Group items tagged

My sense of Yamana is that it works mostly as a clearinghouse of exchange of innovative approaches. The second unSummit coming up in a few weeks has no schedule of papers, but facilitates discussions that evolve over the 2 days. I think one would have to experience this to understand how it works. I had planned to do so this time, but decided I was too far behind on following up on previous connections. Here are Yamana's guidelines: "We feel the current culture of science creates an invisible cost in loss of productivity, slower rates of discovery, and 'wasting assets,' including human capital. We are committed to having enough conversations with the people that can make a difference, including (and perhaps especially) within our own scientific communities. We will transform what is possible both for people who are currently working in the field of science and for those that are interested in studying to become scientists. We will impact the experience of learning science, the experience of teaching science and the experience of doing science. We include conversations across the whole gamut of what affects desired outcomes, from salaries, to healthcare, to personal leave, to the work environment, to the conversations being had about science, to how science is funded, commercialized, and shared. By acting as a clearinghouse for issues and concerns, as well as a catalyst for potential solutions, we are connecting the passionate voices in science with one another to create a shared vision for the future."

I've been thinking about this alot lately. How do you make cultural change? How do you shift conventional wisdom? How do you create new practices and ways of doing, especially if the dominant "narrative" and system of "incentives" don't support change? Do you shift one relationship at a time? Or is larger change possible? What are the spaces for going against the grain?

The goals for the 5th Living Knowledge conference are: "What innovation is needed to guide research towards public concerns? How can civil society fully participate in the co-creation of knowledge? The 5th Living Knowledge Conference will focus on getting more insight into processes, and develop specific policy recommendations that resonate with public concerns and articulated research needs." On the site we see "PERARES (Public Engagement with Research And Research Engagement with Society) project aims to strengthen the interaction between researchers and Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) and citizens in Europe." We also see a description of science shops: "small entities that carry out scientific research in a wide range of disciplines - usually free of charge and - on behalf of citizens and local civil society." All these things would be worth looking further into to understand what guidelines people use or recommend for engaging others in scientific & technological change. In brief, they seem very sympatico to the idea of Case 4 of the course (http://ppol749.wikispaces.umb.edu/PBLEngagementCase).

So this seems to be the other theme emerging, how you work with individuals / the public / citizens in shaping scientific research and the dialogue around it.

Office publication from the Intellectual Property Office, Newport South Wales

This publication might be helpful in some of your inquiry since it outlines some of the guidelines for determining intellectual property for biotechnology inventions in the UK.

Meredith Minkler reviews the current status and practice of CBR in the U.S. and abroad, providing reasons to undertake this admittedly more-complex path for public health research in particular (identifying questions that reflect real community concerns; achieving informed consent and building community capacity; increasing cultural sensitivity and validity of measurement tools, data interpretation, and interventions; uncovering critical lay knowledge; and improving participant recruitment and retention). Along with ethical issues, Minkler uses case study examples to highlight other challenges inherent in the practice, and provides some guidelines for engagement. To my mind, her review is balanced and raises several issues not touched upon by other scholarly writings re: CBR process and practice.

Link to the Massachusetts Curriculum frameworks by subject. Download-able pdfs and word documents.