Group items tagged

Some suggestions fort Scientists about blogging. "So what should you put in your blog? (1) Talk about your research. What have you done in the past? What are you working on at the moment? There is some controversy as to how transparent you should be when talking about your research (OMG, someone is going to steal my idea if I write it down! No wait, if everyone knows I said it first, then they can't steal it!), so it's up to you to decide how comfortable you are about sharing your research ideas. I'm old-fashioned enough that I tend towards the side that thinks we should be discreet about the details of what we're working on, but I also understand the side that wants everything to be out there. (2) Talk about other people's research. Do you agree with their results? Do you think that they missed something important? You may feel unqualified to criticize somebody else's work, but science does not advance through groupthink. Remember, part of your job as a scientist will be to review other people's papers. Now is as good a time as any to start practicing. (3) Talk about issues related to your research. Are you working on smartphones? Talk about how they're being integrated into museum visits. Working on accessibility issues? Talk about some of the problems that the handicapped encounter during their daily routine. Just make sure you choose to talk about something that interests you so that you feel motivated to write to your blog. "

"Weblogs written by scientists are relatively rare, but some of them are proving popular. Out of 46.7 million blogs indexed by the Technorati blog search engine, five scientists' sites make it into the top 3,500. Declan Butler asks the winners about the reasons for their success."

This article provides an international view of the commodification of academic research, including this base line definition, from an email interview with Hans Radder, a professor of the philosophy of science and technology at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Q: Academic research has always cost money to produce, and led to products that made money for others. How is the "commodification" of research different today than in past periods? A: Commodification means that all kinds of activities and their results are predominantly interpreted and assessed on the basis of economic criteria. In this sense, recent academic research is far more commodified than it was in the past. In general terms, one can say that the relation between "money" and specific academic activity has become much more direct. Consider the following examples: first, the amount of external funding acquired is often used as a measure of individual academic quality; second, specific assessments by individual scientists have a direct impact on departmental budgets; for instance, if I now pass this doctoral dissertation, my department receives a substantial sum of money; if not, it ends up with a budget deficit; third, the growing practice of patenting the results of academic research is explicitly aimed at acquiring commercial monopolies. Related to these financial issues are important and substantial changes of academic culture. Universities are increasingly being run as big corporations. They have a top-down command structure and an academic culture in which individual university scientists are forced to behave like mini-capitalists in order to survive, guided by an entrepreneurial ethos aimed at maximizing the capitalization of their knowledge.

Scientists have therefore proved resourceful in using the web to further their research. They have, however, tended to lag when it comes to employing the latest web-based social-networking tools to open up scientific discourse and encourage more effective collaboration...... No one yet knows how to measure the impact of a blog post or the sharing of a good idea with another researcher in some collaborative web-based workspace. Dr Nielsen reckons that if similar measurements could be established for the impact of open commentary and open collaboration on the web, such commentary and collaboration would flourish, and science as a whole would benefit.

"Scientists know much more about their field than is ever published in peer-reviewed journals. Blogs can be a good medium with which to disseminate this tacit knowledge."

"At TED2009, Tim Berners-Lee called for "raw data now" -- for governments, scientists and institutions to make their data openly available on the web. At TED University in 2010, he shows a few of the interesting results when the data gets linked up."

Lobstermen collect data Lobstermen collect eMOLT data by attaching temperature and salinity probes to their lobster traps. The probes measure water temperature and salinity while the traps sit on the bottom. When the traps are brought in, the temperature and salinity data from the probes are downloaded to a computer. eMOLT data is available over the internet This website is a collaborative effort between GoMOOS and eMOLT to bring you environmental data collected by both of these programs. The Internet mapping tool found on this site allows you to see the location of GoMOOS and NOAA buoys and the approximate location of the eMOLT sites. We do not show the exact location of the eMOLT sites in order to keep these lobster trapping sites confidential. Using the map, you can select the data you are interested in and then create a graph to view the data.

Attention to this issue from this resource--Nature--is a breakthrough in its own right. Note the focus on "flourish in the long term...".

The issues are taking root in disciplinary discussions, so perhaps awareness and response will sprout.

"The difference between the alchemists and the chemists was that the printing press was used to coordinate peer review," he said. "The printing press didn't cause the scientific revolution, but it wouldn't have been possible without it." "The difference between the alchemists and the chemists was that the printing press was used to coordinate peer review," he said. "The printing press didn't cause the scientific revolution, but it wouldn't have been possible without it."

our work, our friends (Ken and Jim), and more context that shapes our strategy.

How about using examples of highly motivational lecture and teaching techniques like the Richard Dawkins video I presented on this forum, recently. Even if teacher's do not consciously try to adopt good working techniques, there is at least a strong subconscious human tendency to mimic behaviors. I think that if teachers see more effective techniques, they will automatically begin to adopt adopt them.

"So far, the most useful tool to me, in physics, has been the rubric, which is used widely in grading open-ended assessments in the humanities. "

A focus on improving the grading experience, rather than the learning experience, but still a big step forward for (some) hard scientists.