Christina's LIS Rant
Sunday, January 20, 2008
NC Science Blogging Conference Wrap-Up
Now that I'm home I thought I would post a quick summary of the conference. (BTW- I keep getting strange things when I visit the wiki site - like really old versions of the pages and something was written over one of the pages)
First, it was very well organized. Some conferences run by for profit companies or professional societies don't go this smoothly! The hotel was close and reasonably priced. My room was very nice, and the hotel went out of its way to ferry people around and make sure we had what we needed. It would have been nice if the bar had been laid out so people could socialize and congregate, but that's really pretty minor in the course of things.
Sigma Xi was a great host ("zi" if anyone else forgot their Greek). The center was very attractive and the wireless was great. The food was fabulous (the pulled pork with the NC-style sauce, oh and the cole slaw and the hush puppies, and the locopops ... amazing, now I'm hungry again!).
The goodie bag of swag was packed full. The bag itself was from the local museum and unlike some from other conferences, I'll probably use this frequently. I have enough science magazines to last me for a while, and a business card case, a massager, a USB laptop light, a beautiful coral reef calendar...
The dinner beforehand, the drinks at the bar both nights, and the socializing between sessions were all very useful. I really got a chance to talk for a while with scientists in many different research areas as well as with other interested parties such as science journal editors, PBS consultants, ethicists, gender studies-interested scientists, other science librarians/information scientists, scientific software engineers, museum workers of all sorts, writers... They taught me a lot about what they do and how they use their blogs. With all of this, there is still a need for a ton more research on how scientists blog. Also, what it means for a scientist to blog for an organization, event, or experiment. I really need to get my article edited and submitted to a journal. I want to dive back into another study on the topic, but I'll have to figure out what it should be next. (btw- Tara's article on science blogging has not been published yet, I was afraid I'd missed it. I'll link when it's out)
As for the actual sessions - they were great, too. It's unfortunate I could only be one place at a time. The marine research one actually reminded me of something I'd heard from other bloggers and also something a book author I was sitting next to at dinner mentioned: blogs are a great place to put the extra stuff - stuff that is in excess of what's needed for a journal article or a book or a film, or maybe stuff that isn't enough for a journal article or ... So maybe I should say what I mean by that. Eric Roston will be using his blog to put out a lot of information he found for his forthcoming book, The Carbon Age. Really good stuff, but it just didn't fit into the book. Likewise, the marine researchers go out on extended cruises but sometimes only four papers result. One thing they will do is to communicate with land-based researchers to get their guidance on things - like if they don't have that flavor of expert on board. Now they can use blogs for sort of mini reports of new science. Things that maybe aren't enough for an article, but are still the results of cool research. They can post these things very quickly, too.
We didn't resolve in this session what the difference is between live and real-time blogging, and we didn't figure out what the difference is between blogging for an organization and for yourself (I think most agree that blogging for an organization should still be only lightly controlled and not be overly restricted).
A theme I can't support that I heard at the end of the conference is that science bloggers should go full time and they should be paid to do nothing but blog-- I think some of the best contributions come from scientists who get material through their research, their reading to keep up in their fields, and their attendance at professional conferences. I really think this should be in addition to other forms of communication. With that said, I think we still should try to actively recruit unheard voices. We need many more scientists in all research areas to really establish this as a new way of doing business.
Unfortunately, there are many disincentives for female and underrepresented group scientists to blog at all, even more so with their real life identity. I don't know how to help this - at all - but I think we can learn something from the adoption of other ICTs. Big things need to happen to fix the face of science - but it's a chicken and egg thing, too. Visible female and underrepresented group scientists will recruit more, but the low percent that exists have too much riding on being seen like everyone else, or better than everyone else, to perhaps actively recruit... don't know. Luckily Pat and Zuska (and others) are on the case. I'm sort of building up a backlog, but this would make a great study (women and science blogs...)
As far as open data goes -- this is huge right now, and plenty of computer scientists and librarians and archivists (a special flavor of librarian in case you didn't know) and discipline specialists (bioinformaticists, astronomers, etc.) are on the case (with some help from NSF funding). There are several issues related to culture (getting people to contribute, learning what people need to be able to trust and reuse data), information representation/organization, information retrieval, and data structures required for such massive piles of data. There are also preservation issues (migrate the data, what format to store it in, etc). I totally support what J-C is doing but I also think that if many, many labs do this, we'll need some better way to search and organize than google (IMHO). BTW - I also feel pretty strongly that it is the wrong way to go to look to Congress for a mandate for open data! (ok, if you are a scientist and reading this, do you want Congress to force you to publish your hard-earned stuff and then have all of the Canadian, British, German, etc., scientists dine out on it without sharing their own?). It has to come from the relevant international professional societies and journal publishers, sort of from the bottom up, and so that it impacts everyone with interests in that research area.
The closing session on framing and the science debate was not well done and that's too bad because there was a large audience who were prepared to listen. By presenting the information on framing poorly, they probably lost some support instead of gaining support. As for the science debates, well, it's hard to see how they would make a difference. AAAS has gathered the statements of the candidates and that stuff is pretty telling. So I'll leave this for now, but I will try to weave in more thoughts in future posts.
First, it was very well organized. Some conferences run by for profit companies or professional societies don't go this smoothly! The hotel was close and reasonably priced. My room was very nice, and the hotel went out of its way to ferry people around and make sure we had what we needed. It would have been nice if the bar had been laid out so people could socialize and congregate, but that's really pretty minor in the course of things.
Sigma Xi was a great host ("zi" if anyone else forgot their Greek). The center was very attractive and the wireless was great. The food was fabulous (the pulled pork with the NC-style sauce, oh and the cole slaw and the hush puppies, and the locopops ... amazing, now I'm hungry again!).
The goodie bag of swag was packed full. The bag itself was from the local museum and unlike some from other conferences, I'll probably use this frequently. I have enough science magazines to last me for a while, and a business card case, a massager, a USB laptop light, a beautiful coral reef calendar...
The dinner beforehand, the drinks at the bar both nights, and the socializing between sessions were all very useful. I really got a chance to talk for a while with scientists in many different research areas as well as with other interested parties such as science journal editors, PBS consultants, ethicists, gender studies-interested scientists, other science librarians/information scientists, scientific software engineers, museum workers of all sorts, writers... They taught me a lot about what they do and how they use their blogs. With all of this, there is still a need for a ton more research on how scientists blog. Also, what it means for a scientist to blog for an organization, event, or experiment. I really need to get my article edited and submitted to a journal. I want to dive back into another study on the topic, but I'll have to figure out what it should be next. (btw- Tara's article on science blogging has not been published yet, I was afraid I'd missed it. I'll link when it's out)
As for the actual sessions - they were great, too. It's unfortunate I could only be one place at a time. The marine research one actually reminded me of something I'd heard from other bloggers and also something a book author I was sitting next to at dinner mentioned: blogs are a great place to put the extra stuff - stuff that is in excess of what's needed for a journal article or a book or a film, or maybe stuff that isn't enough for a journal article or ... So maybe I should say what I mean by that. Eric Roston will be using his blog to put out a lot of information he found for his forthcoming book, The Carbon Age. Really good stuff, but it just didn't fit into the book. Likewise, the marine researchers go out on extended cruises but sometimes only four papers result. One thing they will do is to communicate with land-based researchers to get their guidance on things - like if they don't have that flavor of expert on board. Now they can use blogs for sort of mini reports of new science. Things that maybe aren't enough for an article, but are still the results of cool research. They can post these things very quickly, too.
We didn't resolve in this session what the difference is between live and real-time blogging, and we didn't figure out what the difference is between blogging for an organization and for yourself (I think most agree that blogging for an organization should still be only lightly controlled and not be overly restricted).
A theme I can't support that I heard at the end of the conference is that science bloggers should go full time and they should be paid to do nothing but blog-- I think some of the best contributions come from scientists who get material through their research, their reading to keep up in their fields, and their attendance at professional conferences. I really think this should be in addition to other forms of communication. With that said, I think we still should try to actively recruit unheard voices. We need many more scientists in all research areas to really establish this as a new way of doing business.
Unfortunately, there are many disincentives for female and underrepresented group scientists to blog at all, even more so with their real life identity. I don't know how to help this - at all - but I think we can learn something from the adoption of other ICTs. Big things need to happen to fix the face of science - but it's a chicken and egg thing, too. Visible female and underrepresented group scientists will recruit more, but the low percent that exists have too much riding on being seen like everyone else, or better than everyone else, to perhaps actively recruit... don't know. Luckily Pat and Zuska (and others) are on the case. I'm sort of building up a backlog, but this would make a great study (women and science blogs...)
As far as open data goes -- this is huge right now, and plenty of computer scientists and librarians and archivists (a special flavor of librarian in case you didn't know) and discipline specialists (bioinformaticists, astronomers, etc.) are on the case (with some help from NSF funding). There are several issues related to culture (getting people to contribute, learning what people need to be able to trust and reuse data), information representation/organization, information retrieval, and data structures required for such massive piles of data. There are also preservation issues (migrate the data, what format to store it in, etc). I totally support what J-C is doing but I also think that if many, many labs do this, we'll need some better way to search and organize than google (IMHO). BTW - I also feel pretty strongly that it is the wrong way to go to look to Congress for a mandate for open data! (ok, if you are a scientist and reading this, do you want Congress to force you to publish your hard-earned stuff and then have all of the Canadian, British, German, etc., scientists dine out on it without sharing their own?). It has to come from the relevant international professional societies and journal publishers, sort of from the bottom up, and so that it impacts everyone with interests in that research area.
The closing session on framing and the science debate was not well done and that's too bad because there was a large audience who were prepared to listen. By presenting the information on framing poorly, they probably lost some support instead of gaining support. As for the science debates, well, it's hard to see how they would make a difference. AAAS has gathered the statements of the candidates and that stuff is pretty telling. So I'll leave this for now, but I will try to weave in more thoughts in future posts.
Labels: scienceblogging.com, sciencebloggingconference
¶ 1:29 PM| (0) comments |cites (technorati) |
Saturday, January 19, 2008
NC Science Blogging Conference: Adventures in Science Blogging
Jennifer Ouellette
Where is science going?
The way we never were: anti-social geeks
we are: scientists, educators, writers, students, other
She's gotten a lot from her blog.
we have a lot of strengths including personal voice, opinionated...
but there are some concerns: no accountability, comment trolls...
ostrich effect: people only listen to views that agree with theirs
more and more science bloggers and bloggers from msm, etc. blogging now gets you noticed by msm. but there are still some universities that state that they will hold blogging against junior faculty in tenure decisions.
(she sees a need for more professional bloggers -- i disagree. I think it's precisely the people who are active in their discipline who write the most interesting blogs/posts)
(argh! open access <> electronic -- she said that we need open access so we have electronic access ARGH!)
audience:
- D. S. - I don't need or want to be paid for blogging
- someone - institutional reasons to support their scientists blogs
- H. - it's more than either no or tight oversight, there can be some middle ground - someone checking in from time to time and bloggers being considerate of their employers
- science writer vs. science blogger is not a real distinction
- indy media - neither msm or blogs (fills in the continuum)
- the accuracy and expertise of the science bloggers is overlooked - generalist journalists are not able to do the same
-we do have some voice on msm newspaper sites as they now link to blog comments (using technorati or sphere)
- q from online, about getting tenure
(very sleepy and a lot skeptical and a little cranky so take this all with a grain of salt)
Where is science going?
The way we never were: anti-social geeks
we are: scientists, educators, writers, students, other
She's gotten a lot from her blog.
we have a lot of strengths including personal voice, opinionated...
but there are some concerns: no accountability, comment trolls...
ostrich effect: people only listen to views that agree with theirs
more and more science bloggers and bloggers from msm, etc. blogging now gets you noticed by msm. but there are still some universities that state that they will hold blogging against junior faculty in tenure decisions.
(she sees a need for more professional bloggers -- i disagree. I think it's precisely the people who are active in their discipline who write the most interesting blogs/posts)
(argh! open access <> electronic -- she said that we need open access so we have electronic access ARGH!)
audience:
- D. S. - I don't need or want to be paid for blogging
- someone - institutional reasons to support their scientists blogs
- H. - it's more than either no or tight oversight, there can be some middle ground - someone checking in from time to time and bloggers being considerate of their employers
- science writer vs. science blogger is not a real distinction
- indy media - neither msm or blogs (fills in the continuum)
- the accuracy and expertise of the science bloggers is overlooked - generalist journalists are not able to do the same
-we do have some voice on msm newspaper sites as they now link to blog comments (using technorati or sphere)
- q from online, about getting tenure
(very sleepy and a lot skeptical and a little cranky so take this all with a grain of salt)
Labels: scienceblogging.com, sciencebloggingconference
¶ 3:53 PM| (0) comments |cites (technorati) |
NC Science Blogging Conference: Open Data
(I don't know what the exact title was)
Xan Gregg
reproducible, archived, prevent/detect fraud
survey of journal authors
- “available upon request”
- “… with qualifications” (pay, for qualified researchers)
example American economic review data policy
“authors … that contain.. must provide.. sufficient for ..”
benefits of published data
ex: climate change, “more guns, less crime”, better visualizations
quality control, better analysis, better visualizations
how to publish data
raw, plain text, xml, sql database, datasharing sites (many eyes, swivel, wikis)
Jean-Claude Bradley
real time, using a number of tools, to get to open notebook science
walked us through his blogs and the types of posts he makes
- announcing collaborations
- local news
- results
- shipping products
- some science philosophy
blog links to wiki entry for experiment which links to chemspider, methods info, raw data (spectra, etc)
comparing experiments
log system
(results centric view, so that if you drop the vial then everything up to that point can still be used)
people are using his stuff (know through analytics)
- troubleshooting their own experiments
also discuss failures
(I needed to plug in so from here we talked about scalability, findablility, the feasibility of mandating deposit of data)
Xan Gregg
reproducible, archived, prevent/detect fraud
survey of journal authors
- “available upon request”
- “… with qualifications” (pay, for qualified researchers)
example American economic review data policy
“authors … that contain.. must provide.. sufficient for ..”
benefits of published data
ex: climate change, “more guns, less crime”, better visualizations
quality control, better analysis, better visualizations
how to publish data
raw, plain text, xml, sql database, datasharing sites (many eyes, swivel, wikis)
Jean-Claude Bradley
real time, using a number of tools, to get to open notebook science
walked us through his blogs and the types of posts he makes
- announcing collaborations
- local news
- results
- shipping products
- some science philosophy
blog links to wiki entry for experiment which links to chemspider, methods info, raw data (spectra, etc)
comparing experiments
log system
(results centric view, so that if you drop the vial then everything up to that point can still be used)
people are using his stuff (know through analytics)
- troubleshooting their own experiments
also discuss failures
(I needed to plug in so from here we talked about scalability, findablility, the feasibility of mandating deposit of data)
Labels: scienceblogging.com, sciencebloggingconference
¶ 3:40 PM| (1) comments |cites (technorati) |
NC Science Blogging Conference: Gender and Race in science
Gender and Race in science: online and offline
SF (Suzanne Franks, moderator), KV (Karen Venti, science to life), PC (Pat Campbell, fairer science), SW (ScienceWoman)
Starting off points from the blog
PC – in response to Summers, why is the media not covering this, why isn’t there more info on women in science
- guidance from journalists and from other scientists on talking to the media
- wonderful community of women in science
- how to we use women in science blogs to get more girls interested in science – use advocates to promote the blogs to the students
- science carnival (for women scientists) theme this month on telling stories
- blogs have helped her connect with younger women scientists
SW (and minnow)
- science womanofesto (about being a woman and a scientist, and being married and a grad students), starting conversations (see on her blog) (5/11/2005)
- she gets a lot of benefit and feedback, she is a student of gender studies and she learns a lot
- she gives blogs an hour a day to read and write, but she gives so much because she gets so much out of it, especially starting a new job and moving
- audience has changed blogging, and she has become more targeted as she has blogged more
- advice – think about your style beforehand. she’s found that she can do either woman as scientist or do the actual science
KV (grad student, intends to go into science writing)
- her blog is about science and life and for her to get experience writing science for the public
- why with tons of female scientists, why aren’t more blogging?
- advice – just do it, talk to other science bloggers and get some help and just get started
Audience questions
- pseudonyms, assumption that male
- some males with female pseudonyms and vice versa
self-censoring if you’re blogging under your own name
- even if pseudonymously still self censoring (both to maintain anonymity and to maintain blog-life boundaries and to not be a jerk and to present the right social identity of several)
- in the case of race and ethnicity, there might be not enough people to even maintain anonymity so can’t be part of this larger community and get the support that might be built in for majority scientists and students
- if have a job, have to censor further
Maybe science bloggers in the open are more likely to be tenured and out there already.
Maybe scientists think that they’re objective and don’t appreciate racial, gender, etc., lenses (lenses my word).
blogging vs. just being a woman scientists
- can find others like you when you can’t in your local area and can get support
difficult to find African American and Hispanic scientist bloggers
KV- as a grad student, has a PI who is very supportive of what she’s doing, and who wants to increase representation in science,
can women get ahead in science by becoming more visible, because they may be better writers and can have popular blogs
SF- woman’s studies does provide knowledge beyond “anecdotal” this is what I experienced, so there needs to be respect for gender/race things that are results of systematic research (my words: even if qualitative or ethnographic paradigms)
PIs could read what women are experiencing and make sure that they use it to learn and treat women better (I did not capture this thought)
Issue on magazines getting information out there about gender and race issues when participants are not willing to come out and be quoted.
SF (Suzanne Franks, moderator), KV (Karen Venti, science to life), PC (Pat Campbell, fairer science), SW (ScienceWoman)
Starting off points from the blog
PC – in response to Summers, why is the media not covering this, why isn’t there more info on women in science
- guidance from journalists and from other scientists on talking to the media
- wonderful community of women in science
- how to we use women in science blogs to get more girls interested in science – use advocates to promote the blogs to the students
- science carnival (for women scientists) theme this month on telling stories
- blogs have helped her connect with younger women scientists
SW (and minnow)
- science womanofesto (about being a woman and a scientist, and being married and a grad students), starting conversations (see on her blog) (5/11/2005)
- she gets a lot of benefit and feedback, she is a student of gender studies and she learns a lot
- she gives blogs an hour a day to read and write, but she gives so much because she gets so much out of it, especially starting a new job and moving
- audience has changed blogging, and she has become more targeted as she has blogged more
- advice – think about your style beforehand. she’s found that she can do either woman as scientist or do the actual science
KV (grad student, intends to go into science writing)
- her blog is about science and life and for her to get experience writing science for the public
- why with tons of female scientists, why aren’t more blogging?
- advice – just do it, talk to other science bloggers and get some help and just get started
Audience questions
- pseudonyms, assumption that male
- some males with female pseudonyms and vice versa
self-censoring if you’re blogging under your own name
- even if pseudonymously still self censoring (both to maintain anonymity and to maintain blog-life boundaries and to not be a jerk and to present the right social identity of several)
- in the case of race and ethnicity, there might be not enough people to even maintain anonymity so can’t be part of this larger community and get the support that might be built in for majority scientists and students
- if have a job, have to censor further
Maybe science bloggers in the open are more likely to be tenured and out there already.
Maybe scientists think that they’re objective and don’t appreciate racial, gender, etc., lenses (lenses my word).
blogging vs. just being a woman scientists
- can find others like you when you can’t in your local area and can get support
difficult to find African American and Hispanic scientist bloggers
KV- as a grad student, has a PI who is very supportive of what she’s doing, and who wants to increase representation in science,
can women get ahead in science by becoming more visible, because they may be better writers and can have popular blogs
SF- woman’s studies does provide knowledge beyond “anecdotal” this is what I experienced, so there needs to be respect for gender/race things that are results of systematic research (my words: even if qualitative or ethnographic paradigms)
PIs could read what women are experiencing and make sure that they use it to learn and treat women better (I did not capture this thought)
Issue on magazines getting information out there about gender and race issues when participants are not willing to come out and be quoted.
Labels: scienceblogging.com, sciencebloggingconference
¶ 12:21 PM| (1) comments |cites (technorati) |
NC Science Blogging Conference: Real-time blogging in the marine sciences
Real-time blogging in the marine sciences. Discussion leaders are Kevin Zelnio, Karen James, Rick MacPherson, Peter Etnoyer and Jason Robertshaw.
On deep sea expeditions sponsored by NOAA, including real-time video transmitted from UUVs. Scientists on call – if the limited number who can be on the ship, but they can call scientists ashore who can look at the real-time video and then help the shipboard folks decide what to gather or look at more closely.
Got together in small groups to talk about what real-time blogging is, when it’s useful, and what the difference between real-time and live?
- someone from NC marine something (sea grant) or other (how to convince organization worthwhile, maybe not useful for everyday live, but for special events)
KJ – how do we know how are blogs are used and how they are valuable? very limited statistics, very few comments
RM – problem of organization vs. personal, blogging for the org, then become an official mouthpiece, NOAA people can’t comment per policy
- blogs are more than just opinionated diaries
PE- it’s important to put boundaries when you start out, (likes the idea of an event blog), gets more bang for the buck of the event
JR- hard to control the message when everyone has a cell phone and can report
KJ - scientists have personalities – but this has been under wraps
Folks from museum of life scientists – tried out in house first, then to membership, now to public... skeptics could see that it was ok. People think that what they do isn’t interesting, but it really can be.
Real time vs. live
- same?
- thought out vs. stream of consciousness
someone from nc17 – you think you don’t have something to say
How can we measure the impact of blogs?
- page views?
- can’t measure knowledge management
- can’t measure unless you have a purpose – so you can measure wrt a goal
- shouldn’t be all top down for measurements, if a kid enjoys a post maybe that means something more
what about corporations seeding comments and trying to sway the conversation pro industry
- example from mining near extinct vents (?), comments from scientists contracted to support mining operations caused them to be more careful – still outspoken but more careful
Maybe a use of the analytics are to understand how many lurkers – comments aren’t the only thing. This is sort of an old thing because politicians for every letter there are 100 people who feel the same way
RM- perceived value of providing a real time account. What are we adding by telling you about a day in our life.
What does this value then add to the awareness of the science. And how does that compare to value of peer reviewed paper or polished science program.
PE- maybe only 4 papers from a whole trip, but there is a lot of left over material, maybe not worth a whole paper but very interesting
CP- maybe we underestimate the recruiting purposes
KJ – yeah, and for all of science by making it seem accessible and done by real people.
concern from scientists that it will take away from peer reviewed work, and take away respect from
Jennifer (Shiftingbaselines) something to say about professional journalism and “vulgarity of narcissism” - risk of blogging, journalists do a real job filtering and making scientists look good – maybe the blog becomes about the personality and the science is lost
CP- maybe room for both
KJ- but the blog can also become raw materials for reporting
Lisa- community content manager who blogged about a positive experience, and then his post was published in the
Larry - Science education – emphasis on science as a process (not facts handed down from on high), real-time blogging could be really great for this
KJ- real-time blogging maybe can serve later to resolve controversy or for archival purposes.
RM- interesting that people are coming back to older posts
Pamela- uses scientific blogs in the classes (undergrad), a blogger she knows and who does good work, they can then read the full article alongside the blog and understand more.
KZ- pitfalls as real time bloggers?
KZ- how to make relevant
Roy- so much information, but hard to pick out and find the nuggets of info
CP – maybe carnivals and reviews have a fuction here?
Pamela- but who is the audience for the carnival? some are very heavy duty what’s new in science now.
KJ- comments that her blog is too hard for someone.. so what about jargon both of field and of blogging, also how do we avoid “vulgarity of narcissism”
On deep sea expeditions sponsored by NOAA, including real-time video transmitted from UUVs. Scientists on call – if the limited number who can be on the ship, but they can call scientists ashore who can look at the real-time video and then help the shipboard folks decide what to gather or look at more closely.
Got together in small groups to talk about what real-time blogging is, when it’s useful, and what the difference between real-time and live?
- someone from NC marine something (sea grant) or other (how to convince organization worthwhile, maybe not useful for everyday live, but for special events)
KJ – how do we know how are blogs are used and how they are valuable? very limited statistics, very few comments
RM – problem of organization vs. personal, blogging for the org, then become an official mouthpiece, NOAA people can’t comment per policy
- blogs are more than just opinionated diaries
PE- it’s important to put boundaries when you start out, (likes the idea of an event blog), gets more bang for the buck of the event
JR- hard to control the message when everyone has a cell phone and can report
KJ - scientists have personalities – but this has been under wraps
Folks from museum of life scientists – tried out in house first, then to membership, now to public... skeptics could see that it was ok. People think that what they do isn’t interesting, but it really can be.
Real time vs. live
- same?
- thought out vs. stream of consciousness
someone from nc17 – you think you don’t have something to say
How can we measure the impact of blogs?
- page views?
- can’t measure knowledge management
- can’t measure unless you have a purpose – so you can measure wrt a goal
- shouldn’t be all top down for measurements, if a kid enjoys a post maybe that means something more
what about corporations seeding comments and trying to sway the conversation pro industry
- example from mining near extinct vents (?), comments from scientists contracted to support mining operations caused them to be more careful – still outspoken but more careful
Maybe a use of the analytics are to understand how many lurkers – comments aren’t the only thing. This is sort of an old thing because politicians for every letter there are 100 people who feel the same way
RM- perceived value of providing a real time account. What are we adding by telling you about a day in our life.
What does this value then add to the awareness of the science. And how does that compare to value of peer reviewed paper or polished science program.
PE- maybe only 4 papers from a whole trip, but there is a lot of left over material, maybe not worth a whole paper but very interesting
CP- maybe we underestimate the recruiting purposes
KJ – yeah, and for all of science by making it seem accessible and done by real people.
concern from scientists that it will take away from peer reviewed work, and take away respect from
Jennifer (Shiftingbaselines) something to say about professional journalism and “vulgarity of narcissism” - risk of blogging, journalists do a real job filtering and making scientists look good – maybe the blog becomes about the personality and the science is lost
CP- maybe room for both
KJ- but the blog can also become raw materials for reporting
Lisa- community content manager who blogged about a positive experience, and then his post was published in the
Larry - Science education – emphasis on science as a process (not facts handed down from on high), real-time blogging could be really great for this
KJ- real-time blogging maybe can serve later to resolve controversy or for archival purposes.
RM- interesting that people are coming back to older posts
Pamela- uses scientific blogs in the classes (undergrad), a blogger she knows and who does good work, they can then read the full article alongside the blog and understand more.
KZ- pitfalls as real time bloggers?
KZ- how to make relevant
Roy- so much information, but hard to pick out and find the nuggets of info
CP – maybe carnivals and reviews have a fuction here?
Pamela- but who is the audience for the carnival? some are very heavy duty what’s new in science now.
KJ- comments that her blog is too hard for someone.. so what about jargon both of field and of blogging, also how do we avoid “vulgarity of narcissism”
Labels: scienceblogging.com, sciencebloggingconference
¶ 12:13 PM| (0) comments |cites (technorati) |
Friday, January 18, 2008
NC Science Blogging Conference: Dinner
A bunch of bloggers met up at the Town Hall Grill in Chapel Hill. Many of the groups got lost getting there. I'm glad I picked up a car full so I didn't have to try to figure that out on my own!
Once I got there, it was great. I sat with a couple of authors of science books and learned about their work. I also sat by an online educator.
The food was fabulous: salad with a roquefort dressing and bacon, mahi-mahi over fried chipotle polenta, and then banana pudding for dessert (the real stuff!).
Once I got there, it was great. I sat with a couple of authors of science books and learned about their work. I also sat by an online educator.
The food was fabulous: salad with a roquefort dressing and bacon, mahi-mahi over fried chipotle polenta, and then banana pudding for dessert (the real stuff!).
Labels: scienceblogging.com, sciencebloggingconference
¶ 5:56 PM| (0) comments |cites (technorati) |
NC Science Blogging Conference: EPA Tour
Cyndy Yu-Robinson hosted this fabulous tour of the EPA's facility here in RTP. First Cindy took us to hear from Pete Schubert who told us about how they designed, built, and maintain the buildings to be as green as possible. Many of the green building techniques really weren't around when they started, and now they have an Environmental Management System to help them make continuous improvements. They have a few brochures and more information here.
Next, Debbie Janes took us around to a few of the labs. Zora (?) told us all about the wind tunnel that they use to study how aerosols interact with people and objects (please forgive anything I get wrong here -- others on the tour took notes).
Later, Ron Williams told us about his work looking at how point or regional measurements of air quality correlate with personal measurements. He has a participant wear a vest that has various devices to sample the air for all sorts of pollutants. This, along with a time use diary, allows them to study what and individual has been exposed to.
Dr. Nicolle Tulve told us about her work in studying what pollutants children are exposed to around the house. She samples the surfaces with wipes, looks at the foods the children eat, and various other things to get a picture of what the child has come in contact with.
Debbie led us over to the areas in which they look at diesel exhaust and also how to incinerate contaminated stuff (everything from furniture to carpet and more).
I feel like I'm forgetting an entire lab.
This was a great tour and the EPA folks took a lot of time to answer our questions and show us around. I really appreciate it! They do amazing stuff here and good science.
Next, Debbie Janes took us around to a few of the labs. Zora (?) told us all about the wind tunnel that they use to study how aerosols interact with people and objects (please forgive anything I get wrong here -- others on the tour took notes).
Later, Ron Williams told us about his work looking at how point or regional measurements of air quality correlate with personal measurements. He has a participant wear a vest that has various devices to sample the air for all sorts of pollutants. This, along with a time use diary, allows them to study what and individual has been exposed to.
Dr. Nicolle Tulve told us about her work in studying what pollutants children are exposed to around the house. She samples the surfaces with wipes, looks at the foods the children eat, and various other things to get a picture of what the child has come in contact with.
Debbie led us over to the areas in which they look at diesel exhaust and also how to incinerate contaminated stuff (everything from furniture to carpet and more).
I feel like I'm forgetting an entire lab.
This was a great tour and the EPA folks took a lot of time to answer our questions and show us around. I really appreciate it! They do amazing stuff here and good science.
Labels: scienceblogging.com, sciencebloggingconference
¶ 5:12 PM| (0) comments |cites (technorati) |
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Science Blogging Conference: Post 4
From the Nanosphere to the Blogosphere
Brad Herring and Troy Livingston, the Museum of Life and Science, Durham, NC
(looks like more here http://www.nanotechproject.org/)
What is nanotech, why is it different/unique, what can it do, what are some examples
Public Perception of Nano
- study last summer: low awareness of what nanotechnology is, but optimistic about benefits, low public trust in government, benefits will exceed risks,
(ditched this session when the small group work.. sorry, but I’m disappointed with this session because I don’t need or want a lecture on nanotechnology then to do an exercise…. I thought it would be more like an unconference like BloggerCon)
****
Teaching Science
I came in on a discussion of accuracy and contributed a librarian point of view…
Favorite web pages
- moodle (courseware OSS)
- science-house.org
- sciencenews.org
- Google Earth
- National Geographic
- USDA, FDA, CDC, EPA pages
Using blog posts in the classroom
- asking students to compare reports they are seeing
How can science bloggers write so that teachers can use it in the classroom?
- look at lesson plans
- use http://classblogmeister.com (or other tools) to find local teachers or interested teachers and comment on their blogs
- is timing important?
- Do create handouts
- Use citations
Do scientists accept or encourage questions from teachers?
Can we create a collection of experts: some exist already, we need an intermediary, professional societies do this
Blogs are good to get to know the scientist before asking for information.
Accessibility issues?
Maybe have printable versions of your posts
Regardless of all of this, we can’t do anything that doesn’t fit into the standards to prepare for the tests … always preparing for the tests.
Use Marco Polo to find science standards and prepare articles that fit in that area.
Brad Herring and Troy Livingston, the Museum of Life and Science, Durham, NC
(looks like more here http://www.nanotechproject.org/)
What is nanotech, why is it different/unique, what can it do, what are some examples
Public Perception of Nano
- study last summer: low awareness of what nanotechnology is, but optimistic about benefits, low public trust in government, benefits will exceed risks,
(ditched this session when the small group work.. sorry, but I’m disappointed with this session because I don’t need or want a lecture on nanotechnology then to do an exercise…. I thought it would be more like an unconference like BloggerCon)
****
Teaching Science
I came in on a discussion of accuracy and contributed a librarian point of view…
Favorite web pages
- moodle (courseware OSS)
- science-house.org
- sciencenews.org
- Google Earth
- National Geographic
- USDA, FDA, CDC, EPA pages
Using blog posts in the classroom
- asking students to compare reports they are seeing
How can science bloggers write so that teachers can use it in the classroom?
- look at lesson plans
- use http://classblogmeister.com (or other tools) to find local teachers or interested teachers and comment on their blogs
- is timing important?
- Do create handouts
- Use citations
Do scientists accept or encourage questions from teachers?
Can we create a collection of experts: some exist already, we need an intermediary, professional societies do this
Blogs are good to get to know the scientist before asking for information.
Accessibility issues?
Maybe have printable versions of your posts
Regardless of all of this, we can’t do anything that doesn’t fit into the standards to prepare for the tests … always preparing for the tests.
Use Marco Polo to find science standards and prepare articles that fit in that area.
Labels: sciencebloggingconference
¶ 4:01 PM| (0) comments |cites (technorati) |
Science Blogging Conference: Post 3
Open Source/Open Notebook Science
Jean-Claude Bradley, Drexel, http://usefulchem.wikispaces.com/
(not open source software in science, but open notebook science)
(not blogging about an article, but the blog is the article)
Issues
- intellectual property
- referencing and claims to priority
- academic validation
- peer review – mandatory and elective
Opportunities
- more publishable work, not less, because smaller units and cross discipline work that doesn’t have a home
- making explicit the work in collaborations
- more detailed knowledge base
- using semantically rich format and automation…
Robot scientist
How will this happen?
- open source either author pays or reader pays… needs freely open where no cost to submit and no cost to read (like free hosted systems like Blogger, etc.)
What they did/are doing
- google to see what’s needed
- asked Find a Drug for information
- synthesized molecules and documented on blog
- got real comments
Found
- time stamping not as reliable since it can be changed
- if things are changed, then old info is lost
- use a wiki to gather information and a blog for their molecules
Details
- site meter, knows what people are searching for and who’s reading
- use free, hosted software so all of this can be replicated
Automation in Useful Chem
- smiles and InChI through Chemsketch
- useful chemistry molecules
Others connected
- Synaptic leap
- ChemRefer
- Partnerships with English classes and undergrad chem.
Other findings
- Blogs best as an integrative tool
- Graphical Mining of data with JSpecView – java view of spectra where you can actually zoom in on an important area, exporting in a CML format so machines can use
- vendor reliability
- classical long tail – there is only a very small audience for this information, so even though not wide readership, is it reaching who needs to read it
Others
- org prep daily
- open webware – protocols, lab notebooks for intra-group communication (not enough context to allow external people really to communicate)
- RRResearch.blogspot.com (microbiology)
- Chem.-bla-ics – actual code
Comments from the audience (c) and responses (r)
(c) I’m an astronomer, and I do my observations two nights and spend the next few months doing the work – if I publish my data, then someone might scoop me and worse, the work I had planned as follow-on… the data is usually embargoed
(c) I’m in the same boat, you can generate the data very quickly but the analysis takes a long time
(c) What’s your opinion of colleagues who try this? Maybe they won’t get hired.
(r) The open source will beat the traditional publishing to publishing all of the time
(c) can you actually publish this work?
(r) talk to editors, and they say yes, regardless of what written policies say
(c) what would you change with this software if you could to improve this work
(r) they’re all separate programs which is good… we’d like to be able to show more spectra on the same java graph
(c) how do you deal with vandalism?
(r) he’s never had it happen – also don’t have to have it fully open for editing
(c) ada compliant? Universities are required to follow that…
(r) he hasn’t had to deal with this
(c) do you recognize your commenters from references, etc?
(r) frequently in person or via e-mail and then get permission to post that to the blog.
(r) the community of researchers doing the same work is pretty small so you probably know them
(c) but do you ever actually get people from out of the blue
(r) preservation of old data so you might not be in the field later but
Actually have spectra from starting material so will know about impurities, etc.
(c) relative merits of self archiving vs. submitting to open data archives
(r) we do both and whatever is available
(c) do you find new collaborators through this
(r) I didn’t know any of these people before this because I came from nanotechnology, so I’ve met a lot of people – especially
(c) use this for grant applications?
(r) not yet, but will
(c) could you do this with a high value drug – would your university let you?
(r) universities don’t push to patent [depends on the university!], but this works as marketing for the university to bring new students
(c) is your management supportive?
(r) yes, very and we have openings!
Jean-Claude Bradley, Drexel, http://usefulchem.wikispaces.com/
(not open source software in science, but open notebook science)
(not blogging about an article, but the blog is the article)
Issues
- intellectual property
- referencing and claims to priority
- academic validation
- peer review – mandatory and elective
Opportunities
- more publishable work, not less, because smaller units and cross discipline work that doesn’t have a home
- making explicit the work in collaborations
- more detailed knowledge base
- using semantically rich format and automation…
Robot scientist
How will this happen?
- open source either author pays or reader pays… needs freely open where no cost to submit and no cost to read (like free hosted systems like Blogger, etc.)
What they did/are doing
- google to see what’s needed
- asked Find a Drug for information
- synthesized molecules and documented on blog
- got real comments
Found
- time stamping not as reliable since it can be changed
- if things are changed, then old info is lost
- use a wiki to gather information and a blog for their molecules
Details
- site meter, knows what people are searching for and who’s reading
- use free, hosted software so all of this can be replicated
Automation in Useful Chem
- smiles and InChI through Chemsketch
- useful chemistry molecules
- see in Jmol
- smiles
- InchI
- Searches emolecules (used to be chmoogle)
- Data, not just pictures
Others connected
- Synaptic leap
- ChemRefer
- Partnerships with English classes and undergrad chem.
Other findings
- Blogs best as an integrative tool
- Graphical Mining of data with JSpecView – java view of spectra where you can actually zoom in on an important area, exporting in a CML format so machines can use
- vendor reliability
- classical long tail – there is only a very small audience for this information, so even though not wide readership, is it reaching who needs to read it
Others
- org prep daily
- open webware – protocols, lab notebooks for intra-group communication (not enough context to allow external people really to communicate)
- RRResearch.blogspot.com (microbiology)
- Chem.-bla-ics – actual code
Comments from the audience (c) and responses (r)
(c) I’m an astronomer, and I do my observations two nights and spend the next few months doing the work – if I publish my data, then someone might scoop me and worse, the work I had planned as follow-on… the data is usually embargoed
(c) I’m in the same boat, you can generate the data very quickly but the analysis takes a long time
(c) What’s your opinion of colleagues who try this? Maybe they won’t get hired.
(r) The open source will beat the traditional publishing to publishing all of the time
(c) can you actually publish this work?
(r) talk to editors, and they say yes, regardless of what written policies say
(c) what would you change with this software if you could to improve this work
(r) they’re all separate programs which is good… we’d like to be able to show more spectra on the same java graph
(c) how do you deal with vandalism?
(r) he’s never had it happen – also don’t have to have it fully open for editing
(c) ada compliant? Universities are required to follow that…
(r) he hasn’t had to deal with this
(c) do you recognize your commenters from references, etc?
(r) frequently in person or via e-mail and then get permission to post that to the blog.
(r) the community of researchers doing the same work is pretty small so you probably know them
(c) but do you ever actually get people from out of the blue
(r) preservation of old data so you might not be in the field later but
Actually have spectra from starting material so will know about impurities, etc.
(c) relative merits of self archiving vs. submitting to open data archives
(r) we do both and whatever is available
(c) do you find new collaborators through this
(r) I didn’t know any of these people before this because I came from nanotechnology, so I’ve met a lot of people – especially
(c) use this for grant applications?
(r) not yet, but will
(c) could you do this with a high value drug – would your university let you?
(r) universities don’t push to patent [depends on the university!], but this works as marketing for the university to bring new students
(c) is your management supportive?
(r) yes, very and we have openings!
Labels: sciencebloggingconference
¶ 2:44 PM| (1) comments |cites (technorati) |
Science Blogging Conference: Post 2
Janet Stemwedel -- Adventures in Science Blogging: Conversations we need to have and how blogging can help us have them
What scientists can get out of blogging for themselves
Community and communications key ingredients for human flourishing
Trying to explain to people at parties and getting the spinach dip blow-off
Real communication involves a conversation
- establishing common ground through understanding and listening to what the participants know, understand, and are asking
- back and forth negotiation
Traditional scientific communication
- peer-reviewed, some back and forth over a long time scale
- conference presentations, back and forth, but ephemeral because especially at poster sessions, it isn’t captured
- press releases, popular presentations, no back and forth, really
Science is a process not just a product!
“Knowledge production requires good communication with other scientists”
(H.E. Longino, Science as Social Knowledge, 1990)
Why blogs?
- back and forth on a short timescale
- less ephemeral than non-trivial conversations
- can involve people from many backgrounds and many places
Conversations that happen on blogs that wouldn’t otherwise (she showed examples and will blog them later)
- educational: new findings, pedagogical strategies
- political: how science impacts politics and vice versa
- scientist to scientist talks about the literature: “journal clubs”, commentary
- virtual meeting/conference: projects in process
- what it’s like to be a scientist/day in the life, what it’s like in general to be a scientist
- reports from meetings/conferences
- support for women scientists including advice, mentoring
- the practice of science, open access
Many scientist blogs are written under fake names.
How is blogging different than other conversations
- ability to build a virtual community in the absence of critical mass for a “real” community
- “audience of the willing” (no one is forced to read)
- Option to control disclosure of personal information (but may choose to to foster trust)
- Unknown readership (trolls who are looking for a fight? Employers? Family?)
Bad vs. Good
Bad: get dooced, not get tenure
Good: learn new things, and room to grow, change your mind, maybe can get hired (people learn about you and your work)
Good: change how non-scientists understand science/scientists, change how scientists understand their own tribe, expand our sense of community
Where to start:
- blog what you know and are passionate about
- invite people you trust to read and comment
- start by participating on other people’s blogs by commenting
Comment from the audience: some have gotten jobs because of their blogs
Response: right now, it’s still very shaky because tenure committees don’t understand blogs so maybe this will change, but it’s still very uncertain.
Comment from the audience: if you’re trying to add to the conversation, why wouldn’t you sign your work?
Response: many reasons like tenure or fear of being fired, or complaining about poor working conditions, exposing ethical problems
Response (another audience member): sometimes being honest can get you into trouble.
Response (another audience member): I only blog about gender issues in science under my own name because I don’t have a job right now. The women who reply anon. to my posts prove that it is the case that these things happen and they can’t use their names
Comment from audience: building your brand
Response: the blogosphere builds its own authority
Comment from audience: it’s great you have this background in both philosophy and science so you know about both… how do you think social software (more than just blogs) will impact how scientists communicate and think about science [not sure I got her question down right]
Response: things will change as more bloggers move into positions. Also important is “open science”
Response: as more blogs are used in classes, may have more new scientists blogging
Comment from the audience: What’s been missed, scooping articles – he read and commented on an article, scooped the author’s next paper, and was offered a co-authorship (wow!)
Comment from audience: Based on what we’ve seen here about the lacrosse case, what have scientists done to encourage civil discussion
Response: Blogger can to a certain extent set tone by not allowing vitriolic comments. Also, because the comments stay and can be reviewed, misunderstandings can be cleared up. Finally, in her case, commenters are somewhat self-policing
Comment from audience: As a middle school science teacher
Response: You can see what life is like for scientists and talk to real scientists
Geoff Davis - New Challenge: Change Science
Science Policy Blog. NIH, increasing funding, decreasing the number of grants.
Labels: sciencebloggingconference
¶ 12:24 PM| |cites (technorati) |
Science Blogging Conference: Post 1
(just got wireless going, woo-hoo!)
North Carolina Science Blogging Conference
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Opening by Anton
Participate – blog about others as they’d blog about you – thank the sponsors (thank you!)
Bora Zivkovic – Science Blogs
Seed Magazine – hosts about 55 science blogs @ www.scienceblogs.com
Start on the home page and click on “last 24 hours” for the zeitgeist
Book published by Lulu with best Science Writing on Blogs in 2006
- request for nominations
- received over 200 nominations and had a vote
Blog Carnivals
- see his listing, lots of good science ones to just read the best of science blog writing
What types of things appear on science blogs
- same things other people blog about, in part (what my cat did today)
- translating science for the public
- classroom blogs
- debunking stories that appear in the media
- as a lab notebook with observations, measurements, procedures
- actual finished papers reporting the results of research -- especially smaller studies, negative results, and other things that may not go to conferences or journals
Q from the audience – how to do you find these expert bloggers?
- a: technorati
Hunt Willard -- Promoting the Public Understanding of Science
Earlier generations grew up with the space race and media attention was on science. It was part of everyone’s existence. Everyone followed the story, although few understood the science. Coolness and discovery factor, understanding of implications (such as Tang on the breakfast table), etc.
Goals
- To get the public to understand the science… even what a genome is – but this is really hard.
- Or - Not worrying about them getting it, but get them to support it through coolness factor, discussions of implications (why it matters as well as health and safety and environmental issues)
- Start and participate in debates about the ethics of things like cloning.
Examples of their efforts to communicate science to the public
- Announcement of an award for cell division in fungus (not exiting, cool, important while the work actually is)
- Creating the artificial chromosome project (it was a single gene chromosome that could be used to transfer DNA to other cells or successive generations) – they were very careful in the paper and the press releases to describe how this could be helpful for gene therapy. By the time the media got done with it, he had 300-400 letters from families who wanted him to cure their children with genetic disorders.
- Project comparing male and female chromosomes, gene expression. Fairly predictable in the male, lots of variety in the female (between and within). – became men are from Mars women are from Venus, men are boring and women are variable.
His work trying to communicate to the public via editorials, etc.
- about evolution-is-a-theory Cobb County ruling, about 250 e-mails nearly all negative, some thoughtful, some respectful, some “you’re going to hell”, some very scary
- questioning about the probability of gene doping which would be very difficult to detect
Writing op-eds and blogging to a certain extent
- important
- can’t predict outcome, so scary
Blogs are hard for scientists because other publications go through extensive vetting and word choice and to be sure that nothing is printed that isn’t very well supported – OTOH, blogs are immediate and not vetted so may be uncomfortable for science
Comment from audience: Can you say that the message got away in your Op-ed because of a lack of context? In blogs you build context over time, which can be an advantage. Also lets people know that science doesn’t spring out fully formed
Response: There is context, it’s just different. The context is built up over the 40 years but it’s not in real time and it’s not findable in the same place (?) [maybe understandable by the same people?]
Comment from audience: About opinion and comments in blogs vs. papers in which “no opinion” – her opinion on her blog is actually an informed analysis, so not just equal to anyone’s comment
Response: the public doesn’t necessarily understand the difference between analysis, informed opinion, etc
Comment from audience: isn’t this context provided through education
Response: hopefully, but there’s a bifurcation early between I do science vs. I don’t do science cultures. We try to educate people, but
Comment from audience: not real dichotomy between public and science, us vs. them. Can’t get to original articles so bloggers can’t support their points so can’t be part of the discussion
Response: Well some of that is going away with PLOS and similar
Response (Bora): Science bloggers can be intermediaries having access (intellectual and physical) to both the original document and the press release.
Comment: What can be done to get more scientists to blog?
Response: The broader question is how do you get scientists to communicate to the public? It should be a requirement if you work in a public institution that you communicate to the public and work as a educator.
Comment: Would you say that scientists’ distancing themselves from the public is actually harming our funding? Is there a trend in younger faculty to explain research to justify funding?
Response: I don’t see it in younger faculty, but in middle career researchers it can sometimes happen because you’ve got tenure and you’re more secure.
Comment: WRT relationship between scientists, peer-reviewed publications, and publications with the broader world. (he’s from The Lancet). Interested in the timing of blogging – they have embargos and established channels with mainstream media – and they’re interested in opening up more communication… the journal wants to blog about the content, the scientists want to blog about their content. If scientists put up data before it’s peer reviewed, then will it be picked up by the media, or do they need the vetting of the traditional journal
Response: Coin of the realm is still peer review and he doesn’t see that changing yet. New students may find a better way to do this.
Comment: Media might be handcuffed by this timing. News reports journal articles when they come out because they are new, in a cattle stampede, and the rush loses the context. Maybe it shouldn’t be thought about as “news”. Maybe scientists can correct this by publishing things that are more like reviews (this is what’s going on in genetics right now…)
Response: For scientists in academia, there’s a conflict. There’s science as process – a constant flow of research – that’s punctuated by publishing reports.
{break}
North Carolina Science Blogging Conference
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Opening by Anton
Participate – blog about others as they’d blog about you – thank the sponsors (thank you!)
Bora Zivkovic – Science Blogs
Seed Magazine – hosts about 55 science blogs @ www.scienceblogs.com
Start on the home page and click on “last 24 hours” for the zeitgeist
Book published by Lulu with best Science Writing on Blogs in 2006
- request for nominations
- received over 200 nominations and had a vote
Blog Carnivals
- see his listing, lots of good science ones to just read the best of science blog writing
What types of things appear on science blogs
- same things other people blog about, in part (what my cat did today)
- translating science for the public
- classroom blogs
- debunking stories that appear in the media
- as a lab notebook with observations, measurements, procedures
- actual finished papers reporting the results of research -- especially smaller studies, negative results, and other things that may not go to conferences or journals
Q from the audience – how to do you find these expert bloggers?
- a: technorati
Hunt Willard -- Promoting the Public Understanding of Science
Earlier generations grew up with the space race and media attention was on science. It was part of everyone’s existence. Everyone followed the story, although few understood the science. Coolness and discovery factor, understanding of implications (such as Tang on the breakfast table), etc.
Goals
- To get the public to understand the science… even what a genome is – but this is really hard.
- Or - Not worrying about them getting it, but get them to support it through coolness factor, discussions of implications (why it matters as well as health and safety and environmental issues)
- Start and participate in debates about the ethics of things like cloning.
Examples of their efforts to communicate science to the public
- Announcement of an award for cell division in fungus (not exiting, cool, important while the work actually is)
- Creating the artificial chromosome project (it was a single gene chromosome that could be used to transfer DNA to other cells or successive generations) – they were very careful in the paper and the press releases to describe how this could be helpful for gene therapy. By the time the media got done with it, he had 300-400 letters from families who wanted him to cure their children with genetic disorders.
- Project comparing male and female chromosomes, gene expression. Fairly predictable in the male, lots of variety in the female (between and within). – became men are from Mars women are from Venus, men are boring and women are variable.
His work trying to communicate to the public via editorials, etc.
- about evolution-is-a-theory Cobb County ruling, about 250 e-mails nearly all negative, some thoughtful, some respectful, some “you’re going to hell”, some very scary
- questioning about the probability of gene doping which would be very difficult to detect
Writing op-eds and blogging to a certain extent
- important
- can’t predict outcome, so scary
Blogs are hard for scientists because other publications go through extensive vetting and word choice and to be sure that nothing is printed that isn’t very well supported – OTOH, blogs are immediate and not vetted so may be uncomfortable for science
Comment from audience: Can you say that the message got away in your Op-ed because of a lack of context? In blogs you build context over time, which can be an advantage. Also lets people know that science doesn’t spring out fully formed
Response: There is context, it’s just different. The context is built up over the 40 years but it’s not in real time and it’s not findable in the same place (?) [maybe understandable by the same people?]
Comment from audience: About opinion and comments in blogs vs. papers in which “no opinion” – her opinion on her blog is actually an informed analysis, so not just equal to anyone’s comment
Response: the public doesn’t necessarily understand the difference between analysis, informed opinion, etc
Comment from audience: isn’t this context provided through education
Response: hopefully, but there’s a bifurcation early between I do science vs. I don’t do science cultures. We try to educate people, but
Comment from audience: not real dichotomy between public and science, us vs. them. Can’t get to original articles so bloggers can’t support their points so can’t be part of the discussion
Response: Well some of that is going away with PLOS and similar
Response (Bora): Science bloggers can be intermediaries having access (intellectual and physical) to both the original document and the press release.
Comment: What can be done to get more scientists to blog?
Response: The broader question is how do you get scientists to communicate to the public? It should be a requirement if you work in a public institution that you communicate to the public and work as a educator.
Comment: Would you say that scientists’ distancing themselves from the public is actually harming our funding? Is there a trend in younger faculty to explain research to justify funding?
Response: I don’t see it in younger faculty, but in middle career researchers it can sometimes happen because you’ve got tenure and you’re more secure.
Comment: WRT relationship between scientists, peer-reviewed publications, and publications with the broader world. (he’s from The Lancet). Interested in the timing of blogging – they have embargos and established channels with mainstream media – and they’re interested in opening up more communication… the journal wants to blog about the content, the scientists want to blog about their content. If scientists put up data before it’s peer reviewed, then will it be picked up by the media, or do they need the vetting of the traditional journal
Response: Coin of the realm is still peer review and he doesn’t see that changing yet. New students may find a better way to do this.
Comment: Media might be handcuffed by this timing. News reports journal articles when they come out because they are new, in a cattle stampede, and the rush loses the context. Maybe it shouldn’t be thought about as “news”. Maybe scientists can correct this by publishing things that are more like reviews (this is what’s going on in genetics right now…)
Response: For scientists in academia, there’s a conflict. There’s science as process – a constant flow of research – that’s punctuated by publishing reports.
{break}
Labels: sciencebloggingconference
¶ 11:48 AM| (0) comments |cites (technorati) |
Saturday, January 13, 2007
My plans for the North Carolina Science Blogging Conference
I'm definitely going to the NC Science Blogging Conference on January 20. I'll be flying in Friday evening and flying out Sunday afternoon (yeah, it's only a 5 hour drive, but this is probably easier). I'll be there later than the dinner, but I'll have a rental car so if I'm feeling ambitious, I might try to make the end of the Friday night dinner. I'll also be hitting one of the Saturday night dinners.
I'm planning on these break out sessions:
2. Open Source/Open Notebook Science, i.e. using blogs and wikis to collaborate on scientific exploration. Discussion leader: Jean-Claude Bradley of Drexel University and Useful Chemistry. Click over to the Open Source Sience [sic] page to help plan this session. ROOM 118
6. Emerging technologies and how bloggers can lead the national discussions about the ethical, legal and social implications. (More info on this session coming early Jan.) Click over to the Emerging Technologies page to help plan this session. ROOM 118
#2 is definite, but I might change for the second break out. If anyone who can't come wants to give me feedback or information to share/questions to ask, then let me know.
I'll be live blogging and I'll try to bring my camera (and remember to take it out of my bag!). I'll also probably be on GTalk and maybe Meebo if you want to contact me there.
To summarize for other conference attendees who don't know me: I'm a sci/tech librarian and an information studies doctoral student interested in scholarly communication, informal communication, personal information/knowledge management, and just about everything else scientists can use blogs for!
I'm planning on these break out sessions:
2. Open Source/Open Notebook Science, i.e. using blogs and wikis to collaborate on scientific exploration. Discussion leader: Jean-Claude Bradley of Drexel University and Useful Chemistry. Click over to the Open Source Sience [sic] page to help plan this session. ROOM 118
6. Emerging technologies and how bloggers can lead the national discussions about the ethical, legal and social implications. (More info on this session coming early Jan.) Click over to the Emerging Technologies page to help plan this session. ROOM 118
#2 is definite, but I might change for the second break out. If anyone who can't come wants to give me feedback or information to share/questions to ask, then let me know.
I'll be live blogging and I'll try to bring my camera (and remember to take it out of my bag!). I'll also probably be on GTalk and maybe Meebo if you want to contact me there.
To summarize for other conference attendees who don't know me: I'm a sci/tech librarian and an information studies doctoral student interested in scholarly communication, informal communication, personal information/knowledge management, and just about everything else scientists can use blogs for!
Labels: sciencebloggingconference
¶ 12:05 PM| (1) comments |cites (technorati) |
Tuesday, January 09, 2007
The North Carolina Science Blogging Conference, Saturday, January 20, 2007.
Almost too late to register for this now, but I just saw it.
I'll probably try to go. I need to run home and get my MAC number before I register.... Hope I'm not too late!
I'll probably try to go. I need to run home and get my MAC number before I register.... Hope I'm not too late!
Labels: science blogging, sciencebloggingconference
¶ 5:05 PM| (0) comments |cites (technorati) |
