Success Stories
The university will be glad not to lose them, says Eclerová about women in science
Researcher Veronika Eclerová is another example proving that it is possible to combine a scientific career with family life. “The Career Restart grant gives me hope that the university leadership is genuinely working to create an environment where a career in science is a realistic option for women,” she says in this interview. She reflects on the beginnings of her career, her return to research after parental leave, and the support that made that transition possible.
RNDr. Veronika Eclerová, Ph.D.
Veronika Eclerová is an Assistant Professor in the Nonlinear Dynamics Team at the Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Faculty of Science. She has presented her research at prestigious international conferences in the CHAOS conference series held in Paris, Barcelona, Rome, and Athens.
In 2021, she completed a research stay at the University of Twente, and earlier this year she returned from a research visit to the University of Auckland in New Zealand. In 2025, she was awarded a Career Restart grant, intended for researchers whose careers have been interrupted, for example due to parental leave.
As a mathematician, you study epidemics, neural networks, and superconducting phenomena. What do these fields have in common, and what role does mathematics play in them?
My primary research focuses on systems that exhibit oscillatory behaviour. These are periodically recurring processes that have their own natural frequency and interact with one another.
Take epidemic diseases, for example. They naturally display internal periodicity in the form of recurring epidemic waves. In our temperate climate, this periodicity is also influenced by seasonal changes, which affect how easily diseases spread. That is why epidemic waves occur during specific periods of the year – for instance, seasonal influenza outbreaks tend to appear at roughly the same time every year.
Our team was interested in whether this type of periodic behaviour can be described in a general way, modelled mathematically, and analysed using the same mathematical theory that we apply in other research areas.
After all, periodic phenomena are everywhere around us. The brain, for example, contains neurons that exhibit periodic activity, which is why we also collaborate with colleagues in neuroscience.
The same applies in physics. Certain physical processes are periodic, they influence one another, and together they give rise to dynamically interesting phenomena.
What are you working on at the moment?
At present, our team is primarily focused on modelling neurons and the human brain.
We collaborate with colleagues in Brno, which makes regular meetings relatively easy. The St. Anne’s University Hospital Brno provides us with data, and we also work closely with the Institute of Scientific Instruments of the Czech Academy of Sciences.
Alongside collaborative research, however, I would also like to continue developing the line of work that I brought into the group myself. Research on superconducting junctions is something I started independently.
Contributing to a team effort is important, but it is equally valuable to maintain a project that you develop on your own – one where you are fully responsible for its direction and progress.
What fascinates you most about oscillatory phenomena?
The fact that things can be so different, yet fundamentally the same.
You can look at two completely different systems – say, superconducting junctions and epidemics. On the surface, they have very little in common. Yet the underlying principles governing their behaviour are essentially the same. That is what fascinates me.
You mentioned that your research often involves collaboration with scientists from different disciplines. Does interdisciplinarity bring mainly advantages, or do you sometimes encounter misunderstandings?
I believe one of the greatest advantages of working on applications across different disciplines is that each field approaches problems in its own way. That reflects the historical development of the discipline and the way mathematics has been introduced and further developed within it.
When you work across disciplines, you often discover methods that are standard practice in one field but virtually unknown in another. That can lead to entirely new results or provide a fresh perspective on an existing problem.
For me, as a mathematician, the greatest challenge is communicating with colleagues from other scientific disciplines. As I mentioned, not only have different methods evolved within these fields, but their terminology has evolved differently as well.
The key is always to develop a shared understanding—to learn how methods are used in a particular discipline and identify where the approaches we bring from mathematics can add genuine value.
The Career Restart Grant enabled her to go to a foreign university together with her family
What did your path into science look like?
Originally, I had no intention of pursuing a career in science, and studying mathematics did not appeal to me either.
Both of my parents studied mathematics, and for quite a long time they actually tried to talk me out of following a similar path.
My father felt that I could do something more practical with my life and perhaps pursue a career in economics instead. The idea of staying at the university and becoming a researcher certainly did not receive much support from his side of the family.
He had chosen that path himself at one point but eventually left academia because he did not see it as offering much of a future.
Yet you decided to study mathematics at the Faculty of Science. Today, in addition to conducting your own research, you also teach. What ultimately convinced you to stay in science?
I was greatly inspired by my supervisor, Lenka Přibylová. For a long time, I worked mainly with women rather than men, simply because I appreciated their approach. Of course, I have male colleagues whom I enjoy working with as well, but in the early stages of my career it was predominantly women who influenced me.
Even during my PhD studies, I was still considering whether research was really the right path for me. It was only then that I made the final decision to pursue it.
I have never been the kind of person who knew from childhood that they wanted to become a scientist.
Looking back at your early career, was there anything that surprised you when you first joined the university?
When I started studying mathematics, I was worried there would be very few women in the programme. Before enrolling, I even looked into what proportion of the students were female.
I was pleasantly surprised to find that there were many more women than my parents had described from their own student days. Even when I started, the number of female students was already growing.
There are still relatively few women among our academic staff, but many young women are now entering science. The real question is whether, at some point in their careers, they encounter barriers that prevent them from progressing further.
Today there are many grants supporting young researchers and women in science. You yourself received the Career Restart Grant. How did it help you the most?
The Career Restart grant gives me hope that the university leadership is genuinely committed to creating an environment in which women can pursue careers in science.
For me, maintaining contact with my international collaborators was extremely important. Thanks to the grant, my whole family was able to travel with me.
During my research stay at the University of Auckland in New Zealand, my husband came with me and looked after our daughter while I worked at the university. I simply would not have gone away for a month without my daughter.
I went there to work with Professor Hinke Osinga, which was inspiring in itself. She has devoted much of her career to issues surrounding women in science. I also found it encouraging that at their department the proportion of women – particularly associate professors and full professors – is even higher than it is at ours.
Balancing family life and science was challenging, but my colleagues supported me
You managed to combine family life with your scientific career, continuing your research even during parental leave. How did you balance caring for your child with your work?
Honestly, if I had lost six years of my career right at the beginning by staying home full-time to care for my child, it would probably have meant the end of my scientific career.
Instead, I stayed in close contact with my immediate team and collaborators throughout that period.
I was also fortunate to be part of a very supportive team. It makes a tremendous difference when your colleagues help keep you connected to the university environment, even if only to some extent. At the same time, I never felt that anyone was putting pressure on me to return immediately or expecting me to jump straight back into full-time work.
Even so, balancing everything was mentally exhausting. Having to tell yourself that science has to be put on hold for a while, while watching your team continue to move forward, is incredibly difficult.
Fortunately, that feeling did not last long. Once I returned, I immediately realised that the work I had done during that time had been valuable. People were building on it, and they still wanted to collaborate with me.
What helped you most when returning to work?
The grant certainly helped, but above all it was individual people who made my return as smooth as it was.
Some people might disagree with me, but one of the great advantages of working at a university is that many people are genuinely passionate about what they do. They often see their work differently from people in the private sector.
That said, returning is still challenging. Before having children, I had complete control over my schedule and could work whenever I felt most productive. That is no longer the case. Parenthood brings new challenges, and you have to organise your time in a completely different way.
Of course, it also depends on your field. As a mathematician, I am not tied to a laboratory. All I really need is a computer, along with opportunities to discuss data and ideas with my collaborators. I can choose where I work.
In that respect, mathematics is much more flexible than laboratory-based disciplines, where researchers have to dedicate specific blocks of time to experimental work.
On the other hand, although working from home has its advantages, it also means I see my colleagues less often. We no longer meet for lunch as frequently, for example, so there is less informal social interaction.
You mentioned the importance of your team. What makes it so crucial?
A good team can help draw you back into academic life, even during the most challenging periods.
When I look around and see colleagues who do not have that kind of support, I realise that returning to research is often much harder for them. Without people around you who encourage and motivate you, it can be difficult to find the drive to come back.
Because returning to science is not simply about picking up your research again and enjoying every minute of it. Academic work also comes with many responsibilities that are not necessarily enjoyable.
Teaching in person is rewarding, but you also have to grade a hundred exams. You have to prepare grant applications, deal with administration, and take care of many other responsibilities.
Not every aspect of academic work is exciting. And if you do not have people around you who are willing to help carry that burden, it is easy to become overwhelmed.
Finally, what advice would you give to young women who aspire to pursue a career in science?
They should pursue what they truly want to do.
Rather than asking themselves whether it can be done, they should ask how it can be done.
There is almost always a way forward.
If they keep asking questions and are determined to find that path, I believe the university will be more than happy not to lose them.
