Thread by @WomenInStat

Throughout my career, I’ve become a bit wary of institutions that claim to be the best and specify exceptional candidates in job offers and PhD studentships…

(Shout-out to the great @Letxuga007 for the mean gif 😉)

I’d like to take this opportunity to demand the right for the less excellent or “tending towards average” to be given opportunities and have their well deserved place in Academia!

🖼️DIY creation using @allison_horst's fab artwork

This hyperbolic language is exclusionary and will not only deter the “average” student from applying but also very smart yet humble candidates who are perhaps more realistic and indeed honest in their self assessments 🤔

Do we really want to encourage competitive environments with many top individuals (according to the current biased metrics) or top collaborative environments with a variety of individuals skilled in different ways and at different levels? I’d definitely go for the latter!

Wouldn’t it be nice to also encourage extra-ordinary career paths to enrichen homogeneous departments?

🖼️fab artwork by @allison_horst

I’m obviously biased in this respect, I’m “not normal” myself and definitely “average” but I’m not a competitive person and I know I won’t reach excellence so I’m just happily striving to give my best.

I firmly believe inclusivity shouldn’t be just about ticking boxes in a form to get a certificate, and should make real differences in the way our organisations look and operate, also in terms of varied skills and knowledge.