Author Archives: admin

Learning science, reporting science.

Posted on by

As usual, there are more interesting tidbits in the science-y blogosphere than I have time to deal with sensibly, so it’s time for me to pass you some links:

  • Over at Cosmic Variance, Sean takes note of a finding that kids in the U.S. may think they’re better at science than they really are. On the one hand, I find it refreshing that science teachers may not be as effective as I feared at convincing students that science is way too hard for anyone of normal intellect to learn. On the other hand, it would sure be nice if science teachers could impart more scientific knowledge with that self-confidence.
  • Speaking of self-confidence, Chad at Uncertain Principles comments on a sociologist’s success passing himself off as a physicist — to actual physicists. I agree with Chad that this isn’t an indictment of the field of physics, since Harry Collings, the sociologist in question, achieved this feat of “passing” as a physicist by learning enough to write good qualitative answers to questions about gravitational waves and detectors. Writes <a href="“>Chad:

    [T]he reason why the experts picked Collins’s answers: he didn’t use any math. The real expert threw in a lot more technical jargon, and the expert judges thought that it sounded like somebody trying too hard to impress people. This probably indicates that most experts are deluding themselves about the degree to which they avoid jargon in explaining things to each other and to the public.

    This suggests something further to me: physicists don’t fall into the same trap that non-scientists (and science students) often fall into of assuming the more complicated/math-laden/jargon-filled someone’s explanations, the smarter they must be. This fact about physicists pleases me.

  • Meanwhile, Rob at Big Monkey, Helpy Chalk has his students doing a lovely exercise in critical thinking and reading: tracing errors in transmission between press releases and newspaper stories on the Artic winter sea ice cover. Do you suppose they do exercises like this in journalism school?
  • Finally, having seen a media circus up close, Pinko Punko at Three Bulls! is not feeling good about the state of science journalism The potential routes for really fixing the problem, given where we are now, seem extreme — so, I’ll be blogging about my cunning plan soon!

If there are other good science-y posts you’d like to bring to our attention, please share them in the comments!

Cultural differences of opinion about plagiarism.

Posted on by

In a post months and months ago, I wrote the following*:

I’ve heard vague claims that there are some cultures in which “plagiarism” as defined by U.S. standards is not viewed as an ethical breach at all, and that this may explain some instances of plagiarism among scientists and science students working in the U.S. after receiving their foundational educational experiences in such cultures. To my readers oversees: Is there any truth to these claims? (I’m suspicious, at least in part because of an incident I know of at my school where a student from country X, caught plagiarising, asserted, “But, in country X, where I’m from, this is how everyone does it. Sorry, I didn’t know the norms were different here.” Unfortunately for this student, the Dean was also from country X and was able to say, with authority, “‘Fraid not.”)

Since then, I’ve found some slightly-less-vague claims from the pages of Chemical & Engineering News. However, these are still almost second-hand, “word on the street” kind of claims that some cultures involved in the practice of science think plagiarism is just fine. Have a look at the relevant passage:

Continue reading→

U6 soccer and the Nobel Prize.

Posted on by

I’ve been thinking about Zuska’s post on the negative impacts the Nobel Prizes might be having on the practice of good science. She quotes N. David Mermin, who opines:

[T]he system [of prizes] had become a destructive force…these things are systematically sought after by organized campaigns, routinely consuming oceans of time and effort.

I feel the pull of this worry — although I’m also sympathetic to a view Rob Knop voiced in a comment:

What I like about the Nobel Prize : once a year, there is a celebration of science that almost impinges upon the public consciousness. Yes, we are probably over-elevating individual scientists, and yes, for some, the prize has become a goal rather than a recognition, and yes, doubtless there are biases in the selection. But, it’s nice to see the world celebrating and being excited about science occasionally.

No doubt, part of this is my persistent belief that science is cool, dammit, and the public ought to get psyched about it. And, part of it has to do with my two degrees of separation from Nobel Prize winners this year. But I think the concerns raised in Zuska’s post are good ones.
And, I think at least a certain part of the concern ties in naturally to things I’ve been working on with the U6 soccer team I coach.*

Continue reading→

Friday Sprog Blogging: random bullets edition.

Posted on by

Dr. Free-Ride: So, what kind of science are you learning in school these days?
Younger offspring: I don’t know.
Dr. Free-Ride: You don’t know?! You have been going to school, right?
Younger offspring: Of course.
Dr. Free-Ride: When [Dr. Free-Ride’s better half] was in the classroom helping with the lesson this week, what did you learn about?
Younger offspring: About Fall, and pumpkins, and pumpkin seeds.
Dr. Free-Ride: There’s science in that, isn’t there?
Younger offspring: I guess.

Continue reading→

Gabba gabba! One of us! One of us!

Posted on by

Following up on my earlier post on Roger D. Kornberg’s Nobel Prize in Chemistry, I want to call your attention to this comment from the esteemed Pinko Punko:

Well, in the press conf. Dr. Kornberg stated he absolutely and first and formost views himself as a chemist, and his training (Ph.D.) was under a world famous chemist. He considers himself a physical scientist whose goal is to understand the mechanism at the molecular level of a protein machine. Now, perhaps this is somewhat simple chemistry as many of the steps boil down to hydrogen bonding and electrostatic interactions. You will also note in the history of the Chemistry prize, many nucleic acid-transaction relating research programs have been awarded in addition to post-translation modification of proteins, essentially what many would consider biochemistry. He was on many people’s shortlist for the Chemistry prize, perhaps just not those [who] consider themselves primarily chemists. Dr. Korberg referred to Chemistry as the “Queen of the Sciences” and the fundamental basis for molecular understanding.

(Bold emphasis added.)
So, since he:

  1. Trained as a chemist,
  2. Uses chemical methods to study the systems he studies, and
  3. Acknowledges chemistry as the Queen of the Sciences,

I, for one, am satisfied that Kornberg is a chemist.
(He didn’t need the Nobel Prize in Chemistry on top of those three to convince me, but it’s not like I’m going to make him feel awkward for having one.)

Quick notes on the 2006 Nobel Prize in Chemistry.

Posted on by

As Bora noted, this year’s Nobel Prize in Chemistry was awarded to Roger D. Kornberg for a piece of research (the molecular basis of eukaryotic transcription) that strikes lots of folks as being within the bounds of biology rather than chemistry.
I can’t do an elaborate discourse on this (as I have sprog-related errands I must do this afternoon), but I want to get some initial responses to this on the table:

Continue reading→

My mom on the Nobel Laureates in Physics.

Posted on by

Since, as I mentioned, my mom worked with data from COBE, and thus, was in a position to cross paths with newly-minted Nobel Laureates John Mather and George Smoot, I shook her down for some information about the pair.
Disclaimer: I suspect Mom exaggerates more in her anecdotes about her children than in the ones she tells about her work place, but I’m counting on her for the details here.

Continue reading→

Huzzah for Smoot and Mather!

Posted on by

Chad broke the story, at least in the ScienceBlogs galaxy, but I wanted to add my own “Woo-hoo!” for John C. Mather and George F. Smoot, who have won the 2006 Nobel Prize in Physics.
I didn’t want this one to go unnoted, as my mom worked to analyze piles of COBE data and, during this period of her life, made the acquaintance of George Smoot, who (from what I can gather) is not only a really smart scientist but also a good and decent human being.
I’m hoping Mom will leave some good Smoot tidbits in the comments.

What’s the point of a college education?

Posted on by

I started out thinking I was writing this as an open letter to my students, but it turns out I’m talking to you all, too.
* * * * *
I have very strong feelings about what the point of a college education should be. Maybe you do, too. It’s entirely possible that we would disagree about this issue, or that you are so happy with your own picture of the point of a college education that you really have no interests in anyone else’s.
That’s fine. But if you’re my student, certain things I get worked up about may strike you as mysterious if you don’t know what I think this whole thing is aiming for. On the off chance that you’d rather not see your instructor as eccentric or wacko, this is where I lay it all out.
A college education is not job training.

Continue reading→

Free advice for would-be plagiarists.

Posted on by

Disclaimer: Plagiarism is bad. A quick search for “plagiarism” on this blog will demonstrate that I’ve taken a clear stand against plagiarism.
That said, if one were, hypothetically, planning a little online-copy-and-paste plagiarism, and if one’s instructor has earned a Ph.D., in Philosophy, from Stanford, one might reconsider using the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy as the source of several uncited sentences.
There is a better-than-average chance that the instructor is familiar with SEP — indeed, even with the specific entry you (hypothetically) are tempted to plunder.
Even if she’s not, she’s at least as handy with a Google search as you are.