Joanna Behrman is a Postdoctoral Researcher at the Department of Science Education, University of Copenhagen. She is a historian of physics, gender, and science education.
https://joannabehrman.com/about/
BACKGROUND & MOTIVATION
What motivated you to pursue a career at the intersection of physics and history? Was there a moment or experience that sparked this path?
I did my undergraduate degree in physics, but I realized before I had even finished that I did not really want to work as a physicist. I liked reading about physicists and talking to physics, but not actually researching physics. I tried an undergraduate thesis project comparing the history of physics education at Harvard College (back when it was all-male students) and Radcliffe College (the coordinating women-only college). I had so much fun, I applied to a master’s program in the history of science and from then on I couldn’t imagine doing anything else. One of my former professors who also made the switch from physics to the history of physics said he asked himself the question: am I happier in a library or a laboratory? And by far I am happiest with my nose in a book.
You hold degrees in physics, the social sciences, and the history of science and technology. How has this academic journey shaped the way you approach your work?
I had a few bad experiences when I was still in physics, and I heard (and still hear) stories from other women and gender non-conforming people. These stories have motivated me so that even as I drift disciplines, I try to remain connected to physics, and use the tools at my disposal as a historian to improve the field of physics. It’s not unusual for historians of science to maintain a tight connection to contemporary science and scientists, but it’s also not that common either.
RESEARCH & PROJECTS
Your upcoming book, A New History of American Women in Physics, tells the story of physics exclusively from women’s perspectives. What inspired this project, and what are some of the key themes or findings you’re most excited to share?
My book was inspired by the research I conducted during my PhD on the history of women in physics and women’s colleges. I was warned by multiple professors not to do this dissertation, in part because they thought there weren’t enough people or sources out there to write about. But as a matter of fact, my dissertation was massive and there were still more people and stories than I could include. One of my primary arguments is that the history of what it means to be a physicist is very different if we look at it from the perspective of male versus female physicists. But the finding closest to my heart is that women in physics are not alone and have not all led lives of terrible suffering. There have been many, happy, female physicists.
You’ve also studied topics like the “cookbook laboratory” in science education and women physicists in home economics. What draws you to these lesser-known histories, and what do they reveal about science and gender?
I like working in fields where not much has been known or written about. To a certain extent it’s laziness (no competition!) but it’s also the most exciting (and actually quite a lot of work) to try to dig up things that have been, if not lost, then at least greatly obscured or marginalized. With cookbook laboratories, it was about how a historical legacy of discrimination towards women in chemistry was hiding in plain sight. With female physicists in home economics, it was about how these physicists made for themselves successful careers even when they were nudged into the margins of the discipline.
Currently, you’re working in Copenhagen on historical networks of women in physics. What does that project involve, and how does it connect to your broader research questions?
My current project builds on my previous work, but takes a slightly different approach. As I have worked on other research projects, I have been keeping track of female physicists I find in a personal database. The current project is going to take that database and standardize and expand it. My supervisor Adrienne Traxler and I will then study the network of individuals and the institutions where they were educated and worked to discover which institutions have been historically the most productive of women in physics and why.
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES ON GENDER IN SCIENCE
In your work, how do you balance celebrating women’s contributions with highlighting the systemic barriers they faced?
I do not wish to downplay the barriers, but I think that has tended to be most of what is studied or talked about with regards to women in physics. I’m concerned that it gives the impression that all past women (and maybe current ones too) have to be like Marie Curie and be extra brilliant to surpass all the barriers that they encounter. And that’s simply not true. It has been and is still ok to be “average” in physics and still be successful. Remarkably, I actually have written very little about the research contributions of women in physics, probably because I am more interested in the culture surrounding them.
What do you think we lose – in physics or science education – when we leave women and other marginalized voices out of the story?
Well, everything. We lose those voices, but we also lose perspective on the voices we keep. It makes no sense to tell a partial story. You’d never get away with half-doing an experiment in physics, why should we do it in history?
Are there any stories or individuals from your research that you think deserve more public attention?
Gosh, many of them. Every day there is a new interesting individual. Maybe today it should be Geraldine Walker Haupt, who was a major figure in standardizing color systems – for example what color should the signal lights for trains be.
ENGAGEMENT, COMMUNITIES & IMPACT
You’ve worked as a public historian and are active in several professional societies. What role do you think public engagement and community-building play in changing the culture of physics?
Changing a culture can be difficult, but it is still very possible. Sometimes it takes just pushing against the same wall over and over again or saying the same thing but in a new way. I think physics is moving in a good direction, but it is very slow. Nevertheless, clearly something is going right, because I’m finding more and more people recognize the names of historical women in physics beyond Marie Curie. So there is some normalization happening.
You collaborate with both historians and physicists. In your experience, are interdisciplinary spaces more inclusive, or do they come with new challenges?
Jack of all trades, master of none, as the saying goes. If you have a foot in multiple fields, you have to prove your credentials and the validity of your research to different groups who value different things. It’s nice that I have multiple audiences to choose from when publishing my work, but it’s trickier when it comes to professional advancement.
MENTORSHIP & ADVICE
Have there been mentors or intellectual influences who helped shape your work? What did you learn from them?
I have had a mixed experience with mentors, but my PhD advisor Joris Mercelis and my current postdoc advisor Adrienne Traxler have given me the confidence to run with the research questions that I am most passionate about while nudging me to direct that energy in helpful ways. They taught me that a meeting with a mentor should leave you energized and hopeful.
What role does mentorship play in your own academic life? How do you approach mentoring students or early-career scholars, especially those navigating non-traditional paths?
At the moment I am not officially supervising anyone, although there are many people I try to keep tabs on and connect with others. If you hear of an opportunity and it might vaguely appeal to someone you know, then it’s good to pass it on. Also, if you think something complimentary about someone, say it out loud to them. People don’t hear enough compliments. Finally, many people have a very rigid definition of what it means to be successful, so much so that especially students and early-career scholars feel like failures when they deviate even slightly from that definition. They are not failures; there are many ways to be successful; and you can define success for yourself. It’s hard for people to internalize that belief by themselves, and sometimes it helps to have external validation.
REFLECTIONS FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS
What advice would you give to young people, especially women and minorities, who love science but are also drawn to questions of history, society, or education?
I would say that they should follow their passions! It’s important to be able to put food on the table, but you should also be able to find a way where you are proud and happy with what you are doing. These are legitimate and exciting fields, and you are not a failure or a statistic if you decide not to be a research scientist. It also doesn’t necessarily have to be all or nothing – many scientists who are hired to do scientific research also work on other topics as a part of their day or even just in their free time. One of the nice things about history is that it is much more accessible if you do decide to do it as something other than your main paid employment.
If you could change one thing about how physics is taught or remembered, what would it be?
There should be a moratorium on using the word “genius” anywhere near physics education and history. It’s a word that comes from eugenics, is completely inaccurate historically, and continues to be harmful in education perpetuating stereotypes about scientists.
SELECTED PUBLICATIONS
You’ve selected a few of your research papers to share with the KIF audience. Could you briefly introduce them and explain what makes each one meaningful for understanding gender and physics?
Physics … is for Girls?
https://doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.5061
This paper is about how the stereotype that physics is a boy’s subject is only about a hundred years old. At least in the United States, prior to around 1900, more girls than boys took physics in school. The sciences were considered more appropriate for girls and humanities for boys. The article is mostly a synthesis of the research of other scholars, but I wanted to bring it to the attention of physicists because it’s such an amazing revelation that our stereotypes are not permanent and unchanging. Things didn’t used to be this way, and so they can absolutely change again for the better.
Domesticating Physics
https://doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.3922
This article is a nice overview of the research I did on the field of household physics – which was at the intersection of physics and home economics. In this article I show the hidden curriculum of household physics – that is the unstated values and skills being taught to students. I also argue that, even though this field was used to push women out of other physics sub-fields, it was a way they could make careers for themselves in physics. Physics still struggles with looking down on external indicators of femininity, or even research in fields that aren’t considered rigorous enough.
A History Mystery
https://www.aip.org/library/a-history-mystery-adventures-identifying-people-in-a-photograph
This blog post is more about the process of research than about the results. I documented my efforts to identify all the individuals (8 men and 3 women) in a photograph taken in 1913 at ETH Zurich. I think it illustrates how much more difficult it is to study the history of women in physics and the kinds of alternate strategies it sometimes requires.
(J. Dane and C. Verhoef continued the research and published their findings open access here: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.endeavour.2024.100967)
kvinderifysik.dk 