Making physics outreach more gender inclusive

“Diversity in the Cultures of Physics” was an Erasmus+ funded Strategic Partnership launching several key actions aimed at improving the gender balance in physics and its subfields. The Strategic Partnership consisted of six universities in four countries: Freie Universität Berlin in Germany, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona and Universitat de Barcelona in Spain, the University of Manchester and the University of Sheffield in the United Kingdom and Uppsala Universitet in Sweden. This flyer provides recommendations and a checklist to make outreach activities in physics more gender inclusive. It is aimed at people already active in outreach activities for young people. The flyer indicates relevant examples of outreach projects, highlights diversity-relevant questions and topics for planning outreach activities and provides a checklist for how outreach events in physics can be made more gender inclusive

On "responsible researchers" and "peace women". The political memory the West German post-war society and the role of physics. Historical conditions and political meanings as constitutive elements of a sociological understanding of science.

Die Rede von der “reinen” und “freien” Wissenschaft hatte in der deutschen Nachkriegszeit vielfach die Funktion, die Teilhabe dieser Wissenschaft an den Schuld- und Gewaltzusammenhänge nationalsozialistischer Politik unkenntlich zu machen. Das Wissenschaftsideal war in diesem Sinne ein Teil des Schweigens danach. Daran anknüpfend zeigt Elvira Scheich, dass das gesellschaftliche Wissenschaftsverständnis mit der deutschen Geschichte und deutscher Erinnerungspolitik in mehrfacher Weise verknüpft ist. Ihre Studie geht der Fragestellung nach, mit welchen verschiedenen Bedeutungen die Wissenschaft im Gedächtnis der Nachkriegsgesellschaft der BRD aufgeladen wurde und wie diese miteinander im Verhältnis stehen. Das Schlüsselmoment ist dabei die Rolle deutscher Wissenschaftler in der Anti-Atomwaffenbewegung der 1950er Jahre, in der die Wissenschaft zur moralisch integren Instanz avancierte. Als Material wurden zwei Zeitschriften zum einen die Physikalischen Blätter und zum anderen Frau und Frieden analysiert, die in der Debatte über nukleare Waffen zentrale Beiträge lieferten. Der Ausgangspunkt der Arbeit ist ein Ereignis, das im Zwischenraum von Wissenschaft, Politik und Öffentlichkeit stattfand. Es handelt sich um die sogenannte “Göttinger Erklärung”, in der 18 führende deutsche Wissenschaftler den Bau und die Benutzung von Atomwaffen öffentlichkeitswirksam ablehnten. Der Hintergrund dieses Ereignisses war eine weltweit alarmierte Wahrnehmung der besonderen Bedrohungen, die von Radioaktivität ausgehen, und die Debatte um die Stationierung atomarer Waffen in der BRD. Die darauf bezugnehmende Massenbewegung “Kampf dem Atomtod” in den Jahren 1957 und 1958 bildet den erweiterten Kontext der Untersuchung. Im öffentlichen Diskurs jener Zeit avancierte Wissenschaft zu einem Ersatz für Politik, deren Motive generell moralisch zweifelhaft erschienen. Aber erst mit der Wendung der Auseinandersetzung um Atomwaffen zu einer Gewissensfrage, die eine absolute und vom konkreten politischen Kontext unabhängige Geltung beansprucht, erhielt Wissenschaft ihren besonderen Stellenwert: In der beklemmenden Alternative zwischen Leben oder Tod der gesamten Menschheit wurde die Notwendigkeit eines überpolitischen Handelns betont, die Vernunft der “übernationalen” Wissenschaft angerufen und an das “Forschergewissen” appelliert. Der grundsätzlichen Rahmen und die wesentliche Begriffe der Interpretation folgen den Forschungsansätzen zu Traumatisierung und den Theorien zum kulturellen Gedächtnis, mit denen frühere soziologische und sozialpsychologische Untersuchungen zu Schuld und Abwehr (Adorno 1955) sowie zu der Unfähigkeit zu trauern (Mitscherlich 1967) weiterentwickelt und erweitert wurden. Die wichtigsten dieser Konzepte sind Adornos Überlegungen zum Realmoment der Schuldabwehr und Dan Bar-Ons Analyse (1996) der paradoxen Rede, demnach eines Sprechens, das zugleich benennt und das Benannte verbirgt. Damit ist es möglich, ein sprechendes Schweigen zu identifizieren, das dem Diskurs über die Atomgefahr seine spezifische Gestalt gibt. Die beiden Haupteile der Untersuchung konzentrieren sich auf die Analyse der zwei Zeitschriften Physikalischen Blätter und Frau und Frieden. Damit wurden aus dem großen Spektrum der damaligen Debatte zwei sehr verschiedene soziale Gruppen, die Physiker und die friedenspolitisch engagierten Frauen, ausgewählt. Beide Gruppierungen zeichnen sich durch klare Topoi aus, mit denen sie sich in der Debatte über die Atomgefahr artikulieren und auf deren Grundlage sie jeweils ihr Verhältnis zur Vergangenheit im Nationalsozialismus bestimmen. In beiden Fällen lassen sich Verleugnungen und Denkblockaden entschlüsseln, die aus der Vergangenheit herrühren. Weiterführend lässt sich zeigen, dass es damit zu einer langfristigen Beschädigung sowohl der politischen Begriffe als auch der unter sie gefassten Wirklichkeiten führen. Markant dafür ist der Verlust der zeitlichen Dimension und die Löschung jüdischer Namen. Das Schlusskapitel geht auf das theoretische Denken über Wissenschaft ein und verfolgt die Spuren, die der historische Prozess auch in der gesellschaftswissenschaftlichen und wissenschaftssoziologischen Reflexion hinterlassen hat. Dafür wird an drei verschiedenen Theoriekomplexen herausgearbeitet, welche Rolle den Dimensionen von Zeit, Gedächtnis und Geschichte in den jeweiligen Vorstellungen über soziale Objektivierung zukommt. Am Beispiel der Wissenssoziologie, des Strukturalismus und der Kritischen Theorie wird analysiert, wie auf dieser Grundlage jeweils das Verhältnis von Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft gefasst wird.Speaking of "pure" and "free" science in the post-war period suitably shadowed the involvement of science in the context of violence and guilt during the National Socialist regime. The scientific ideal in this sense was part of the collective silence afterwards. Based on this insight, Elvira Scheich’s study unfolds how the social understanding of science is linked in many-faceted ways with German history and German politics of remembrance. Her study investigates the different meanings with which science was charged in the memory of the post-war society of the FRG and how these relate to one another. The key moment is the appearance of German scientists in the anti-nuclear weapons movement of the 1950s, through which science advanced to a supreme moral authority. To understand the impact and dynamics of this event, two periodicals were investigated: on the one hand the Physikalische Blätter, the journal of German Physical Society, and on the other hand Frau und Frieden, the journal of the West-German Women’s Peace Movement. Each represents a pivotal position in the debate on nuclear threats. Starting point of this study is an event that took place in the interstices of science, politics and the public. It is the so-called "Göttingen Declaration", in which 18 leading German scientists publicly oppose the construction and use of nuclear weapons. The background to this statement was a worldwide alarmed perception of the specific hazards caused by radioactive fallout and planned the deployment of atomic warheads in the FRG. In the following years 1957 and 1958 the mass movement "Kampf dem Atomtod” (Fighting Nuclear Death) sprang up, which forms the broader context of the investigation. In the public discourse of that time, science became a substitute for politics, whose motives generally appeared morally dubious. But it was only when the dispute over nuclear weapons turned into an issue of conscience, science fully obtained this particular meaning meaning. In the chilling dilemma between life and death of all humanity, the necessity of “supra-political” action reaching beyond the historical geo-political schism was emphasized. On this account, the internationality and rationality of science was invoked and a strong appeal to the responsibility of researchers was brought forward. However, posed as a matter of conscience the opposition to nuclear weapons claimed an absoluteness and unconditionality, which remained without any alternative and closured any further discussion. The basic framework and essential terms of the interpretation follow the research approaches of traumatization and theories of cultural memory, in which earlier sociological and socio-psychological investigations as Schuld und Abwehr (Engl.: Guilt and Defense, Adorno 1955/2010) and Die Unfähigkeit zu trauern (Engl.: The Inability to Mourn, Mitscherlich 1967/1975) were further developed and expanded. The most important of these concepts are Adorno's reflections on the real factors as a potent part of defense mechanisms, and Dan Bar-On's analysis (1996) of paradoxical speech, that is, a speech that indicates past events and at the same time obscures what has happened. Using these conceptual tools allows to identify patterns of speaking silence as constitutive to the discourse on nuclear danger. The two main parts of the investigation focus on the respective analysis of two magazines, the Physikalische Blätter and Frau und Frieden during the first decades after WWII. Thus, two very different social groups, the scientific community of physicists and the peace-politically committed women, were selected from the broad socio-political array of the debate at that time. The two groups are characterized by clear topoi with which they determine their bearings during National Socialism. In both cases, distinctive denials and thinking barriers can be decoded, that derive from the past and reappear in the debate on nuclear dangers. Salient signifiers of these distortions are confusions in the temporal dimension and the deletion of Jewish names in the recollections of the recent past. Subsequently, it is shown how the undisclosed aspects of the collective memory lead to a long-term damages to both the political concepts and eventually to the realities they seek to conceive. The final chapter deals with the theoretical thinking about science and pursues the traces which the historical process has left behind in sociological and scientific-sociological reflection. Three different theoretical complexes have been studied with regard to the role that have been given to the dimensions of time, memory and history in the respective conceptions of social reification. Using the examples of sociology of knowledge, structuralism and critical theory, it is analyzed how the relationship between science and society is conceptualized on this basis

Körper Raum Transformation. Gender-Dimensionen von Natur und Materie

Scheich E, Wagels K, eds. Körper Raum Transformation. Gender-Dimensionen von Natur und Materie. Vol 32. Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot; 2011

Unterrichtsmaterialien: Reflektion von Gender & Physik

In this volume we present a collection of 7 lesson plans to explore the gender imbalances in science and particularly in physics. The aim of these teaching units is to understand how gender inequalities are constructed and reproduced during the interactions in the labs and class rooms while doing physics. On the one hand, the students will learn to uncover the often unconscious processes which lead to underrepresentation of women in physics at all levels. On the other hand, the basic structural dynamics linking gender effects in science and society are taken into account. The lesson plans have been designed and tested as a part of the International Summer Schools “Diversity in the Cultures of Physics”. This project is funded by DAAD / Erasmus+ since 2016, when a Strategic Partnership was formed to enhance the situation of female junior scientists. Scientists from the physics departments at Freie Universität Berlin, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Universitat de Barcelona, the University of Manchester, the University of Sheffield and Uppsala Universitet joined this co-operation. Each lesson plan represents a teaching unit of 180 minutes that comprises discussion topics, references for reading materials and other resources, and interactive learning tasks. Taken together, the lesson plans provide the material for a full course on gender & physics covering a set of key issues based on research in science studies. Parts of the lesson plans can be integrated in either general courses on interdisciplinary gender studies or specific courses on gender in STEM. Individual units can supplement social and natural science courses, that wish to point out specific gender dimensions in a reputedly gender neutral field of knowledge production. The resources can be used in classrooms from undergraduate level onwards

Vielfalt in den Kulturen der Physik: ein europäisches Sommerschulcurriculum

“Diversity in the Cultures of Physics” was an Erasmus+ funded Strategic Partnership launching several key actions aimed at improving the gender balance in physics and its subfields. The Strategic Partnership consisted of six universities in four countries: Freie Universität Berlin in Germany, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona and Universitat de Barcelona in Spain, the University of Manchester and the University of Sheffield in the United Kingdom and Uppsala Universitet in Sweden. One of the central activities of the transnational network was an annual international summer school series for female physicists transitioning from Undergraduate/Master programmes to a PhD study. This document presents the curriculum that has been developed for those summer schools and that has been used and evaluated in each round of the summer school series. Thus it is based on the insights and evaluation of all summer schools implemented. The curriculum consists of four core pillars of modules: 1) research stays at physics departments; 2) visits to physics research institutions; 3) empowerment and gender equality policy; 4) gender studies and physics. A transversal pillar is composed of sessions concerning group-building processes and group dynamics. For each pillar, a manifold variety of modules that pursue the learning objective of the respective pillar have been designed, planned and carried out. The curriculum describes aims and functions of the pillars and provides an overview of formats and designs of the modules that have been part of each pillar. For some prominent modules that have been carried out in almost every summer school and might also be practicable in future summer schools, more details are provided. It is pointed out which instructional recommendations are to be considered, what challenges are to be expected and how long the module typically lasts