|
Quick Links Bookmarks
|
Preview: AIBS Executive Director's Weekly Blog
AIBS Executive Director's Weekly Blogby Richard O'GradyUpdated: 2008-11-05T12:17:34Z
Understanding Science Website Preview Launches -- AIBS Endorses 2008-11-05T12:17:34Z An amazing presidential election yesterday, and a resounding demonstration of America's participatory democracy in action. New opportunities for the scientific community and the conduct of science for the public good lie ahead. Speaking of which... I've blogged before about...An amazing presidential election yesterday, and a resounding demonstration of America's participatory democracy in action. New opportunities for the scientific community and the conduct of science for the public good lie ahead. Speaking of which... I've blogged before about the terrific Understanding Science website that's being built by the folks at the University of California Museum of Paleontology, UC Berkeley. The website is now in beta release at www.understandingscience.org. The organizers invite you to review the site and let them know what you like, what you don't like, and what additional features you'd like to see when the website makes its official launch next January. Quoting from the website's About section, its basic goal are to (1) improve teacher understanding of the nature of the scientific enterprise, (2) provide resources and strategies that encourage and enable K-16 teachers to reinforce the nature of science throughout their science teaching, and (3) provide a clear and informative reference for students and the general public that accurately portrays the scientific endeavor. AIBS endorses the Understanding Science website project and considers it to be a integral part of our COPUS and Year of Science 2009 efforts with UCMP and other organizations to promote the public understanding of science. The website's official release next January will be in connection with the annual meeting, in Boston, of the AIBS member-society, the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology, where COPUS will be launching its YoS09 events: see the press release.
Countdown to November 4th Elections 2008-11-14T20:22:23Z This is it, folks. If you're eligible to vote in the November 4th U.S. elections, be sure to make your voice heard. Familiarize yourself with candidates' support of scientific research and education: the Scientists and Engineers for America and...This is it, folks. If you're eligible to vote in the November 4th U.S. elections, be sure to make your voice heard. Familiarize yourself with candidates' support of scientific research and education: the Scientists and Engineers for America and ScienceDebate2008 websites are among the best sources for this information. Consider, for example, what kind of administration and policies we need to have in place next January in order to be responsive to the forthcoming National Academies report, "A New Biology for the 21st Century: Ensuring that the United States Leads the Coming Biology Revolution." This report, scheduled to come out in 2009 (initial report by February, followed by public commentary, then the final report by October), will: "...examine the current state of biological research in the United States and recommend how best to capitalize on recent technological and scientific advances that have allowed biologists to integrate biological research findings, collect and interpret vastly increased amounts of data, and predict the behavior of complex biological systems." (quoting from the report's project scope -- for the rest of the scope, click here). Above all, on November 4th, think of your country and your fellow citizens and VOTE.
Comment Period Open for National Academies forthcoming report: "A New Biology for the 21st Century" 2008-11-14T20:23:40Z [30 October Update: This project's website remains open for public comment; see link below] On 21 October 2008 the National Academies announced that it is accepting comments on the committee membership and project scope for its forthcoming report, "A...[30 October Update: This project's website remains open for public comment; see link below] On 21 October 2008 the National Academies announced that it is accepting comments on the committee membership and project scope for its forthcoming report, "A New Biology for the 21st Century: Ensuring that the United States Leads the Coming Biology Revolution." The committee roster, project details, and a feedback form are provided on the project's website, which also announces the committee's first two meetings: 4 November 2008 and 3 December 2008, both of which include a public session. AIBS is following this project closely. The project's scope as stated at the above URL reads: An ad hoc committee will examine the current state of biological research in the United States and recommend how best to capitalize on recent technological and scientific advances that have allowed biologists to integrate biological research findings, collect and interpret vastly increased amounts of data, and predict the behavior of complex biological systems. Among the questions the committee may address are: - What fundamental biological questions are ready for major advances in understanding? What would be the practical result of answering those questions? How could answers to those questions lead to high impact applications in the near future? - How can a fundamental understanding of living systems reduce uncertainty about the future of life on earth, improve human health and welfare, and lead to the wise stewardship of our planet? Can the consequences of environmental, stochastic or genetic changes be understood in terms of the related properties of robustness and fragility inherent in all biological systems? - How can federal agencies more effectively leverage their investments in biological research and education to address complex problems across scales of analysis from basic to applied? In what areas would near term investment be most likely to lead to substantial long-term benefit and a strong, competitive advantage for the United States? Are there high-risk, high pay-off areas that deserve serious consideration for seed funding? - What federal initiatives could be considered to ensure that the US is positioned to take maximum advantage of a vast increase in biological data and understanding, and position itself to be the leader in technologies derived from it? Is the biology research portfolio appropriately balanced among biology subdisciplines and new areas that cross traditional biology subdisciplines? Are new funding mechanisms needed to encourage and support cross-cutting, interdisciplinary or applied biology research? - What are the major impediments to achieving a newly integrated biology? - What are the implications of a newly integrated biology on infrastructural needs? How should infrastructural priorities be identified and planned for? - What are the implications for the life sciences research culture of a newly integrated approach to biology? How can physicists, chemists, mathematicians and engineers be encouraged to help build a wider biological enterprise with the scope and expertise to address a broad range of scientific and societal problems? - Are changes needed in biology education-- to ensure that biology majors are equipped to work across traditional subdisciplinary boundaries, to provide biology curricula that equip physical scientists and engineers to take advantage of advances in biological science, and to provide nonscientists with a level of biological understanding that gives them an informed voice regarding relevant policy proposals? Are alternative degree programs needed or can biology departments be organized to attract and train students able to work comfortably across disciplinary boundaries? The committee will organize a Biology Summit to garner input from a broad spectrum of stakeholders-government and private agencies that fund biological research, the biotech and pharmaceutical industries, universities and medical schools-to consider barriers to progress and to highlight exciting new areas of research that cross traditional disciplinary boundaries. An individually-authored summary of the Summit's proceedings will be published. Subsequently, in its report to be issued at the end of the study, the committee will recommend actions that federal policy makers can take to ensure that the United States takes the lead in the emergence of a biological science that will support a higher level of confidence in our understanding of living systems, thus reducing uncertainty about the future, contributing to innovative solutions for practical problems, and allowing the development of robust and sustainable new technologies. The committee will not make specific budgetary or government organizational recommendations.
AIBS Adds YouTube Channel to its Free Online Collection of Lectures and Interviews 2008-10-20T01:17:03Z AIBS has added a YouTube Channel to its lineup of free online lectures and interviews with some of the world's most eminent biologists. Now online are 18 archival recordings from the year 2000 that include interviews with Stephen Jay...AIBS has added a YouTube Channel to its lineup of free online lectures and interviews with some of the world's most eminent biologists. Now online are 18 archival recordings from the year 2000 that include interviews with Stephen Jay Gould, E.O. Wilson, Gene Odum, and a remarkable conversation between Ernst Mayr and Michael Robinson, former director of the National Zoo in Washington DC.
Here's the Ernst Mayr interview (copyright Smithsonian Institution, with whom AIBS held its 2000 Annual meeting):
And here's the Stephen Jay Gould interview:
We'll continue to add to the YouTube postings while we also continue to build the AIBS Media Library, which currently contains more than 70 plenary lectures recorded at AIBS Annual meetings from 2000 onwards, with audio, video, slides, and transcripts. The themes of these meetings have been:
2008 - Climate, Environment, and Infectious Diseases With plenary speakers including:
Steven Aftergood * Bruce Alberts * Rustom Antia * Francisco Ayala * Ann Bartuska * Stephen Bocking * Richard Boohar * John Brown * Carlos Bustamante * James Carlton * Jamie Rappaport Clark * Rita Colwell * Kathryn Cottingham * Ellis Cowling * Joel Cracraft * Andrew Dobson * Paul Ehrlich * Niles Eldredge * Daniel Esty * Durland Fish * Ira Flatow * Howard Frumkin * Douglas Futuyma * Arturo Gomez-Pompa * Stephen Jay Gould * Peter Grant * Rosemary Grant * Eric Green * Duane J. Gubler * James E Hansen. * Stephen L. Hoffman * Edward Holmes * Daniel Janzen * Alison Jolly * Phillip Kitcher * Carl Leopold * Simon Levin * Gene Likens * David Lodge * Thomas Lovejoy * Jane Lubchenco * Paula Mabee * Richard Mack * David Magnus * Terry Maple * Lynn Margulis * Chris Mooney * Robert Morris * Stephen Morse * Randall Murch * Shahid Naeem * Randolph Nesse * Matthew C. Nisbet * Richard B Norgaard. * Martin Nowak * Gordon Orians * Stephen R. Palumbi * Stephen Polasky * Sandra Postel * Sir Ghillean Prance * Nancy Rabalais * Loren Rieseberg * Paul Risser * David Rogers * Kim Stanley Robinson * Eugenie C. Scott * Daniel Simberloff * Sarah Tishkoff * Marvalee Wake * Douglas C. Wallace * Edward Wilson * Joy Zedler The next set of lectures to be added to the Media Library will be those from the 2009 AIBS Annual meeting, scheduled for 18 - 19 May in Washington DC, on the theme of Sustainable Agriculture: Greening the Global Food Supply.
Presidential Candidates Science Forum on Energy and Innovation: Oct. 21 at Stanford University 2008-10-12T16:41:23Z AIBS has joined with Scientists and Engineers for America, American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), American Chemical Society (ACS), American Institute of Physics (AIP), American Physical Society (APS), American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), and IEEE-USA to...AIBS has joined with Scientists and Engineers for America, American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), American Chemical Society (ACS), American Institute of Physics (AIP), American Physical Society (APS), American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), and IEEE-USA to cosponsor a science forum between senior representatives of the Obama and McCain presidential campaigns on October 21st at Stanford University. The topic is energy and innovation issues, with:
Daniel M. Kammen
Kurt E. Yeager (An earlier AIBS-cosponsored SEA forum, on health issues, was held at George Washington University in Washington, DC, on 18 September 2008.) Individuals unable to attend the debate in person can view it online at http://sharp.sefora.org/candidate-forum/; questions can be sent in advance to Questions@SEforA.org. If you're planning to attend in person, RSVP by 17 October to rsvp@SEforA.org or 202.223.6444 then go to:
Kresge Auditorium For further details about the forum and for information about the candidates' positions on science, visit http://sharp.sefora.org/.
Biologists: Help Us Help You Become More Effective Advocates for Biology 2008-09-21T14:14:53Z AIBS Public Policy Office Training Initiatives "The public thinks science is good and we need lots of it" -- I don't disagree with Dan Greenberg on this point. "The scientific community’s government wish list is small and tidy: Send...AIBS Public Policy Office Training Initiatives "The public thinks science is good and we need lots of it" -- I don't disagree with Dan Greenberg on this point. "The scientific community’s government wish list is small and tidy: Send more money, minimize regulations affecting research, and show us respect" -- nor do I disagree with the core arguments of this, his somewhat puckish point. But there's many a slip twixt cup and lip as one goes from generalities to specifics. Scientists need to keep in mind that while broad public support for science is necessary for the success of the scientific enterprise, it rests on what the general public and their elected representatives at federal, state, and local levels think science is and is not. Constant explanation and reminding are necessary lest things drift off-course. The merits of scientific arguments do not speak for themselves. As one extreme example of how off-course things can get, this fall we have the alarming situation of Gov. Sarah Palin, a candidate for Vice-President of the U.S., being a proponent of young earth creationism, which holds that the earth is less than 7,000 years old and that humans once walked with dinosaurs. Success also rests on recognizing that the public funding legislators approve does not go toward an amorphous activity simply called "science"; rather, it is allocated among specific disciplinary areas of science, specific programs, and specific funding agencies -- each of which must be its own best advocate to receive support. If biologists and biological organizations are going to be heard in this crowded and cacophonous arena where interests jostle for public attention, policy impact, and funding support, we need to have a clear message, sharp elbows, and the smarts to stick together while pursuing alliances with other scientists. One great way for biologists to work together is through the AIBS Public Policy Office's training programs. Staffed by professionals with years of experience working with scientists, law-makers, and opinion shapers, the AIBS Public Policy Office provides public presentations and small-group training programs that help scientists and educators become effective advocates for science. A one-hour talk exploring a current science policy issue is usually available on relatively short notice. Themes for these talks include such issues as the politics and policy of evolution education, federal funding trends for scientific research and development, or an overview of on-going science policy issues. These one-hour presentations provide the basic information required to understand the debate surrounding an issue, along with practical steps on how to engage in the public policy discourse. The AIBS Public Policy Office also offers two-hour and longer interactive workshops for AIBS member organizations, academic departments, or similar organizations. These workshops afford participants the opportunity to interact with the instructor and others in the course. Participants learn basic skills and knowledge that will help them work productively with policymakers, administrators, news reporters, or the public. Depending upon the interests and composition of the sponsoring organization, these workshops can be designed to include a mix of advocacy and media training. Participants receive a tool-kit of quick reference materials (e.g. a Congressional Directory, and the AIBS publication, Communicating Science: A Primer for Working with the Media).
McCain and Obama have replied to Science Questions -- now let's have a Discussion 2008-09-16T00:53:10Z [Update: see William J. Broad's article on this today in the New York Times] Senator Obama replied to ScienceDebate2008's "14 top science questions facing America" last August. Senator McCain has now also replied. A side-by-side listing of the two...[Update: see William J. Broad's article on this today in the New York Times] Senator Obama replied to ScienceDebate2008's "14 top science questions facing America" last August. Senator McCain has now also replied. A side-by-side listing of the two presidential candidates' answers to each of the questions can be found here. The questions were developed from over 3,400 submissions from the more than 38,500 signers of the ScienceDebate2008 initiative, including scientists, engineers, and other concerned Americans, as well as nearly every major American science organization, dozens of Nobel laureates, elected officials and business leaders, and the presidents of over 100 major American universities. The 14 questions address energy policy, national security, economics in a science-driven global economy, climate change, education, health care, ocean health, biosecurity, clean water, space, stem cells, scientific integrity, genetics, and research. Efforts to engage the candidates and their representatives in public discussions of science issues continue -- see, for example, the upcoming candidates' forum on 18 September organized by the Scientists and Engineers for America. For more information on the ScienceDebate2008 initiative, to see a list of the signers, and to see detailed results of national polls, see www.sciencedebate2008.com.
Presidential Representatives to Debate Health and Energy Issues 2008-09-06T14:39:57Z Here's an excellent opportunity to publicly question the Obama-Biden and McCain-Palin tickets about their views on some of the scientific aspects of broader public policy issues... As noted in the most recent AIBS Public Policy Report, AIBS has joined...Here's an excellent opportunity to publicly question the Obama-Biden and McCain-Palin tickets about their views on some of the scientific aspects of broader public policy issues... As noted in the most recent AIBS Public Policy Report, AIBS has joined with Scientists and Engineers for America, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB), IEEE-USA, Research!America, and The George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services to cosponsor two debates between senior representatives of the Obama and McCain presidential campaigns. The first debate, themed "Presidential Perspectives on Health," will be held at George Washington University in Washington, DC, on 18 September 2008, 5:00 - 6:30 p.m. Moderated by Julie Rovner, health policy consultant for National Public Radio, the debate will feature Jay Koshla, health policy advisor to John McCain and Dora Hughes, MD, MPH, health advisor to Barack Obama. Campaign representatives will accept questions from the audience. Individuals unable to attend the debate in person can view it via a web feed at http://sharp.sefora.org/candidate-forum/; questions can be sent in advance to Questions@SEforA.org. If you're planning to attend in person, RSVP by 16 September to rsvp@SEforA.org or 202.223.6444 then go to:
Jack Morton Auditorium A second debate on energy policy will be held in the coming weeks, likely at a university in California. For further details about these debates and other information about the candidates' positions on science, visit http://sharp.sefora.org/.
Obama Replies to ScienceDebate2008 Questions 2008-09-03T15:46:07Z The ScienceDebate2008 initiative, of which AIBS is a part, aims to make key science issues a larger part of the upcoming U.S. presidential election. The initiative has posed a list of 14 science questions facing America to the Democratic...The ScienceDebate2008 initiative, of which AIBS is a part, aims to make key science issues a larger part of the upcoming U.S. presidential election. The initiative has posed a list of 14 science questions facing America to the Democratic nominee, Senator Barack Obama, and the Republican nominee, Senator John McCain. “Most of America’s major unsolved challenges revolve around these 14 questions. To move America forward, the next president needs a substantive plan for tackling them going in, and voters deserve to know what that plan is,” states ScienceDebate2008. The questions were developed from over 3,400 submissions from the more than 38,000 signers of the ScienceDebate2008 initiative, including scientists, engineers, and other concerned Americans, as well as nearly every major American science organization, dozens of Nobel laureates, elected officials and business leaders, and the presidents of over 100 major American universities. The 14 questions address energy policy, national security, economics in a science-driven global economy, climate change, education, health care, ocean health, biosecurity, clean water, space, stem cells, scientific integrity, genetics, and research. Yesterday, August 30th, ScienceDebate2008 issued a press release that Barack Obama has responded to the 14 questions. A response from John McCain is hoped for soon. And in coordination with ScienceDebate2008, the Scientists and Engineers for America organization (SEA) has posted additional information on the two candidates' positions on major scientific issues, including an online form that can be used to send a message to John McCain asking that he respond to the ScienceDebate2008 14 questions, and a tabular comparison of the two candidates' previous statements on the following science topics: Climate Change, Alternative Fuels, Nuclear Energy, Off-shore Drilling, Healthcare, Embryonic Stem Cell Research, Sex Education, Evolution and Intelligent Design, Research & Research Funding, Broadband access, Net Neutrality, Space. Here at AIBS we note that in all of the above there also needs to be a more explicit probing of both the candidates on their positions on the teaching of evolution and creationism in the classroom -- not just to gauge their cognizance of evolution's central role in the understanding of all of the biological and health sciences, but also more broadly to assess their comprehension of the basic scientific reasoning and evidence-based inference skills that any graduate of U.S. schools needs to succeed in the highly technical and competitive global economy. There are unanswered questions, for example, about John McCain's position on these issues, especially in light of the fact that his running mate, Gov. Sarah Palin, is on public record as stating that creationism should be taught alongside evolution in public classrooms.
Lake Monster Devours Science 2008-08-26T11:18:33Z Summer break over... My vacation with my family (children aged 8, 10, and 12) was once again in the Lake Champlain - Adirondacks region, a beautiful part of the country that we keep returning to (it also feeds the...Summer break over... My vacation with my family (children aged 8, 10, and 12) was once again in the Lake Champlain - Adirondacks region, a beautiful part of the country that we keep returning to (it also feeds the native-born Pacific Northwesterner in me). As I did when I last blogged on this topic in 2006, I again wish to give kudos to the Leahy Center for Lake Champlain in Burlington VT, also known as the ECHO science center, for Ecology, Culture, History and Opportunity of the Lake Champlain Basin. This is a top-notch center for the general public, deftly melding science -- including a good dose of evolutionary thinking -- with cultural, historical, and socioeconomic topics. The exhibits also give good treatment to climate change, acid rain, sustainability, and going Green. But the ECHO center, like all public science centers, relies heavily on gate receipts and giftshop sales. That means getting people through the doors -- and in the Lake Champlain area that means including a campy but carefully uncritical exhibit about Champ, the Monster of the Lake. Champ is cute. Champ is a major local industry. Kids get a kick out of Champ and I'm all for such Waterhorse fantasies in context, but not in a science center the rest of whose exhibits are devoted to promoting scientific reasoning. Alongside lucid exhibits explaining the geological history of Lake Champlain before and after the retreat of glaciers 10,000 years ago and its closing off from the sea, the exhibit and lecture on Champ is a mix -- from a marketer's point of view, pitched so as not to alienate any constituency -- of information about Champ "sightings" (the photos! the videos! the interviews with believers as well as with skeptics!) mixed in with notes on crytozoology (equal treatment given to coelacanths, okapis, Big Foot, and Champ) and the fact that Champ would have to be either a single plesiosaur more than 10,000 years old (and there's also that 65mya extinction problem), or a 10,000-year old population of plesiosaurs -- air-breathing animals -- none of whose members have ever been irrefutably sighted while surfacing, caught, or washed up on shore. Champ: real or not? The ECHO science center says: You decide, dear customer; we're going to present all sides of the argument equally and will stay away from the messy business of debunking. The whole thing -- even though it is presented with well-intentioned jest -- can do as much harm to the public understanding of science as any creation museum. It promotes sloppy thinking among the general public that can be taken advantage of by anti-science proponents.
Biology in the Federal Science Enterprise: NSF BIO AC April Meeting 2008-05-01T23:53:15Z On April 17th, AIBS Public Policy Director Robert Gropp and I joined staff from the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology to speak at the spring meeting of the...On April 17th, AIBS Public Policy Director Robert Gropp and I joined staff from the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology to speak at the spring meeting of the Advisory Committee of the National Science Foundation's Biology Directorate. The agenda and slides from the meeting are here on the NSF website. James Collins, NSF Assistant Director for Biological Sciences, spoke about BIO's FY09 funding priorities for "Life in Transition" studies. He also spoke about the terrific new study that NSF commissioned from the National Research Council, The Role of Theory in Advancing 21st-Century Biology: Catalyzing Transformative Research. Dr. Collins will be meeting with the AIBS Board of Directors later this month. AIBS, AAAS, and FASEB staff were then asked to speak for about 20 minutes each (Rob Gropp gave the AIBS presentation) on "biology in the federal science enterprise" with respect to the following three points: How does your organization describe and represent the biological sciences/biology with respect to science policy and budget? What are your metrics for determining the effectiveness of “science on the Hill” and other similar activities for Congress with respect to science policy and budget? Will your organization provide science policy advice for the transition to a new administration? To the next Congress? If so, will your efforts be targeted to a particular group or groups within the new administration or Congress, and will they emphasize any specific area or areas of science? The talks went very well; discussions continue. As we see it, in the coming decades, the public as well as decision-makers will demand that scientists provide answers to questions of great societal importance. Informed responses to global environmental change, sustainable development, biodiversity conservation, nanotechnology, biometrics, artificial intelligence, public health threats, food security and quality, among many other issues, will require a coordinated and prioritized response from the research community. Currently, however, few individual scientists are prepared to provide this response. As a result, few scholarly or professional organizations are positioned to appropriately inform a collective response. In order for the biological sciences to advance, a new, efficient, and coordinated trans-disciplinary community will be required. Biologists need to employ new technical skills and theoretical frameworks that build upon and surpass traditional taxonomic and integrative approaches. More importantly, biologists from various subfields must be prepared to work collaboratively with each other and with scientists from other fields, members of the media, policymakers, and science educators. A cultural shift within the scientific community's traditional organizations and new models for supporting research are required.
Scientific Habits of Mind and Bunk Detectors 2008-04-19T13:01:04Z It's a weekend witnessing the odious Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed spreading into movie theaters across the land. The reviews are somewhat tepid; my favorite so far is in the New York Times: "One of the sleaziest documentaries to arrive...It's a weekend witnessing the odious Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed spreading into movie theaters across the land. The reviews are somewhat tepid; my favorite so far is in the New York Times: "One of the sleaziest documentaries to arrive in a very long time...a conspiracy-theory rant masquerading as investigative inquiry...an unprincipled propaganda piece that insults believers and nonbelievers alike. In its fudging, eliding and refusal to define terms, the movie proves that the only expulsion here is of reason itself." Anyone looking for information on how best to counter the claims and assertions in the movie should consult the National Center for Science Education's terrific new website, Expelled Exposed. And anyone wanting to reacquaint themselves with the ability of "scientific habits of mind" to improve the human condition should do two things: First, watch the April 7th installment of the Charlie Rose Science Series: The Imperative of Science, with Paul Nurse, President of Rockefeller University; Harold Varmus, President of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center; Shirley Ann Jackson, President of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Bruce Alberts, Editor-In-Chief of Science; and Lisa Randall of Harvard University. Second, read Bruce Alberts' March 21st editorial in Science. Here's an excerpt: Let's start with a big-picture view. The scientific enterprise has greatly advanced our understanding of the natural world and has thereby enabled the creation of countless medicines and useful devices. It has also led to behaviors that have improved lives. The public appreciates these practical benefits of science, and science and scientists are generally respected, even by those who are not familiar with how science works or what exactly it has discovered. But society may less appreciate the advantage of having everyone acquire, as part of their formal education, the ways of thinking and behaving that are central to the practice of successful science: scientific habits of mind. These habits include a skeptical attitude toward dogmatic claims and a strong desire for logic and evidence. As famed astronomer Carl Sagan put it, science is our best "bunk" detector. Individuals and societies clearly need a means to logically test the onslaught of constant clever attempts to manipulate our purchasing and political decisions. They also need to challenge what is irrational, including the intolerance that fuels so many regional and global conflicts. So how does this relate to science education? Might it be possible to encourage, across the world, scientific habits of mind, so as to create more rational societies everywhere? In principle, a vigorous expansion of science education could provide the world with such an opportunity, but only if scientists, educators, and policy-makers redefine the goals of science education, beginning with college-level teaching. Rather than only conveying what science has discovered about the natural world, as is done now in most countries, a top priority should be to empower all students with the knowledge and practice of how to think like a scientist.
Organize! Research Coordination Networks for Undergraduate Biology Education 2008-04-09T00:38:23Z AIBS recently received the following request from the National Science Foundation to help get the word out on an exciting new program, and we're happy to assist! NSF has created a new track in the Research Coordination Network program...AIBS recently received the following request from the National Science Foundation to help get the word out on an exciting new program, and we're happy to assist! NSF has created a new track in the Research Coordination Network program that is aimed at undergraduate biology education. We’d like to get news of this funding opportunity distributed as widely as possible. Would you please make sure to pass on this information to the appropriate people at AIBS so that it can be posted on your website, listserves, and in any relevant bulletins. See the announcement at http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2008/nsf08035/nsf08035.jsp . Dan Udovic, Program Officer, DUE/NSF, Phone: 703-292-4766, e-mail: dudovic@nsf.gov NSF's RCN grants are innovative funding vehicles to encourage and foster interactions among scientists to create new research directions or advance a field. In this case, quoting from the announcement, it's "an opportunity to request support for networks that will catalyze positive changes in biology undergraduate education. Application of new technologies to enhance pedagogy, increased use of inquiry based learning, enhancement of curricula with ideas from the frontiers of science, and building research into curricula to motivate the next generation of scientists all may benefit from increased collaboration among those who develop and offer undergraduate biology curricula. Research Coordination Networks – Undergraduate Biology Education (RCN-UBE) will provide opportunities to join biology and education researchers and practitioners in networks that enhance the exchange of ideas and innovative practices."
AIBS Endorses Science Debate 2008 2008-02-02T22:35:17Z My previous blog on this topic noted that AIBS is pleased to see momentum growing for the Science Debate 2008 initiative, the goal of which is to bring about a public debate in which this year's U.S. presidential candidates share...My previous blog on this topic noted that AIBS is pleased to see momentum growing for the Science Debate 2008 initiative, the goal of which is to bring about a public debate in which this year's U.S. presidential candidates share their views on science, technology, and the economy. AIBS has now officially endorsed Science Debate 2008; I sent the organizers a note today on behalf of AIBS President Rita Colwell and the AIBS Board of Directors. The scientific, education, and business communities are coming together in truly impressive breadth and numbers to move this call for a debate ahead. As my friend Lee Allison (State Geologist and Director of the Arizona Geological Survey, as well as a fellow organizer of the Coalition on the Public Understanding of Science) writes at Arizona Geology, American leadership -- economic and political -- is suffering, due in large part to our falling behind in science and technology. We simply must have more information about where our presidential candidates stand on their understanding and appreciation of the issues and challenges. 02/02/2008 Columbia, Case Western Reserve, and AIBS officially sign on 02/01/2008 PBS Online NewsHour: Scientists, Journalists Push for Science-based Election Debate 02/01/2008 U.C. Berkeley, Chancellor Birgeneau, & Friends of the Earth sign on 01/31/2008 The "Science 57": Fifty-seven universities and other organizations join 01/31/2008 Nobelist Laureates Holland and Watson, Columbia President Bollinger, Congressman Baird, and Oak Ridge National Laboratory Director Mason join 01/30/2008 U of Maryland & ASU presidents sign on; also former NIST director William Jeffrey 01/29/2008 Council on Competitiveness supports a Presidential Debate on Science & Economy; becomes official cosponsor 01/29/2008 Richard Meserve, President, Carnegie Institution of Washington, and George Scalise, President, Semiconductor Industry Association, Member, President Bush's Science & Technology Advisory Committee, sign on 01/28/2008 Sigma Xi, the Scientific Research Society, endorses us, as does the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 01/23/2008 American Association for the Advancement of Science calls for presidential debate on science & economy 01/20/2008 Intel's Craig Barrett: Flagging economy needs science investments
A Presidential Debate on Science 2008-01-24T14:37:21Z AIBS and many other scientific organizations are pleased to see momentum growing for the Science Debate 2008 initiative, the goal of which is to bring about a U.S. presidential debate this year on science, technology, and the economy. I myself...AIBS and many other scientific organizations are pleased to see momentum growing for the Science Debate 2008 initiative, the goal of which is to bring about a U.S. presidential debate this year on science, technology, and the economy. I myself have signed up as a supporter, and I know other scientists who have, too. Above all, the initiative shows the scientific community's moxie and ability to organize. This week's announcement of the American Association for the Advancement of Science's endorsement of Science Debate 2008 gives even more of a boost. And social networking sites such as The Intersection blog, the Uncommon Ground blog (I could go on--it's a long list of related blogs) and Science Debate 2008's own Facebook group are bringing many more people into the efforts. All this said, it's still easy to find doubt within yourself that this initiative will ever succeed, even as you applaud its goals. Dan Greenberg's posting on the Brainstorm blog, A Debate on Science? Ho-Hum provides a cold half-empty glass of water in the face assessment of the challenges that lie ahead, as do, to provide only one other example, some of the readers' comments at The Intersection. Not until nationwide business interests are also truly on-board with the effort, the cautions say, will a presidential debate on science have a chance of moving forward and being taken seriously. This is all true enough and the challenges should not be taken lightly, but let's return to the aforementioned moxie and ability to organize being demonstrated by the scientific community. It's galling to see science's and scientists' success in improving the human condition being taken for granted by too many policy makers--those in office and those running for election alike. These attitudes are treating science as a public good that can always be counted on to be there, producing material and economic prosperity, regardless of how poorly treated and neglected it might be. You can't win if you're not in the game. So, a presidential debate on science, technology, and the economy? Heck yeah. |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzz Saw
My Groups
My Feeds
Searched
Email This
RSS Alerts
RSS Tracker
http://blogs.aibs.org/richardogrady/atom.xml
