As a clinician in K-12 education, Adjoa Asamoah witnessed too many injustices in our schools. So she decided to pivot her career to the intersection of policy and politics, where she has worked to tackle systemic inequities across our country. Her efforts to actualize liberty and justice for all have been noticed, and during the last presidential race, she was tapped to be the National Advisor for Black Engagement for the Biden-Harris Campaign based on her ability to engage the community and her record of success.
The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Michael J. Feuer, Dean of the GW Graduate School of Education and Human Dev, which is the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Listen Notes, Inc.
Dan and James answer listener audio questions on indirect costs for research grants, the mind/body problem, and why many academics aren’t trained to teach. They also profess their love for the overhead projector
Some more details:
Should we require universities to justify overhead costs, like heating and electricity?
Overheads can inflate the costs of grants, some grants provide an additional percentage for overheads but others don’t allow this, which can eat into grants
Get to know the people in your local grant office!
Julie Gould asks how early career researchers can develop their careers in the face of funding’s “boom and bust” cycle and the short-termism it engenders.
Governments are swayed by political uncertainty and technological developments, argues Michael Teitelbaum, author of Falling Behind?Boom, Bust, and the Global Race for Scientific Talent.
In the US, for example, space research funding dramatically increased after Soviet Russia launched the Sputnik 1 satellite in 1957, ending after the 1969 moon landing.
Similar booms followed in the 1970s, 80s, and 90s, says Teitelbaum, a Wertheim Fellow in the Labor and Worklife Program at Harvard Law School and senior advisor to the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation in New York.
But he argues that they are unsustainable and can have a negative impact on the careers of junior scientists and their research. Will Brexit trigger a funding downturn, and if so, for how long? Watch this space, says Teitelbaum.
How much can you trust people’s retelling of information the’ve read? In episode 95, Shiri Melumad discusses her research showing that when – much like the children’s game “telephone” – news is repeatedly retold, it undergoes a stylistic transformation through which the original facts are increasingly replaced by opinions and interpretations, with a slant toward negativity.
The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Parsing Science: The unpublished stories behind the world’s most compelling science, as told by the researchers themselves., which is the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Listen Notes, Inc.
Wrong answers can be an incredible tool for learning and critical thinking. In this episode, Thinking Like a Lawyer author Colin Seale teaches us four easy ways to add mistake analysis into our regular teaching practices. This is a strategy that works in any content area and at any grade level!
Getting published for the first time is a crucial career milestone, but how does a set of experiments evolve into a scientific paper?
In the first episode of this four-part podcast series about writing a paper, Adam Levy delves into the all-important first stage of the process, preparing a manuscript for submission to a journal.
He also finds out about the importance of titles, abstracts, figures and results, why good storytelling counts, and the particular challenges faced by researchers whose first language is not English.
Pamela Yeh, an evolutionary biologist at the University of California, Los Angeles, shares some personal pet peeves when she reads a paper: “I can’t stand those papers that have really long sentences with a ton of commas and a lot of jargon. I don’t think the writer is thinking about the reader,” she says.
Scientific research is not the endeavour of a single person. It requires a team of people. How can this be better reflected in graduate student training, asks Julie Gould.
Is science ready for “Team PhD”, whereby a group of students work more collaboratively, delivering a multi-authored thesis at their end of their programme?
Jeanette Woolard, who recently secured a £4.5m Wellcome Trust grant to fund a four-year collaborative doctoral training programme in her lab at the University of Nottingham, UK, believes it could happen one day.
“The team driven PhD is not distant dream. It’s soon-to-be a fulfilled reality,” Woolard, professor of cardiovascular physiology and pharmacology, tells Julie Gould. “If you give it enough of an incentive and wave the flag hard enough for team science, it will come.”
Woolard’s Wellcome grant allows four graduate students to have their own research focus but to work collaboratively. “Each of the individual candidates are still pursuing an individual PhD and they will each write up an individual thesis at the end of their four year period of study,” she says, arguing that the scientific community and students themselves aren’t yet ready for programmes that culminate in a team focused thesis. “I think individual students still either like the idea or deserve the opportunity to defend their own piece of work at the end of their studies.”
The new programme at Nottingham, she says, provides them with “the most collaborative environment possible, where they have the opportunity to work together as much as they can, to utilise as many skills as are available, and to really experience a dynamic, collaborative team-driven environment.
“Ultimately that’s what there are going to experience especially if they go into industry or pursue excellence in academia. Our best outputs now are judged as being multidisciplinary,” Woolard adds.
A team thesis may be some way off in science, but what about other disciplines? Jill Perry is Executive Director at the Carnegie Project. She tells Gould how the project is helping to redefine the education doctorate in the US.