Unbeknownst to the general public, a generation of scientists is being sheared away as the Trump administration takes a chainsaw to federal science. The United States is losing scientific training programs, research funding, and jobs in federal agencies and sectors that employ scientists. Training grants and direct funding from the National Science Foundation (NSF) and National Institutes of Health (NIH), for example, are key to recruiting and growing scientific talent. Federal research funding to academic institutions supports salaries of students, staff, and faculty — the entire US university system is reliant upon these funding sources. Finally, federal science positions, which provide the backbone of our country’s scientific enterprise, are being chaotically terminated.

The rapidly unfolding contraction of government-supported science is being orchestrated haphazardly under the guise of reducing costs and increasing government efficiencies. Collectively, these administrative actions will destroy scientific progress. Early career scientists, those in training or who recently entered the workforce, are bearing the brunt of unfolding funding cuts and employment losses. The US administration threatens the future of the scientific workforce, with impacts that will be felt for years to come.

What’s happening?

The returning Trump administration has been busy gutting the United States’ federal scientific workforce and cutting funding to science across a broad set of topics. On top of that, the new administration’s Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) orders and related task forces, together with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), have targeted large swaths of federal training programs, research funding and shut down many open opportunities. In March, many federal scientists in probationary positions were Illegally fired, and while some were hired back, they continue to face likely termination through reductions in force (RIF). Public and private universities are being targeted with broader threats to cut funding if these institutions do not capitulate to the whims of the administration

Summary of current attacks on science and scientists (for more, see the Silencing Science Tracker)

Mass layoffs

• Impacting: At least 105,000 federal employees, mostly probationary employees at early career stages
• Further reading: Tracking Trump’s overhaul of the federal workforce

Hiring freezes

• Impacting: Government and university employees
• Further reading: OMB-OPM federal civilian hiring freeze guidance; Universities across the U.S. freeze hiring as federal funding hangs in the balance

Rescinded graduate admissions offers

• Impacting: Would be graduate students who may choose a different career path
• Further reading: Graduate student admissions paused and cut back as universities react to Trump orders on research; tracker for graduate reductions across biomedical sciences

Downsizing of the NSF Research Experience for Undergraduates program

• Impacting: College students who need research experience
• Further reading: NSF downsizes summer research program for undergraduates

Termination of NIH training programs

• Impacting: Community college to Baccalaureate- R25 (B2B), undergraduate- T34 (MARC and U-RISE), post baccalaureate-R25 PREP, some Graduate T32s, and F31, post-graduate K12 (IRACDA) and K99 (MOSAIC)
• Further reading: APHA v NIH complaint

Terminations or pauses of federal research grants

• Impacting: University employees at all levels who depend on grants for their salary and research costs.
• Further reading: Tracker for rescinded NIH grants; HHS website rescinded; tracker for NIH Study Section cancellations

Delayed grant review

• Impacting: NIH grants due for renewal are paused, with massive cascading impacts on labs and staff
• Further reading: Trump administration stalls scientific research despite court ruling;

Scrutiny of grant applications containing newly banned words

• Impacted: All grants that focus on topics now deemed controversial, with large additional workload to PIs who are obligated to revise grant applications
• Further reading: These 197 terms may trigger reviews of your NIH, NSF grant proposals

Travel bans and restrictions

• Impacted: Government and university employees, international students; researchers engaged in international fieldwork, conference travel to the US, and travel by international scientists residing in the US, including those with legal status.
• Further reading: Trump’s latest DOGE order aims to cut costs through federal contracts, travel; Spring break warning: Students, faculty advised to postpone international travel plans

Early career scientists hit hardest

These cuts to the scientific workforce and funding have disproportionately dire impacts for early career scientists, especially women and historically underrepresented groups, for two main reasons (discussed in more detail below):

(1) The educational track into science is long and often includes expensive or low-paying undergraduate and graduate education and post-graduate research experience. After years of training and low pay, early career scientists are already in precarious positions and are less financially insulated from job loss. Federal agency layoffs have mainly focused on probationary employees, who are often the most recently hired and include a disproportionate number of recent graduates.

(2) “Just get another job” is not an option when there is a general contraction in the workforce across sectors, on top of direct research funding cuts, and when scientific expertise is highly specialized and not well represented outside of research settings. And not everyone is able to move for employment opportunities, for many reasons.

The long academic path to a career in science

Scientific careers typically require a decade or more of higher education. Many students navigating academia for the first time are supported by a variety of student training programs; the most well known and highly lauded program is the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU). This program is currently being downsized. REUs and other similar programs increase participation in science, and losing these programs would be a major setback to building a diverse STEM workforce and ensuring science is inclusive.

Some reflections from mid and later career scientists who have been impacted by similar training programs:

“I learned things in my REU internship that were essential to doing science that I never got training on during my PhD. This included a workshop on science ethics and instruction on how to document information about my research sites that I would need later on.” — current research associate

“My REU experience gave me the connections that led me to graduate school and allowed my early scientific career to flourish. Without the training experience, networking, and skills I learned in that single summer of my undergraduate degree, my life now would look immeasurably different.” — current Associate Professor

In graduate school, students develop deep expertise in a particular field, combining theoretical knowledge with technical and professional skills. In the United States, this takes years — generally 2–3 years for a Master’s degree and 5–7 years for a PhD. During this time, graduate students are often supported by teaching or research fellowships to compensate for time spent in the classroom or laboratory. In the US, salaries are low and most graduate students make less than $40k/year (e.g. NSF), and often less than $30k/year (e.g. NIH), although rates vary wildly by institution and department (e.g. https://csstipendrankings.org/). Many students often take on loans to make ends meet and graduate with substantial debt. Becoming a scientist is a huge investment of time and carries a large financial risk, betting that the degree would yield higher-paying job opportunities to make up for years of low income. Historically, this has been a good bet.

After graduate school, scientists may initially face low pay and/or low job security as they navigate postdoctoral opportunities and apply for jobs, which may start with several temporary jobs before landing a more stable position. In the United States, widespread reliance on student loans, relatively low pay, and moving costs associated with frequent relocation mean that many early career scientists are already in debt, living paycheck to paycheck, and can’t afford to lose their jobs, making them vulnerable in the face of current funding cuts and layoffs targeted at probationary employees. Those who are otherwise financially vulnerable or don’t have robust safety nets in place (i.e. people from low-income backgrounds, people with disabilities, and people who are starting families) will be hit especially hard.

“I was a federal probationary employee who was illegally fired on February 13th, two months after starting my job. Before this position, I had two years of federal experience resulting in glowing reviews, and yet I was fired because of my “performance.” I was excited for this start to my permanent career that I worked very hard for, and in an instant, my entire future was upended.

Fortunately, the courts ruled in our favor that these firings were illegal, and I was reinstated March 24th, with full back pay. Despite this win, less than two weeks later, rumors of very deep cuts through a planned reduction in force surfaced. As a probationary worker, my position was most vulnerable to be eliminated. In light of these cuts, my agency re-offered the deferred resignation program. This program allows federal workers to be placed on administrative leave with full pay and benefits through September 30th, after which they must voluntarily resign.

I loved my job and I wanted to keep it and continue serving the American people. However, due to the instability and emotional trauma of the last several weeks, I felt I had no choice but to take the offer and step away from government. To make matters more complex, I am also expecting my first child, and I need stability now more than ever. This treatment of federal workers, who keep our country running, is inhumane, unnecessary, and completely inefficient.” — current USDA scientist

Many scientists have invested deeply in their education and training because they love science. However, we cannot expect passion alone to keep the forthcoming generation of scientists on track, without training opportunities and funding that supports science as a whole.

For early career scientists from underrepresented and lower socio-economc backgrounds, for women, and scientists with disabilities and LGBTQIA+ scientists, the loss of research funding and/or employment is a threat multiplier. The lack of strong financial and community safety nets and challenges associated with moving to new cities and states for employment create additional barriers. Consider that LGBTQIA+ scientists may not feel safe moving to states within the US that have anti-LGBTQIA+ laws or consider additional barriers that may exist for people who do not have the ability to pay for a large move to another city or state. Diversity in science already decreases with each career stage and women and underrepresented minorities continue to face challenges, even in more senior positions. Drastic cuts to funding will have dire consequences for diversity in science and the modest progress that has been made in recent years will be undone .

“Where are the jobs?”

Government jobs provide important next career steps for new graduates and these are rapidly vanishing. At the same time, industry relies on government contracts and these are also being cancelled, so industry cannot absorb more than a small portion of the scientific workforce. In fact, many companies are already reducing their workforce in response to government cuts, and more reductions are coming. For example, biotechnology companies like Fisher Scientific, which are heavily reliant on researchers buying supplies, will also reduce their workforce as demand for supplies decreases.

It’s tempting to tell laid off scientists to “just get another job” — but this is impossible if science jobs are disappearing in private, government, or academic sectors too. On top of that, many early career scientists have spent the bulk of their adult years building specialized knowledge and skills that are not readily transferable outside of academic or research institutions. Layoffs and funding cuts are happening against the backdrop of a general contraction of the job market, placing early career scientists at an even larger disadvantage when they are forced to compete for a vanishing number of jobs against people with more experience who are targeting lower level positions out of necessity.

“One cannot claim a passion for capitalism while simultaneously gutting the engines that feed it — namely the knowledge, experience, skillsets and especially the fostering of the collective creativity that this country has amassed through its history.” — current Provost

The actions of the current administration are putting the potential for future scientific innovation in the US into a state of grave uncertainty and the cost of losing a generation of scientists is immeasurable. In the span of just three months, the US has ceded our leadership in science and innovation that took generations to build. As a result, we are less prepared to meet emerging challenges and leverage science to solve society’s most pressing problems.

So where do we go from here?

First and foremost, we need to support early career scientists who have been impacted by layoffs and funding cuts. At the same time, we need to get creative and find new ways to train the next generation of scientists.

Support from a position in within science:

• Check in on students and early career scientists in your life. Let them know you see them and acknowledge how stressful the current moment is.
• If you know someone who has lost their job, offer monetary support and help finding another position if you are able to do so.
• Make introductions, set up informational interviews, review CVs and resumes, tap into your network to help early career scientists find a good place to land.
• Mentor or connect early career folks with potential mentors.
• Reallocate resources to support students who have lost training opportunities.
• Organize with others across your institution and make your voice heard with your administration.
• Pursue avenues to appeal funding terminations.

Regardless of your profession, tap into collective action and help build public support for science.

• Contact lawmakers. Let your representatives know that you value science. Make use of data on the impacts to grad programs, NIH and NSF grant cancellation, and regional funding impacts, including regional impacts of NSF and NIH funding. These sources are also compiled in the 500 Women Scientists Action Lab.
• Engage in your community.
• Support science in K-12 schools in addition to higher education

More than anything else, don’t shy away from sharing the importance of science and how the current cuts are impacting you and your friends and family. Many people outside of science do not understand how scientific institutions work and don’t know what these funding cuts mean for scientists personally or for the entire scientific enterprise. Hearing from trusted friends, neighbors, and family members about the impacts of funding cuts, mass firings across federal agencies, and targeted attacks on higher ed institutions will be more impactful than reading about it in the news.

We are witnessing attacks on science and evidence-based policymaking in the U.S. at a scale we have not experienced in our lifetimes. We, former and current members of the 500 Women Scientists leadership team, are gathering in support of our community across the world in this critical moment.

We are scientists. We are members of racial, ethnic, and religious minority groups. We are immigrants. We are people with disabilities. We are LGBTQIA+. We are parents. We are women. And we stand with scientists in the US and across the globe.

Ramping back up in 2025

Threats to science, to women, to LGBTQIA+ people, to people from historically excluded racial and ethnic backgrounds, to immigrants, to democracy, and to civil society are imminent and increasing by the hour. It feels like we have to address everything all at once, which is by design. In our first full leadership team meeting since October 2023, team members past and present decided to focus efforts on what we do best: holding scientific institutions accountable and uplifting the voices of women and gender minority scientists.

Government-led attacks on science, immigrants, education, diversity, equity, and inclusion, and marginalized communities are not new, but the scale and speed of the recent administrative actions are unprecedented. At the same time, the integration of the tech industry and the use of artificial intelligence and digital surveillance into our government is deeply concerning and is akin to adding fuel to a raging fire. Since January 20th, 65 executive orders have been signed that eliminate protections for immigrants and the environment, undermine diversity and civil rights efforts within and outside the federal government, and severely limit access to critical public health information, education, and science. A slew of executive orders focus on outright censorship, targeting programs and federal grant awards that include words related to diversity, equity, inclusion, accessibility, climate change, women, gender, and many others; taken together, this censorship fundamentally undermines research and the ability of the federal government to tackle real challenges for real people. The president of the United States has unleashed a wrecking ball to dismantle the scaffolding of the country’s scientific enterprise. This does not just impact scientists — it impacts everyone in the U.S. and across the world.

While the attacks on science and scientists are deeply concerning, we are never just scientists and our other identities as women, people from marginalized backgrounds, immigrants, and people with disabilities are also under threat.

These Attacks on Science are Personal

• One of us is a young breast cancer patient, impacted by clinical trials being threatened to halt due to the funding freeze, budget cuts slowing research for a cure, not to mention the risk of losing health insurance and being labeled with a pre-existing condition for the rest of her life.
• One of us is a small business owner, not allowed to continue her work because of the EO ending all federal DEIA efforts, including her facilitation of workshops to make the scientific enterprise more welcoming and just; she is now worried about paying her bills.
• Several of us are professors working every day to educate the next generation of scientists and physicians. Our students’ future is suddenly full of uncertainty–critical training programs abruptly cancelled, arbitrary cuts to research funds, and existential threats to higher education. Words and work central to our research (and our students’ diverse identities!) are suddenly forbidden and are being erased. Simultaneously, we rush to hire back former trainees illegally fired from federal positions.
• One of us is losing the ability to maintain international research collaborations asUSAID and other international science programs and initiatives are eliminated.
• Many of us are reeling from the destruction of the federal workforce and continuing threats to science-based agencies across the government, including the USDA, NPS, USGS, CDC, NIH, NSF, EPA, NOAA, USAID, and more. We personally know many federal scientists who have already lost their jobs.

The entire scientific community in the U.S. and abroad is reeling in the wake of federal funding cuts, illegal terminations and hiring freezes, and increasing censorship of research related to health, climate change, environmental protection, clean energy, and diversity, equity, and inclusion. Even those with jobs outside of sectors currently targeted by the administration, people who are housed, healthy, and live in communities relatively insulated from the initial onslaught of attacks are still affected by the actions of this new administration. Everyone will feel the impacts of rolling back environmental protections, lack of food and drug safety measures, eradication of the use of vaccines, deregulation of the financial industry, and more. And as people lose their jobs, there will be direct and indirect impacts in their communities. When people can’t afford basic necessities and can’t pay their bills, the entire social safety net is strained and goods and services become more expensive for everyone, not just the people who have lost their jobs.

We, 500 Women Scientists, know it is critical to bear witness to what is happening, bring community together, and build collective power to fight back. We are here to stand up to the rapid normalization of fascist rhetoric and actions, to stand against cuts to science and education more broadly, and to leverage our growing community to find small and large ways to fight back. Working together, we can still win.

Where do we go from here?

Today, we recommit ourselves to our collective mission to serve society by making science open, inclusive, and accessible, and to transform society by fighting racism, patriarchy, and oppressive societal norms.

And we need you to help us bring this mission to reality.

There are several ways in which you can engage. Start by simply following us on social media (we are currently active on Medium, Instagram and Bluesky). In the coming weeks, we will share stories of how scientists are being impacted by the ongoing onslaught and provide clarity on the issues you care about: DEIA, science funding, public health, environmental protections, and more. We will share resources for science advocates on our website and through our social media channels.

If you are ready to roll up your sleeves and join us, we welcome all kinds of engagement.

• Call your elected representatives and tell them how the actions of the current administration affect you, personally and in your scientific work. Talk to your students, trainees, friends, colleagues, family about the impacts and how they can contact their representatives, too! These conversations don’t have to be ideological or political — the reality is that many people across the U.S. don’t know what scientists do and the critical roles our federal agencies play in advancing science.
• Reach out to your hometown newspaper and introduce yourself. It’s time for scientists to share what their work means and how it helps our communities.
• Read and sign our Updated Pledge to reaffirm your commitment to foundational principles of inclusion, equity, justice, and the scientific enterprise.
• Check out our Action Lab Database for easy-to-implement actions, and do what you can, when you can.
• Contribute to Action Lab by adding action items.
• Join our 500WS community
• Join our leadership team, bring your ideas, and we will leverage our capacity to move them to action.

The most important thing is to take action and remember that hope is a communal effort.

— Your former and current members of 500 Women Scientists Leadership Team

500 Women Scientists is a global non-profit organization that formed in 2016 as a response to the outcome of that US election. Our mission is to make science open, inclusive, and accessible and to fight racism, patriarchy, and oppressive societal norms.

For Mental Health Awareness Month, we kicked off a crucial, but difficult, conversation about the mental health crisis in the STEMM fields. We spoke to several women and minority researchers, scientists, and mental health professionals to dive deeper into the causes of this crisis. We also saw the dire need to offer a platform and amplify voices on this matter.

As part of our Mental Health Awareness series, we spoke with Dr. Monica Malta, who is a professor at the University of Toronto, and a scientist at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health. She is also a member of the 500 Women Scientists’ leadership team.

There is an indubitable mental health crisis in science and STEMM fields which requires immediate action. Women scientists and minorities in science are especially susceptible to these crises. What are your perspectives on this, both as a mental health professional and as a woman in STEMM yourself?

There’s indeed a mental health crisis in academia and science. Graduate students are six times more likely to experience depression and anxiety than the general population, with a whopping 36% of them having sought help for depression or anxiety caused by their studies. This is corroborated by other independent surveys done by individual schools: more than 40% of graduate students in STEM (degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) in University of California, Berkeley are depressed, while 50% of doctoral students in University of Arizona reported high stress. The COVID-19 pandemic also, unsurprisingly, worsened the situation, with a more than 10% jump in the number of students with depression and anxiety symptoms.

As with many fields across the world, a competitive environment often leads to depression, anxiety and stress, and the field of STEM academic research has indeed become more and more competitive over the years. It is harder than ever to obtain funds or publish in high impact journals. This pressure generates many issues for the scientific community as a whole (such as increasing the tendency to avoid novel research, overestimate results’ significance, and, in more severe cases, commit research fraud), and also plays a huge role in affecting graduate students’ stress in academia.

Mental health struggles in science are still often viewed as individual weaknesses and not the result of a larger dysfunctional institutional culture where systemic racism and gender inequalities are key problems. And mental health interventions in the STEM academic community often focus on what individuals can do to improve their mental health instead of focusing on improving the institutional environment.

Many institutions have implemented ‘mental health awareness campaigns’, and that’s an interesting and valid strategy. However, until each university and lab really works to address key problems such as gender pay gaps, motherhood penalty, systemic racism, LGBTQ+ discrimination etc., those awareness campaigns serve just as a way to ‘check a to do list’.

As a mental health researcher, I think we’re missing the point. We need to really engage people with lived experiences to develop adequate, feasible and acceptable interventions. We need universities and institutions to really commit and change a highly toxic environment to work, teach and study. We need more work flexibility for breastfeeding mothers, paid sick leave for staff and faculties struggling with mental health disorders. We need free mental health care on campus that are accessible for students. We need to decrease the level of stigma and discrimination that surrounds mental health disorders, in order to make mental health care more acceptable and easy.

Mental health is health. But somehow we’re forgetting this as individuals and most importantly as institutions.

What are the key facets that are contributing to this crisis in science & STEMM fields?

There are many problems influencing the high prevalence of mental health disorders in science. But key aspects include a highly competitive environment where each student and professor struggle with an enormous pressure to publish (or perish) and receive grants, while high impact journals tend to be highly selective and funding agencies have seen a flat increment on their annual budget while the number of people applying for grants have steadily increased… If you think about PhD students, lack of financial stability and job security are key problems. For instance, in the US PhD students earn between $15,000 and $30,000 a year depending on their institution, field of study, and location — while working for more than 41 hours a week!

Bullying and harassment are widespread in our field and frequently perpetrators are not held accountable, especially if they are senior scientists with a large portfolio of funded research… People of color, people with disabilities, LGBTQ+ persons, and women are frequently subjected to increased levels of bullying and harassment. In February 2020, Nature journal conducted a survey with more than 7,600 postdoctoral scientists from 93 countries. Among then, 74% observed power imbalances and/or bullying, 43% saw gender discrimination and 37% observed racial discrimination or harassment.

We need perpetrators to be held accountable. We need a shift in institutional culture that really listens and supports survivors. This highly toxic environment is taking a heavy toll on the next generation of scientists, and many are opting out of academia. If academia continues to be a place where white, old, cis, heterosexual males are the ones dictating norms and making decisions, unfortunately we won’t see any change in the near future. Academia needs changes, and it needs to change now.

What is your advice for prioritizing and ameliorating mental health for women scientists, researchers (and minorities) in science/STEMM?

We need a change in the academic culture and a true commitment of institutions to tackle deeply entrenched problems. We need diversity in leadership, we need more Black and Brown faculty members. We need more women and LGBTQ+ persons in positions of power. We need affirmative actions polices to attract and retain diverse students in the STEM disciplines. And to do so, institutions need to offer a non-toxic and supportive environment. Institutions need to include people with lived experiences in the development and implementations of mental health awareness campaigns and interventions.

Mental awareness campaigns are interesting, but they fall short. Universities, labs and other STEM organizations need to go beyond that. We need to promote a working environment where mental health treatment is viewed as a health treatment like any other.

Students should have access to 24/7 crisis support. Suicide attempts are rising — depression, anxiety, PTSD etc., are highly prevalent on campus. Each institution should offer free or at least subsidized counseling and treatment to their students, staff and faculty members.

Without strong investment and commitment to go beyond timely campaigns, the mental health crisis we are seeing today in academia won’t be addressed at all.

What steps do we take as individuals to increase mental health awareness?

We should talk more about the importance of mental health. If you feel comfortable with sharing your own struggles, please do so. If you experienced bullying, harassment, power imbalance etc., please look for support.

If you are a member of a marginalized group, look for a supportive environment. If there is no support group, think about creating one for your community. One person might be too fragile to denounce an abusive mentor or a toxic environment, but an entire group can work together to create awareness and demand overdue changes.

For those who use frequently social media, speak about mental health. Talk about the importance of working/studying in a safe and supportive environment, share your suggestions to improve your lab/university/college. If we all talk as freely about mental illness as we have been talking about COVID-19, we will all be fighting the stigma surrounding mental illness. We should all remember that mental health is health.

The Mental Health Awareness campaign and interviews were conceived and conducted by 500 Women Scientists’ leadership team member Rakenduvadhana Srinivasan.

Rakenduvadhana Srinivasan (she/her) is a neuroscientist based in Helsinki, Finland. Her doctoral research focuses on the effects of acute neuroinflammation on hippocampal function. She is also a writer and artist among other things.

Academic institutions must still do better to protect caregivers, now and into the future

Parents, particularly women and historically excluded groups, have faced disproportionate career losses throughout the pandemic. In the face of the record-high COVID rates of the Omicron surge, parents are exhausted. Titles of recently published articles drive this point home, again and again: Being a working parent sucks right now; Omicron means parents are doing it all again, except this time dead inside; The agony of parents with kids under 5; No Shots, No Daycare: Parents of Kids Under 5 Stuck in Grueling Limbo; Daycares are shutting down and parents are ‘tired of being tired’; Latest COVID surge pushes parents to next-level stress; COVID parenting has passed the point of absurdity. What was once unprecedented has become an unwelcome norm in our lives.

Women in science have experienced career disruptions that will take years, or even decades, to undo. In academia, where women and marginalized identities remain underrepresented due to systematic barriers on the long road to tenure-track positions that frequently conflict with desires for family building, it seems progress towards equity is quickly unraveling. Data show that pandemic setbacks have disproportionately fallen on women and early career researchers in academia, with other studies forecasting that the nature of these setbacks implies that these disparities may persist for years. Here we focus on academic women parents, who continue to bear the brunt of childcare gaps due to the pandemic. These problems are not new, but the pandemic is exposing them in new ways with much greater consequences.

Although many in academic leadership positions are eager to move past the pandemic, we implore those in such positions to face the reality of this situation: we are facing massive losses in the workforce concentrated in already underrepresented groups, historic levels of anxiety surrounding health concerns, and impossible choices about how to maintain productive careers while keeping our children safe. Women, parents, caregivers, and immunocompromised people need support now. Ignoring this only worsens the unrealistic nature of our current demands. Furthermore, we need forward-thinking and ambitious visions for how to repair the setbacks faced by disproportionately affected groups once we eventually emerge from the pandemic.

Parents are facing massive life disruptions with illness, school and daycare closures, and quarantine periods. All of society is suffering as a result of the overwhelmed healthcare system and continued disruptions to supply chains and businesses. For many parents who have sacrificed so much to keep their kids safe over the past two years, it now feels nearly inevitable that our kids will get sick. For those with kids under five who remain ineligible for vaccination, this is particularly hard to bear, as no one wants to willingly expose their child to covid to “just get it over with.” On one hand, we have been told (even by other mothers) not to worry because the risks to children under five are smaller than the rest of the population. But we also know that our children are at risk for serious breathing problems due to their relatively smaller airways, and that there are many unknowns related to long-term health consequences, such as the recently reported elevated risk for post-COVID diabetes in pediatric patients. There is no clear end in sight to this unknown state of risk, given excruciating clinical trial extensions for immunization in this age group.

Meanwhile, most of America is trying to move on. With U.S. academic institutions facing steep drops in enrollment over the last two years, the pressure to return and maintain in-person learning experiences is huge. For the many academic parents teaching courses and labs, this can only be accomplished with functioning and safe childcare. When childcare centers are open, the infectiousness of Omicron truly makes this a choice between maintaining a career or avoiding a COVID-19 infection. The pressure on parents isn’t just huge — it’s enormous, and soul-crushing. The situation is further exacerbated by politically and economically driven, anti-science decisions, such as bans on masks and vaccination, and requiring in-person teaching with little or no flexibility. Many of our colleagues are at institutions with no options to move classes virtual, even as infections in courses skyrocket or childcare options become untenable, given high COVID rates in daycares and schools. In essence, while some of our colleagues and students may be feeling a boost of confidence from the data showing that Omicron is milder in vaccinated individuals, many parents of children younger than five are still operating in the mindframe common in 2020–2021 before vaccinations were widely available. This disparity puts parents in an impossible position: defeated by uncertainties about the risks to children, but also beholden to institutions forcing returns to in-person instruction under the assumption that it is actually safe to resume college campus activities. This is unacceptable.

As we have previously discussed, masking, testing, and vaccination are pillars of good COVID policy. We need high quality masks, readily available for free to campus populations. We need testing. Despite the challenges to testing logistics posed by high rates of positive tests, it is crucial that we understand disease prevalence if we want to maintain in-person learning on campuses. If testing logistical issues are insurmountable, this is a clear indication that instruction should be moved to virtual until positivity rates decrease. Other decisions directly sacrifice the health of immunocompromised people and those too young to be vaccinated in our communities. We need people to get vaccinated and boosted, and we need vaccines for children under five years of age. We also need global vaccine equity: none of us are safe until all of us are safe. These minimum requirements will help to keep us healthy. But we need so much more to actually function in our workplaces.

We recommend immediate action by those in academic leadership positions on the following fronts:

1. Flexibility in course delivery modes and working location. In the short term, instructors need flexibility and the decision power to pivot from in person to virtual instruction without onerous and time consuming bureaucratic hurdles. This should be accompanied with clear messaging to all levels of administration and faculty so that the campus culture supports the most vulnerable to make the decisions they need. Risk tolerances in the pandemic state are highly variable and there is no correct answer for what is appropriate risk for all employees. A faculty or staff member with an immunocompromised child under the age of five at home should not be forced to make the same decisions as those without health concerns or dependent care responsibilities. Although the ADA accommodation process can sometimes be helpful in creating equity in such situations, it is far too slow to employ in the current crisis-level environment in which we are operating. We emphasize that there are far-reaching benefits to those in leadership who can offer a supportive and flexible approach to employees in these circumstances, rather than placing themselves in an adversarial position by requiring in-person instruction/meetings at all costs. These are trying times for all, and in addition to concerns with retention, the risk of large-scale faculty disengagement is high without supportive leadership. A culture of flexibility and support for faculty, staff, students, and postdocs will help to retain individuals from under-represented groups who we need, and who belong, in science and academia.

2. Emergency leave contingency plans. Universities should put in place policies and contingency plans for emergency leaves and extend sick leave for COVID-19 related needs. Given the prevalence of illness we can expect as classes resume, many instructors and staff will need time away due to their own illness or the illness of dependents. Many staff are required to take sick leave when they cannot work in person, and if there is not enough accrued, they end up taking unpaid leave, thus incentivizing people coming to work in person while still sick or avoiding testing. Departments can help to lessen the chaos associated with emergency faculty sick leaves by putting in place plans for substitute instruction should designated instructors get sick. Additionally, emergency childcare funding would help in allowing parents to continue work while daycares and schools are closed. If daycare centers close due to positive cases, parents could be forced to hire in-home care that is often more costly than group facilities, while often continuing to pay for nonexistent care from the closed daycare center. Additionally, if centers are open, but COVID-19 rates are high, parents may choose to keep their children home, but still pay the very expensive tuition to keep their children’s spot, leaving no funds for additional childcare. Putting emergency childcare funding programs together at an institutional level will require creativity in how to fairly implement them, as well as in targeting sources for funding, but this work is well worth the effort. These contingency funds and programs might mean the difference between retention or loss for women in science, who have spent decades building their careers.

3. Planning future policies to ameliorate pandemic career setbacks. In the long term, the careers of those disproportionately impacted by the pandemic will need support to recover, and this may be a long-term process, even after the acute setbacks of the pandemic have eased. Strategies that will help this process include releases from service duties, teaching releases, extra support for teaching assistants, and targeted pilot seed funding programs. Although tenure clock stops due to the pandemic may be helpful in some cases, they also have long-lasting negative impacts on salary. This detrimental effect could be addressed through raises that are not associated with promotion. Many of these strategies focus on support at the institutional level, but we also encourage funding agencies to commit to both short-term and long-term strategies that will support scientists that have faced substantial pandemic setbacks (NSF is currently collecting ideas through its covid DEI challenge). This should include extending or adding flexibility to proposal deadlines during the present Omicron surge and future surges, as well as designing targeted funding programs to help support and re-start research of impacted scientists. We also highlight the need to ensure that review panels remain diverse despite the time constraints that may currently prevent many women and parents from serving in this capacity. We encourage those in leadership positions to immediately begin work on implementing programs that address the long-term disparities that the pandemic has imposed on the scientific and academic community.

The pandemic has amplified nearly every disadvantage that women in STEMM already face. Though we are all ready for the pandemic to be over, these burdens on parents and caregivers, and women in particular, continue. It is crucial that we, especially leaders in academic institutions, think carefully about how to support these hardest-hit scientists, now and well into the future. Acknowledging the continuing struggle is an important first step in addressing it, but the time for action is now.

To close, we turn directly to more words from parents in science. These are the voices who need support:

This nightmare just continues. We made it for two days at the university daycare before an exposure in our toddler’s classroom.

I came back from maternity leave into a pandemic. I keep hoping for a chance to be productive (employable!) again but the gap just. keeps. getting. Bigger.

It’s so exhausting. I don’t know what normal feels like, still just going on one day at a time…

If anything the burden has only gotten worse now. Everyone else seems ready to move on which makes things infinitely harder when you have a child who can’t yet be vaccinated.

Contributors

Catherine (Katie) Wagner (she/her/hers) is an evolutionary biologist who studies processes contributing to the origins and maintenance of earth’s biodiversity. She holds a PhD in ecology and evolutionary biology from Cornell University, and a BA in biology-geology from Whitman College. She is currently an Assistant Professor at the University of Wyoming. She is on Twitter @cewagnerlab.

Jessica L. Metcalf (she/her/hers) is a microbiome scientist who leads highly interdisciplinary microbiome research projects that span the fields of forensics, animal science, and health by combining experimental ecology, large genomic datasets, and bioinformatics tools. She has a BS in chemistry from the University of Georgia, and a PhD in ecology and evolutionary biology from University of Colorado Boulder. She is an Associate Professor at Colorado State University., where she co-chairs the Council for Gender Equity on the Faculty. She is an Azrieli CIFAR Global Scholar. She is also on twitter @DirtySci

Elizabeth (Liz) McCullagh (she/her/hers) is a neuroscientist who specializes in how animals, including humans, process sound location information in the brain. Her education is in Biology with her BS and MS from Virginia Tech and PhD from University of Illinois Chicago. She is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of Integrative Biology at Oklahoma State University and member of the 500 Women Scientists’ leadership team. Liz is an advocate for parental issues in the workplace, and co-founder of Milk and Cookies, a lactation support group on the University of Colorado Anschutz campus. She is also on Twitter @ZaarlyLiz.

Tanya Dapkey (she/her/hers) is an entomologist who studies macroinvertebrates in freshwater ecosystems as bioindicators of water quality. Her Masters is from the University of Pennsylvania where she integrated stream ecology and DNA barcoding. She currently works at the Academy of Natural Sciences of Drexel University in Philadelphia, PA. She is also on Twitter @tanyadapkey.

Theresa Jedd is a political scientist specializing in environmental topics. She is particularly motivated to understand how policies and proactive planning can solve water, energy and forest conservation challenges. She earned her M.A. and Ph.D. from Colorado State University and did her postdoc at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. She is currently working 50% of the time as an instructor and researcher at the Technical University of Munich.

500 Women Scientists who wish not to be listed.

Ahead of the International Day of Women and Girls in Science on 11 February 2022, we — Palestinian scientists and members of the 500 Women Scientists collective — called attention to the continuing plight of women trying to do research in the Occupied Palestinian Territories in Nature Correspondence.

As scientists, we cannot selectively choose which crises to care about, and continue to overlook the plight of our fellow colleagues who are living in volatile regions. Immediate action is needed by members of the global scientific community, especially those in leadership positions, on several fronts, including:

● Learning about what is going on in the world, especially in conflict zones: For example, you can learn about the injustices that Palestinians have faced and continue to face, through a number of resources and organizations, including the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, BADIL, B’Tselem, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, and the Jewish Voice for Peace. Keep in mind that there are many scientists across the world who face occupation and/or violence — the 2017 Science in Exile documentary, produced by the World Academy of Sciences, shares how violence in Syria, Yemen and Iraq threatened the lives of four researchers.

● Volunteer your time and skills to help support at-risk scientists through mentoring, collaborations and partnerships: Scientists across academic institutions and scientific societies can take a number of actions, including establishing scholarship and fellowship schemes, creating new grant programs for women scientists living in conflict zones, and implementing mentoring or support programmes for early-career, at-risk and displaced scientists living in volatile regions.

● Spearheading institutional efforts to better support scientists living in conflict zones: Institutions can appeal to their governments to take action to secure the lives and careers of scientists and students. Examples include the Global Young Academy’s Strategic Project — At-Risk Scholars Initiative and the Three Circles of Alemat mentoring program. (Note: the International Science Council has convened a Science In Exile project, which is currently mapping organisations which provide support to and opportunities for at-risk, displaced, and refugee scientists.)

As scientists who identify as women, we understand the resilience and perseverance that is required to conduct research in such conditions, and commend these women on their dedication to science. We hope the resources provided in this post can help empower further allyship and support to all the women facing these hardships.

Corvallis sits on the land of the Kalapuya People, descendants of whom are now members of the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde. It is the westernmost city in the contiguous 48 states with a population larger than 50,000 and has only 12.4 days annually when the temperature is over 90°, which is cooler than most places in Oregon.

Quick Facts about 500 Women Scientists Corvallis:

Location: Corvallis, Oregon

Member Count: 128

STEMM Fields represented:

• Ecology
• Biology
• Toxicology
• Conservation
• Engineering Design
• Materials Science
• Physics
• Science Communication
• System Dynamics

Social Media:

Find their social media handles, website and resources on LinkTree: http://linktr.ee/500WSCorvallis

Q & A

What is your favorite pod event to date?

One of our favorite pod activities is hosting a resource booth at local events including at Farmer’s Markets, concerts, Earth Day celebrations, and more. Through in-person interactions at public venues, we share information about 500 Women Scientists’ mission, our pod projects, and ways to live more sustainably. We are also partnering with local groups to distribute resources that help reduce waste, while saving time and money, including guides for food storage, recycling, water-efficient landscaping, and making green cleaning products. We enjoy hosting science activities at our booth, such as extracting DNA from strawberries, solar-powered toy car demo, and biological surveys. Interacting with the public is especially fun when we see excitement and enthusiasm in people of all ages and backgrounds!

What can other pods connect with the Corvallis pod about?

A primary initiative of our pod is to provide a platform for women and gender minorities in STEMM fields to share their work and research with the community. Our goal is to enhance the visibility of diverse scientists, fields of expertise, and methods of discovery. So, we started hosting Tap Talks (monthly presentations at 7:00 pm Pacific Time on the first Tuesday). We joined forces with a local brewery to provide in-person and virtual talks that highlight the work of local scientists at different career stages. Our pod website has more information and we posted some of the recorded talks on YouTube. If other pods were interested in organizing community-oriented seminars, we can share our experiences, format, and strategies for behind-the-scenes coordination and advertisement.

Another of our pod initiatives is focused on environmental education. We are working on connecting local scientists with teachers in the classroom. We are also using nature-centered activities to teach students how to document, evaluate, and communicate scientific research. Together with local groups and teachers, we developed Eco Survey (an online form that enables crowdsourcing of observations of climate and wildlife). The resulting public database will provide classrooms, watershed councils, environmental groups, marginalized communities, and others with the information they need to determine how our environment is changing and what to do about it. We are interested in expanding the outdoor science program to include other languages and locations, so we would love to connect with other pods that are interested in promoting scientific literacy.

Have you formed any local connections with schools, universities, or grassroots STEMM organizations?

We often partner with Mid-Valley STEM-CTE Hub, a local organization that elevates STEM and career technical education in our region. One of our collaborations was a virtual Tag Campaign for #STEMLikeAWoman, a celebration of Women’s History Month 2021 aiming to bring awareness to the gender gap in STEM careers. Participants tagged inspiring STEM women in their lives and then tagged someone to spread the word! Mid-Valley STEM-CTE Hub has amazing initiatives that we help to promote and advertise whenever possible.

Our pod also works in close collaboration with other local groups and businesses including the Corvallis Sustainability Coalition, Corvallis Climate Action Alliance, Block 15 Brewing Company, Corvallis Environmental Center, Corvallis Parks & Recreation, First Alternative Natural Food Co-op, and many more.

••••••••

Feeling inspired? Want to join a pod? Learn more here. [Interview with Susan Salafsky- Corvallis Pod Event Coordinator; Edits by Kara Bocher, Pods Coordinator & Anushka Gole, Director of Communications at 500 Women Scientists]

500 Women Scientists is thrilled to continue our Meet the Scientist blog series! In celebration of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, we’re excited to highlight Palestinian women scientists who are both living in occupied territories and beyond. In this blog post, the spotlight is on Dr. Maha Samman!

Dr. Maha Samman is an Assistant Professor at the Architecture Department and lectures in Jerusalem Studies MA program at Al-Quds University (AQU). She is the author of Trans-Colonial Urban Space in Palestine: Politics and Development, Routledge 2013, and co-editor of the Ya Quds! periodical. She holds a Bachelor Of Science (BSc) in Architecture from Birzeit University, a Master of Science (MSc) in Urban Planning from the Netherlands’ Technical University of Delft, and a PhD in Political Geography from the University of Exeter (UK).

Samman won the Palestine Islamic Bank Research Award in the category of Distinctive Researcher in Palestine 2019, for her article The Production of Colonial Temporal Patterns in East Jerusalem in the Journal of Holy Land and Palestine Studies (2018). She has several other published articles in pronounced journals on Architecture, urban and political issues, especially about the city of Jerusalem. She received the Arab Council for the Social Sciences (ACSS) Research Grant (2018), for research on: “Geopolitics of “Time” and colonial temporal patterns in Jerusalem”. She was the head of the Housing sector in the Updating and Development of the Sectoral Development Plan of Jerusalem (2018–2022). She organized the multidisciplinary international conference: Production of Inequalities: Realities and Prospects for Change, AQU, in 2016.

1. When did you first identify as a scientist?

During the years of my Bachelor’s in Architecture, I started to learn how to do research, especially before designing any kind of building, on the social and spatial dynamics in the specific sites of the building. Although most of this research was for developing architectural designs, it was important to keep in mind what was happening in the everyday life of our cities.

I started doing extensive research during my MSc studies at the Technical University of Delft in the Netherlands. This developed and broadened during my PhD studies, after which my research experience and insight took form in various research topics which were published in different arenas.

2. What does your work focus on?

My research is inter- and multi-disciplinary as it intersects Architecture, urban planning, urban politics, urban and cultural heritage, social science and political geography. I work on the politics of urban space in its various scales within the colonial setting and with a focus on Palestine and more on the city of Jerusalem.

3. What’s the best advice you’ve received over your career?

While doing research, the cumulative advice I received covers the following:

• Keep at it, despite obstacles or setbacks.
• Focus on producing quality knowledge in a professional form.
• Keep goals high, on the local, regional and international levels, in case any one level is not encouraging for one reason or another.

4. How did the current climate in Palestine impact your ability to work as a scientist?

As a social and urban scientist and architect planner, everyday life in Palestine exposes the extent of the injustice under colonialism which compels scientists to communicate what is going on in Palestine, and especially Jerusalem, to the rest of the world. In my writings, I always try to unfold the realities of the colonial situation that impact Palestinians on the individual and communal levels.

5. When you’re not researching or organizing events to promote women in STEM, how do you relax and unwind?

I try to spend time with genuine loving friends and family, especially my children. I also try to exercise at least once a week, and to watch movies from time to time.

6. Is there anything else you would like to share?

I try to participate in community awareness and urban development with the context of municipalities and unions. I also have received awards for my research and managed to publish a book which develops a new paradigm in urban politics — the Trans-colonial.

[Written interview with Dr. Maha Samman was coordinated by Dr. Rana Dajani; Edits by Farah Qaiser and Rosie Dutt.]

500 Women Scientists is thrilled to continue our Meet the Scientist blog series! In celebration of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, we’re excited to highlight Palestinian women scientists who are both living in occupied territories and beyond. Today, the spotlight is on Dr. Yara Saifi.

Dr. Yara Saifi is an associate professor of architecture at the Department of Architecture at Al Quds University in Jerusalem, where she has been the department head since 2015. She was previously the Dean of Hind Al Husseini’s Faculty of Arts at Al-Quds University. Her research interests are architectural aesthetics, design and conflict studies. Saifi is a member of different committees related to urban planning, restoration and conservation of historic buildings, and the Master’s (MA) program in Jerusalem Studies at Al-Quds University. She was also a local juror to the 2018 RIBA Awards for International Excellence in Palestine.

1. When did you first identify as a scientist?

2012.

2. What does your work focus on?

Architecture, urban planning, and the occupation itself.

3. What’s the best advice you’ve received over your career?

Keep writing!

5. How did the current climate in Palestine impact your ability to work as a scientist?

I have received several refusals from various reputable journals to consider research that involves the Israeli violation of Palestinians’ right to the city, freedom, movement and to provide shelter to live. And being constantly asked to reduce “the political tone”!

6. Is there anything else you would like to share with us?

Besides teaching, I carry out an architectural practice, research and motherhood. I am always involved with projects that involve students’ participation in the protection of the Palestinian cultural heritage, narrative and identity. This also involves research and has other challenges. However, research and teaching are time-demanding, and do not leave me with time to participate in other activities that are centered on hobbies and other joyful events. I relax and unwind with my family and daughter.

[Written interview with Dr. Yara Saifi was coordinated by Dr. Rana Dajani; Edits by Farah Qaiser and Rosie Dutt.]

500 Women Scientists is thrilled to continue our Meet the Scientist blog series! In celebration of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, we’re excited to highlight Palestinian women scientists who are both living in occupied territories and beyond. In this post, the spotlight is on Dr. Joman Y. Natsheh!

Dr. Joman Y. Natsheh, a physician and a neuroscientist, is the research lead for the Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics section of Children’s Specialized Hospital, a visiting scientist at Kessler Foundation and a Research Assistant Professor at Rutgers University Medical School in the USA. She is a founding member and the associate director of the Palestinian Neuroscience Initiative at Al-Quds University in Palestine.

Dr. Natsheh received her medical degree from Al-Quds University, and completed her Ph.D. training in behavioral and neural sciences at Rutgers University. She also completed a fellowship in pediatric neuroscience at Rutgers/Kessler Foundation. Her research focuses on characterizing neural, molecular, and cognitive/behavioral correlates of neurodevelopmental disorders in children and in animal models. After completing her medical training, Joman was selected as one of three researchers worldwide to receive the Rita Levi-Montalcini Postdoctoral Fellowship from the International Brain Research Organization (IBRO). She has also received a Postdoctoral Fellow Research Award from Rutgers University, the Dr. Raniyah Ramadan Award for Young Arab Neuroscientists, and the Al-Ashwal award for Outstanding Neuroscientists in the MENA region.

1. When did you first identify as a scientist?

Since my childhood, I immersed myself in activities, competitions, and challenges to push my limits and get out of my comfort zone. I have always found an unparalleled thrill in exploring new things; books, study topics, and places. During the second year of medical school, my interest in the human brain was significantly primed by learning the principles of neuroanatomy and neurophysiology. I knew at that point that a career in neuroscience would be my way forward.

2. What does your work focus on?

Between Palestine and the U.S., I study developmental aspects of the brain and behavior in children with neurodevelopmental disorders. Specifically, I use functional brain imaging and basic behavioral and cognitive paradigms in children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder to study habitual and goal-directed behavior. My research aims at identifying individual differences in brain and cognitive function that can lead to novel diagnosis and treatment approaches.

Our efforts at the Palestinian Neuroscience Initiative focus on building capacity for neuroscience research in Palestine that addresses locally-relevant and internationally-generalizable needs. At both the Palestinian Neuroscience Initiative and Children’s Specialized Hospital, I am leading the efforts to establish a neurodevelopmental research nucleus through building original research studies and fostering local and international collaborations.

3. How did the current climate in Palestine impact your ability to work as a scientist?

I work between the U.S. and Palestine. The pandemic, along with the latest events in Palestine, made it difficult for me to go back and forth and be physically present in Palestine as much as I like or used to.

However, despite the pain of hardships in Palestine, they create unconventional opportunities to identify and train dedicated and bright young people. This has been particularly inspiring to me when working with young women who have a future that is wide open; waiting for them to explore. Supporting these women, and showing them by example that “we” can embark on a unique journey in science and in life without sacrificing everything, has been the highlight of my career at the Palestinian Neuroscience Initiative.

4. What’s the best advice you’ve received over your career?

“Woman up!”

When I was a second year graduate student, I had a meeting with my program director. I was tearing up after a very difficult and challenging day. She stopped our discussion; looked me in the eye, and said: “Woman up! You’re a strong young lady! You’re an immigrant who is succeeding despite being away from home, family, and a familiar culture. Never show tears or be silent in a professional setting. You have a voice; own it!”.

This advice hit me and stuck with me throughout my career. Ever since, if I face any conflict or challenge, the first thing that comes to my mind is: how can I woman up in the face of this? And it always works!

5. When you’re not researching or organizing events to promote women in STEM, how do you relax and unwind?

I read. Books have always been my refuge. The beauty and elegance of Arabic literature light up my days, and recharge my soul. I also love traveling; the magic of exploring new places can always widen your horizons and give you a new perspective. Finally, I can spend long hours immersed in graphic design. It’s limitless, fluid, and creative. To me, playing with colors and patterns is therapeutic.

Check out Dr. Joman’s TEDx talk at Al-Quds University about the cultural stereotypes around women, and how understanding the distinct nature of women’s brain and behavior can shape new habits and address the stigma against women’s mental health: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hy6RqKjgs1I&t=120s

[Written interview with Dr. Joman Natsheh was coordinated by Dr. Rana Dajani; Edits by Farah Qaiser and Rosie Dutt.]

500 Women Scientists is thrilled to continue our Meet the Scientist blog series! In celebration of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, we’re excited to highlight Palestinian women scientists who are both living in occupied territories and beyond. In this post, the spotlight is on Dr. Elham Kateeb!

Dr. Elham Kateeb is an Associate Professor of Dental Public Health, and the Dean of Scientific Research at Al-Quds University (Jerusalem, Palestine), and a research affiliate at the Public Policy Center at the University of Iowa. Kateeb completed a PhD in Dental Public Health from University of Iowa, a Master’s in Public Health (MPH) at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, and a Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS) at the University of Jordan. Dr. Kateeb has been a diplomate of the American Board of Dental Public Health since 2013. You can find her on ResearchGate, LinkedIn, Google Scholar, Scopus and ORCID.

1. When did you first identify as a scientist?

I think I got into research during my Master’s of Public Health, where I conducted my first form evaluation study. Although I published two papers before I got into my PhD, I think I became properly trained on research in my PhD at the University of Iowa during 2008–2012, where I got my PhD in oral sciences, with a focus on Dental Public Health.

2. What does your work focus on?

I am a health services researcher, focusing on access to oral health care among marginalized populations. My research usually uses advanced modeling, behavioral frameworks and Conjoint experiments to understand barriers to accessing dental care. In addition, I conduct epidemiological studies and education too.

I am also an elected member of the International Dental Federation (FDI) Public Health Committee. I lead the efforts in this committee to improve oral health and general health for disadvantaged populations, my focus recently was on access to essential dental services among refugees. Lastly, I am a dental public health specialist who supervises many oral health promotion and disease prevention programs in Palestine, in collaboration with the ministries of Health and Education, the Palestinian Dental Association, and different local and international oral health organizations targeting children, women and special health care need patients in marginalized areas.

3. How did the current climate in Palestine impact your ability to work as a scientist?

As a researcher and a Dean of Scientific Research in my institution, I believe that our future, as Palestinians, depends on the strong intellectual base that we can create and retain. I am trying my best to serve my institution and to support my colleagues, but at many times, I feel helpless when I can’t make the desired impact, given the conditions we live in. The current situation in Palestinian territories is unjust and unstable for us as scientists. It is very difficult to live in a society that is deprived of its basic rights, such as the freedom to move, to express ourselves, and to demand from its intellectuals to excel in research and innovation.

In addition to everyday challenges for women scientists who live in occupied territories, we, researchers in Palestine, face many challenges. My commute to work should be a 20-minute drive, prior to the establishment of the Separating Wall that encircles Jerusalem and cuts it off from the surrounding villages where my university is located. However, I spend 60 minutes commuting on good days, and on bad days, my trip can last up to two hours and a half. This is simply because of the alternative roads and checkpoints imposed by Israeli occupation forces.

Travel and imports are heavily controlled by the Israelis, so we find it very difficult, most of the time, to participate in international conferences and research visits, or access research materials. Science can’t survive without a strong economy and good resources, and in the current situation, with complete control of resources and borders by the Israelis, all research institutions face a daily struggle to keep research labs open, or cover the running costs to conduct research and buy essential equipment and maintain them.

In the absence of national funding to research, researchers in Palestine rely heavily on international funding. This funding is usually linked to collaborative work that needs travel and active participation in conferences, workshops and research visits. This returns us to square one, where restrictions on movement, difficulties in getting visas, and restrictions on inviting international scholars and experts are obstacles to navigate. The absence of any airport in the Palestinian territories limit the participation of many scientists in such programs.

Despite all of these challenges, we are seeing the future brighter in our young. We, at Al- Quds University, established research bodies in all university colleges and tried to empower undergraduate students to get engaged as early as possible in research. We also reached out to high school students and encouraged them to actively participate in research activities. We started to see this work blooming in the high-quality publications our students publish. I always tell my students when you publish, you are not getting engaged in a scientific activity only, but you defend your existence by stating your affiliation as “Al-Quds University, Jerusalem, Palestine.” For the past seven years, our research production at AQU is steadily increasing, and women researchers have contributed to 45% of this production. In 60% of this contribution, women researchers were the lead authors.

4. What’s the best advice you’ve received over your career?

• To not burn my bridges with anybody.
• To not let others’ negativity affect you. It is their problem, not yours.
• Everybody has their own path, and you can’t judge.
• Hard work + Passion= Success

5. Can you tell us more about your awards, and service?

I was awarded the 2016 FDI Smile Award in the Innovation category by the Caries Prevention Partnership and the FDI Smile Award Committee for my project that promotes oral health among pregnant women in public clinics. I am also a 2015 Fellow of Zamalah program for academic career development, and a 2014 laureate of L’Oréal-UNESCO For Women in Science Levant Award.

I won the Olav Alvares Co for Best Article Published in the Journal of Dental Education (JDE) journal, and I am a 2013 fellow of the Leverett Graduate Student Merit Award for Outstanding Achievement in Dental Public Health.

Currently, I am a board member in the Palestinian Medical Council and the Palestinian Higher Education Council. I am also the co-chair of the Women in Science Organization (OWSD) Palestine chapter, and a board member of international organizations, such as VISTO International For Rights and Development, Academic Network for Development Dialogue (ANDD), the Global Movement for Sustainable Health Equity (SHEM) and others.

In addition to all of this, I am an educator who tries to inspire my students to learn every day, and a proud mother of two sons, Sami and Saif.

6. When you’re not researching or organizing events to promote women in STEM, how do you relax and unwind?

Travelling is my big passion: I love exploring new cities, new cultures and tasting new foods.

[Written interview with Dr. Elham Kateeb was coordinated by Dr. Rana Dajani; Edits by Farah Qaiser and Rosie Dutt.]