Grace

Grace is 18 years old and she is in her first year working towards a BS in Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology. Right now, she is working through her general chemistry courses, but she is really interested in molecular pathology, driven by her need to fully understand how disease messes with us at the smallest scale. At the larger scale, she wants to show younger girls how complex and interesting life is when you ask questions. She has hands-on experience through basic high school labs, but most of her knowledge comes from Science Olympiad. Claiming her favorite part about it was teaching younger students about biology, her proudest moment in STEM is definitely when one of her middle schoolers said to their friend that microbiology was "hard but pretty cool" after a challenging lesson she led. She said that seeing a kid engaged in the difficult subject made her day!

What drives your passion for science? Was there a specific moment or experience that made you want to pursue a career in biology?

I’ve always been interested in science. I blame my parents for that. My father was especially supportive, entertaining his toddler’s ‘why’ game to a ridiculous extent, giving different demonstrations and explanations to the same simple question each time. Books, children’s museums, and hiking trails were staples of my childhood, all of which I recommend for parents looking to promote curiosity in their children. One moment I’ll never forget is looking through an old textbook and seeing an actual photograph of malaria in the blood. It was horrifying. I could see the little worms (or as I later learned, protists) growing in each sick cell, growing and growing until it bursts, just to infect the next one. The caption explained that in the past, malaria could only be cured by a poison so strong that the person taking it might just die from fever, instead of their blood cells bursting one-by-one. Was sickness really that tangible? At that moment I decided to learn everything that could go wrong in the body at the most basic level, in hopes of finding a cure.

Molecular pathology is such an interesting discipline. Are there any specific diseases or conditions that you're particularly interested in studying? 

I can’t honestly say yet, there are still so many things I don’t know. What I can say is that I’ve always had a particular interest in neurodegenerative diseases, illness of the brain. The brain is already such a mystery, and when one tiny thing goes wrong it’s devastating.  I hope I can contribute a little to what we do know, in hopes of making life easier for someone. A specific disease that led me to the study of molecular pathology in the first place was something called Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease. CJD is caused by a protein, called a prion, that’s folded into the wrong shape. It could be just one tiny change, but it causes the brain to die within a matter of months, and there’s no medicine that can help. The fact that such a simple thing, just one protein, could stump the scientific community for so long while causing such brutal symptoms is absolutely terrifying, fascinating and absolutely worth spending a lifetime studying.

You mentioned your experience teaching younger students in the Science Olympiad and it seems like you’re good at making complex topics more accessible to others. Are you planning to go into research, work in a laboratory or down the path of teaching? 

My plans are mostly about research, but the ideal scenario would be to work at a university where I could teach some adjacent classes as well. I enjoyed teaching little kids for an hour a week, but it requires a different kind of mental fortitude to do that full-time. I’m still incredibly invested in science communication and accessibility, though. One of the subjects I taught to those middle schoolers was epidemiology, or public health. It’s a difficult subject, with lots of numbers and fancy-looking graphs. I found that when it was presented as just data and practice problems, the lessons were a bore. But, when it was presented in a way that resonated, hands-on, engaging, relevant, it sparked curiosity, and that’s where the real learning happens. This approach to teaching became all the more relevant in 2020. I saw how the lack of scientific literacy caused an astounding amount of misinformation about the pandemic to circulate. Many people at that time dismissed scientific findings outright. It was at those moments that I realized how much work it takes to make science feel real. Science communication helps people realize that science has an impact, outside of the isolated laboratory. These complex discoveries, grand additions to the whole of human knowledge, don’t do any good if they can’t be communicated clearly and effectively. Building a community that fosters the kind of curiosity necessary to learn about science is essential, and it starts outside of the classroom. As a non-teacher, directly supporting local museums, natural areas where kids can play and learn and schools are all great ways to contribute to building that environment, long before the lecture halls.

As you continue your studies, how do you plan to stay motivated during difficult or frustrating times in your coursework?

Allowing myself to have a break when I need it is the best way to keep burnout away, whether it’s for five minutes or the whole weekend. Study strategies like the Pomodoro technique help start tedious tasks, but for myself, I find the best way to stay motivated is to study a wide variety of things that I’m interested in. For example, when I’m stuck on a difficult and boring math problem, I might take a break by working on a writing assignment instead. I try to have fun with it, not just doing the assignment but playing with the topic, and exploring it until I find something that interests me personally. The other way I keep myself motivated is by reminding myself what I’m working towards. For me, grand reasons like “the advancement of all human knowledge” are usually enough, but if that doesn’t work I can also be easily bribed with the promise of chocolate!

Growing up I have noticed that many young students aren’t interested in science, may it be because it’s hard or because they don’t believe it’s useful. What do you think is the most effective way to show them the value of science? 

There are three main things that I think lead to students valuing science. First, hands-on activities help kids see how interesting science can be. If their only exposure to the subject is in school with a teacher giving them facts to memorize, it becomes boring, fast. Even with adequate context, the concepts don’t feel real. Giving hands-on demonstrations allows it to be real. The first lesson I ever gave my middle schoolers was how to start a Bunsen burner. Allowing them to operate the equipment (in a safe, supervised manner) piqued their interest right through the rest of the lesson. The other most important thing, more accessible without equipment, is allowing space for all questions. Students following their natural curiosity, instead of going by the book, will be infinitely more interested. Entertaining their silly but enlightening questions is the most reliable way to garner interest in an otherwise boring subject. As you said, many kids aren’t interested in science because they think it’s too hard, or that they’re not smart enough. Making students feel smart during the lessons is essential but incredibly difficult. We’ve all had a teacher who has rambled on completely oblivious to the fact that the class is lost or felt patronized when someone didn’t have faith in our ability to understand a topic. Being able to speak at the student’s exact level and avoid these pitfalls is a rare skill that I certainly haven’t mastered, but I do think its rarity is part of the reason why so many students feel like science is so hard. Just one teacher who can make them feel good about learning can show kids that it isn’t too hard and that any subject can be valuable and interesting.

As advances in molecular biology and genomics continue to grow, concerns regarding genetic editing have arisen. What are your thoughts on genome editing in humans? Given your interest in molecular pathology, would you say these technologies could prevent the development of some diseases and if so, is it ethical to try it this way?

Interesting question! I do think we have at least some responsibility to try and cure diseases that can be life-threatening, but we’re still a long way out from the technology being commonplace. Genetic engineering on humans should be treated with caution, especially due to its long history of misuse. As a culture, I don’t think we can be trusted to use gene editing technology responsibly, but I’m not sure it matters. The technology will continue to develop, and it would be a downright waste not to fulfill that potential to alleviate suffering. When this happens though, it will be the responsibility of everybody impacted by the technology, from scientists to lawmakers and laypeople to make clear that improper use will not be accepted. A recent development that I think is largely positive, on the other hand, is technologies like prenatal screening. They can be wonderful in preventing complications during childbirth and letting the parents know what to expect, but many companies can produce false promises about how reliable the technology is. We now know that the environment and other external factors have a large impact on what traits are presented and nothing is simple, so it’s important to be wary of any company trying to tell people they can prenatally screen for complex traits.

What advice would you give to other young women who are interested in pursuing careers in science but feel like it’s too much for them? 

Imposter syndrome runs rampant in this field, especially for women. It’s normal to feel like you’re out of your element, just remember that most people around you probably feel it too. When I first applied to start teaching other students for the Science Olympiad, I was terrified that I wasn’t qualified. I had been with the club for longer than most, but I was still younger than the other applicants. What if someone older was more suited for the job? What if I didn’t know anything about science at all? It took talking to my own teachers, most of them just a year older, to remind me that I wasn’t alone, it is possible to learn, and it’s impossible to know everything that might crop up. So stop judging yourself by that metric. Look, science is difficult to learn, but most of my tips on engaging kids are the same that I use for myself. Don’t just memorize the facts from the book, that’s boring. Follow your curiosity. Find a reason to make the material feel real. You’ll gain confidence with experience, just remember why you’re doing it. Many people do a STEM degree purely for the money and if you’re genuinely interested you’re already one step ahead. Of course, you’ll have to work. Of course, it will be hard. Following your interests helps. Don’t feel afraid to ask questions, or share ideas, your perspectives are valuable.