After the Inclusive Astronomy 2 conference in 2019, the Women in Astronomy Blog team reached out to Dr. Alexandra Pope to share her experience introducing a journal club series exploring diversity, equity, and inclusion issues facing astronomers to her department. This article stems from an interview with Dr. Alexandra Pope on Friday, April 9, 2021.
Gender and racial bias in Physics and Astronomy departments have moved to the forefront of meetings, conferences, and discussions that were before exclusive to scientific research. There have been numerous studies over the decades that quantify the effects our internalized biases have on the recruitment and retention of people with underrepresented identities in STEM fields. And many workshops, seminars, and trainings have been given at our institutions and meetings in efforts to raise awareness. But most of these events are voluntary. The people putting them on volunteer their time and energy and the attendees make a conscious choice to attend.
In order for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts to work, entire departments need to recognize the effects internalized biases have on the recruitment and retention of astronomers. Currently, our physics and astronomy departments still skew heavily towards older, white, cis-gendered, and able-bodied men meaning that hiring decisions, student mentoring, and teaching is predominantly done by this group of people. In the same way ‘you can’t be what you can’t see’, you can’t change what you don’t know is causing harm.
Alexandra Pope, Associate Professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, found that instead of convincing senior faculty and researchers to attend bias training or expecting them to attend meeting spaces built for underrepresented groups, bringing the bias training to them is one way to foster a more inclusive and supportive department. Using an already established course that had department-wide support, she created a familiar environment for faculty and students to engage with studies of internalized biases and has seen real transformation happen as a result.
Bringing DEI Home
After attending the 2018 Women in Science Symposium at Wellesley College, Dr. Pope noticed that she saw the same people participating in and presenting at these events. “Meg Urry gave one of her great talks about statistics and biases, and I was just like I want to get this information to more people in my department,” she says. Her department is “top-heavy” in that most faculty are senior, white men—people who weren’t as likely to attend a symposium focused on women in science.
Each semester the department offers a journal club course for graduate students. This semester-long class runs as you’d expect: graduate students choose research papers on a certain topic and present them to the group for discussion. What might be unique about UMass Amherst’s course is that they have essentially 100% faculty participation in this course and undergraduate astronomy majors are invited to attend as well. It’s an established event where the department gets together on equal turf to discuss scientific discoveries and their impacts.
A different faculty member runs the course each semester and is in charge of choosing what topic to focus on. In the Spring of 2019, it was Dr. Pope’s turn to oversee the course. She thought since all these papers on bias and equity are also scientific papers—with statistics and data we can analyze—why not switch up the focus of one of the journal clubs from astronomy to an analysis of bias in the sciences?
As a tenured faculty member, Dr. Pope felt comfortable reaching out to peers in her department to gauge interest. She discussed her idea with a few individually and then sent an email to all the faculty in the department. She encouraged those voicing their support to also CC the whole department. There were some questions about the scientific rigor since many studies were done in the social sciences. Dr. Pope assured her colleagues that the papers chosen would have the same scientific rigor and strategies that astronomers do in their field. Graduate students can apply many of the same statistical analyses they do for astronomy papers to these papers.
Dr. Pope then reached out to the graduate students to gauge their interest. They were overwhelmingly in support of this. So she titled the course “A review of cultural issues facing astronomers” and compiled a bibliography of papers that she had collected from the symposia and meetings she attended. The bibliography had categories for bias, mental health, career impacts, and other topics. This curated list made it easier for the students to choose topics that interested them or that they had personal experience with. She also paired students together so that a more experienced graduate student could work with a more junior one to practice their talk prior to presenting.
Building a DEI Community
“The outcome far exceeded my expectation,” reflected Dr. Pope. “We had really great participation. Everyone continued coming and was really engaged. The question period went on, we were always over our hour block and everyone was staying, asking questions, and discussing. I saw my senior colleagues put themselves in these vulnerable positions and open up. It was a good process for our department to go through together so we can feel like we're all on the same page.”
Having the students give the presentations helped give teeth to the statistical analysis the participants were working through. For example, some students talked about their own experiences with biases and mental health. This had a big impact on the participants and empowered others to open up about these issues.
In the last two weeks of the course, they held an informal workshop where they discussed strategies and solutions to a number of topics like imposter syndrome, racial biases, and graduate admissions. The subgroups were a mix of students and faculty identifying issues and thinking of solutions they could implement in their department.
“That was a really good momentum building for our department,” says Dr. Pope. Since then, their department has gotten rid of both the general and Physics GRE as a graduate admissions requirement and they are working to create an REU program for underrepresented students.
Making DEI Second Nature
One of the biggest changes Dr. Pope noticed though is that bias and marginalization are now at the forefront of her colleagues' minds. “It's just part of the equation now. It's in the conversation. It's not something that needs to be always brought up by me or my other female colleagues. Everybody now recognizes this is going on,” she says.
Quantifying the success of the journal club with a thoughtfully crafted survey allowed Dr. Pope to present the project at the 2020 AAS Meeting and the Inclusive Astronomy 2 conference. Major takeaways were that participants indicated increased awareness of topics related to bias/diversity/inclusion/equity and a desire to alter their practices when encountering issues of bias/diversity/inclusion/equity. Three-quarters of the participants also supported doing a journal club series like this every 0-3 years.
If you are interested in establishing your own journal club-style course or symposium in your department, here are the main things to keep in mind.
Alexandra Pope, Associate Professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, found that instead of convincing senior faculty and researchers to attend bias training or expecting them to attend meeting spaces built for underrepresented groups, bringing the bias training to them is one way to foster a more inclusive and supportive department. Using an already established course that had department-wide support, she created a familiar environment for faculty and students to engage with studies of internalized biases and has seen real transformation happen as a result.
Bringing DEI Home
After attending the 2018 Women in Science Symposium at Wellesley College, Dr. Pope noticed that she saw the same people participating in and presenting at these events. “Meg Urry gave one of her great talks about statistics and biases, and I was just like I want to get this information to more people in my department,” she says. Her department is “top-heavy” in that most faculty are senior, white men—people who weren’t as likely to attend a symposium focused on women in science.
Each semester the department offers a journal club course for graduate students. This semester-long class runs as you’d expect: graduate students choose research papers on a certain topic and present them to the group for discussion. What might be unique about UMass Amherst’s course is that they have essentially 100% faculty participation in this course and undergraduate astronomy majors are invited to attend as well. It’s an established event where the department gets together on equal turf to discuss scientific discoveries and their impacts.
A different faculty member runs the course each semester and is in charge of choosing what topic to focus on. In the Spring of 2019, it was Dr. Pope’s turn to oversee the course. She thought since all these papers on bias and equity are also scientific papers—with statistics and data we can analyze—why not switch up the focus of one of the journal clubs from astronomy to an analysis of bias in the sciences?
As a tenured faculty member, Dr. Pope felt comfortable reaching out to peers in her department to gauge interest. She discussed her idea with a few individually and then sent an email to all the faculty in the department. She encouraged those voicing their support to also CC the whole department. There were some questions about the scientific rigor since many studies were done in the social sciences. Dr. Pope assured her colleagues that the papers chosen would have the same scientific rigor and strategies that astronomers do in their field. Graduate students can apply many of the same statistical analyses they do for astronomy papers to these papers.
Dr. Pope then reached out to the graduate students to gauge their interest. They were overwhelmingly in support of this. So she titled the course “A review of cultural issues facing astronomers” and compiled a bibliography of papers that she had collected from the symposia and meetings she attended. The bibliography had categories for bias, mental health, career impacts, and other topics. This curated list made it easier for the students to choose topics that interested them or that they had personal experience with. She also paired students together so that a more experienced graduate student could work with a more junior one to practice their talk prior to presenting.
Building a DEI Community
Having the students give the presentations helped give teeth to the statistical analysis the participants were working through. For example, some students talked about their own experiences with biases and mental health. This had a big impact on the participants and empowered others to open up about these issues.
In the last two weeks of the course, they held an informal workshop where they discussed strategies and solutions to a number of topics like imposter syndrome, racial biases, and graduate admissions. The subgroups were a mix of students and faculty identifying issues and thinking of solutions they could implement in their department.
“That was a really good momentum building for our department,” says Dr. Pope. Since then, their department has gotten rid of both the general and Physics GRE as a graduate admissions requirement and they are working to create an REU program for underrepresented students.
Making DEI Second Nature
One of the biggest changes Dr. Pope noticed though is that bias and marginalization are now at the forefront of her colleagues' minds. “It's just part of the equation now. It's in the conversation. It's not something that needs to be always brought up by me or my other female colleagues. Everybody now recognizes this is going on,” she says.
Quantifying the success of the journal club with a thoughtfully crafted survey allowed Dr. Pope to present the project at the 2020 AAS Meeting and the Inclusive Astronomy 2 conference. Major takeaways were that participants indicated increased awareness of topics related to bias/diversity/inclusion/equity and a desire to alter their practices when encountering issues of bias/diversity/inclusion/equity. Three-quarters of the participants also supported doing a journal club series like this every 0-3 years.
If you are interested in establishing your own journal club-style course or symposium in your department, here are the main things to keep in mind.
- Reach out to peers to establish buy-in. Make sure colleagues publicly voice their support.
- Find an already established platform in the department that has high attendance such as colloquia, journal clubs, or other weekly department meetings.
- Create a database of papers for people to choose from.
- Have a wrap-up at the end where you discuss strategies for creating a more inclusive, equitable department.
- Find a way to make this cyclical or continue conversations.
- Ensure that everyone has a chance to speak and feel comfortable in the space.
No comments:
Post a Comment