Theme editorial
The inspiration of Marie Curie
Averil Macdonald, Special issue Editor
Marie Curie was awarded her second Nobel Prize
100 years ago. Her name invokes two thoughts,
one of the dangers of radioactivity and the other
of being ‘the only’ woman in science. Both are
incorrect to some degree.
Radioactivity generates fear in the majority
of the population and in some teachers of science
too. The general population often relies on media
articles and programmes such The Incredible
Hulk and The Simpsons for its information on
radioactivity, and some journalists prey on this
fear to publish sensationalist pieces. The charity
Sense About Science works to counter temptation
for journalists not to check their facts and to
exaggerate others. The charity’s publication
Making sense of radiation is an excellent resumé
of the typical errors and myths held about
radioactivity (and the confusion with radiation).
Leonor Sierra has written a summary of some
of the more typical misconceptions drawn from
this publication and goes on to discuss the need
for peer review in ensuring the publication of
reliable science.
The discomfort felt by some teachers about
radioactivity may come from there being so few
‘real’ experiments that they feel able to do with
their classes when teaching this topic and the
dread of having a series of lessons based entirely
on theory. Having a bank of useful anecdotes is
an ideal way out of this trap. As a non-specialist
teacher of physics, Paula Kennedy has worked
hard to collect an informative and entertaining
series of anecdotes that can enliven any theory
lesson and she shares them with us here.
Geoff Auty takes a very different tack and
provides a clear, step-by-step approach to
handling the mathematics of radioactive decay
and half-life that should be understandable to
those not studying the subject.
Ralph Whitcher offer ideas for teaching
radioactivity using everyday items. People are
often surprised that items such as a balloon or the
gas mantle from a camping lamp can be a source
of radioactivity. Using these will not only enable
students to see demonstrations of radioactive
decay but also come to understand that we are all
surrounded by background radiation that comes
from a range of natural and synthetic materials
and poses us no danger.
Marie Curie seems to have monopolised
the position of ‘the only woman in science’
throughout the last 100 years but is this correct?
Very few people can name more than one other
woman scientist, and yet there have been many
others who have won Nobel Prizes and indeed
many more who were denied Nobel Prizes and
similar accolades over this period. In my own
article I provide a potted history of some of the
more impressive achievements and those that were
overlooked so that, when challenged on why there
are so few women, the response can be ‘but they
were there – we simply fail to tell their stories’.
So what of the modern era? Are there any
up-and-coming young successors to Marie Curie?
In 2007, the Institute of Physics instigated a Very
Early Career Woman Physicist of the Year Award.
The five winners to date have provided their
thoughts on what it’s like to be a young woman
physicist 100 years after Marie Curie, with some
interesting insights.
Marie Curie is so often held up as a role model
to young women but is she still relevant today?
After all, we don’t say ‘study English and you
could be the next Tolstoy’! In a short article, we
present the thoughts of two young women who
had achieved top grades in physics, one at A-level
and the other at GCSE. Neither of them was
sufficiently inspired by Marie Curie to continue
with physics and they offer us their reasons why.
While women only represent 20% of
undergraduates in physics and 14% in
engineering, in the world of IT they are almost
invisible. Reena Pau has studied the reasons why
so few women choose to continue their studies in
this most modern and visible of all sciences – and
it doesn’t make very comfortable reading.
SSR June 2011, 92(341)
39
Theme editorial: The inspiration of Marie Curie
For those who are keen to ensure their teaching
is as positive and ‘gender neutral’ as possible
in order that girls can engage with physics, the
Institute of Physics offers a number of publications.
Clare Thomson from the Education Department
describes some of these publications, which not
only dispel myths but also provide concrete advice
on effective teaching approaches.
Finally, an innovative way to inspire the next
generation is to draw on the enthusiasm of the
current generation of students. Elizabeth Page
describes an exciting initiative whereby university
chemistry students go into local schools to support
teachers and talk to students, offering their insight
into science and their reasons for choosing to
study it further. For teachers interested in inviting
university students into their classes, there is some
useful advice. As Marie Curie’s second Nobel
Prize was for chemistry, this seems a fitting way
to conclude the articles in this special issue.
Averil Macdonald is a professor of science communication at the JJ Thomson Physical Laboratory at
the University of Reading.
Email: [email protected].
Find out what Leonardo da Vinci
and a half-dead Cat knew about
Time Travel and the Holy Grail
by Andrew Bone
A
Novel
that
celebrates
Science
www.vitruvianboy.com
40
SSR June 2011, 92(341)
(digital watch version)
Ideal for Teachers serious about
making Learning fun(-ny)