It’s true that I recently returned from a fairly geeky conference, but I just found out about one happening practically in my backyard. And, given that I don’t yet have any papers to grade, I figured I should check it out.
(Today is the last day to register without paying the late registration fee, in case that helps you make up your mind.)
From the web page:
Search term hilarity.
While I meet my students and try to mitigate freak-outs about enrollments, I offer for your consideration some of the search strings that brought people to this blog during the month of January:
Spring term faculty meeting: it’s still an exploding monkey factory in here.
(As before, I’m still not sure whether, in the metaphor, the factory is building monkeys or staffed by monkeys. Perhaps, really, we’re in the business of making educated monkeys, and the problem is that our administration views this as akin to making widgets. Anyway, the point is: Explosions! Chaos! Shrieking! Brachiating along the pieces of wreckage!)
We had our beginning-of-the-semester faculty meeting today, and I have to conclude that our department is in an abusive relationship with the university (and system) administration.
Why I’m convinced of this is the simple fact that we have little to no idea what will make them spank us, at least not in advance of being spanked.
Friday Sprog Blogging: getting organ-ized.
Early this month, my better half got something for the Free-Ride offspring that is somewhere in the realm of “this will be edifying, but maybe they’ll find it cool, and if they don’t then at least the grown-ups will have fun playing with it”.
So far, it has been all of the above.
It’s a human anatomy model (not life-size, thanks), and here’s the state I found it in this morning:
Obviously, this isn’t going to stifle my children’s creativity.
Civility and politeness.
In a comment on a post at Henry Gee’s blog (I’d link the comment itself, but for the life of me I cannot figure out where the permalink is), Ed Yong offers his view on the relation between politeness and civility. Quoth Ed:
My objection comes when people mistake politeness for virtue rather than what it actually is – artifice masquerading as virtue. Politeness is what you teach children to tell them when and how to speak and behave before they are fully rational and capable of thinking through the moral consequences of their words and actions.
Adults, being (technically) able to do this should arrive at their words/actions through more sophisticated means. It’s the difference between “I won’t say that because it’s rude and is therefore wrong” and “I won’t say that because it has the following consequences and is therefore wrong”.
Politeness is a route towards true civility and not an endpoint in itself. It’s civility for beginners. The big problem is that when people forget this fairly basic difference and focus on the polite/pleasant aspect without the deeper, underlying stuff, all sorts of incivil behaviour goes unnoticed because it’s said under the veneer of politeness.
What to do with the cheater once caught.
Back in December (or as we academics call it, Exam-Grading Season), esteemed commenter Ewan told us about a horrifying situation that was unfolding for him:
Probably not totally relevant, but frankly I’m still in a little shock.
Graded exams Friday evening before heading out for weekend. Noted some really strong efforts (take-home exam), some really lame, nothing special. Then: two word-for-word identical, typos-and-all, answers with *many* unique characteristics compared to all other answerers of that Q, even down to the same joke-aside-to-the-professor.
Ack, really? Check. Yep, really, and true for about four Qs (of 27) on this short-answer format take-home final (given this way because somewhat akin to Janet, I also want them to demonstrate knowledge even if they have to use a book or the net for some facts/help. Anyway..).
I’m still in shock; some details adding to shock are unpostable b/c of identification possibilities in public.
I send email to the two: “I need to speak to you regarding your final; are you around next week?”
From A: detailed reason, perfectly fine, why no. Also unbloggable.
From B: “Yes. If this has anything to do with similarities between A’s paper and my own, I want to talk with you privately.”
Well, there goes any possibility that I was wrong, huh? Wow. And what a response to send!
Oh, and: f*ck.
That last part of Ewan’s comment is relevant because I suspect some students believe that the people grading their papers are giddy with glee when they find evidence of cheating.
We are not.
#scio10 aftermath: first thoughts on “Online Civility and Its (Muppethugging) Discontents.”
There was one session at ScienceOnline2010 which I did not Tweet as it was going on — the session I led with Sheril Kirshenbaum and Dr. Isis. Here’s how that session was described in the conference program:
Online Civility and Its (Muppethugging) Discontents – Janet Stemwedel, Sheril Kirshenbaum and Dr.Isis
Description: Janet, Sheril, and Isis regularly write about the role of civility in dialog with the public and other scientists. In this session, we will discuss the definition of civility, its importance in the communication of science, and how the call to civility can be used to derail discourse. Additionally, we will discuss the importance of finding the appropriate balance of civility and tolerance for what gets labeled as incivility in reaching and engaging each other. We reserve the right to use the words “balls,” “muppethugger,” and “wackaloon,” to FWDAOTI liberally, and cannot guarantee that at least one of the moderators will not lose her junk. Discuss here.
The session was … eventful.
Ways to tell today’s weather that don’t involve looking outside.
1. The barometric pressure has dropped from what it was last night (when it was raining).
#scio10 aftermath: my tweets from “Getting the Science Right: The importance of fact checking mainstream science publications — an underappreciated and essential art — and the role scientists can and should (but often don’t) play in it.”
Session description: Much of the science that goes out to the general public through books, newspapers, blogs and many other sources is not professionally fact checked. As a result, much of the public’s understanding of science is based on factual errors. This discussion will focus on what scientists and journalists can do to fix that problem, and the importance of playing a pro-active role in the process.
The session was led by Rebecca Skloot (@RebeccaSkloot), Sheril Kirshenbaum (@Sheril_), and David Dobbs (@David_Dobbs).
Here’s the session’s wiki page.
#scio10 aftermath: my tweets from “Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial Session: Engaging underrepresented groups in online science media”.
Session description: The conference timing may keep some attendees away in their hometowns participating in local MLK activities. Therefore, we are introducing a session to promote the principles of Dr King in the context of online science communication: promoting social justice and eliminating racism in areas ranging from healthcare to scientific career paths. We plan to take a different angle from the blogging about gender/race session: how do we cultivate emerging science writers from underrepresented groups to promote science, for example, in areas of health disparities (i.e., diabetes, substance abuse, prostate cancer) and in providing opportunities to increase the number of underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers. Locally in Durham, North Carolina, efforts are underway through the non-profit Kramden Institute to start by making newly-refurbished computers available to honors students in underserved school districts as a model for what can be done nationally. We’ll also be represented by local IT and social media folks who are setting up the infrastructure to make internet access more affordable and accessible. Any advice, comments or ideas are welcome from attendees, especially if you engage with underrepresented groups in your respective line of online or offline work.
The session was led by David Kroll (@abelpharmboy) and Damond Nollan (@damondnollan).
Here’s the session’s wiki page.