Ekkehard Winter, long-standing foundation manager and member of the GDNÄ Board of Directors, on new ways to improve STEM education in Germany.

Dr Winter, you became a member of the GDNÄ a good thirty years ago. Back then, in the mid-1990s, you were just starting your career in major German science foundations. What made the GDNÄ interesting to you?
It was definitely personalities such as Hubert Markl, Joachim Treusch and Detlev Ganten, who were successive presidents of the GDNÄ at the time. They are the pioneers of modern science communication in Germany, and we owe them a great deal. I attended GDNÄ meetings on a regular basis, and I was particularly impressed by the 200th anniversary celebrations in Leipzig three years ago. All these meetings offer high-quality lectures that thoroughly illuminate a topic – not just snippets of knowledge like at other events with a similar target audience. 

Almost a year ago, you were appointed to the GDNÄ Executive Board. What does that mean for you?
I have been appointed for two years, until the end of 2026. I enjoy contributing my decades of experience in mathematics and science education. My network of contacts – whether in foundations, universities, research museums or politics – could also be helpful. So far, I have attended two GDNÄ strategy meetings and each time I have been impressed by the productive discussions among peers and the refreshing contributions of young members. 

You know many organisations for young people in science. What is your impression of the still relatively young jGDNÄ?
Its members are bursting with ideas and want to achieve something – including for their own careers. This is similar elsewhere and very welcome. I also think it’s good that young people organise their own events between GDNÄ meetings. But it’s also part of the bigger picture that the initiative currently thrives on the enthusiasm of particularly committed members. But what happens when they go abroad? Or when they hardly have any time for voluntary work? Is there a risk of the organisation falling apart? To prevent this, a kind of liaison office will be needed in a year or two – a hub that holds everything together. All this costs money, and without funding it will be difficult to achieve. I’m happy to help think about this.

 © Marlene Anders

Are there any funding opportunities on the horizon?
Let’s take foundations, for example. Many of them are now less involved in programmes for individuals due to strategic decisions and also for cost reasons; they tend to support structures instead. This would therefore be a good fit for a jGDNÄ hub. However, there are many other funding opportunities available through civil society or government institutions, some of which can be combined. What is missing is an overview that highlights the strengths, weaknesses and special features of the various offers. Creating a ‘funding map’ would be a great topic for a bachelor’s thesis! 

One suggestion from the jGDNÄ is a mentoring programme that brings young people together with established GDNÄ members from science and industry. A good idea?
A very good idea! I am reminded of an experience I had as managing director of the Telekom Foundation. We set up a programme that brought together doctoral students with leaders from various fields, including top managers from industry. Each mentee had a mentor who was very enthusiastic about participating and often came from a different discipline than their mentee. It worked extremely well. But it has to be well organised and requires enthusiasm, time and money. 

The jGDNÄ is an umbrella organisation that also houses the GDNÄ’s long-running and successful school programme. How do you rate the programme?
From what I have seen in recent years, it has developed wonderfully. It plays an important role in the ecosystem of STEM education, i.e. in the fields of mathematics, computer science, natural sciences and technology. Such programmes strengthen the fascination for subjects that are urgently needed but have always lacked young talent. Fundamentally, this is unlikely to change in the future. This makes programmes for schoolchildren all the more important, as they spark enthusiasm and nurture talent from the sidelines, so to speak. 

The jGDNÄ runs several programmes, including a small teacher programme run by the GDNÄ. Do you see any potential here, and if so, how can it be exploited?
There are incredibly dedicated teachers, especially in the STEM subjects. I know from conversations with Paul Mühlenhoff, the head of the GDNÄ programme, that this is also the case there. These teachers often really enjoy getting together outside their own schools and exchanging ideas. In their home schools, they are often seen as troublemakers because they like to try new things and raise standards. One idea, for example, would be a teachers’ café at the next meeting in Bremen in 2026. Established and aspiring STEM teachers with an interest in exchange and cooperation would be invited. I have coordinated several meetings of this kind and have always been amazed at how little teachers know about initiatives in other federal states and how keen they are to take up good ideas. Our federal education system is so provincial! We should change that, and the GDNÄ could make an important contribution here. 

You retired two years ago. In addition to your honorary positions, including at the GDNÄ, you are now studying philosophy of science at the University of Münster. Was that a good decision?
Yes, definitely. Until now, I didn’t have the time to delve into the history of ideas and theoretical constructs in the natural sciences. However, these areas should not only be of interest to retirees; in my opinion, they should also be included in the teaching of STEM subjects at schools and universities. With its long history, the GDNÄ could also be a good place for this.

Professor Bolm, you decided early on to pursue a career in chemistry, became a university lecturer and have remained in this field for over thirty years. Would you choose the same path again?
Yes, it has always been the right choice for me. I can conduct my research at my own discretion and support talented young people in their development: these are advantages I enjoy every day. It is not a nine-to-five job; you are always challenged, and occasionally my team thinks I work too hard. There is a trend among young people to turn their backs on academia and look for a quieter job. I try to counteract this, among other things with my lecture ‘Why you should stay at university’. I will be giving it again soon. 

What are your main arguments in favour of a career in academia?
Freedom of thought and the opportunity to do what you like best in your job. 

What sparked your enthusiasm for research and chemistry in particular?
There were no role models in my family. But my parents gave me chemistry sets and I was allowed to buy all the chemicals I needed for my experiments at a nearby pharmacy. That wouldn’t be possible today; adults would consider it too risky, but in the 1960s and 1970s it wasn’t a problem. I owe a lot to my biology teacher. She was doing a PhD in microbiology and taught biology with a strong focus on chemistry. Her fascination was contagious, and at some point I realised: I’m going to be a chemist.

 © Carsten Bolm

Carsten Bolm’s large, internationally diverse working group in front of the institute building.

It seems that you pursued this plan with determination.
It may seem that way from the outside. I myself felt quite erratic during that time. I moved eight times, in Germany, Switzerland and the USA, and nowhere did I stay longer than two years. The fact that this led to an academic career has a lot to do with luck, with meeting the right people at the right time. 

You mentioned the fascination of chemistry. What exactly fascinates you?
Chemistry requires both brainpower and manual dexterity, a wonderful combination. It is also the only discipline in which new substances are constantly being created – substances that did not exist before. That never ceases to inspire me. 

You are an organic chemist, but you also work in mechanochemistry. How do the two fit together?
At the beginning of an academic career, you have to specialise in a few research questions in order to gain a profile and visibility in the professional world. Later, I gradually expanded my spectrum, including in the direction of mechanochemistry. It is often used in the geosciences, for example when it comes to grinding materials energy-efficiently and without solvents using a ball mill. Twenty years ago, this was still uncharted territory in organic synthesis chemistry, but today mechanochemistry is regarded as a significant methodological advancement. In my working group, we use the process to improve existing synthesis methods and to discover new ground in chemistry – the unusual reaction conditions in the ball mills are good for a few surprises.

  © Carsten Bolm

How do such new approaches emerge at your institute?
Often through interdisciplinary exchange. When searching for new active substances to combat diseases, for example, I work a lot with medical professionals. Sulphur chemistry plays a central role in this, for example in the development of new tuberculosis inhibitors. Thanks to interdisciplinary cooperation, we have been able to significantly expand the substrate range of sulfoximines, which are particularly suitable for use in medicinal chemistry and plant protection. We also collaborate with engineers, for example in the recently reconfirmed RWTH Excellence Cluster Integrated Fuel & Chemical Science Center, or FSC2 for short. Here, we support the development of environmentally friendly liquid energy sources. Whether at our own university or as part of large EU projects, we always rely on high-calibre, reliable partners. And that suits us very well. 

What role do contacts with industry play in your work?
A very important one. I would even say that without industry contacts, it would be impossible to work in my field. My working group, for example, has close contacts with the pharmaceutical industry in order to jointly develop new active substances. A plant protection company is currently testing a new class of compounds discovered in our laboratories. And like many other chemistry institutes at German universities, we benefit greatly from the Chemical Industry Fund in promoting young academics. It awards prizes and grants, which is very important for our young scientists. 

How do you see Germany’s position as a centre for chemistry? 
We are concerned that the large chemical companies are offering fewer and fewer jobs for our graduates. But if you look long enough, you will find something – this is especially true for chemists with doctorates. These are often positions in smaller companies. Overall, the industry is suffering from enormous energy costs and many companies are currently considering relocating abroad. Rapid political intervention to reduce costs would be helpful. 

Almost 30 years ago, you accepted a professorship at RWTH and stayed despite other offers. What kept you in Aachen? 
The strong location, good research conditions and high quality of life. I come from Braunschweig, did my habilitation in Basel and dreamed of a life in southwestern Germany. But I ended up in Aachen. At the time, I thought that if an offer came from Freiburg, I would sign it blindly. A little later, the call from Freiburg actually came. The RWTH made such a generous counteroffer that I couldn’t say no. Another offer followed – but once again, RWTH was better. And over time, I have come to really appreciate the city, its proximity to Belgium and the Rhineland. 

How did you come to the GDNÄ?
Through a phone call a year and a half ago. Michael Dröscher, a chemist like me and long-time secretary general of the GDNÄ, asked me if I would be interested in working with them. I was familiar with the GDNÄ at the time, but I didn’t have a clear picture of its goals. I think that’s the case for many people at universities. I then travelled to the meeting in Potsdam and found it extremely successful. I was impressed by the interaction between the disciplines and the appreciative cooperation between young and old – I had never experienced anything like it before. The GDNÄ’s Young Network was founded in Potsdam and has developed magnificently since then. It immediately gives you lots of new ideas. 

Such as?
Perhaps we will be able to organise a series of lectures on topics related to modern chemistry in Aachen, together with representatives of the jGDNÄ. If that works, it could also be a format for other university cities. Another idea would be to send GNDÄ members on lecture tours to German universities in order to put the society and the jGDNÄ in the university spotlight. 

You were elected to the GDNÄ Executive Board as representative for chemistry. What do you want to achieve in this role? 
One of my main tasks at the moment is to recruit top-class chemists to give lectures on their research that are as accessible as possible for the 2026 meeting in Bremen. The topics should be current and of interdisciplinary interest. It’s a wonderful position and fits in perfectly with my goal: I want to make chemistry more visible – in science and in the public eye – and the GDNÄ along with it.

  © Stefanie Zimmer

The laboratory as a place of learning: Dr Renè Hommelsheim (right) answers Christian Keiser’s questions about sulphur chemistry.

How do such new approaches emerge at your institute?
Often through interdisciplinary exchange. When searching for new active substances to combat diseases, for example, I work a lot with medical professionals. Sulphur chemistry plays a central role in this, for example in the development of new tuberculosis inhibitors. Thanks to interdisciplinary cooperation, we have been able to significantly expand the substrate range of sulfoximines, which are particularly suitable for use in medicinal chemistry and plant protection. We also collaborate with engineers, for example in the recently reconfirmed RWTH Excellence Cluster Integrated Fuel & Chemical Science Center, or FSC2 for short. Here, we support the development of environmentally friendly liquid energy sources. Whether at our own university or as part of large EU projects, we always rely on high-calibre, reliable partners. And that suits us very well. 

What role do contacts with industry play in your work?
A very important one. I would even say that without industry contacts, it would be impossible to work in my field. My working group, for example, has close contacts with the pharmaceutical industry in order to jointly develop new active substances. A plant protection company is currently testing a new class of compounds discovered in our laboratories. And like many other chemistry institutes at German universities, we benefit greatly from the Chemical Industry Fund in promoting young academics. It awards prizes and grants, which is very important for our young scientists. 

How do you see Germany’s position as a centre for chemistry? 
We are concerned that the large chemical companies are offering fewer and fewer jobs for our graduates. But if you look long enough, you will find something – this is especially true for chemists with doctorates. These are often positions in smaller companies. Overall, the industry is suffering from enormous energy costs and many companies are currently considering relocating abroad. Rapid political intervention to reduce costs would be helpful. 

Almost 30 years ago, you accepted a professorship at RWTH and stayed despite other offers. What kept you in Aachen? 
The strong location, good research conditions and high quality of life. I come from Braunschweig, did my habilitation in Basel and dreamed of a life in southwestern Germany. But I ended up in Aachen. At the time, I thought that if an offer came from Freiburg, I would sign it blindly. A little later, the call from Freiburg actually came. The RWTH made such a generous counteroffer that I couldn’t say no. Another offer followed – but once again, RWTH was better. And over time, I have come to really appreciate the city, its proximity to Belgium and the Rhineland. 

How did you come to the GDNÄ?
Through a phone call a year and a half ago. Michael Dröscher, a chemist like me and long-time secretary general of the GDNÄ, asked me if I would be interested in working with them. I was familiar with the GDNÄ at the time, but I didn’t have a clear picture of its goals. I think that’s the case for many people at universities. I then travelled to the meeting in Potsdam and found it extremely successful. I was impressed by the interaction between the disciplines and the appreciative cooperation between young and old – I had never experienced anything like it before. The GDNÄ’s Young Network was founded in Potsdam and has developed magnificently since then. It immediately gives you lots of new ideas. 

Such as?
Perhaps we will be able to organise a series of lectures on topics related to modern chemistry in Aachen, together with representatives of the jGDNÄ. If that works, it could also be a format for other university cities. Another idea would be to send GNDÄ members on lecture tours to German universities in order to put the society and the jGDNÄ in the university spotlight. 

You were elected to the GDNÄ Executive Board as representative for chemistry. What do you want to achieve in this role? 
One of my main tasks at the moment is to recruit top-class chemists to give lectures on their research that are as accessible as possible for the 2026 meeting in Bremen. The topics should be current and of interdisciplinary interest. It’s a wonderful position and fits in perfectly with my goal: I want to make chemistry more visible – in science and in the public eye – and the GDNÄ along with it.