News Category: Elsewhere
SCWIST member Dr. Elizabeth Croft to speak on Studio 4 September 15th
Elizabeth Croft, NSERC Chair for Women in Science and Engineering, BC and Yukon will be speaking with Fanny Kiefer of Studio 4 (Shaw Cable 4) September 15 at 9:00 am on Encouraging Girls To Pursue Science (airs 9am, 1pm, 4pm and 9pm). Check your local listings.
SCWIST Director Linda Lanyon to attend Secrets of the Female Mind Symposium
The University of British Columbia Chapter of Women in World Neuroscience’s Symposium on Secrets of the Female Mind: Understanding Women’s Brain and Behaviour over a Lifetime
With Opening Remarks from:
The Honourable Kevin Falcon, Minister of Health Services
Speakers:
Three distinguished UBC faculty, Drs. Liisa Galea, Pam Arstikaitis and Teresa Liu-Ambrose, will share their expertise on the effects of hormones and exercise on memory and decision-making, and how advances in neuroscience can help you feel younger and age more gracefully.
Hosted by:
Dr. Gavin Stuart, FRCSC, Vice Provost Health and Dean, Faculty of Medicine
Thursday June 24th, 2010, 2:00 – 4:00 pm
Brain Research Centre, 1st Flr, UBC Hospital, Koerner Pavilion, 2211 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC
Refreshments provided.
To attend please RSVP by Friday June 18th, 2010 to: Laura Ralph, Faculty of Medicine, T: 604.827.3699 or E: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
SCWIST President Dr. Elana Brief comments on selection of 19 male Canada Excellence Research Chairs
Canadian Universities Pick 19 Good Men
by Kelli Whitlock Burton – May 20, 2010
When the Canadian government created a $200 million pot to attract up to 20 of the world’s best researchers in four target areas, university administrators had no trouble finding 36 stars that they wanted to hire. Diversity was another matter, however as the inaugural class of Canadian Excellence Research Chairs (CERC) have two things in common: They are all illustrious scientists. And they are all men. In fact, not a single woman was even nominated.
“The fact that only men’s names were put forward indicates to me that our ideas about who can succeed in science and who we want to celebrate remain very gendered, and that it runs very deep,” says Elana Brief, president of the Society for Canadian Women in Science and Technology and a physicist at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver.
Joan Herbers, president of the Association for Women in Science and a population biologist at Ohio State University in Columbus, doesn’t mince words. “It’s hard to believe that there aren’t some superstar women out there that Canadian universities might be interested in recruiting,” she says. “I’m very disappointed in the outcome.”
The first group of CERC hires includes scientists from the United States, Europe, South America, and Greenland. Each will set up shop with $10 million over 7 years at one of 13 Canadian universities. The CERC program is administered jointly by Canada’s three research-granting agencies: the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. All three are part of the governmental department Industry Canada (IC).
When IC Minister Tony Clement learned that all the CERC finalists were men, he assembled an ad hoc panel to investigate. It was led by Suzanne Fortier, president of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and included Elizabeth Dowdeswell, president of the Council of Canadian Academies, and Indira Samarasekera, president of the University of Alberta in Canada. The panel found that “the absence of female recipients was not a result of active choices made during the formal review processes of the program,” says Lynn Meahan, IC press secretary.
The awards process had two phases, according to Michele Boutin, executive director of the CERC program. In phase 1, 41 Canadian universities submitted 135 proposals describing the research programs to be created at their institutions, but not the specific scientists they would seek to run them. Universities were allowed to submit more than one proposal. The proposals were reviewed by an international committee of 13 scientists, three of whom were women. This group pared the list to 36 proposals from 17 universities.
In phase 2, universities nominated scientists to go with each proposal. None of the 36 nominees was a women. A second committee-composed of 16 scientists and industry leaders, including three women-chose the 19 CERC winners at 13 universities.
Universities that made it to phase 2 were required to “use a fair and equitable process” to select their nominee, says Boutin. She adds that a senior university official had to attest that the nomination process was equitable.
Although the ad hoc panel cleared the process of any blame, the members did note several elements that may have put women at a disadvantage. For example, the CERC competition rewarded universities who put forth senior researchers as nominees. Because women have not been in the field as long as men, many haven’t yet reached that level of seniority, says Fortier, who led the panel.
“It’s very difficult to compare two types of candidates where both have superb accomplishments but one has 10 years seniority over the other,” Fortier says. “A university putting forward a candidate who has that lesser volume of accomplishments is to some degree taking a risk.”
Fortier suggests creating two tracks of nominees, one for senior-level faculty and another for midcareer scientists. Awards would be given in both categories. The panel also suggested that universities be required to provide documentation of their recruitment process when they submit their nominee.
Although the first class is now history, Brief and others hope the government won’t wait until the next awards cycle in 7 years to address the issue of gender equity. For example, the three agencies that administer the CERC awards could require that universities go further to ensure diversity in the hiring of personnel—including graduate students and postdoctoral fellows—in the labs of the CERC awardees, she suggests. CERC chairs could also create mentoring programs that target junior faculty women in the sciences, to encourage them to seek out such senior positions. If nothing changes, Brief says, “the world could see Canada as a backward nation that doesn’t have an appreciation for the richness of diversity.”
Science magazine
Honorary SCWIST member Dr. Barbara Moon says you can believe in both evolution and religion
Dr. Barbara Moon recently retired after teaching biology at UFV for more than 30 years. During that time she has had many conversations with students about the debate surrounding evolution and creationism. She says you can believe in both. Since 2009 marks the 200th anniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin, it seemed appropriate to feature the issue in our Sound Off column.
By Dr. Barbara Moon
A scientific theory is a comprehensive explanation of observed natural phenomena that is supported by a large body of evidence. As such, scientific theories only concern the
natural world (e.g., atomic, gravity, evolutionary theories). They can be used to make testable
predictions about natural phenomena or about phenomena that have not yet been observed.
Scientists use the scientific method as an effective way to study the natural world and to develop and test theories. A key point aboutscientific theories is that they are practical
only when they deal with natural causes.
Evolutionary theory provides an explanation for why there are so many different kinds of organisms on earth, how all organisms on earth are related and how they share an original common ancestor. In common with other scientific theories, it does not and can not
investigate supernatural causes of life on earth.
An examination of the various perspectives on creation and evolution has convinced me that the relationship between evolution and creationism is a continuum, not a dichotomy between two irreconcilable opposites. The perspectives range from literalist traditions, which interpret scripture as equivalent to scientifi c explanations of origins, to atheistic ultra-evolutionism, which proposes that the natural world is all that exists and thus nothing supernatural exists. The extremes are indeed incompatible, but there are many positions in between where scientists and people of faith agree. I do not have the space here to go into a description of all the perspectives along the continuum.
You can get detailed explanations in my Powerpoint lecture, which can be found as a link off the following web page: http://www.ufv.ca/biology/Darwin.htm
Theistic evolution is a perspective of which many people are unaware yet is a position where people of faith and evolutionists can come together. It is a view in which God created the laws of nature and thus events in the universe generally unfold with no further divine intervention. This is a view held by many Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Sikh, Jewish, and Christian biologists. Their approach to science uses the scientific method.
Such a view accepts all the results of modern science, including the Big Bang, random mutation, and Darwin’s notion of descent with modifi cation through natural selection. Furthermore it is the position of most Protestant and Catholic churches (and many other religions) and is the perspective taught at their seminaries. I encourage alumni to not reject evolution without investigating the theistic evolutionary perspective. Many theistic evolutionists are working biologists who uphold both the authority of scripture and the integrity of the scientifi c process. One online group (An Evangelical Dialogue on Evolution) is trying to get
beyond the warring positions of “evolution or God” and to critique the commonly voiced positions in which “evangelicals condemn evolutionary science as atheistic; evolutionists mock evangelicals as being little better than medieval religious nutcases” (from Evangelical Dialogue on Evolution website). I invite you to do the same.
The evolutionary perspective holds sway in the modern world for several reasons. First, it is supported by a large array of data collected over centuries. Second, it is accepted by scientists across all fields. Third, it is a highly productive theory that has enabled us to rapidly advance understanding of the natural world. Modern medicine is now at an exciting stage in which the basis of many human diseases and conditions is starting to be understood. However, this knowledge did not arise from the study of humans alone but from experimental analysis of a whole range of organisms such as bacteria, fungi, plants, and small mammals. The findings from these studies are often directly applicable to humans because, since we are all interrelated via common descent, we share most of the molecular systems taking place within our cells. Once a molecular mechanism is found in experimental organisms, there is a good chance it will be similar in humans. The latest manifestation of this process is in the ongoing analysis of the human genome: sequencing the genome was a wonderful technological accomplishment but useless without analyzing gene function.
By comparing a human gene with the evolutionarily similar gene from an experimental organism, a reasonable function can be attributed in humans, and the basis for a disease understood. Some people see the theory of evolution as an amoral position, but evolutionists can have just as strong a moral compass as deists. I also contend that looking at the world through an evolutionary lens can lead to new moral insights. Once one understands that all creatures are interrelated via evolution, one sees that we are all cousins who are very much in the same boat together. This can inspire a desire to care for the earth and everything in it. I
challenge you to investigate further.
Univeristy of the Fraser Valley Alumni magazine Aluminations Fall 09 Volume 10 Issue 1
Congratulations to Anne Condon, Sara Swenson & Dawn McArthur on 2010 YWCA Women of Distinction Noms
Honorary SCWIST member Dr. Anne Condon and SCWIST members Sara Swenson and Dawn McArthur have been nominated in the Education, Training & Development category for a 2010 YWCA Women of Distinction Award.
Dr. Condon is a Professor of Computer Science and Associate Dean of the Department of Computer Science at UBC. Dr. Swenson is a Senior Research Grants Facilitator at SFU. Dr. McArthur is a Senior Research Development Facilitator at the Child & Family Research Institute. Drs. McArthur and Swenson received a co-nomination. Congratulations to all and best of luck!
The event will be held June 1, 2010. For more information please click here.
Nominee Profiles
Dr. Anne Condon A gifted Professor of Computer Science and Associate Dean of Science at UBC, Anne has led several successful initiatives aimed at broadening participation in science and engineering, with a particular focus on women in computing. As the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada/General Motors Canada Chair for Women in Science and Engineering, she created a regional community of leaders who support girls and women in exploring non-traditional career goals and funded nationwide research and mentoring programs for women undergraduates in computing. Anne initiated the development of policies at UBC’s Faculty of Science that strengthen mentoring practices and support faculty who take maternity or parental leaves. Anne is an inspiring mentor and role model to countless students and faculty across North America.
Connecting the Community Award quote: “Education in computer science offers incredible opportunities for everyone to make a positive difference in society. I choose to support early learning and care for children so that our children can be curious, yet secure, in exploring the frontiers of tomorrow’s world.”
Drs. Dawn McArthur and Sara Swenson More than ten years ago, searching the Internet for “research grants facilitator” provided only two names: Dawn McArthur and Sara Swenson. Since then, almost every university and research institution in Canada has embraced Sara and Dawn’s model of research support. Dawn and Sara are scientists who love research, educators who love teaching and writers who love using language as a tool. They are out-of-the-box thinkers who play multi-faceted roles as advisors, collaborators, mentors, teachers and coaches. Dawn and Sara both have long histories supporting young women in science and scholarship and are both former Presidents of the Society for Canadian Women in Science and Technology.
Connecting the Community Award quote: “Reducing child poverty is one of our greatest social challenges; raising healthy children, one of our primary social responsibilities. I choose this area because the YWCA takes on the challenge of child poverty directly at the grassroots level—where services have the most impact—by providing community-based resources to support the essential daily needs of vulnerable children and women.” Dawn McArthur
Connecting the Community Award quote: “As the mother of three children—two sons in university and a daughter in high school—I understand how difficult it is to help youth make the transition from childhood to adulthood and the challenges that many youth face. I choose to support the YWCA program supporting healthy choices for youth which empowers young people to become self-confident, healthy, socially responsible adults.” Sara Swenson
Volunteer Spotlight - Stephanie McInnis
By day Stephanie McInnis is Projects Coordinator at the BC Cancer Agency’s Genome Sciences Centre. Outside of work she is a dedicated SCWIST volunteer… she is our XX Evening Coordinator extraordinaire! Stephanie generously donates an incredible amount of time to oversee our annual XX Evening at TELUS World of Science. From corralling volunteers, to arranging catering, to promoting the event and even sewing tablecloths(!), Stephanie is invaluable to us in organizing this fabulous networking event. We truly could not do without her amazing contributions to SCWIST. THANK YOU Stephanie!!
SCWIST remembers honorary member Joe Quan
Joe Dick Quan, honorary member of SCWIST passed away January 30, 2010. He was an early supporter of women in science and actively supported SCWIST from its starting days. Born in Vancouver on May 18, 1931, he graduated from UBC with a degree in commerce in 1955. His career spanned many areas including founding Customcolour Labs, real estate and being a Notary Public. He was active in the Grand Chapter of the Royal Arch Masons of BC and the Yukon and he was a founder and secretary of Keystone of Life.
He leaves his wife, Hilda Lei Ching, his sons Walter, Tom and Andy and their families. He is also survived by his brother Dick and good friend George Tanco. At his memorial service, his sons described his great love of life, his generosity and kindness. He was a loving father who taught his sons to be be considerate, polite and respectful.
Hilda and Joe were married for 49 years, a life full of adventures, travel and good friendships. He was proud to attend International meetings on women in science as Hilda’s spouse. He was a community leader and role model for many. We will miss him and his unique personality.
Watch SCWIST Scholarship winner Diksha Chellaramani on YouTube
Diksha received the Margaret Lowe Benston Memorial Award in the 2006-2007 academic year. See what she is up to now on YouTube.
Congratulations to SCWIST Member Elizabeth Croft
Professor Croft who teaches Mechanical Engineering at UBC has been elected Fellow of Engineers Canada.
SCWIST Director Linda Lanyon to speak at SBN Biotech Expo - January 21, 2010
SBN’s 6th Annual Biotech Expo & Conference
Thursday, January 21st 2010
Coast Plaza Hotel & Suites
Vancouver, BC
5:00-9:00 pm
Student Registration 4:45-5:25pm
Mentor Registration 7:00pm
Networking Reception 8:00 pm
The Biotech Expo & Conference offers a mix of both educational seminars and exposure to over 75 industry representatives from over 40 participating organizations. Throughout the event, students will be able to visit booths from local biotech companies, government organizations and academic institutions. SBN’s Career Expo and Conference will host over 400 students with from diverse disciplines, including the life sciences, commerce, engineering, social sciences and law. This event grown to become the largest biotech career expo in Western Canada and is the primary means for students in BC to learn about the opportunities that exist in the local and international biotech industry.
For more information, to view the program or to register, visit http://www.thesbn.ca
SCWIST supporter merges art and technology
Vantage Art Projects is helping the Cultural Olympiad with ongoing efforts to spread the word on CODE Screen 2010. It’s a free online arts Exhibition you can view on your screen at any time and new exhibits launch every 2 weeks.
The latest exhibition:
Gathie Falk, Governor General Award Winner is live now on your computer screen! Curator Milena Placentile brings together the work of Gathie Falk, and socially and politically engaged artists Conde + Beveridge, Jennifer Marman + Daniel Borins, Leslie Supnet, Dixon, Susan Dobson, Robyn Moody and Noam Gonick in Exhibition #7 of CODE Screen 2010.
As a countdown to the 2010 Winter Games, let CODE Screen 2010 animate your screen and captivate your imagination. By the end of the Games, CODE Screen 2010 will have showcased the work of more than 100 of Canada’s finest creators, including recipients of the Governor General’s Award for Visual and Media Arts.
Click here to go to the CODE Screen 2010 launch page!
SCWIST President Dr. Elana Brief and Honorary Member Hiromi Matsui Speak to the State of Science
Canadian Science Policy Conference 2009: State of Science
Physicist blasts science minister’s competitive outlook on innovation
International science is inherently collaborative, rather than competitive, but Canada’s science minister doesn’t seem to know that, says Elana Brief.
See Elana’s video here.
Should science be more democratic?
Democratizing science improves research by incorporating the voices of those who will be affected by it, say professors Elana Brief and Hiromi Matsui.
See Elana and Hiromi’s video here.
Wed Feb 01
