快猫短视频

The career of Julia Higgins was definitely not planned, taking her from an early passion for physics and an Oxford degree, followed by an accidental move into the brand-new field of neutron scattering for her DPhil. Another unplanned opportunity gave her the chance to apply her knowledge, probing the properties of polymers, and set her on the path to become a professor of polymer science at Imperial College London, where she researches polymer 鈥渁lloys鈥�. Among her many other 鈥渏obs鈥� are vice-president of the Royal Society, chair of the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, and president of the British Association for the Advancement of Science.

It鈥檚 2004, women everywhere are doing everything, yet you鈥檙e still worrying about the position of women in science. Why?

Science shapes every aspect of our lives. If women are not well represented at every level then important things are lost. The number of women who stay in science in the UK and I suspect elsewhere in the west is still quite small. We have a huge problem with what Americans call the 鈥渓eaky pipeline鈥�: women leaving science from PhD level upward.

What does get lost if women leave?

Women are missing out on really interesting careers, especially in technology and engineering. This is a great pity when you think of the many applications in engineering such as design and materials, all of which have a huge effect on women鈥檚 lives.

Do women work differently?

About 25 per cent of the undergraduates in the chemical engineering department at Imperial are women. When you have a team working together there are usually one or two women in it 鈥� and those teams work differently and work better than the teams without them. They are probably less competitive, and they often have a broader view of the problems they are working on.

So how bad are the numbers?

In medicine, an amazing 73 per cent of graduates from British universities are women, but by the time they get to be professors it鈥檚 more than a complete reversal, with women making up just over 11 per cent. In chemistry, women graduates amount to 40 per cent, but only 3 per cent of professors are women. Remember that鈥檚 just 13. In engineering things are even worse. The graduate rate ranges from 8 per cent to 21 cent, but only 1 per cent of professors are women.

Are there any disciplines where women professors outnumber men?

Nursing 鈥� 59 per cent of the total.

What about your field 鈥� polymers?

Polymer science is rarely a separate subject at undergrad level. But women do study chemistry and materials in large numbers 鈥� and a fair few who go on to research specialise in polymers.

Is that down to you as a role model? After all, you鈥檙e a professor and vice-president of the Royal Society, with loads of prestigious initials after your name鈥�

I wish it were! Yes, women do need women up there 鈥� and in numbers. But the truth about polymers is probably more to do with the perception that it is easier for women who want a career in science to go into a new area. Even so, at professorial level in polymers and similar fields, the percentage of women shrinks to around 3 per cent.

You started out in physics. Why was that?

I was at a girls鈥� school, a Catholic convent grammar school, where the headmistress was a nun and a mathematician. When I was 15, a brilliant physics teacher joined the school, and suddenly science was fun and I could do physics. She was absolutely inspiring. I was a bright kid, so every time I said 鈥淲hy?鈥� she stopped and did it again, because if I hadn鈥檛 understood it, then no one had. Having a good teacher along the line is crucial.

And your parents?

Both my parents were extremely keen on education for all their kids. All four of us have taken scientific directions. Neither of my parents was a scientist. Apparently my father, who was a senior civil servant, said when I was born: 鈥淚f she wants to go to university, she will.鈥� My sister is a maths teacher, one brother is an architect and the other did physics and works with computer systems.

How did you end up in chemistry?

I had done my physics degree at Oxford and was looking around for a place to do research. My tutor had a young friend in the chemistry department who had just come over from Australia and wanted to use this tool called neutron scattering to look at materials. He thought a young physicist might take more kindly to it than a chemist, so he interviewed me and offered a three-year place to move into the chemistry department. I hadn鈥檛 done chemistry for five years at that point, and having to use a tool I had never heard of was daunting. I鈥檇 like to think it was curiosity that made me take the offer but I must say that my friends were staying in Oxford too.

Did you see it as an advantage to be entering a new field, where ideas hadn鈥檛 become entrenched?

Yes in a way. But what happened was far more accidental. I don鈥檛 believe you can plan research careers; they sort of happen. I got married after my DPhil and started teaching physics in a school, because I didn鈥檛 know what else to do. I wasn鈥檛 particularly good at it. Then after two years we moved to Manchester. My then father-in-law was working for the chemicals giant ICI there, and he gave me the name of a professor he knew. I wrote to him and he passed my letter on to another professor, who passed it on to a chemistry professor who wanted to use neutron scattering to look at polymers.

There are no careers in particle physics, my earlier love 鈥� papers have 42 authors. Neutron scattering wasn鈥檛 being used in chemistry at all, and it certainly wasn鈥檛 being used on polymers. I came in with the tool to look at the polymers, and very quickly the polymers became the research. But having that tool, which was unique, has been my passport all the way through.

What were your goals in those early days?

Early on in my career, I thought it would be wonderful to be a Fellow of the Royal Society. I didn鈥檛 believe I would get there, but I did know what it would take. Could I get to be like that, I asked myself?

Well you did but there are still only a few women among its members鈥�

There are about 1200 fellows, and most live to a ripe old age. We elect around 40 a year, so it takes time to change. Over the past few years, we have been electing on average 10 per cent women 鈥� four out of the 40 鈥� but this year we elected twice that many. I don鈥檛 believe that鈥檚 going to happen every year from now on. So now there are 53 women fellows. That鈥檚 a rather higher percentage than women who are professors in some academic departments.

But at that rate you鈥檒l never get to parity鈥�

Fortunately, some of the initiatives and schemes I鈥檓 involved with are going to make a difference. The Royal Society has a large amount of money that it puts into university research fellowships to very bright young people in their early 30s. This gives them up to 10 years in a university doing research. After that they usually go on to become professors almost immediately. The RS also invented the Dorothy Hodgkin Award, which kicks in before the research fellowships. They last for four or five years, but they are yours, they are not linked to a departmental project. We never said explicitly that these were aimed at women, but that they were aimed to be 鈥渇amily friendly鈥�, providing maternity leave, and so on. The extraordinary thing was that 90 per cent of the applicants were women: the moment it said things like 鈥渇amily friendly鈥�, they read 鈥渨omen鈥�. Interestingly, of the incoming applicants for research fellowships at least half are women so this has also turned out to give women a good start in a research career because it鈥檚 quite flexible. Most recently, we introduced a 鈥渇ollower鈥檚 fellowship鈥�, aimed at two-career families in which one partner moves job. The partner who has to follow can get a fellowship for a year to hold in the new place. It can work for both sexes but we suspect it will be more used by women. We鈥檒l have the cash for about 10.

Outside the Royal Society, what of Athena?

Athena was given 拢250,000 of government money aimed at helping recruit and hang onto women in university academic careers, using the involvement of vice-chancellors and the great and the good to ensure high visibility. It gave small awards to centres of excellence with good practice for women.

The government has also just said it would put 拢5 million into coordinating these small initiatives through a central resource unit. Is this enough?

I鈥檓 not sure that throwing more money is the whole answer. What matters is support and real enthusiasm 鈥� and our male colleagues won鈥檛 always give that, so the only way you are going to get something done is by supporting the women who are already there. Frankly, most of us aren鈥檛 prepared to spend all our lives doing that. So you have a problem. That said, quite clearly more needs to be spent on part-time working 鈥� and spent in quite specific ways.

What about the next generation?

I think they think in terms of having a career and family. Research chemist Susan Gibson, who has just won the first Rosalind Franklin award of 拢30,000, is a good example of someone doing great science who happens to have two kids under 5. This is an award for a rising star rather than for women alone, and it is there to be spent on the winner鈥檚 research, not their salary, and on promoting women.

So do you disagree with Susan Greenfield when she talks about it not being possible for women to combine children and science if they want top jobs?

I certainly don鈥檛 think young women see it that way, though the middle ranks may. The problem really lies with breaks in research. The thing about research is you have to have a certain sort of mind. You have to be a bit driven. You are constantly putting yourself up against not knowing the answer. In some ways, research has to be uncomfortable, so it鈥檚 actually quite hard, and there is only a subset of people who really like doing it.

Does this mean fewer women than men make good researchers?

Absolutely not. But it is my observation that when women are at an age when they are making choices, they have less self-confidence than men about how good they are at everything. You constantly see women undersell themselves. Research is quite hard: you are constantly measuring yourself against the outside. You send off papers to a journal, which may well come back with 鈥淩eject鈥� marked on them. That鈥檚 hard to take. You send off a grant proposal which you may or may not get. So you need people and structures to build up your confidence. I was very lucky that the people I worked with were always saying, 鈥淵es, go for it.鈥�

Is some of the drop-out rate to do with not having the same sense of entitlement to a career that men have?

There is no doubt that the spirit of the times is to make sure it鈥檚 possible to have a career and be a woman rather than drop out. I do think that young women now should demand that.

Would it have turned out differently if you had had children?

I can鈥檛 tell you what would have happened had I had children, it wasn鈥檛 a conscious choice. It happens to have turned out that way. I have a wonderful time with my eight nieces and nephews, who all live close to me.