Ivana Gadjanski

researcher and project leader, R&D Center for Bioengineering - BioIRC
Belgrade, Kragujevac, Serbia

About Ivana

Bio

Ivana is a scientist who writes poetry and a poet who does science. She tries to use poetry, an intricate mesh of words, connected in ways not always easily detectable, to mentally visualize connections inside and between cells. Ivana likes to change her systems of reference from time to time, both geographical and professional ones. It keeps the motivation level high and gives an opportunity of getting a look at the bigger picture. She obtained her Ph.D. in Neuroscience at Georg-August University and BiomedNMR at Max-Planck-Institute for Biophysical Chemistry, Goettingen, Germany and worked at Ludwig-Maximilian University, Munich, Germany. She focused on mechanisms of calcium influx in pathologic conditions using animal models of Multiple Sclerosis and Traumatic Brain Injury. She returned to Serbia and worked as assistant professor at the State University of Novi Pazar until 2010 when she obtained Fulbright Visiting Scholar Grant in the Stem Cells and Tissue Engineering Laboratory at Columbia University and decided to step into the wonderful field of tissue engineering where she works again on calcium-related communication mechanisms. She is also employed as the researcher and project leader in the R&D center for Bioengineering – BioIRC, Kragujevac, Serbia. She published two books of poetry in Serbian and is currently translating/writing poems in English. Stay tuned :)

Languages

English, French, German, Serbian

TED Conferences

TED Fellows Retreat 2013, TEDGlobal 2012

Areas of Expertise

mesenchymal stem cells, cartilage tissue engineering, Multiple Sclerosis, Neurodegenerative Diseases, poetry (reading and writing), Yoga , krav maga

I'm passionate about

thinking about art in scientific terms and vice versa, about science with some creative intuition derived from art-perspective.

Favorite talks

Comments & conversations

145294
Ivana Gadjanski
Posted over 1 year ago
Will making rockstars out of women in science get more girls interested in science/technology/engineering/math (i.e. STEM) fields?
Yes, Osaze, I agree, it's not only the gender issue that's preventing individuals from pursuing STEM-related fields. It's also the socio-economic factors... I have some understanding of what it means to come from underrepresented group since I am from an Eastern European country (Serbia) that most of the people in US never even heard of (unless they like tennis, then they must have heard of Novak Djokovic, but actually also if they are in the STEM field then they should know of Nikola Tesla...both are from Serbia :)...I am just now reading the great book by Malcolm Gladwell: Outliers, story of success http://www.amazon.com/Outliers-Story-Success-Malcolm-Gladwell/dp/0316017922 and I really liked how he explains success as the result of the "accumulative advantage", which is very different from the common thinking that success only depends on the talent, zeal and persistence (plus some luck) of an individual...that's another reason why I think that those "rockstar" scientists are not extremely good examples per se since their success is a result of whole ecosystem that they belong to...am a bit jet lagged at the moment to write more about this now, but will follow up on this soon! :)
145294
Ivana Gadjanski
Posted over 1 year ago
Will making rockstars out of women in science get more girls interested in science/technology/engineering/math (i.e. STEM) fields?
What negative vibes? I didn't say I don't like rockstar female scientists - my point in previous comment was that not everyone can be a rockstar (then "being a rockstar" would kinda loose a point, right?) It's important to analyze how majority of women in science (STEM fields) can improve their positions - having several examples of female rockstar scientists of course helps a lot, but does not solve the whole problem. Becoming a rockstar is a result of so many factors - and not every female scientist has access to all of those...to conclude, I was not making a point against rockstar female scientists - in fact I love rockstar female scientists and would like to see as many of them as possible - but I do think that it is not enough to inspire more young women to go into engineering in equal numbers to men (which was Hindi's direct question if I understood it properly) so I suggested some more steps in that direction
145294
Ivana Gadjanski
Posted over 1 year ago
Will making rockstars out of women in science get more girls interested in science/technology/engineering/math (i.e. STEM) fields?
Hey Hindi - great question! My view on this is that yes, female role models are definitely needed, not only to inspire and motivate but also to give concrete advice and tips on what to do, how to do and also when to do certain steps in education and career. Nina is doing such great job exactly in this aspect! This conversation topic is one proof of it:) However, in my opinion, "rockstars" is not really what most of women scientists/engineers are aspiring to become, or at least it's not the only thing. I think most girls who are considering STEM field are also wondering how it will be possible to balance career and family life. Men are also thinking about that, I know, but it is a fact of nature that women need more time - at least 9 months more:) to devote to "having-a-child"-project. So it is harder, especially in very competitive field and all STEM fields are highly competitive...I think that if Universities and companies would make better arrangements - arrange for more flexible working hours, childcare facilities within campuses etc. it would mean a lot for motivating more girls to choose such careers.
145294
Ivana Gadjanski
Posted over 2 years ago
A Journal (Journal of Errology) that creates a repository where researchers share their experiences, learned mostly via mistakes
Journal of Errology is a really great idea. Undoubtedly, it would have one of the highest impact factors ever, since everybody makes mistakes. But, I am not so sure how willing people would be to report their own mistakes...it's a matter of ego and vanity, unfortunately very ubiquitous in the competitive field of science...or any other field, for that matter. However, I strongly support this idea. It was always my belief that by reporting only positive results we lose a significant amount of data. Negative result, as well as a mistake, but the mistake which has been analyzed and accounted for, that we know what to attribute to, that can give a lot of very valuable information. But I keep wondering what the reviewers in that Journal would ask for the revisions:))) To repeat the same mistake? :D....on that topic: http://www.ted.com/conversations/6727/mistakes_are_necessary_aren_t.html
145294
Ivana Gadjanski
Posted over 2 years ago
Do you think it's necessary to be very pushy in order to be successful (e.g. in science)? What if it doesn't match your character?
the question wasn't really about me. It was in general about the way of behaving I percieve in the field I'm in. I didn't say that not being "bitchy-pushy" means being not ambitious, and I don't think it is so. One can be ambitious but have one's own method of promoting oneself without doing very aggressive self-promotion. And that is my modus operandi, I have my own methods.