to have dedicated and enthusiastic lecturers at Edinburgh Napier University who did nothing but inspire me to learn and develop my skills. One of them, the late Dr Robbie Cooper, took me to a meeting of the Scottish Face Research Group at University of Stirling, where I later did my MSc in Psychology of Faces. I then went on to study for a PhD at Bournemouth University which was about super-recognisers, what makes them special, and can we put their skills to good use, in national security and forensic assignments. I’m currently working as a Research Fellow at Bournemouth University, investigating the best ways to identify super-recogniser officers in Police ranks. Being a scientist is great; it’s a constant challenge of discovering new things and finding (at least some!) answers to important questions.

 

SS:  What is the most exciting aspect of your research?

AB: I can’t decide on one, can I have two things? Faces are cool and face recognition is a very special super-power! While most of us tend to be relatively good at it, some people can’t recognise faces at all (they are face-blind), and some people seem to never forget a face (super-recognisers). Understanding what makes those ‘super-recognisers’ so special may not only help those who struggle by designing training programmes improving face recognition, but may also help to allocate the right people to the right places; jobs requiring great face recognition ability, such as passport matching, CCTV control and so on. I also get to meet many interesting people who are interested in face recognition, such as Police Officers and software developers. There is never a dull day!

 

SS: Why soapbox science?

AB: It’s a fantastic opportunity to talk about the research that has received little publicity to date. Also, I’m passionate about teaching and outreach, and if someone takes away one interesting “face fact” with them on the day, then I’ll see it as a job well done!

 

SS: What is the most challenging part of being a scientist?

AB: There are times when research, teaching, and administrative duties can get a bit much and you have to prioritise. For me, however, one class of curious and engaged students or a new, interesting project are enough to reassure me that I’m on the right career path!

 

SS: What would be your advice for aspiring female scientists?

AB: Do what feels right and follow your interests. A career in academia is hard work, but also extremely fulfilling, because you feel like you’re giving a lot back by advancing knowledge and teaching.

Posted in 2016 speakers blog | Tagged | Leave a comment

The best possible thing to do on a Saturday afternoon: Meet Regan Early

Posted on June 10, 2016 by Nathalie Pettorelli

Regan EarlyDr. Regan Early is a Lecturer in Conservation Biology at the University of Exeter. She studies the effect of human activity on wildlife all around the world. Come and see her in Exeter on the 11th of June where she will talk about The Great Climate Change Race!

 

 

SS: Regain, how did you get to your current position?

RE: A mix of working far more hours than is healthy, having some good scientific ideas, being thick-skinned enough to ignore those who told me that they weren’t good ideas, and having some really wonderful mentors and colleagues who were convinced I could have a career in academia

 

SS: What, or who, inspired you to get a career in science?

RE: I always wanted to understand how things worked, and go exploring and discover things. But there’s no doubt that I wouldn’t have become a scientist if it wasn’t for a whole load of people helping me out. I don’t come from the kind of background where it’s normal to want to grow up to be a scientist. My parents don’t have a University education, in fact my mum left school at 14. But if I wanted to be a scientist they were damn well going to help me be a scientist. They got me science kits for Christmas and stayed up late reading the instructions on things they had never done before. They sent me off to the bottom of the garden, with mini-beast books, a magnifying glass and collecting tray. They carted me off to science day camps during the school holidays. My primary school head teacher, Mr Gibbons, used to come and give my class in promptu talks about things like atoms. I doubt his talks were in the national curriculum but they were so fascinating I made my friends play ‘nuclear fission’ with me in the playground for days afterwards (it wasn’t much more sophisticated than running around and crashing into each other, but hey). And science fiction played a massive role, not least because I actually got to read about or see women being scientists, like Dana Scully in the X-Files, Ellie Sattler in Jurassic Park, or Ellie Arroway in Contact.

 

SS: What is the most fascinating aspect of your research/work?

RE: I work a lot on invasive species. Humans have transported thousands of species around the world, and many of these species have established populations where we’ve taken them. Some examples of these in the UK are horse chestnut trees, rabbits, and pheasants. It’s generally expected that these species will continue to inhabit the same kind of environments when they are introduced, as they do where they are native. I was studying these species and I was really surprised to find that the opposite were true. Many plants, birds, and mammals that have been transported around the world end up living in places with climate that is completely different to their native range. What’s really strange is that the species that seem to thrive most in unexpected places, are the species that are really rare in their native range. It’s as if you went abroad on holiday and did something totally out of character. My 60-year old parents went to visit my sister in New Zealand, and the next thing I know they’re calling me to tell me they’ve Bungy-jumped off the Auckland Harbour bridge. Or think of the famous British tourist. A Ryanair flight to Benidorm seems capable of turning the most shy and retiring Brit into a rampant force of nature, carousing bawdily into the small hours. That’s what has happened to the species I study. At home they’re all meek and unassuming, and you hardly ever notice them, but abroad they get into all sorts of places you’d never expect. I’m still trying to figure out why this happens.

 

SS: What attracted you to Soapbox Science in the first place?

RE: After many years of short term post-doc contracts and living in fear that I wouldn’t have my contract renewed, I secured the coveted position of ‘lecturer’. Now I think it’s time I got to spend more time doing the parts of science I adore. Standing on a street corner, declaring to the world why science is brilliant, playing science games with kids, and maybe even raising awareness of how we can help wildlife survive climate change sounds like the best possible thing to do on a Saturday afternoon. It would be great if I could inspire someone to become a scientist. But it would be just as brilliant to remind the general public that science is for them, just as much as it’s for people in labs. Scientific discovery depends on the public being willing to pay for it, and progress depends on the public understanding and accepting new discoveries. Soapbox Science sounds like a great way to support that.

 

SS: Sum up in one word your expectations for the day – excitement? Fear? Thrill? Anticipation?

RE: Eeeek!

 

SS: If you could change one thing about the scientific culture right now, what would it be?

RE: The government-imposed requirement that every few years all University research in the UK is judged on its merit and societal impact against a set of narrow, political, and poorly thought out criteria. Oh, and we don’t get to find out what those criteria are until after our research is judged. This is the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF). I believe passionately in doing research that changes the world. The REF is just a completely pointless way of making sure that happens. It actively discourages scientists to write papers that review the state of the art in a field, or to publish the results of research that didn’t work out. Much of the research in the past that has gone on to be enormously influential wouldn’t be scored highly in the REF today.

 

SS: What would be your top recommendation to a female PhD student considering pursuing a career in academia?

RE: Don’t forget what freedom there is in academia. Many people will try to tell you what research to do, how to play the career game, or that your ideas aren’t good enough. Listen to them as little as possible, and try to find out something that you think is really interesting.

 

Posted in 2016 speakers blog | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Entrench the Athena SWAN’s aims into the fabric of institutions: Meet Olivia Champion

Posted on June 10, 2016 by Nathalie Pettorelli

Olivia ChampionOlivia Champion is a research fellow in molecular pathogenesis at the University of Exeter and recently commercialized some of her research to become co-founder and CEO of a University of Exeter spin out company called BioSystems Technology. Here she tells how her travels in Nepal inspired her career choice; how she enjoys applying basic research to solve real world problems; and how she believes that resistance to the Athena SWAN charter is undermining progress towards an equal society. Catch Olivia on her soapbox on Saturday 11th June 1-4 pm in Exeter where she will be talking about “Microbes: The good, the bad and the ugly?”

 

 

SS: Olivia, how did you get to your current position?

OC: I am a Research Fellow at the University of Exeter and more recently I have also become a founder and CEO of a University spin out company called BioSystems Technology. My research interests include bacteria that cause infection in humans and animals and how we can better detect, prevent and treat infections. My route to my current position started with a gap year after A-levels during which I traveled to Nepal and India for a year. Before setting off I had a deferred entry position at Cardiff University to study Optometry as I was planning to go into the family business; both my father and grandfather were opticians. However, during my time in Nepal I lived with a family and the mother of the family became really sick with Typhoid fever. Fortunately she recovered but I remember thinking how ridiculous it was that people were still dying from drinking dirty water. It was that experience that changed the course of my career. When I got back to the UK I changed courses and studied Applied Biology rather than Optometry in Cardiff. After graduating I worked as an intern for the World Health Organisation in Geneva for the summer before getting my first proper paid job as a trainee clinical scientist in London at what is now called Public Health England (PHE). It was around this time that I married my boyfriend, moved from my home in Torquay to London and as a trainee I was sent around the country to learn the skills, techniques and meet the scientists in a range of specialist laboratories; I also spent a year working on secondment in the North Middlesex Hospital in the diagnostic Microbiology lab where I discovered that Tuberculosis is alive and well in London, and all the while I was studying part time for an M.Sc. in Clinical Microbiology at Queen Mary and Westfield University. Eventually my line manager at PHE suggested that I ought to do a PhD as without one I would hit a glass ceiling in my career. I carried out a PhD at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) supervised by Professor Brendan Wren and funded by a Medical Research Council (MRC) studentship. Towards the end of my PhD I went to a conference where I met some professors who offered me a position working jointly between their laboratories at the University of British Columbia (UBC) in Vancouver: Prof Erin Gaynor and Prof Brett Finlay. I was all set to move to Vancouver when I discovered that I was, very unexpectedly, pregnant! We made the decision to move to Vancouver before the baby arrived as I felt uncertain whether I’d still want to make the move after the baby had come along. It put a lot of pressure on me to write up, pack up and do a viva but we flew out of Heathrow the day after I defended my thesis as after that I wouldn’t have been allowed to fly on medical grounds as I was too heavily pregnant. We arrived in Vancouver and after a period of maternity leave I started my first post doc at UBC. Although I could have stayed longer at UBC we made the decision to move back to the UK for personal reasons. We moved back to Devon and I joined Prof Rick Titball as a Research Fellow in his new group at the University of Exeter. I’ve been happily working in Exeter for nearly a decade and have had a further two career breaks for maternity during that time. Over the past year or so I have been working towards commercialising some of my research and this has led to the establishment of the University of Exeter spin out company BioSystems Technology (www.biosystemstechnology.com).

 

 

SS: What, or who, inspired you to get a career in science?

OC: As a child I was always interested in Science and I selected science GCSE’s and A levels to study at school. I was fortunate enough to have a fabulous Biology teacher during secondary school called Miss Mason who really inspired my love of Biology. My dad has always had a great interest in science and would talk to me about scientific concepts; for example, he read Steven Hawking’s “A Brief History of Time” and he would attempt to talk with me about the ideas in that book. It was all a bit over my head but I enjoyed thinking about how things work and I loved the fact that people could try to solve the mysteries of the universe by using their brains and applying logic to a problem. It was living in Nepal and seeing the devastating effect of poor hygiene and disease that really inspired me to study, and later work, in the field of pubic health and infectious disease.

 

SS: What is the most fascinating aspect of your research/work?

OC: The job of a researcher is to create new knowledge and I have always got a kick out of discovering something new. I love the idea that before I found it out, this piece of information was not known to the world. It’s that buzz that keeps researchers going on research projects that can last for many years. When you make a discovery or a breakthrough it is genuinely really exciting. However, for me the most fascinating part of my work is trying to apply basic research to real world problems to make a positive difference to society. Much of my research over the past 8 years has been involved with finding alternatives to experimental mice and rabbits. We have tested the use of insect larvae and have found that they can be used instead of mice for a range of different experiments such as for understanding mechanisms of pathogenesis in bacteria and also for antibiotic discovery programmes. Results obtained from the insect larvae correlate well with results from mice and we (and other researchers) have found that the number of mice can be reduced by up to 80-90% in some studies. It is this research that has been commercialized to form BioSystems Technology. We believe that the use of our insect larvae can not only save many thousands of mice and rabbits, but can also increase the success of drug discovery programmes by allowing huge panels of compounds to be screened at a rate that just wouldn’t have been feasible in mammals due to the cost as well as ethical issues.

 

SS: What attracted you to Soapbox Science in the first place?

OC: Soapbox is a fantastic initiative that promotes the breakdown of gender sterotypes, supports female scientists and provides positive role models for children. These aims are really important for both science and society as a whole, not just in the UK but around the world. I fully support the aims of Soapbox Science and I’ve been involved in outreach projects previously in my role as a STEMNET ambassador.

 

SS: Sum up in one word your expectations for the day – excitement? Fear? Thrill? Anticipation?

OC: In a word I would say I am “delighted” to have been selected as a Soapbox speaker and I can’t wait for the big day.

 

SS: If you could change one thing about the scientific culture right now, what would it be?

Figure 1OC: When I was a girl I didn’t perceive that sexism was really a problem any more. I felt that there was nothing to stop a woman from succeeding in her ambitions so long as she worked hard and had a “can do” attitude. However, the evidence shows us that regardless of hard work, female scientists are far less likely to secure a permanent academic position compared with their male counterparts. Data collected from Universities across the UK on the gender split during academic progression in STEM disciplines highlights the problem and Figure 1 exemplifies the situation.  Grade F is the last point in a researcher’s career progression before tenure.  In this example, there are equal numbers of men and women at every point until grade F after which the number of women drops dramatically from around 50% to around 15%. To women entering a career in academia with ambitions to become a professor this makes sobering reading.

The reasons behind the stark gender imbalance in academia are now being investigated and appear to be multifactorial. Obviously there is the fact that the female reproductive window of opportunity coincides with the point at which she’d finish her education and would ideally put her foot down with her career. But, career breaks for maternity leave and the ongoing disruption of juggling family life with a career, the need for flexible working hours and good child care are not the only factors at play. Many talented women without children do not secure tenure and conscious and unconscious discrimination may be a factor in this. Worrying evidence by Moss-Racusin and colleagues published in PNAS in 2012 reveals outright sexism by academics who favour male students.

The current spotlight on gender imbalance in science is thanks to the Athena SWAN charter that promotes gender equality and which was championed by Dame Sally Davies, the chief medical officer and chief scientific advisor in 2011. Dame Sally Davies placed a financial incentive on academic institutions to address their gender inequality issues by restricting the award of research funding to only those institutions that had achieved a Silver award of the Athena SWAN charter for women in science.

However, despite the obvious gender inequality in science and the positive role of Athena SWAN in addressing this important issue I have encountered  resistance to Athena SWAN from senior academics who see Athena SWAN as a politically correct annoyance and from younger women who may still be blissfully unaware of the glass ceiling that their heads are about to crash into. Many of the women who I have seen objecting to Athena SWAN are either too young or too junior to have been aware of being affected by any of the issues that Athena SWAN aims to address. Yet, ironically, in time these women will see that they are the very people that the charter is trying to protect. Their opposition to Athena SWAN, combined with the opposition by a small group creates a culture in which it becomes difficult to tackle the issues and consequently slows progress. It also disheartens the women who are at the glass ceiling and are trying to have their voices heard.

If I could change one thing about science culture right now it would be to garner an overwhelming support for Athena SWAN, not just as a tick box exercise but to entrench the equality charter’s aims into the fabric of institutions to create a more equal society.

 

SS: What would be your top recommendation to a female PhD student considering pursuing a career in academia?

 OC: My top recommendation to a female PhD student considering pursuing a career in academia would be to do your first post doc in the best overseas laboratory that you can. A strong first post doc position is critical if you have ambitions to become a professor as it is often during this period in your career that you will establish yourself as a potential leader in your field and you will be eligible to apply for early career research fellowships that can support an important first step into independence. To identify the best laboratory in which to do your first post doc, principal investigators can be assessed by their international reputation which you will pick up from word of mouth and from conferences. In addition, the quality of a lab can be measured by the number and impact factor of its publications, and the number and value of grants that have been won. It becomes far harder to travel and be flexible if and when you decide to have children.

Posted in 2016 speakers blog | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

You should do it mum! Meet Stacey Heath

Posted on June 9, 2016 by Nathalie Pettorelli

profile picStacey Heath is a PhD student in the Department of Psychology at the University of Exeter. She has a BSc in Psychology and an MSc in Social and Organizational Psychology. Here she tells us about leaving her working life to start a career in science, the inspiration she has received from a long list of people at the forefront of tackling adversity in society, the underlying drivers of her pursuit of a career in science, wanting to be an inspiration to her children and what she sees as key to completing a successful PhD. Catch her speaking at Soapbox Science in Exeter on the 11th of June,

 

SS: Stacey, how did you get to your current position?

SH: Having worked for local government and councils in an array of positions from working with the long term unemployed, opening jet (jobs enterprise and training) centres to working as a housing solutions officer I developed an avid interest in the experiences, difficulties and challenges of people from different social classes. In particular I was interested in the examinations of socioeconomic status and inequities in access to resources, plus issues related to privilege, power and control.  These interests and working experiences were at the root of my decision to return to education.  In 2014 I graduated with a BSc Honours degree in Psychology from Staffordshire University, with my final year project focussing on understanding the construction of communities.  Whilst in my final year I applied for an Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) 1+3 studentship at the University of Exeter, I was successful in this and began my MSc in social and organisational psychology at Exeter in October 2014.  Having completed my MSc I am now in the first year of my PhD, still furthering my interest in the construction of communities, specifically, looking at urban regeneration schemes. My PhD has a current, working, title of ‘Exploring the impact of urban regeneration schemes on communities: An analysis of the proposed psychological processes involved in successful and sustainable communities’.

 

SS: What, or who, inspired you to get a career in science?

SH: There are a number of people who have inspired me.  The many people I worked with throughout my career, those helping people in the face of adversity to tackle the odds and complete key skills, such as learning to write, and gaining secure employment, those fighting homelessness,  the list is never ending, these people were absolutely inspirational and the reason I decided to conduct research within this area.

On a more personal note, the belief that I, as a mature student and single mum, could succeed stems from my ever encouraging parents and, specifically my aunt who moved to Australia when I was very young and started a degree in industrial engineering.  Her experience wasn’t all pleasant, there were very few women in this line of work and she faced  gender based discrimination on a daily basis.  However, these experiences made her more determined and now, I am very proud to say, Carol Jones is very successful in her career, and facing these kind of challenges, on the other side of the world with no family around, her inspired me.
SS: What is the most fascinating aspect of your research/work?

SH: The most fascinating part of my research is facing the challenges, treading on new ground, helping the world to understand the different experiences of different people.  Highlighting the importance of people’s identity in their well-being and sense of community.
SS: What attracted you to Soapbox Science in the first place?

SH: The premise behind Soapbox Science, engaging the public in science, in my research, and the emphasis on women in science. It was my daughter who first saw the poster at the University of Exeter and asked me what it was about, so we read it together and she said ‘you should do that mum’ the thought of promoting women in science to my daughters was the biggest attraction I think.
SS: Sum up in one word your expectations for the day – excitement? Fear? Thrill? Anticipation?

SH: Inspiration.
SS:If you could change one thing about the scientific culture right now, what would it be

SH: To tackle the imbalance of girls in science at GCSE and A-level stages, this is where it should begin, encourage girls from a young age to engage in these subjects.

 

SS: What would be your top recommendation to a female PhD student considering pursuing a career in academia?

SH: I am only at the very beginning of my PhD, so I guess it would be the things I say to myself.  Exeter offers fantastic mentor schemes, research groups, buddy systems and my supervisors are always approachable and happy to help if I am struggling with anything.  So, my advice would be take all the help that is offered to you, be driven by your research and enjoy your work!

 

 

Posted in 2016 speakers blog | Tagged | Leave a comment

Just a kid from Bombay: Meet Shanti Shanker

Posted on June 9, 2016 by Nathalie Pettorelli

Shanti ShankerShanti Shanker is a Lecturer in Cognitive Psychology at the University of Bournemouth. She works on the brain mechanisms of cognitive control and executive functions. Come and hear her speak about the “Spotless mind: the science behind selective forgetting!” in Exeter on the 11th of June!

 

 

SS: Shanti, how did you get to your current position?

SS: I had few years of experience before I embarked on my PhD (in Neuropsychology, Bangor University) and it was exactly what I had envisaged. The PhD topic was an interesting idea that eventually was guided with inputs from my supervisors (one of whom was a neuroscientist, one a neuropsychologist and the other a neurologist). During the three years of my PhD I continued to contribute to teaching and few other projects. I am aiming to submit my thesis quite soon, and will continue my collaboration with Prof. Michael Anderson and Prof. Oliver Turnbull. My current position (Lecturer – in Cognitive Psychology) is the perfect fit, gives me the opportunity to teach and continue my research in areas of neuropsychology and neuroscience. As they say, life happens when you are not paying attention. This was one of the best things in my academic journey, life just continues!

 

SS: What, or who, inspired you to get a career in science?

SS: As a kid from Bombay, I was always inspired by women in science. I was always interested in understanding the human brain and especially how it contributes to everyday functions. It was only later in life that I understood the nuances of neuroscience. Professor Anthony Wagner is my first mentor, and he is one of the people who have inspired me to continue a career in science. Also, Professor Emily Cross who joined Bangor University as I started my PhD, is another inspiration – her passion and focus is very infectious.

 

SS: What is the most fascinating aspect of your research/work?

SS: The human brain and interaction with clinical patients! The ability to understand specific functions in the brain is beautiful. But each time I see my patients and speak to them, the human brain never fails to amaze me. Especially, how each person’s experience can be unique yet there is that collective understanding!
SS: What attracted you to Soapbox Science in the first place?

SS: Being passionate about the brain, this was an excellent opportunity to interact people from other fields. An avenue to use creativity to spread the passion of learning and understanding how science can influence our everyday activities and encourage curiosity.
SS: Sum up in one word your expectations for the day – excitement? Fear? Thrill? Anticipation?

SS: Enthusiasm.
SS: If you could change one thing about the scientific culture right now, what would it be?

SS: Personally, I would like to convey that passion, focus and resilience is key to be successful in science and not just opportunities or getting the right fit. Each one (especially females) can find their niche and science is definitely not for any selected few.
SS: What would be your top recommendation to a female PhD student considering pursuing a career in academia?

SS: Be resilient!

 

Posted in 2016 speakers blog | Tagged | Leave a comment