I'm not sure how many people have as extensive a bookshelf as mine. This is actually after a huge book purge. And I certainly have more ebooks and books that I've given away or sold or checked out of the library. If I had to think back to how many books I've read over my lifetime, the number is probably in the tens of thousands.


These books have made me into the person I am. I started thinking about this, after I read an article this morning called "What Did Charles Darwin Read? See His Handwritten Reading List & Read Books from His Library Online." Can you even imagine? What if you had read all the books Charles Darwin had read? This article essentially gives you a brief glance at what was in his head. It leads you on the journey of what it's like to come up with the greatest theory in all of science.


So I started thinking about what I've read, and what would someone come back and say about me, from the books/evidence I leave behind. I've had that joke with my girlfriends "If I die, the first thing someone should do is erase my browser history." 

My very gorgeous son is SIX! Below are some photos from his photo shoot, when his dad was here, and his sixth birthday party. This is just one good looking kid! And we had a great party with Aunt Ryan and the green apple TMNTs. Guppy ate one of the apples, though, which was supposed to be him, so we replaced him with a green pepper! It was hilarious!

Anyone on social media in the last week has been inundated with articles about evolution versus creation. One very famous scientist, Bill Nye, the Science Guy, debated the founder of “The Creation Museum,” Ken Ham. Nye defended the science perspective, that the Earth is billions of years old and life evolved very slowly via evolution, while Ham described a Young Earth perspective, that the Earth and everything living on it was created by God in 6, 24-hour days and is 6000 years old. In the course of the debate, Ken Ham first claimed that the word “science” has been hijacked, and that things that are now observed in the natural world could have been different in the past, because none of us were there to see God creating everything. Ham says that since the Bible says Earth was created, we should accept that as historical fact. Bill Nye was very detailed in giving evidence for science’s version of events, that every living creature is a descendant of a previous ancestor, and that the fossil records corroborate this. Nye also described how evidence of the biblical flood is not present in the way animals and plants are dispersed throughout the globe, and that a ship the size the arc would have been an engineering marvel, or scientists who described the conditions that would have been necessary for an arc to hold and feed animals for that length of time would have made the voyage impossible.

Whether you believe in the creation story, or you understand the scientific theory of evolution – your mind was probably not going to be changed by the debate. If you are pro-science (and I am very pro-science, as a Biologist at a large, research university) then the words of Ken Ham were probably maddening – every point Ham made came back to “You don’t know that. You weren’t there. But God was there. We have the Bible.” Ham made assertions, not based on evidence, and made them sound like any reasonable person should just get it. Don't understand something? God did it. Can't explain that? God did it. Every possible question, Ham had an answer for, and started with that answer in mind. He looked cool, calm, and confident, with his one answer that explains everything. Nye used scientific evidence like a pro, discussing ice cores, radio-dating, trees older than Ham thinks the Earth is, Neanderthal skulls, and the fossil record. Listening to Ham explain it all away – complete rejection of the data, explaining that historical science is different than observational science because God says so – was enough to make you throw the screen across the room. How can someone like Ham get it so wrong, we scientists wonder?

My son Matthew, who is almost six years old, has a book at home that we sometimes read at night, called “Mythical Beasts.” Described in the pages of this book are creatures like the kraken, a beast so large that 14th century Vikings mistook its tentacles for small islands. These fishermen were known to search for whirlpools left by the kraken to fish over, where the catch would be plentiful. It has been suggested that giant squid, octopus, or whales may have been what were mistaken for kraken, or the water activity may have been over undersea volcanic activity. The legend of the kraken persists today, not just in pop culture and depicted in movies like Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea, but in Norwegian and Greenland culture. How could people believe in such a creature, which has been easily explained by the filming of the giant squid in its natural habitat? The kraken is one of my favorite mythical beasts.

My son enjoys the chupacabra, which was a beast I heard a lot about while I lived on the Mexican border. This creature is said to be like a vampire, sucking all the blood out of its victims. The name literally means “goat sucker” in Spanish. I always pictured a rabid, hairless dog – but in some pictures it looks like an alien or deformed rat. Biologist Barry Connor examined the chupacabra carcasses, and found that they were actually coyotes with an extreme case of mange. As late as last week, chupacabra carcasses were examined in Houston Texas, and were determined to be a hybrid species of coyote, wolf, and domesticated dog. But just uttering the word chupacabra can instill fear in people, especially children who might be taunted by a babysitter or sibling, “If you don’t go to bed, a chupacabra might get you!”

Despite the evidence scientists have been able to offer, often proving that these stories have logical explanations, there are people who will continue to believe the story, because of its implications. In the case of the biblical flood – the soul is at stake. If presented with two options – either “believe” science, OR believe in God – which has the biggest implications to the average person? Yeah, it’s that heaven or hell thing. The debate is often phrased so that if you believe the science story, you are damned to burn an eternity in hell. If you were that child, sitting in a classroom, and you were told that if you didn't believe in the biblical flood, you would go to hell, you’d be scared to death! And since we begin telling these biblical stories from a very young, Sunday School age, you can guess which story sits in a person’s mind. Who is this science teacher to come along and say the Earth is billions of years old, when what you've been told from the moment you can remember is that the Earth was created by God in six days, 6000 years ago?

So, as a Biology teacher, I've run into the student who has told me, “I don’t believe anything you say. I’m only in this class because I have to be. I believe in God, end of story.” Even answering all their questions cannot get them to “change their minds.” (This is one of the best articles I’ve read about challenging creationists’ questions, but the title is a bit inflammatory) Over the years, I’ve run into probably a hundred versions of this very statement, even from fellow science teachers! I’ve had moments when I’ve seen fellow scientists call Christians flat-out stupid. I’ve seen scientists' exasperation when “no, 6000 years. Bible says so.” is repeated as “proof.” And in all of my readings on how to make people understand evolution as “very gradual change over time,” I know that all the evidence I provide will not FORCE a person to give up their SOUL – so I’ve had to become an ally, instead of the enemy. I am a scientist who believes you can both be a faithful Christian, and an educated scientist, because religion and science are two different, but not incompatible, ways of knowing about our world. I would like to implore to scientists that they understand the worldview of Christians, and stop giving them such a hard time. Keep calm, science on.

I am upfront with my students that I believe in God. I am also upfront that I believe that science is the way we know about the natural world around us. And then, I go on to teach about the nature of science. I discuss how the Galapagos and Hawaiian island chains were formed. I describe how scientists have studied DNA and genome sequencing, what homologous structures are, how fossils form, how we know how old fossils are, and the science of embryology. I also describe how science works – that we take all the evidence, and use it to formulate an understanding of how the world works. Religion is an entirely separate way of knowing – it starts with an end in mind, an all-powerful God – and works back from that. I personally have had moments in my life that make me “know that God exists.” I have no doubt in my mind. I have faith. My faith does not interfere with my science, and my science doesn't interfere with my faith. In fact, I think one compliments the other. When scientists freak out (which was something that Bill Nye did not do, which is impressive) we alienate Biblical believers from ever understanding science, which hurts science. By making creation the forbidden fruit, we make it something to cling to, and reject science over.

What is the harm in believing in God? What is the harm in believing in the kraken or the chupacabra? There is none. Believing in God gives spiritual guidance to Christians’ lives, and the teachings of Jesus are a moral guidance. Believing in the kraken reminds Norwegians of the power of the ocean, and to be responsible fisherman. Believing in the chupacabra keeps little children in line, listening to their parents. Religions have been used throughout the history of man to guide the actions, both good and bad, explain the soul, describe where we go after we die, and explain how we should act towards our fellow man. Whatever your religion, I, as your teacher, should respect it. And you, as my student, should give me the respect to understand how the discipline of science explains the natural world. So, why should science be taught in schools, and religion be taught outside of school?

There are a multitude of religions. There are even variations of major religions – some Christians say you can be pro-choice, some take objection to homosexuality, Young Earth creationists say the Earth is only 6000 years old – and I’m sure the same is true for Muslims, Jewish people, Buddhists, Native Americans, etc. Religions vary by region, by denomination, and by culture. Scientists would never openly attack a Native American in the classroom - so why do we do it to Christians?  Pick up an intro to Biology textbook. There are virtually no introductory Biology texts that give any credence to creationism, because creationism is not science. Even though university research scientists may believe in God, they are not teaching God as science, because that is not how science works. The fact that there are middle school science teachers and high school Biology teachers – like Ken Ham, who was a high school science teacher – that are teaching creation as science, indicates an alarming problem in education. There is an entire group of science teachers who cannot differentiate science from religion. How can a science teacher not understand enough about the natural world and how science works, to give supernatural phenomenon credence in a science class? That would be analogous to your Biology teacher warning you not to cheat on your test, or a chupacabra would suck out all your blood in the middle of the night. Mythical beasts do not lend themselves to sound science. If you teach one supernatural story to your students, then you have to teach them all. And imagine what a nightmare that would be. How would you feel if public tax dollars were spent to introduce your child to Pagan, Wiccan, or Heathen creation stories, or to the Greek creation myths (think Zues, Gaia, and Choas) as scientific fact?

Some people said it was a bad idea for Nye to debate Ham – it makes it look like there are two equal sides debating – and there aren’t. Just because Ham found five “creation scientists” to make youtube videos, doesn’t mean there are an equal number of evolutionists versus creationists. There are plenty of scientists who believe in God – some of the most faithful people, like myself, believe in God – but who also understand that the Bible is not a science book. Chemistry, physics, geology, astronomy, medicine, and biology all work together as disciplines to explain the natural world. Though scientists may debate the exact mechanisms for evolution, almost no scientist doubts there has been very gradual change in organisms over a very long period of time, billions of years.

Does this really come down to a “teaching religion in the science classroom” agenda? 92 percent say Bill Nye won the debate in Christian Today poll. Because I believe that most Americans understand that the people who wrote the Bible, inspired by God, also were not scientists. They described the world around them with the best understanding of how things worked that they had, at that point in time. Fishermen described the kraken, as a way of understanding the ocean. Latin Americans used the chupacabra as a way of understanding unknown phenomenon. And my son and I settle in to read about mythical beasts, and he understands that these people weren’t stupid – they were using stories to explain the natural world. Many years later, science has helped us understand the Earth in new ways. Just as DNA fingerprinting has allowed over 312 convicted criminals to be exonerated based on the evidence, we learn that eye witness claims cannot always be trusted. The people who were eye witnesses to the Biblical tales did the best they could, but now new evidence has arisen. Evidence, at the end of the day, is what science is all about.

Income Inequality seems to be on the tip of everyone’s tongue lately. President Obama spoke about it in his State of The Union Address on January 28th. He described how the middle and lower classes have stalled in their wage potential, and the possibility of getting by, much less getting ahead, seems to have lessened. Also in the news is the plight of adjuncts – those part-time college instructors who teach one or two classes at a university for a small sum and no benefits. This morning, adjuncts at my university were described in an NPR story, “Part-time Professors Demand Higher Pay; Will Colleges Listen?” The story goes on to describe how “professional adjuncts” – those workers who hold a graduate degree in their field, and who teach as needed at one or several higher education institutions, as their full time job – are essentially making minimum wage, or less. The plight of professional adjuncts is often a sad tale – often we read about how they struggle to make ends meet, selling plasma on the side to supplement their income, Margaret Mary Vojtko who died destitute at the age of 83 as she taught French for 25 years as an adjunct at Duquesne University, to this self-proclaimed “adjunct whore” who describes herself as doing tricks each semester to make ends meet. The horror stories abound. But how did these horror stories come to fruition?

I must first divulge my own experiences as an adjunct. I enjoyed my position as a non-major, adjunct biology instructor for 6 semesters at my university. I taught large, stadium-style lectures for classes of 100 to over 300 students each semester. I enjoyed working with these students, even though there were a lot of them, as they worked through the general education requirements of their degree plan. I spent three contact hours a week – either two classes of an hour and a half every Tue/Thur, or three classes of one hour every Mon/Wed/Fri – lecturing, using classroom technology, answering questions, helping the students find videos of concepts they didn’t understand, helping students with campus problems, or just counseling students on problems I could help with, be it personal or academic. Outside of class, I had to order textbooks, sit on review committees, collaborate with other lecture professors, do grades, answer emails (and with 300 students, that’s a TON of email) and make copies. I earned less than $1000 per credit hour for the course. After taxes, for one semester, I would see $399 deposited once a month, five times, into my direct deposit bank account. Take home for one semester of work - $2000.

Now here is where I differ from the adjuncts that are often described in the depressing stories you hear about these people with advanced degrees living on welfare and food stamps – I have a full time job. I work at the university already, as a Biology lab Coordinator. 40 hours a week, I work with teaching assistants, supervise 640 lab students a semester, order supplies, write curriculum, do learning management software for the course, and keep a bustling Biology lab exciting and fun. In between writing curriculum and being a single mom who just earned a doctorate, I love to teach a class or two. Most of the classes that are offered to adjuncts are the general education, lower level courses in the 100 or 200 range. I taught the lowest level of Biology course there is offered at this university – the one taught to general education, non-majors students. I know people who adjunct who teach the freshman English classes, the non-major History courses, even Physics! I also have my name and resume in the pool at six other universities/colleges for these types of adjunct positions. I think adjuncting is fun! It allows me to do something I find enjoyable – teaching. But, there’s been no adjunct teaching positions available in my department for the last three semesters, because of grant fluctuations and course load changes for professors. Thank god for my full time job.

Adjuncting was NEVER meant to be a full time job. That is the exact reason adjuncts, who are “professional adjuncts,” are in the position they are today. Adjuncting is a part time type of position, meant for people who are professionals in other full time jobs, who essentially “pick up a shift” here or there. They are like substitutes, who are called to fill in when a full time, tenure tract faculty gets a huge grant and the department needs someone to fill in. The people who wish adjuncting was a full time profession are sadly mistaken, and I believe will continue to suffer if they keep trying to push to make adjuncting a full time job with benefits and security. Just as I feel the minimum wage employee at Walmart or McDonalds is futile in fighting for this type of job to support them and their families (these fast food jobs were meant for teenagers who needed part time work, not for someone needing to support a family) – I feel the plight of the adjunct is useless. Someone who has the basic skills to man the fryer, stock the shelves, or teach the most basic of college courses will continue to earn part time employee pay, for low-level, part-time created jobs. Adjuncting is not a career, adjuncting is the burger flipping of higher education.

Now please, don’t think I’m dissing on adjuncts. I know how hard, stressful, and overwhelming adjuncting can be as a job. When you have students taking intro courses, they can be the most needy students – the ones who may be taking your course while also taking basic math because they can’t do math, taking basic reading, because they can’t read, or just aren’t cut out for college. You may pour 30 hours a week into one course, to do the justice to your students that you feel, and I felt, they deserve. But the honest truth about adjuncting is that there is no security to it as a profession, it’s low paid work meant for people who have other full time jobs, and it’s something that I would advise ANY person who is getting a graduate degree and plans to go teach “because they love it” to stay away from. Go into secondary education and teach high school students. Find a job at a company that you can do professional development or job training. But if you get your grad degree and plan to “just go teach” instead of having a research agenda that is good enough to get you a tenure track position (and I almost guarantee you are not in that top 5% in your field who will be offered a tenure track job), then you are going to find yourself unhappy, unemployed on a whim of the finances of higher ed institutions, or forced to move somewhere you don’t want to live, working at a university no one has ever heard of. The truth of the matter is that a $80,000 a year job that you don’t have to move for, that allows you to teach a subject you love, with benefits and security, is a fantasy. 

And as long as “professional adjuncts” are offering themselves on the altar of higher education in hordes, the market for them is not going to change. Only when ALL adjuncts decide to pursue other job opportunities, that are full time, with benefits, and security, and no one wants those adjunct positions anymore, will higher ed pay more for them. Supply and demand. The brutal truth of education as a business.

This post is inspired by a sermon from Joel Osteen called “Stay in the Game.” You might not be in grad school, but I think this applies to life as a game, as well. It doesn’t take a lot of faith to stay in the game when things are going our way. Many times along the way, I considered grad school (and life) as a game. Completing my dissertation, and getting a PhD was a win/lose type of situation, or at least it was for me. If I had given up, I would have lost at the game. Looking back, if I had effortlessly completed the classes and the dissertation, with no bumps, bruises, or challenges, that prize, being Dr. Hollingsworth, wouldn’t mean as much to me. If the grad school game were easy, it certainly would not have taught me all the lessons it did.

It’s easy to lose our passion when we’re hurt – our advisor is critical, a colleague does us wrong, an experiment doesn’t work, our families aren’t understanding of the pressure, the program changes to become harder, the environment on campus becomes negative or nasty, or we flat out feel the pain of stress pressing down on our lives. It’s easy to begin the negative talk. “This program is stacked against women. This research doesn’t mean anything. My experiments don’t matter. My advisor is a jerk. My committee has it out for me. They don’t like me. I chose a bad advisor. This program is doomed.” This negative talk is making excuses for why we MIGHT fail, and prepares us to shield our emotions, in case we do fail.  Shake off the pity, and get back in the game.

Some students make excuses to sit on the sidelines. You can still play, even in pain. “I’d rather be in the game in pain, than sitting on the sidelines watching.”

This is where the game became personal for me. Through my entire grad school career, I was having massive surgeries. Any one of them would have been reason to give up. In February of 2008, both of my retinas blew out. I had over 20 eye surgeries, the last two of which they removed my eyeballs, and scraped them out, and filled them with fake fluid. One of these surgeries was right before I was supposed to take a final. The other kept me from starting class for three weeks. Throughout all of these surgeries, I never once thought of quitting my program. I always was thinking “How can I get back to school, so I can get on with my life?” There were days I couldn’t see well, and my father drove me to work. There were other days where I laid face down on the floor in my office, waiting for my pain meds to kick in, so I could get back to writing. The last of my eye surgeries was January 11th, 2011.

Almost a year went by of me feeling horrible physically. I didn’t move a lot, because I was scared to hurt my eyeballs. I was depressed, I felt awful, but I stayed in grad school. It was the one thing that gave me solace from the pain. I loved the group of women I worked with, and was in class with, and they provided me with so much support. Reading and writing were two things I could do, despite my physical maladies. I bandaged up what was hurting, and I stayed in the game. I said, “I may be hurting, but I’m still here. I may have been knocked down, over and over, but I’m in this to win this, and I won’t quit.” In December of 2011, I had a massive abdominal surgery that left me in chronic pain, pain that persists until today. I’ve had surgery many times since that first one, for kidney stones, for a bowel obstruction, and for the wound that refused to heal.

At this point, it would have been easy to become bitter. I could have blamed my failures on my pain, my body, or other people. I didn’t. I let people know when I was hurting so bad I couldn’t complete assignments, but I never asked to not do the assignment. Sometimes I needed a week extension, sometimes I was past the due date, but I made up my mind to never quit. I saw some people in my program that were so sour, who wanted other people to be unhappy with them. They tried to bring others down. The ladies I surrounded myself with, however, were my rock. I could have hung out with the complainers and joined their pity party. There were definitely always people around me who were quick to grumble, whine, and nit-pick, to say why they couldn’t do this, to make excuses. I will admit – I did let these negative folks into my head a few times. And after I would talk to them, I would feel like I was run over by a bus. I had to actively choose to smile at these people, offer them a word of encouragement, and then go back to my group of girls who cheered me on. If you surround yourself with criticism, self-pity, bitterness, anger, hatred, and discontentment, don’t be surprised when that weighs down your soul. Get back in the game, and find your cheerleaders.

The best thing to do when you hurt is to go help someone else in need. You sow the seed to change your own situation. This is why I love to teach. No one would have faulted me if I had given up. I was injured, but I never left the game. When times were tough, and nothing was going my way, I was still good to the people around me. Even when my eyeballs or my guts hurt, I still treated my students well. And they knew that I loved what I was doing, and many approached me and told me that they were inspired by the fact I never gave up. This world has a great reward for people who are faithful in the tough times. My graduate school experience resulted in me winning the game, because I never gave up, even when it was rough. Because I have paid it forward, by helping students be successful, by cheering on my group of girls, and by giving my work my all, I won that game. Now, I’m on to the next game, The Superbowl that is my life.

I refuse to just exist. I will live. If I had quit, what would I have done? Become disabled? Planned my funeral? That wasn’t even an option. Even when I couldn’t do all the things I wanted to do on my own, I could still offer friendship, hard work, and dedication to the people around me. When you put yourself in the right position, when you coordinate your game plan so that you are in success’s path, that’s when the universe pays you back. You position yourself for good karma. I never stopped searching out new friends, looking for new opportunities, and searching for ways to get past my pain. Grad school was never meant to end a person, even though it may feel that way. It’s meant to be a beginning. An awakening of your spirit, a challenge to your mind, the seed of your dreams. It allows you to have double what you had before.


Nobody knows the battles you fight when you take on this program. When you defy the odds, when you play despite the pain, the most powerful force in the universe breathes in your direction. You may not be able to do what you used to, but the wind fills your sails, and you stay in the game. Just being here, that took an act of faith. Part of the game of academia is its critical nature. It will crush you, if you let it. It’s easy when people are criticizing your ideas to feel as if you are the one who has it all wrong. Eyes on the prize, stay in the game. Keep the game ball moving forward, run with your ideas, allow them to blossom, and take on that fight. No one knows your battles, but everyone knows that you can’t win the battle if you don’t show up in the first place.


My biggest and best quality is the fight I have in me. I never give up. I keep on going, because I love what I do. I allow others to achieve their dreams, and I can’t do that from my bed. I need to be in that game. I need to be a positive role model for my son. I needed to fight.


People can’t look at me and know that I’m in pain. I don’t look sick, even though I’ve been diabetic 30 years and have had all those surgeries. I’ve had people tell me “You don’t look sick. I had no idea,” or “You seem so happy! I had no idea you were in pain!” It’s one thing to go through a struggle that everyone knows about, or can view you going through. But my struggle is all inside me. I struggle with my feelings, with my body, and with figuring out who I am. Despite my pain, I persist. I go to work, I’m kind, friendly and compassionate, I help everyone I can, and I never give up. There is no way I could sit back, nursing my wounds. I’m hurting, but I’m still here. I can still smile, and be kind, even if no one knows what kind of horrible pain my body is in. If I can do this, I have no doubt that other women can get through the game of grad school, too. Play on, despite the pain.