Connect with us

CivicSciTimes - Stories in Science

Overcoming Stereotypes in Education

CSM Lab

Published

on

– Laurie Wallmark – 

[dropcap]E[/dropcap]ver since I was a little girl, I’ve loved math and science. After all, playing with numbers was fun! I think I read every math book our public library had to offer. And science? What’s not to like about tinkering and building and figuring out how things worked? Not only was science fun in and of itself, but science also used math. A double benefit. I couldn’t wait until I hit junior high and could take all those harder math and science courses. You know, the ones I heard my brother and sister complain about.

I was especially looking forward to studying architectural drawing because architects applied math to real world problems. Wanting to take this course is where I encountered my first challenge because I was a girl. In order to take architectural drawing, you first had to take mechanical drawing in eighth grade. Great! Sounded like a plan! Soon, I’d be sitting on a tall stool at one of those big drafting tables and working with all those drawing tools.

When it was time to fill out the class selection form near the end of seventh grade, I made sure to write each letter carefully just like a real architect would. I was on my way to the professional career of my dreams. Or so I thought. The counselor returned the form to me with a note from the principal attached. It said I couldn’t sign up for mechanical drawing! Why not? Well, the reason was that I hadn’t taken the mechanical drawing intro course in seventh grade.

Now from the outside, that seemed like a reasonable restriction. After all, he was correct. I hadn’t taken that first course. But there’s more to the story. In seventh grade, girls had to take overview courses in sewing, cooking, and art. Let’s just say that I didn’t excel in any of these subjects. In fact, I once had to pay a fine in cooking class because I wrapped leftovers in expensive aluminum foil instead of the cheaper plastic wrap. It was clear to everyone that I should strike homemaker off my list of possible careers. 

Laurie Wallmark

Boys on the other hand took courses in wood shop, metalworking, and mechanical drawing. I think you can see the problem here. Talk about your basic Catch-22. I couldn’t take mechanical drawing in eighth grade without the intro course and I hadn’t been allowed to take it in seventh grade because I was a girl!

Here’s where advocacy comes in. Luckily for me, I had parents who didn’t believe my education should be limited because of my gender. Faced with parents like mine the principal quickly caved and let me take the class. Believe me, that was certainly easier for him than continuing to argue with my mother. Obviously this chain of events led to my being the only girl in the mechanical drawing class, and soon, the only girl in the architectural drawing class.

My interest in architecture waned shortly after that, but not my love for mathematics. I knew that in high school I could look forward to studying geometry, trigonometry, and best of all, calculus! Okay, I’ll admit it. I was and still am a geek.

There was a meeting for parents and students to learn about the high school courses offered. During the question and answer period, my mother asked about the availability of higher-level math courses. The principal – a different one this time – asked her if she had a son or a daughter. When my mother answered, “a daughter,” he said, “Oh, you don’t need to worry then. Since she’s a girl, she won’t be taking any advanced math classes.”

Micro-aggressions are easy to miss, especially if you’re not looking for them or are not the intended target, but they definitely exist.

Unfortunately, in the 1970s, it was not unusual to hear statements like this from educators. But just because it was common, my mother did not let the principal get away with spreading such stereotypes. After the meeting, she told the principal she had been a math major and had probably taken many more advanced math classes than he had. I also took an inordinate amount of pleasure in showing the principal that this girl, would not only take, but excel, in the higher-level math classes.

Explore Next:  Science is Sharing Cups of Tea

Of course, there are no longer rules against girls taking mechanical drawing, and no principal will ever say, in public at least, that girls won’t continue on to harder math courses. Instead, a girl might be discouraged from doing so by being told, “math is too hard” or “wouldn’t you rather take…?” These micro-aggressions are easy to miss, especially if you’re not looking for them or are not the intended target, but they definitely exist.

When it came time to apply to college, I planned on majoring in math, and maybe taking a few computer courses in addition. My counselor never suggested that engineering might be a good choice for me. The idea of majoring in engineering – a field that uses applied math – never occurred to me even though I had previously thought about architecture. Again, this is the subtle way that girls were and often still are, steered away from the hard sciences.

In college, I decided to major in a science, not math. I chose biochemistry because it allowed me to apply my math skills to a variety of scientific disciplines. I also took computer science courses. The combination of my major and the programming courses led me to my first job as a scientific programmer at a pharmaceutical company. Wanting to learn more about the way computers can be used to solve problems, I returned to school and got a masters degree in information systems.

Many years later, I received an MFA in writing for children and young adults. I now am both a professor of computer science and an author of picture book biographies about women in STEM. My first two titles are about computer scientists, Ada Byron Lovelace and the Thinking Machine and Grace Hopper: Queen of Computer. Through my books I hope to encourage children, especially girls, to enter STEM.

The most important advice I can give to young people who experience roadblocks based on other people’s expectations is to have a community of peers and mentors. Sharing your stories and being there for each other will help you stay strong. At first, it’s hard to speak out when you encounter prejudices. With practice, and with the help of your community, it gets easier.

Laurie Wallmark is an award winning children’s author. You can follow her on Facebook and Twitter: @lauriewallmark. Visit her website at http://www.lauriewallmark.com/ | Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay | CC0 Creative Commons

CivicSciTimes - Stories in Science

Unexpected Stories and Spindle Mistakes: Discovering that Wild-type Cells are Full of Surprises

CSM Lab

Published

on

By

Natalie Nannas

Natalie Nannas is an Associate Professor of Biology at Hamilton College in Clinton, NY. She teaches courses in genetics, molecular biology, and bioethics. Dr. Nannas graduated from Grinnell College with bachelor’s degrees in biological chemistry and French. She received her Master’s and PhD from Harvard University in molecular biology and genetics. Dr. Nannas conducted her postdoctoral research at the University of Georgia where she won a National Science Foundation Plant Genome Postdoctoral Fellowship. At Hamilton College, Dr. Nannas enjoys teaching and sharing her passion for microscopy with her undergraduate research students. When not glued to a microscope, she loves spending time with her husband and two daughters. The narrative below by Natalie Nannas captures the human stories behind the science from a 2022 paper titled “Frequent spindle errors require structural rearrangement to complete meiosis in Zea mays” which was published by her group in 2022 in the International Journal of Molecular Sciences.

Science never works out the way we plan. As scientists, we ask questions, hypothesize and outline our goals … then reality of science occurs. The reality of science is often full of failed controls, endless troubleshooting, and sometimes strange findings that lead us in new and unpredictable directions. Our publications give the impression that we planned these scientific journeys from the beginning and do not tell the human side of the process with all of its twists and turns, dead-ends and U-turns. I want to tell you the real story behind my first publication as a faculty member with my own lab. It did not go as planned due to the COVID-19 pandemic. My lab was shut down in the middle of our investigation, and my students and I were unable to generate new data. In the beginning, it seemed like we were stranded with only control data and no story to tell, but the time away from the lab allowed us to spend more time looking carefully at wild-type cells. What seemed like a dead-end suddenly became its own story when we found something unexpected hiding within microscopy movies. Our wild-type cells were making mistakes, attempting fixes and changing directions, just like we do as scientists.

My scientific journey began with flickering green lights and a microscope (you can read more about it here). As an undergraduate, I was mesmerized by the beauty of watching living cells shuffle fluorescently labeled proteins throughout their cytoplasm. I followed this passion for microscopy into my doctoral dissertation research at Harvard University where I investigated how yeast cells build the machinery needed to pull their chromosomes apart. This machinery is a dynamic collection of long protein tubes called microtubules and other organizing proteins that help move and shuffle microtubules. I loved watching the delicate dance of chromosomes interacting with microtubules of the spindle, and I wanted to continue studying this process in my postdoctoral studies.

During postdoctoral studies at the University of Georgia, I won a fellowship from the National Science Foundation to develop a new technique in microscopy. No one had ever watched plants building their spindles in meiosis, the specialized cell division that produces egg and sperm. Other scientists had performed beautiful microscopy studies observing how mitotic spindles function inside of plant cells, but due to the technical challenges, no one had ever observed live plant cells building spindles in meiosis. I was thrilled to take on this challenge by using version of maize that had fluorescently labeled tubulin, the protein that makes up microtubules of the spindle. With this line of maize, spindles would glow fluorescent green, allowing me to image if only I could extract the meiotic cells.

Dr. Natalie Nannas

We were so busy collecting data and prepping for our mutant studies that we never really took time to analyze the wild-type cells.

After almost a year spent dissecting maize plants, I finally managed to develop a method to isolate these tiny cells and keep them alive in a growth media long enough to image them. This new method of live imaging was going to serve as the foundation of my new lab at Hamilton College, a primarily undergraduate institution. With my students, I planned to investigate the pathways governed spindle assembly. Most animal mitotic cells have a structure called a centrosome that dictates how spindles are formed; however, female animal meiotic cells lack these structures and must use other pathways to direct spindle assembly. Plants also lack centrosomes, and I wanted to inhibit these known animal pathways in our plant live imaging system.

Explore Next:  Playing in the Dirt and Calling it Science

As I set up my lab, my students and I collected live movies of wild-type maize cells building their spindles. I told my students and myself that these movies were not the main event, they were just the control cells so we would have a baseline comparison for our experimental conditions. We were so busy collecting data and prepping for our mutant studies that we never really took the time to analyze the wild-type cells. At the surface level, they built spindles and segregated chromosomes in a generally expected amount of time, so we focused on preparing for our upcoming experiments…. then March 2020 occurred.

The pandemic forced us to slow down and look more carefully at our wild-type data, and I am grateful for the detour.

My students headed home for spring break with a warning that there may be a delay in coming back to campus due to the spread of COVID-19. None of us were prepared for the shutdown that followed. Like many colleges and universities, our campus was closed for the remainder of the spring 2020 semester and the summer of 2020. My students and I began meeting on Zoom, trying to make a new plan for our research. The only data we had to work with were the microscopy of wild-type maize cells, so we decided to spend time digging more deeply into these movies. Originally, we had only measured the total time it took to build a spindle as it would be a baseline for comparison to our mutants. We had not looked carefully at any of the intermediate time points in the assembly process. When my students looked more closely at our movies, they discovered that wild-type cells built an incorrectly shaped spindle over 60% of the time!

We found that maize meiotic cells often built spindles with three poles instead of two, and they had to actively rearrange their spindle structure to correct this mistake. We also found that in these cells, there was a delay in meiosis as cells refused to progress until this correction had been made. This is an exciting discovery as it showed that plants are error-prone in their spindle assembly, much like human female meiotic cells. Our findings also suggested that meiotic cells were monitoring their spindle shape when determining if they should move forward in meiosis. Previous work has shown that cells monitor the attachment of chromosomes to the spindle to make this decision, but our work adds a new dimension, showing that they also monitor spindle shape. As we continued to analyze our videos, we also learned that cells corrected their spindle morphology in a predictable way. They always collapsed the two poles that were closest together, creating a single pole and resulting in a correct bipolar spindle.

The image shows the first page of the paper which can be accessed here.

My students and I had begun our scientific journey planning to breeze over wild-type cells, moving on to what we envisioned would be a more exciting story of spindle mutants. The pandemic forced us to slow down and look more carefully at our wild-type data, and I am grateful for the detour. I rediscovered my love of closely watching flickering green fluorescent lights, the dance of microtubules sliding into place or making missteps and shuffling into new arrangements. Watching life attempt a complicated process, make mistakes, and try again, is a lesson that never grows old. It reminds me that our scientific journeys are just the same, they start in one direction but are fluid and constantly changing, and hopefully, they end with a functional spindle!

Read the Published Paper

Weiss, J.D., McVey, S.L., Stinebaugh, S.E., Sullivan, C.F., Dawe, R.K., and N.J. Nannas. 2022. Frequent spindle errors require structural rearrangement to complete meiosis in Zea maysInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences, 23 (8):4293–4312.

ABOUT: Stories in Science is a special series on the Civic Science Times. The main aim is to document the first-hand accounts of the human stories behind the science being published by scientists around the world. Such stories are an important element behind the civic nature of science.

SUBMISSION: Click here to access the story guidelines and submission portal. Please note that not all stories are accepted for publication. After submission, we will let you know whether we have selected the story for the review process.

Continue Reading

Upcoming Events

Trending