I am a part of the team lead by Professor Gabriele Griffin, Uppsala University who got funding for working in a Nordic Centre of Excellence to solve the nordic gender paradox. I will work at this centre of excellence around 20% of my time for five years.
This will be such a great learning experience for me to work with eHealth, which is one of my research areas, and collaborate closely with gender researchers. I think that this collaboration will also give synergies to my research area as a whole, and to my work with gender equality. I am really happy to be a part of this effort! 🙂
You are right though, gender has not been a part of my quite broad research area so far. 😮 . However, I have been interested in gender ever since I was a student, and I wrote two of my master level essays in the area of gender and literature. I have also worked closely, and thrived from, collaboration with the excellent Nina Almgren and Minna Salminen Karlsson in the FESTA project a couple of years. And I have one publication on inclusive supervision with Ulrike Schnaas. And since a couple of years I work as the Gender Equality Officer at the department of Information Technology, and in this role I have read and followed research on gender in academia.
The centre will work with action research and explore women careers in technology-driven work environments. It has four main research pillars, one of which is eHeath in which I will work.
Surely, there will be more to come about this new exciting Centre of Excellence!
Even though there is a larger number of women studying at the university, and PhD students, there is only about 25% female full professors in Sweden. This is problematic from many perspectives. One of the consequences is quality of academic work since there are lots of brilliant women who don’t contribute to research.
Today there is a strong focus on gender en academia in Sweden. The government has given the universities a task to integrate gender equality and perhaps things will happen now?
I work as the gender equality officer at the Department of Information Technology, so working with this is a part of my job (10%). As you might know, I work in the area of computer science where there are very few women today.
I am extremely proud of our work with gender equality. The gender equality group has an excellent plan for their work that might inspire others. We have gotten lots of help from the FESTA project in writing this one. Thanks Nina! Have a look at our plan and be inspired
I listened to this panel from Almedalen called “from decision to change” (in Swedish) and here are some of my reflections:
1) The paradox of meritocracy – we all believe that we evaluate men and women objectively and fair. We don’t according to many, many research studies. We need to be more aware of our gender bias, and see to it that we educate the recruitment groups in this area.
2) We need better and more transparent rubrics for assessment for academic positions. My experience is that the rubric for assessment of teaching skills is much more elaborated than the assessment of scientific skills. My experience is also that people tend to believe that it is the other way around!
3) The term innovation that is used by for example Vinnova is very gender coded and affects who applies for those money.
4) Women leave academia due to a crappy work environment, whereas men leave academia since they got a good job. This has to change, as with the help of initiatives such as the FESTA project. More of these kinds of projects need to be funded.
PhD supervision is a complex phenomenon that is addressed in a special issue on PhD supervision in Tidskriften Utbildning och lärande. I have read the special issue, and it is well worth the time. 🙂
Ulrike Schaas and I have collaborated around one of the papers in the journal. The title of the paper is “Peer reflection on inclusive supervision – a study circle as a space for collegial learning”
The paper presents a new form of learning opportunities for PhD supervisors where peer learning is a central concept. Ulrike Schaas has written about the pedagogic underpinnings of the study circle, and presents the facilitator’s perspective whereas I participated in the study circle and present the learner’s perspective.
For further details, read the paper!
Now our journal paper on development of inclusive supervision skills through collegial learning is published. It will appear in a special issue on PhD supervision in the journal “Utbildning och Lärande / Education and Learning”, ISSN 2001-4554. Some of the ideas in the paper are:
- PhD supervision plays an important role when promoting gender equality in academia.
- It is important to create a good work environment for PhD students.
- Collegial learning can be one way of improving your supervision skills.
- More opportunities for progression of supervision skills are needed
The paper also gives some ideas on how to arrange learning opportunities for PhD supervisors.
I am the gender equality officer at the department of IT at Uppsala University where I work. This is a challenging and exciting job, and I learn new things in the area every day. This week I attended the FESTA conference on gender in academia. FESTA is a large (enormous?) project related to gender in academia and you find many good resources on their web page.
From this conference I learned many things, but the most prominent where:
- Women need to be better at networking and visibility. This resulted in me starting this blog 🙂
- ERC grant writing seems to be a great learning experience, and I will start doing an application after the summer. 😮
- Monitoring of change when working with gender equality seems to be very related to my gender equality group’s work – but difficult to launch in practice? Can I make use of this?
In October 2015 I did a key note on being a woman in a male dominated field. I talked about the imposture syndrome (ie. the feeling of being fake) and harassment techniques.
How do you succeed in the area of computer science? My research has shown that having grit is more important than IQ or any other personality trait, and that grit together with the student’s overall view of success matters the most. If you work hard, and do not give up when it is really tough, then you are likely to have a good career in any subject, including computer science. However, if you are a woman in computer science success also correlates to you handling the male dominated field, and being the token figure. This can be seen as another kind of grit. The norm of the field is connected to the computer science nerd who has no interests but technology, and that this personality trait is required to be a part of the community. In this keynote I will tell some of my stories about how it is to be a woman in the field, and give some insights into the kind of grit that it requires to be a successful token figure.
There is an interview with me found here:
The key note is found here
Next week I am attending the NU 2016 conference in Malmö.
I am organising a workshop together with colleagues on inclusive supervision, and we will present and discuss a toolkit for Inclusive PhD supervision developed by the FESTA project. The workshop will include a role play as well as a discussion about the implementation of the toolkit in organisations.
I will also present a poster on a pedagogic development project related to the development of a framework for professional competencies.
Below is a picture of the printed tools from the toolkit