tag:theconversation.com,2011:/fr/topics/science-technology-engineering-and-mathematics-12133/articlesScience, technology, engineering and mathematics – The Conversation2021-09-07T12:53:12Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1647442021-09-07T12:53:12Z2021-09-07T12:53:12ZWomen face motherhood penalty in STEM careers long before they actually become mothers<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/418715/original/file-20210831-21-tu1umn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=208%2C73%2C3850%2C2066&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Women in Ph.D STEM programs say they were told they had to choose between family and career. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/young-female-microbiologist-studying-coronavirus-royalty-free-image/1224202939">janiecbros/E+ via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/research-brief-83231">Research Brief</a> is a short take about interesting academic work.</em> </p>
<h2>The big idea</h2>
<p>Unfounded assumptions about how motherhood affects worker productivity can harm women’s careers in science, technology, engineering and math long before they are – or even intend to become – mothers, <a href="https://www.doi.org/10.1177/08912432211006037">we found in a new study</a>. </p>
<p>It is well known that <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/04/01/stem-jobs-see-uneven-progress-in-increasing-gender-racial-and-ethnic-diversity/">women are underrepresented</a> <a href="https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25585/promising-practices-for-addressing-the-underrepresentation-of-women-in-science-engineering-and-medicine">in the STEM workforce</a>, including in academia. For example, <a href="https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20198">women constituted</a> only 20% of tenured professorships in the physical sciences and 15% in engineering in 2017, despite the fact that their share of doctoral degrees in those fields <a href="https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf21321/report/field-of-degree-women">has increased substantially</a> in recent decades.</p>
<p>We wanted to understand what might be causing women to be more likely than their male peers to forgo science, technology, engineering and mathematics careers in academia. We conducted extensive interviews with 57 childless Ph.D. students and post-doctoral scholars – both men and women – in natural science and engineering programs at elite U.S. research universities. </p>
<p>The interviews covered a wide range of topics, including workplace experiences and relationships, personal background and career and family plans. Using the data obtained from the interviews, we analyzed gender differences in intentions to pursue a career as a professor after earning a doctorate. </p>
<p>We found that, upon entering the Ph.D. program, men and women were equally interested in working as a professor after finishing their degree. But, by the time of our interviews, women were twice as likely as men to say they had decided not to pursue a career as a professor after all. </p>
<p>Our analysis ruled out a variety of factors that might explain this gender pattern, such as the interviewee’s discipline, their partner’s career and their age. Instead, we found that women who had changed their minds about becoming a professor cited a workplace culture that assumes motherhood – but not fatherhood – is incompatible with an academic career. We dubbed this the “specter of motherhood.”</p>
<p>Several of the women we interviewed said their advisers explicitly told them they have to choose between an academic career and a family and that “there’s more to life than babies.” Women also said they experienced intense pressure to reject, denigrate or hide the mere possibility of motherhood for fear of no longer being taken seriously in the profession. Some went to great lengths, such as hiding medically dangerous miscarriages or strategically telling others that they didn’t intend to have children. </p>
<p>One student recounted how, at a panel on gender issues in STEM, a woman professor’s “gist was that having children is sort of narcissistic. And she’s above that … like, simpletons want to have kids.”</p>
<h2>Why it matters</h2>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.11.006">Research shows</a> that mothers in high-status, elite professions - ones that demand significant levels of training and long work hours - are no less committed or productive than fathers or childless peers. Yet inaccurate stereotypes persist and are a <a href="https://www.doi.org/10.1086/511799">critical source</a> of discrimination.</p>
<p>The irony is that, despite workplace cultures that can be hostile to motherhood, elite, often male-dominated, careers can be very favorable for parents – at least when it comes to overall levels of pay and access to benefits. The very things that make these jobs desirable in the first place – such as <a href="https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/docs/equal_pay_issue_brief_final.pdf">high salaries</a>, <a href="https://www.doi.org/10.1111/josi.12012">flexible work hours</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S1049-3867(00)00053-0">access to health insurance</a> and high-quality child care – also make them particularly supportive of parenting. </p>
<p>But if the culture of these workplaces pushes women out, it makes it doubly hard to challenge these damaging stereotypes. </p>
<h2>What still isn’t known</h2>
<p>An outstanding question is the extent to which women in elite and male-dominated occupations that we did not study, like corporate law and finance, might be similarly affected by the “specter of motherhood.” </p>
<p><a href="https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691126432/selling-women-short">Some evidence</a> <a href="https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674018167">suggests</a> that they are. </p>
<p>If the problem is pervasive across many industries and workplaces, targeted policies like improved child care or more flexible hours are important, but not enough. Leaders also need to proactively challenge the narrative that motherhood can’t coexist with success in an elite career.</p>
<p>[<em>Like what you’ve read? Want more?</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=likethis">Sign up for The Conversation’s daily newsletter</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/164744/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>New study finds that workplace hostility toward motherhood in STEM fields can deter even young, childless women from pursuing academic careers.Sarah Thebaud, Associate Professor, Sociology, University of California, Santa BarbaraCatherine Taylor, Associate Professor of Sociology, University of California, Santa BarbaraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1636302021-08-12T12:27:15Z2021-08-12T12:27:15ZFemale scientists set back by the pandemic may never make up lost time<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414005/original/file-20210730-13-18b7c35.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=21%2C32%2C7143%2C4740&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Economist Esther Duflo sits with a tableful of men just after winning a Nobel Prize in 2019. She was the second female in history to win the economics prize for her research in global poverty.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/french-esther-duflo-and-indian-born-abhijit-banerjee-news-photo/1186805023?adppopup=true">Jonathan Nackstrand/AFP via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>During the COVID-19 quarantines, scientists, like most professionals, took their work home. </p>
<p>Women researchers, however, bore the disproportionate <a href="https://doi.org/10.17226/26061">burden of caregiving</a> responsibilities, forcing <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01294-9">a drop in their productivity</a>. Although this decrease may be temporary, my research suggests the <a href="https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:219573509">hit to women’s reputations and their scientific impacts</a> may compound over time, potentially setting female scientists back by years, if not decades, compared to their male colleagues.</p>
<p>The reason is the inequitable structure of rewards in science. I <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Cz6vH68AAAAJ&hl=en">study</a> social systems from the perspective of network science, which focuses on the structure of connections between people. My colleagues and I analyze statistics about scientific publications to understand how collaborations form and how researchers cite each other.</p>
<p>We have found that <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.12149">inequalities in science emerge from biased individual decisions</a> about whom to cite. Our work shows that this <a href="https://arxiv.org/pdf/2103.10944.pdf">leads to gender disparities in scientific impact</a>.</p>
<h2>Top scientists get disproportionate credit</h2>
<p>Science is far from egalitarian. A small group of “top” scientists receive a disproportionate share of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2012208118">recognition</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1800485115">awards</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1719557115">funding opportunities</a> compared to the rest. The inequality is rising: In 2015, 1 in 5 papers cited a “top” researcher — someone among the 1% of the most-cited scientists. That increased from <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2012208118">1 in 7 papers in 2000</a>. </p>
<p>One of the first researchers to explain how structural factors skew scientific rewards was Robert Merton. He described the mechanism of cumulative advantage, dubbed <a href="https://science.sciencemag.org/content/159/3810/56">the Matthew effect</a> after the Biblical book of Matthew, “the rich get richer, while the poor get poorer.”</p>
<p>Cumulative advantage channels bigger rewards to researchers who are already advantaged. The more-eminent scientists receive disproportionate credit for joint work done with lesser-known colleagues. The more citations a scientist receives, <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.00269">the easier it is for others to discover</a> his or her papers and cite them in their own work.</p>
<p>Other factors interact with cumulative advantage to create structural inequalities. For example, a faculty position at a more prestigious institution brings <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.08734">opportunities to join larger</a> and <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33558230/">higher-profile</a> collaborations, and be <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/115/50/12603.full.pdf">mentored by better-known researchers</a>, which bring still more recognition and opportunities. As a result, a few “top” researchers receive disproportionately more recognition than the rest. </p>
<h2>Scientists accept the skewed system</h2>
<p>Scientists tolerate these skewed reward mechanisms because they believe that they motivate all researchers to produce their very best work. Scientists have written about this problem since <a href="https://aapt.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1119/1.1987897">the 1970s</a>, recognizing that <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1970.tb01010.x">the field tolerates</a> unfair recognition and that the unequal recognition system could be <a href="https://science.sciencemag.org/content/344/6186/809.summary">getting worse</a> in the internet age. </p>
<p>And so, cumulative advantage snowballs: The “best” get hired at more prestigious institutions, where they find more mentors and more opportunities to produce more outstanding work. </p>
<p>Conventional wisdom says: Inequality in recognition simply reflects the inequality of merit. However, evidence has emerged over the years that factors other than merit affect scientific recognition.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/715021?journalCode=jpe&">One study found</a> that papers published in a journal that became defunct received 20% fewer citations than similar papers in journals still publishing — even when the defunct journal papers were widely available.</p>
<p>Another extraneous factor — gender — was found to affect faculty <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1602.00795">hiring</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250500145072">tenure</a>, <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.08912">getting published in prestigious journals</a> and other academic rewards.</p>
<h2>A glass ceiling in science</h2>
<p>The Matthew effect also amplifies such extraneous factors, allowing disadvantages due to human biases to accumulate and create inequality. For instance, <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-40990-z">men tend to cite other men</a> in their research. But <a href="https://dictionary.apa.org/heterophily">women also tend to cite men</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414003/original/file-20210730-28-1a9j9se.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414003/original/file-20210730-28-1a9j9se.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/414003/original/file-20210730-28-1a9j9se.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=874&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414003/original/file-20210730-28-1a9j9se.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=874&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414003/original/file-20210730-28-1a9j9se.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=874&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414003/original/file-20210730-28-1a9j9se.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1098&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414003/original/file-20210730-28-1a9j9se.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1098&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/414003/original/file-20210730-28-1a9j9se.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1098&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Andrea Ghez, shown here in California in 2017, became only the fourth woman in history to receive the Nobel Prize for Physics in 2020 for her work discovering a supermassive black hole at the center of the galaxy,</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/professor-andrea-ghez-of-black-hole-apocalypse-speaks-news-photo/824984202?adppopup=true">Frederick M. Brown/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Our work demonstrates that <a href="https://arxiv.org/pdf/2103.10944.pdf">biased individual preferences systematically reduce the number of citations women receive</a>. Since citations measure scientific impact, women receiving fewer citations find fewer professional opportunities. This affects all female scientists. Even the most distinguished female researchers <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.12149">struggle to break through the invisible glass ceiling in science</a>: Women have received only seven of the 186 Nobel Prizes in Chemistry, four of the 216 prizes in physics and two of the 86 prizes in economics. </p>
<h2>Inequality harms science</h2>
<p>The inequalities due to gender, race, class and other factors harm scientific innovation and the purpose of science itself.</p>
<p>Inequalities <a href="https://estsjournal.org/index.php/ests/article/view/142">reduce the diversity</a> of the scientific workforce and the creativity and productivity of collaborations. <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/117/9/4609">Women remain a small minority</a> of researchers in many fields. Since hiring and promotion decisions depend on the metrics of impact, gender disparities systematically limit women’s career opportunities, regardless of their individual merit.</p>
<p>Inequalities reduce the talent of the scientific workforce. The fewer women faculty who serve as mentors, the fewer talented young women will go into science. <a href="https://science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6497/1317.summary">Research shows</a> that girls who score in the 80th percentile on high school math and science assessments choose to major in science at low rates — the same rate as the boys who score in the 1st percentile.</p>
<p>Inequalities poison the culture of science. Economic inequality, where a small minority controls the disproportionate share of income and wealth, reduces well-being and increases mortality, crime and social problems. Scientific inequality is less studied but may result in similarly corrosive effects that deter talent from entering science.</p>
<p>Changing how scientists credit each other could reduce inequality. Our analysis of citations inequality shows that merely increasing the size of the group receiving less recognition — through hiring or affirmative action, for example — does little.<br>
[<em>Over 100,000 readers rely on The Conversation’s newsletter to understand the world.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=100Ksignup">Sign up today</a>.]</p>
<p>Journals and academic search engines could audit bibliographies, index for diversity, or limit the number of references authors may make, forcing them to cite judiciously. Academic search engines could deemphasize popularity when ranking search results.</p>
<p>This is less about recognition and more about spurring scientific innovation on which society’s prosperity depends. The pandemic has altered the career trajectories of many women, but it is the inequalities endemic in science that may keep them from catching up.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/163630/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kristina Lerman receives funding from DARPA and AFOSR.</span></em></p>Science is not egalitarian. Top researchers get more credit and funding than lesser-known scientists. The long-held practices creating inequality also amplify gender disparities that hold back women.Kristina Lerman, Research Professor of Computer Science, University of Southern CaliforniaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/636492016-08-24T20:26:14Z2016-08-24T20:26:14ZWhy STEM subjects and fashion design go hand in hand<p>The fashion industry evokes images of impossibly beautiful people jet setting around the world in extravagant finery. Like a moth to the flames, it draws many of our most creative young minds. Often, the first instinct of high school students who want to work in creative industries is to drop all their math and science subjects to take up textiles and art. </p>
<p>As a fashion and textile designer myself, I would like to explain how this is a bad strategy and how the future of fashion requires <a href="https://www.academia.edu/27951162/SO_YOU_WANT_TO_BECOME_A_FASHION_DESIGNER_..%E2%80%8B">science, technology, engineering and mathematics</a> (STEM skills) more than ever.</p>
<p>Beneath the glamorous façade, the fashion industry is undergoing disruptive changes due to rapid advances in technology. We take it for granted that you can use your Iphone to watch a fashion runway show on YouTube, Google the garment to find an online retailer like Net-A-Porter, pay for it using PayPal and then upload a selfie onto Snapchat. None of these services even existed 20 years ago.</p>
<p>Materials that were theoretical thirty years ago have become pervasive. So when you buy yoga clothing from Lululemon that are “anti-bacterial” you are actually wearing fabrics that are coated in silver <a href="http://eng.thesaurus.rusnano.com/wiki/article1257">nano-whiskers</a>. Sportswear companies such as <a href="http://www.materialise.com/cases/software-solutions-help-nike-in-supporting-great-art">Nike</a> and <a href="http://www.materialise.com/cases/adidas-futurecraft-the-ultimate-3d-printed-personalized-shoe">Adidas</a> engage in a technological arms race of materials and technology. The reason why their latest shoes look like something out of science fiction is because the technology is truly cutting edge science.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/135242/original/image-20160824-30249-1wzaln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/135242/original/image-20160824-30249-1wzaln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/135242/original/image-20160824-30249-1wzaln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/135242/original/image-20160824-30249-1wzaln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/135242/original/image-20160824-30249-1wzaln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/135242/original/image-20160824-30249-1wzaln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/135242/original/image-20160824-30249-1wzaln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/135242/original/image-20160824-30249-1wzaln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Actor Gwendoline Christie models a creation by Iris van Herpen.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Benoit Tessier/Reuters</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In 2011, Parisian High Fashion forever changed when designer Iris van Herpen was <a href="http://www.materialise.com/cases/iris-van-herpen-s-escapism">invited as a guest member</a> of La Chambre Syndicale de La Haute Couture. Van Herpen, who makes liberal use of hi tech materials such as magnetic fabric, laser cutters and custom developed thermoplastics which are 3D printed, was embraced by the oldest establishment as “Haute Couture”.</p>
<p>Even the supermodel Karlie Kloss advocates the importance of STEM skills for future careers in the tech industry and has a scholarship program <a href="http://kodewithklossy.com/">Kode with Klossy</a> that teaches young girls computer coding.</p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/135055/original/image-20160823-18708-1v506s6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/135055/original/image-20160823-18708-1v506s6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/135055/original/image-20160823-18708-1v506s6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=879&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/135055/original/image-20160823-18708-1v506s6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=879&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/135055/original/image-20160823-18708-1v506s6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=879&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/135055/original/image-20160823-18708-1v506s6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1105&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/135055/original/image-20160823-18708-1v506s6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1105&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/135055/original/image-20160823-18708-1v506s6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1105&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Karlie Kloss: a fan of coding.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Danny Moloshok/Reuters</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Fashion is a unique blend of business, science, art and technology. It requires a polymath, a person who can understand all of these skills. The most compelling reasons to learn STEM skills is because technology and rapidly changing business models have made surviving in the business more competitive than ever. </p>
<p>If you are running a fashion label you will probably need a business loan or have to justify what you are spending your money on. No matter how brilliant your ideas, the people who control money are only swayed by arguments based on sound financial reasoning. Rates of return, accounting and interest rates are all ideas that can only be well understood using mathematics.</p>
<p>Mathematics is mandatory for financial literacy. It introduces ideas such as optimisation, understanding statistics and problem solving and forms a language that allows designers to talk to scientists, engineers and business people.</p>
<p>If you are going to study fashion in college, you will need to learn about fabrics, which are material science. No matter how advanced the school syllabus in textiles, by the time you get to college there will be new materials and technology that did not exist before you got there. If you learn chemistry and physics you will understand the underlying scientific principles on a deeper level, making new material science really easy in the future.</p>
<p>Learning chemistry in school introduces you to lab protocols, taking measurements and accurately recording experiments. These are the exact skills you will need when working with dyes and pigments in textiles. </p>
<p>Using dyes to change the colour of textiles is essentially carbon chemistry. To do this a designer must change the acidity or alkalinity of the fabric - known as the PH level. This allows the “chromophores,” which are the parts of the dye molecule that create colour, to embed into the fabric. The PH scale in chemistry is a logarithmic scale and this is one place where abstract mathematical ideas are actually used in practice.</p>
<h2>Maths and creativity</h2>
<p>Mathematics can also push the boundaries of creativity in fashion. Designer Dai Fujiwara collaborated with legendary 1982 <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/Fields-Medal">Fields Medal</a> winning mathematician William Thurston to create radically different garments inspired by geometry and topology. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/135238/original/image-20160824-30216-1rw5c23.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/135238/original/image-20160824-30216-1rw5c23.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/135238/original/image-20160824-30216-1rw5c23.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/135238/original/image-20160824-30216-1rw5c23.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/135238/original/image-20160824-30216-1rw5c23.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/135238/original/image-20160824-30216-1rw5c23.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/135238/original/image-20160824-30216-1rw5c23.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/135238/original/image-20160824-30216-1rw5c23.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A 2011 creation by Dai Fujiwara.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Benoit Tessier/Reuters</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In his 1 32 5 collection Fujiwara collaborated with computer scientist Jun Mitani to create mathematical folding algorithms generating innovative clothing. My own PhD research explores <a href="http://newsroom.uts.edu.au/news/2016/08/disruptive-fashion?utm_source=disruptive_gk6&G3utm_medium=gk&utm_campaign=disruptive_aug16">the underlying geometry of how clothing is made</a> and has even been used to teach abstract mathematical concepts through making fashion garments. </p>
<p>For a socially minded designer, STEM skills are essential to understanding environmental sustainability. Fashion used to have seasons, but now with fast fashion companies such as Zara and H&M, new clothing is coming into stores in each week. Fast fashion companies are often criticised for being unsustainable and exploiting workers. </p>
<p>Sustainability in the fashion industry is an extremely complex issue. It requires an understanding of the underlying science, economic behaviour and business practises of the fashion industry and their environmental impact. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/eQAuSGvQjN0?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>The fashion industry is full of “Greenwash,” fake sustainable marketing which has no scientific basis. STEM skills allow you to navigate these complex issues and try to address them for yourself.</p>
<p>The future of fashion is uncharted territory, but STEM skills make a budding fashion designer smart and adaptable.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/63649/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Liu receives funding for an Australian Postgraduate Award from the Australian Government Department of Education and Training. </span></em></p>The fashion industry attracts creative young minds. But to succeed as a designer in a time of rapid technological change, knowledge of maths and science is invaluable.Mark Liu, PhD Philosophy, Fashion and Textiles Designer, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/384532015-03-11T13:51:36Z2015-03-11T13:51:36ZCan a new university close the gender gap in engineering?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/74349/original/image-20150310-13543-1nfavvn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A new model aiming for equal numbers of women and men.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Engineer image via SpeedKingz/www.shutterstock.com </span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Fashioning itself as the “first purpose-built university in the UK for 30 years”, the New Model in Technology and Engineering (NMITE) aims to “<a href="http://nmite.org.uk/media/">radically evolve the way technology and engineering are taught to undergraduates</a>”. NMITE will be based in Hereford, with the intention to open in 2017-18 with around 300 undergraduates, expanding to 5,000 students by 2027. It can’t quite call itself a university yet – NMITE will have to approved by the privy council, which will take some time. </p>
<p>Backed by the universities of Bristol and Warwick and Olin College of Engineering in Massachusetts, NMITE will focus on teaching, rather than on gaining research funding. The economic rationale for the project is based on the <a href="http://www.engineeringuk.com/Research/Engineering_UK_Report_2015/">well-publicised shortage</a> of technology and engineering graduates in the UK, as well as supporting local economic development in Herefordshire. </p>
<h2>Gender balance</h2>
<p>NMITE will also focus on increasing the number of female graduates in technology and engineering. Its website says the aim is to admit an equal number of women and men to the programme, with a similar profile for faculty members, but there are no clear answers as yet on how they will go about this. They may find it difficult to obtain gender equality, especially if other universities’ technology and engineering departments are anything to go by.</p>
<p>Looking at undergraduate degrees, women do study science subjects – particularly in human and veterinary medicine, and dentistry. However, the percentage of women studying technology and engineering at university remains stubbornly low. According to the <a href="https://www.hesa.ac.uk/stats">latest data from the Higher Education Statistics Authority</a>, women made up 39% of all enrolments in science subjects in 2013-14. At undergraduate engineering level, the percentage was even lower, at 24%. The table below helps illustrate the gap. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/74460/original/image-20150311-24203-1rct7ee.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/74460/original/image-20150311-24203-1rct7ee.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/74460/original/image-20150311-24203-1rct7ee.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/74460/original/image-20150311-24203-1rct7ee.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/74460/original/image-20150311-24203-1rct7ee.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/74460/original/image-20150311-24203-1rct7ee.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/74460/original/image-20150311-24203-1rct7ee.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/74460/original/image-20150311-24203-1rct7ee.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Technology and engineering are very female-light.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/371340/Main_text_SR45_2014.pdf">Department for Education</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>At GCSE level, due to the structure of the curriculum, there are almost equal numbers of male and female students studying all three sciences. But as the graph below shows, this balance changes at A Level. While biology continues to appeal to both genders, chemistry and physics – along with maths and computing – attracts a significantly lower percentage of female students.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/74163/original/image-20150309-13579-1hp3rie.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/74163/original/image-20150309-13579-1hp3rie.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/74163/original/image-20150309-13579-1hp3rie.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=392&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/74163/original/image-20150309-13579-1hp3rie.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=392&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/74163/original/image-20150309-13579-1hp3rie.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=392&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/74163/original/image-20150309-13579-1hp3rie.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=492&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/74163/original/image-20150309-13579-1hp3rie.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=492&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/74163/original/image-20150309-13579-1hp3rie.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=492&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Percentage of girls and boys taking A Level subjects in 2014.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Carol Davenport, data from JCQ</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The likelihood is that NMITE will end up with a similar composition, with a very male-dominated student population. This is certainly what has happened to the University Technical Colleges (UTC), a form of free school for 14 to 19-year-olds funded by the Department for Education. Many of these UTCs focused on technology and engineering, and <a href="http://schoolsweek.co.uk/utcs/">have a student population which is predominantly male</a>. One of the few that isn’t is the <a href="http://lifesciencesutc.co.uk/">Liverpool Life Science UTC</a> which, as its name suggests, focuses on pathways into life science careers such as medicine, healthcare and animal sciences. </p>
<h2>Start early</h2>
<p>Unfortunately for NMITE, the answer to gender equality probably lies much earlier in the educational journey of young people. The longitudinal <a href="http://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/education/research/aspires/10FactsandFictionsfinalversion.pdf">ASPIRES project</a> at King’s College London, which looks into maths and science education, found that although many young people enjoy science, even at the age of ten they don’t see it as being something that “people like me” do. The ASPIRES research team recommended that careers information and activities start earlier, in primary school, not in Year 9, and that the idea of science careers need to be embedded into everyday lessons. </p>
<p>Unless NMITE works with primary schools, that isn’t something that they’ll have much influence on. And even if they do work with primary schools, they won’t reap the benefit for at least seven years.</p>
<p>But there is good news: their approach to teaching engineering and technology may appeal to female students. In its 2006 report, <a href="http://www.iop.org/education/teacher/support/girls_physics/resources-and-guidance-for-teachers/page_63821.html">Girls in the Physics classroom: A teachers guide for action</a>, the Institute of Physics identified a number of useful similarities in schools where high numbers of girls chose to study physics. </p>
<p>The report said these schools give pupils a glimpse of the “big picture” by reinforcing links between topics, key ideas and their applications wherever possible. The schools also tried tackling applications first, and then the principles behind them, so that the rationale for studying a topic were clearer throughout. </p>
<p>NMITE’s approach of creating a <a href="http://nmite.org.uk/curriculum/">curriculum</a> with a focus first on applied engineering rather than theory may provide the big picture and the practical application that appeal more to women. Part of the degree will be called “human interaction”, with a focus on a liberal education akin to a broad-based liberal arts degree in which students learn about “the historical, cultural, political and ethical context of technology and engineering” alongside employability and communication skills. This may also help improve the gender balance. Or, of course, they could simply include life sciences in their curriculum as well.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/38453/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Carol Davenport receives funding from the HEFCE Catalyst Fund.</span></em></p>A new university based in Hereford plans to attract a new generation of engineers – and more women.Carol Davenport, Director, Think Physics, Faculty of Engineering and Environment, Northumbria University, NewcastleLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/343072014-12-08T19:35:03Z2014-12-08T19:35:03ZVoices of a generation: young scientists must be seen and heard<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/66541/original/image-20141208-20492-1y6lhtx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Postdocs do the lion's share of research, so maybe it's time we started listening to them.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/katherynemily/5819998952">∞ katherynemily./Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/">CC BY-NC-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Postdoctoral scientists – postdocs – are the engines of biomedical research. As early career researchers, they conduct the most experiments and are responsible for sculpting how we treat disease in decades to come. But as a major stakeholder in discussions about the future of biomedical research, their views are often overlooked. </p>
<p>Young scientists from eight Boston institutions including Harvard and MIT last week published a report, <a href="http://f1000research.com/articles/3-291/v1">Shaping the Future of Research</a>. The paper speaks for hundreds of young scientists who attended the Future of Research symposium held by the same group in October this year. </p>
<p>The problems raised may not all be new, but do represent a starting point for discussions between young scientists and other, more senior stakeholders.</p>
<p>Some concerns of the US group resonate with Australia’s recent <a href="http://www.mckeonreview.org.au/">McKeon Review of Health and Medical Research</a>. The excessive burden of grant administration and short funding cycles are mentioned. As one quoted participant put it, this means “too much time [is] spent by highest-level scientists writing grants”.</p>
<p>Other concerns raised in the report are of less relevance to the Australian system. US postdocs typically earn a starting wage of US$42,000 (A$49,000). Although many would still argue that Australian postdocs are underpaid for their level of expertise, in a global context they are relatively well off. Their typical starting salaries are around A$72,000 (US$60,000). </p>
<p>On the whole, though, the report is highly relevant to Australians as we continue to debate our own preferred models for research in our science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) and health sectors.</p>
<h2>No success without support</h2>
<p>Last week, Australia’s Chief Scientist, Ian Chubb, <a href="http://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/2014/12/benchmarking-australian-science-technology-engineering-mathematics/">documented</a> our bottom-of-the-table performance for collaboration between business and research. </p>
<p>But even in the US, which prides itself on strong academic-industry collaboration, graduate and postdoctoral programs train researchers solely to become academics, despite <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0036307">less than 15%</a> of postdocs progressing to run an academic lab within five to seven years. </p>
<p>This lack of support for non-academic careers led one symposium participant to comment “there is no way to exit [academia] positively”. If Professor Chubb’s <a href="http://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/FINAL_STEMAUSTRALIASFUTURE_WEB.pdf">vision</a> for increasing STEM-trained researchers’ contributions to Australian business is to come true, appropriate training and support to equip researchers must be a focus.</p>
<p>Recent downward trends in Australian funding success rates (which were <a href="https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/grants/outcomes-funding-rounds">14.9% this year</a> compared with <a href="http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/file/grants/rounds/projects/2010_project_grant_statistics_091029.pdf">22.9% five years ago</a> for National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) grants), are also worrying. </p>
<p>US postdocs cite the hyper-competition caused by their similarly low success rates as a problem for innovation, reproduction and integrity of research – three key aspects we should instead be encouraging. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/66593/original/image-20141208-16326-kyxnvh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/66593/original/image-20141208-16326-kyxnvh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/66593/original/image-20141208-16326-kyxnvh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/66593/original/image-20141208-16326-kyxnvh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/66593/original/image-20141208-16326-kyxnvh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/66593/original/image-20141208-16326-kyxnvh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/66593/original/image-20141208-16326-kyxnvh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/slumadridcampus/5750162705/in/photolist-4VABMa-5ML3FW-4h7hKe-9L863i-pzgPcA-mhukPH-cLjwnN-cM4nLd-cLxdwo-cLP9UN-cLQrnY-cLuaYu-cLdGCG-9LF56h-cJPCtU-cLvvTY-cLxqyf-cLrStW-ePyufL-cMtz5N-5VvsUv-nAPkXA-d6kmBG-hyxbJ9-cLiMoy-avkKbB-8z28SH-cJQbBL-bvUssy-cLit7S-aKzyaK-cLqaJA-cLhZwq-cK5Sh1-cLk7HJ-cJQcbQ-cK5QHQ-h2ZbP2-aMtHWT-83Y8t-cLvMvC-db52S8-cK4BNW-cLjd9W-db4DKZ-cK5k6C-db576P-cLs6Mm-db4WTf-aKFsba">Saint Louis University Madrid/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Worryingly, 58% of respondents to a <a href="http://nuffieldbioethics.org/project/research-culture/">survey of British scientists</a> released last week identified as “being aware of scientists feeling tempted or under pressure to compromise on research integrity and standards”. This shows this is a global issue that needs to be addressed, perhaps through changing the metrics used to evaluate a “good” scientist.</p>
<p>The report also raises concerns over increasing trends for funding to focus on “short-term” applied research at the expense of “longer-term” fundamental research. Similarly, focusing on “popular” topics at the expense of mature fields is mentioned as a problem. </p>
<p>In a time when big funding increases, courtesy of the medical research future fund (<a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/medical-research-future-fund">MRFF</a>), are on the table in Australia, albeit with an uncertain future due to the complex Senate landscape, these discussions are particularly pertinent to the future of Australian research. </p>
<p>US postdocs favour a model where “industrial/commercial entities should assume responsibility for the advances that are most directly commercialisable”. This leaves more government funding to “support public health and environmental health research” and “prospective” research. </p>
<p>In Australia, where the venture capital market is far smaller and the number of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies is tiny compared to the US, it is unrealistic to think the private sector will, in the short to medium term, take responsibility for funding all or even a majority of the research needed to translate fundamental discoveries into new diagnostics, vaccines or pharmaceuticals.</p>
<p>The US postdocs’ concerns are an important reminder, though, that we need to choose carefully where our balance eventually lies.</p>
<p>Overall, the recommendations from US postdocs are clear: </p>
<ul>
<li>increase communication between young scientists and other stakeholders</li>
<li>increase transparency for outcomes of scientific careers and train young scientists accordingly</li>
<li>increase investment in young scientists. </li>
</ul>
<p>Careful planning for major changes, such as those the MRFF and STEM strategy may bring, is necessary to ensure a sustainable and honourable future for Australian biomedical research. </p>
<p>The Australian Academy of Science’s <a href="https://www.science.org.au/emcr-forum">Early- and Mid-Career Researcher Forum</a> is one group advocating for young scientists and their ideas.</p>
<p>Young scientists, as major stakeholders in the future of biomedical research, will continue to be important voices in this process. They are a group worth investing in.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/34307/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Riglar receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council and the Menzies Foundation as the 2014 NHMRC/RG Menzies Fellow.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Douglas Hilton works for the Walter And Eliza Hall Institute Of Medical Research and The University Of Melbourne, and is president-elect of the Association of Australian Medical Research Institutes. He advises a range of medical research institutes, collaborates with CSL and founded and owns shares in the privately owned company, Murigen Therapeutics. Doug was the director of CRC Growth Factors, and the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute receives funding from CRCs including the HEARing-CRC, and Cancer Therapeutics CRC. Doug receives funding from the NHMRC, the Australian Research Council, CSL, National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy (NCRIS), National Institute of Health (USA), CSIRO via the Science and Industry Endowment Fund, and various philanthropic trusts and foundations.</span></em></p>Postdoctoral scientists – postdocs – are the engines of biomedical research. As early career researchers, they conduct the most experiments and are responsible for sculpting how we treat disease in decades…David Riglar, Postdoctoral Fellow, Harvard UniversityDouglas Hilton, Director, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute & Professor of Medical Biology , Walter and Eliza Hall InstituteLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/332822014-10-30T06:27:30Z2014-10-30T06:27:30ZUniversities shouldn’t see schools as competitors for teacher training funding<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/63194/original/gp6v8s64-1414593342.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">First class teaching.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?safesearch=1&search_type=keyword_search&extra_html=1&lang=en&language=en&search_source=search_form&version=llv1&anyorall=all&use_local_boost=1&searchterm=school%20uniforms&show_color_wheel=1&media_type=images&page=1&sort_method=popular&inline=71234953">Schoolroom via Monkey Business Image/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The coalition is ploughing ahead with its plan to give schools more control of training new teachers. A <a href="http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/university-teacher-training-places-cut/2016359.article">recent announcement</a> of government-funded places on teacher training courses for the next academic year gave a 15% boost for the <a href="http://www.education.gov.uk/get-into-teaching/teacher-training-options/school-based-training">School Direct</a> programme, through which teachers are trained on the job. At the same time, universities will face a 3.7% reduction in funded places on more traditional training routes such as the Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE). </p>
<p>Now <a href="http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/highereducation/Pages/ImpactOfITTreforms.aspx">research</a> published by <a href="http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/Pages/default.aspx">Universities UK</a> sets out in starker terms what the impact of this shift has been on universities – a 23% drop in teacher training places allocated to universities between the 2012-13 and 2015-16 academic years. It also warns of issues around teacher shortages in some subjects – particularly as School Direct has faced more challenges in recruiting teachers for science, engineering, maths and technology (STEM) subjects. </p>
<p>These figures come at a time when the role of universities in teacher training is already under scrutiny <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-27238264">by the Carter Review</a> of initial teacher training. Some universities, including the University of Bath and the Open University, have pulled out of postgraduate teacher training already, followed <a href="http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/future-of-teacher-training-under-threat/2016503.article">most recently by Anglia Ruskin University</a>. </p>
<h2>Partnerships are key</h2>
<p>Yet despite the gloomy picture presented for universities, there are some who have adapted and continue to deliver high-quality teacher education in partnership with schools. Most School Direct providers do work with university partners to deliver teacher training education. And the shift from a university-led model to one built around partnerships with schools can help add value to trainee teachers. Whether the funding for places is allocated to schools or universities becomes irrelevant if all involved recognise the contribution that each party can bring towards achieving a common set of goals. </p>
<p>The reality is that universities are buying-in school provision – such as school placements and access to experienced teachers – to add value to the quality of their teacher education courses. In return, schools are buying-in university expertise to enhance the quality of their own courses. On the University of Warwick’s secondary teacher education programme, whether an applicant is on the core PGCE route or the School Direct route, they receive very similar overall provision. From Warwick’s perspective, the financial arrangements for delivering the two routes are equivalent.</p>
<p>So with partnership at the heart of teacher education, the differences between School Direct and core PGCE are not so apparent. But as the sector commercialises and universities compete for business from schools, they must be careful not to undersell or devalue their contribution to teacher education. The PGCE is still highly valued and the focus on partnership must centre on the high quality expertise that universities can offer. </p>
<h2>Expertise still in high demand</h2>
<p>Universities also need to be clear about the rationale for being involved with teacher education. It is no longer only about producing high quality teachers, but about having a direct and sustained impact on school improvement and pupil progress in the classroom. This has to be explicit, so that the benefits of partnership are obvious to schools. </p>
<p>Across the country, universities are struggling to identify school placements for trainees on primary PGCE courses, which has led to a shortage. This reluctance to accept new trainees is sometimes attributed to headteachers’ perceptions that they could be a burden on existing school staff. But in most cases trainees can help both schools improve and pupils progress from the outset. </p>
<p>Once the core values of university teacher education courses are aligned to those of schools, partnership is a natural and successful way forward. The University of Durham has a long-standing approach of clustering, where groups of schools work together to train teachers, to achieve a mutually beneficial partnership with schools. It was <a href="http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/surveys-and-good-practice/u/University%20of%20Durham%20-%20primary%20-%20good%20practice%20example.pdf">highlighted by inspectorate Ofsted</a> as good practice. </p>
<h2>More recruiting might</h2>
<p>In the past, when the School Direct programme has failed to recruit sufficient numbers, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-25104936">universities have stepped in</a> to take on extra trainees to avoid a teacher shortage. The Universities UK report found that in 2013-14, School Direct filled only two-thirds of its allocated places, while universities and other PGCE providers filled 90% of theirs. </p>
<p>This is probably because the marketing prowess of universities to recruit high-quality trainees generally exceeds that available in schools. The government tends to allocate more teacher training places than are needed in the education system. The amount of over-allocation has now risen from 18% in 2014-15, to 32% in 2015-16, highlighting clear concerns that some places may not be filled.</p>
<p>With the Carter Review yet to report its findings, the decline of allocations to universities, and a general election on the way, the role of universities in teacher education in the future is difficult to predict. But in the meantime, they can be proactive in adapting their approach into a way of teaching built on partnerships with schools to ensure they are well-positioned to continue to play an active and crucial role in teacher education.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/33282/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Adam Boddison does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The coalition is ploughing ahead with its plan to give schools more control of training new teachers. A recent announcement of government-funded places on teacher training courses for the next academic…Adam Boddison, Director of the Centre for Professional Education, University of WarwickLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/310582014-09-01T20:40:19Z2014-09-01T20:40:19ZLIVE STREAM: Smart Science symposium with Chief Scientist<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/57851/original/8c4qwpvh-1409558020.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">You can join in the discussion from 11.30am AEST.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/liquene/3900145161">Alessandro Valli/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>Please note: the live stream has now finished. A video of the the live stream is below.</em></p>
<p>Australia in 2025 will be strong, prosperous, healthy and secure and positioned to benefit all Australians in a rapidly changing world.</p>
<p>We are told that Australia will need a diverse economy built on sustainable productivity growth, knowledge-based industries and high value goods and services.</p>
<p>How will science address the challenges of the future? </p>
<p>You’re invited to take part in the discussion. This symposium held at Parliament House is the culmination of a 12-part series co-commissioned with the Office of the Chief Scientist, examining the contribution of each of the major disciplines to address the challenges of Australia in 2025. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hlQY0VJ7JQ4?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p><br>
The live stream will begin at 11.30am AEST – please refresh your browsers or press “play”.</p>
<p>Submit your questions in the comments stream below, on Twitter using <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23smartscience&src=typd">#SmartScience</a> or via our <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ConversationEDU">Facebook page</a>.</p>
<p>The series – authored by recognised experts in their field – can be <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/australia-2025-series">read here</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/31058/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Please note: the live stream has now finished. A video of the the live stream is below. Australia in 2025 will be strong, prosperous, healthy and secure and positioned to benefit all Australians in a rapidly…Belinda Smith, EditorLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.