NL
DE
Radboudumc is aiming to increase their percentage of female professors. In 2019, 29.6% of the professors of Radboud University were women. Within the Netherlands, only the Vrije Universiteit and Maastricht University have higher percentages. By 2025, Radboud University aims to further increase this percentage to 36.0%. Within this goal, Radboudumc has appointed thirteen female professors this year, and will make inclusivity and diversity a more explicit part of upcoming recruitments.
Previously, we talked to Baziel van Engelen and rector magnificus Han van Krieken about the new appointments. Today, we are talking to Ellen van den Bogaard, one of the newly appointed professors.
Can you tell us about how you ended up here? What did you study and where did you work before you came to work at Radboudumc?
'After I trained to be a laboratory technician, I started studying Biomedical Sciences here in Nijmegen. I knew from an early age that I wanted to work in a pathology laboratory, I was fascinated by tissues and microscopes. But during my internship I discovered that routine work didn't suit me that much. During the next research internship I pledged my heart to science. After internships at King's College in London and at Radboudumc I came into contact with the department of Dermatology and their experimental research. That's what got me excited. After my PhD, I started my independent research line, became a group leader and later the head of the laboratory.
I have been told by grant committees that they found my CV a bit static: I did not spend years of postdoc training abroad but instead I went on several work-visits and a short term fellowship in the USA. International relations are indeed important, but in my case I did not need to go abroad for longer periods to acquire my network and opening myself up to other people's ideas. There are several roads leading to Rome, and this road suited me best. So even with an atypical career it is possible to become a professor. Only you won't know that until it has happened, but you need to trust that the choices you make will work out for the better.’
What goals did you have for your career? Has a professorship always been part of that?
'It wasn't necessarily part of it. At some point in my career I reached a point in which I had to make a choice, and that led to the submission of my cv while thinking: we’ll see where that gets me. I get excited about teamwork, supervising students and postdocs and contributing to their personal development. The fact that you are part of something bigger and get to be creative. Leading a great group of people, that's my motivation, not the title. By way of illustration, I still use the Radboudumc badge I had when being a PhD student.'
What is the focus of your chair? Where does your passion about this subject come from?
'My research involves experimental dermatology and translations science. In our lab we collaborate with physician-researchers who conduct clinical research with patients. The next five years are about the development of organoids of the skin, which we want to further develop so that we can use them to better mimic disease mechanisms. Gene editing technology and advanced cell culture systems made this development possible, minimizing the use of laboratory animals. Our vision is that we won’t have to tell a patient: 'You have a skin disease, here is a standard treatment that works for most patients', but that with the help of biomarkers and personal characteristics we can determine in a very structured way which treatment fits that specific condition. I believe that the organotypic skin models can play an important role in this.'
Can you take us through any barriers you may have experienced in your career? How did you deal with these?
'I've been on the verge of leaving academia twice. I doubted whether it still suited me, or whether I actually wanted to do the things I imagined having to do to take the next steps in my career. At my internship at King’s College London, research was highly individual, and there were very few interactions and collaborations between groups and even group members. I wanted to work together towards a bigger goal. I thought, if this is the way you do science, I’m out of here. The second time was after my PhD. I saw PIs working 24/7: their whole world was science. I just had a young family and thought: I don't know if I can or want to do that. Not only being responsible for your own research, or for your PhD student's research, but also for a group of 12-15 people, who all need guidance and also make a living - I thought: oh my, how are we ever going to reconcile that? But at that time I enrolled in the Galilei track for postdocs in the Radboudumc. That has helped me enormously in gaining perspective on the whole thing: everyone in the track was at the same stage, most of them also had a young family, some of them had not gone abroad either, but were successful in their work. That is how I gathered a peer group around me with whom I could (and still can) discuss critical situations and receive valuable feedback. The Galilei track was a three-year course in which I took masterclasses for example on finance, time management, politics and power, and negotiation. That additional baggage and experience has helped me to hold my own in science, since there is more to it than doing good research.'
Do you have tips for (female) researchers who also aspire a career in academia?
'Don't let yourself be talked into a particular career path: another way might work better for you. You have to follow your own intuition and reasoning: what are my opportunities, where can I get funding, who are valuable partners to work with? Trust that you will do the right thing, like Steve Jobs said: 'You can only connect the dots looking backwards'. Like my own struggles with not having been abroad for long which could affect my career as a scientist: I'll prove you wrong.'
In one of the next newsletter editions you will find the last interview in this series with professor Romana Netea-Maier.
Interview by Nina Wubben and Eline van Hugte
