Thread by @StalagNick

This year we (seminar organisers, EDI committee and some senior management) discussed having an EDI seminar @UCD_Earth_Sci We decided not to. Here’s why, and what we did instead 🧵(1/9)

First, the burden of EDI work falls disproportionately upon underrepresented groups and can therefore undermine the principles and goals that EDI work sets out to achieve. By creating additional workload EDI seminars can (sometimes) run into the problem (2/9)

Further, getting scientists from underrepresented groups to talk about EDI issues can distract from the great science they do (3/9)

Finally, those who actively attend EDI seminars are often those from underrepresented groups or those already engaged - a preaching to the choir situation (4/9).

So how do we 1) normalise EDI discussion into the department’s everyday conversation 2) engage the entire department, 3) limit the burden on scientists from underrepresented groups and celebrate them for their science? We decided to introduce our ‘EDI forward’ policy (5/9)

All seminar speakers were invited for their scientific excellence. All speakers were encouraged to discuss their experiences or work on aspects of EDI and/or outreach. This could be 5, 10 or the full 45-minute slot, stand-alone or integrated into the main talk (6/9)

We had a good response from our speakers, including sections on conducting science in a second language, sexism and safety in the field, engaging local communities, and resources for encouraging children into STEM etc (7/9).

It’s not ground-breaking by any means, but by encouraging this to happen each seminar we hope to move the conversation beyond EDI discussions in EDI spaces, and engage everyone, every week (8/9)

Thanks to all our speakers who took part this semester. Your stories and insight were valuable and valued. And we’re always willing to take on feedback and improve (9/9)