Mgr. Ivana Víšová, Ph.D., a postdoc at the Joint Laboratory of Optics, her research topics included the study of interactions of functional surfaces with biological systems. A holder or a number of awards, she considers a Ph.D. degree, which opens the door to the world of science, a kind of necessary evil.
What career did you dream of as a child? Was it physics from the beginning?
When I started university, I still did not believe it was physics. At the very beginning it was veterinary medicine and at primary school I dreamt of Egyptology. And it remained so until the end of high school. But at the last minute I had to choose something else. I still remember a newspaper article that listed all the universities and their faculties and how I ran my finger over the names and eliminated what wasn't an option. And what remained was physics – not that I ever wanted to study it, but at the time I toyed a bit with the idea of doing meteorology. Meteorology could be studied either at the University of Defence, where the admission procedure also included running, or at the Faculty of Mathematics and Physics of Charles University. And as no one would ever see me running at school, I took a chance on Matfyz (the Faculty of Mathematics and Physics). In the end it was “love at first semester” although I deserted meteorology at the very beginning in favour of biophysics.
It's true that I've dealt with unsolicited opinions from those around me (with the exception of my family). They said I had to go completely crazy – a girl choosing physics. To this day, my major elicits surprised expressions, awkward moments of silence, and wonder in conversations. Frankly, I prefer to avoid the subject of what I do for a living.
The rules of a career in science include mobility. What is your opinion of this necessary step – is it more difficult for women and why?
I don't know how much of a rule it is, but it is definitely a very desirable aspect of a career in science. It's a topical issue for me and I admit it's not easy. As long as you are a young scientist, you are expected to work elsewhere and gain experience every year/two. But the time after school is also the life phase when people seriously consider starting a family - for women, this often means either consciously or subconsciously postponing starting a family even further, or dealing with their first pregnancy (at a not-so-young age) in a foreign country. It means a lot of extra work navigating through foreign social systems and, last but not least, "falling off" a moving train of science at the time when scientific work is most fruitful and active and when scientists are making an effort to establish themselves.
The time constraints of a postdoctoral position (and often the rules of postdoctoral projects) cause stress, as does the lack of support from close family while abroad. If a woman already has children, this is compounded by moving the children to a foreign country where they do not understand the language or have friends. You, on the other hand, don't have a stable place for living built up and you won't build one because in 1-3 years you will probably move again. On the other hand, the rules of projects are gradually being adjusted to make it easier for women, at least partially – projects can be suspended for a limited period of time, they take maternity leave into account, and there are often child allowances. But somehow life works that out, and if I want to do what I enjoy, there is no other way anyway.
How do you think Ph.D. students are doing today?
I can only draw on the experience of my peers/classmates. My answer is probably unpopular; financially and psychologically, they are not doing great. I recently read an interesting reflection that a Ph.D. is not to learn something fundamental, but to train oneself to cope with stress, deadlines and heroic feats.
I talked to more peers who would have rather given up between 3rd and 4th year than those who lived a happy and balanced life. Most didn't give up in the end, but that was only because since they had already invested their time they decided to put their back into it, and also because a Ph.D. opens doors to the world of science – it is a kind of a necessary evil.
The concept of doctoral studies somewhat encourages a tendency to treat people more like students than working adults for an unnecessarily long time, even though these "students" are already full-fledged graduates who are almost thirty. They are able to work, have bills to pay, and would like to live a life – and that eventually starts to wear thin. A big question is whether the problem resides more in the perception of young people, which comes from their upbringing and from being present in the education system for too long, or in the system itself. It's probably somewhere in between, but I think that a happy life of Ph.D. students is still a topic worth discussing and reflecting on.
What kind of support by FZU do you as a scientist appreciate the most?
There are several things I like about FZU. It's the support of my supervisors and the whole institute in different life situations – despite the size of the institution, you are not just a number. In terms of scientific support – I was able to go out into the world to get experience, there is good collaboration between groups and departments, I have always felt the interest of the management in laboratories expansion, cutting-edge equipment, and at least in the Division of Optics they are not afraid of dynamic development, new topics and experience. I also like the offer of courses developing non-scientific knowledge and social activities where you can get to know your colleagues better in an informal environment. For me, a friendly and welcoming workplace environment is extremely important, as it makes work more enjoyable and more efficient.