Tag: links

Aggregating links for Science Forward eportfolio sites

One of my favorite posts to add to Science Forward eportfolio sites is the “link round-up” post that aggregates links to science news and other related content from around the web into a single post. As an ITF, my job isn’t really to “create content” though I do think it’s important that we engage with the same issues alongside the students so that they know their ITFs are paying attention to the course and not just some “tech person.” This type of post is fun to create and easily tailored to the themes or issues discussed in a specific class. Here are some of the posts that I’ve created for Science Forward sites:

how does science & scientific thinking intersect with other disciplines?

A post with links categorized around the headings “Art and Science,” “Science & other industries and disciplines,” and “Critical Thinking, Intelligence, and the Nature of Knowledge.” Originally published 9/26/16.

Read More

science and science fiction

Links to articles about science news, science and entertainment, and satirical articles. Originally published 9/13/16.

Read More

scientific knowledge and the general public

A post published on the first class of Science Forward for the Fall 2016 semester created as supplement to the course topics.

Read More

communicating scientific research to the general public

A lengthier post that poses questions to students using two articles at The Atlantic’s website. Originally published 10/30/15.

Read More

Most importantly, this type of post aligns with Science Forward’s emphasis on scientific literacy, including the ability to evaluate and understand scientific information even when the information is presented by the news:

[aesop_video align=”center” src=”youtube” id=”9Ol1c7FSl-Q” caption=”‘Science Senses’ from the Science Forward video series” disable_for_mobile=”on” loop=”on” autoplay=”off” controls=”on” viewstart=”on” viewend=”on”]

As the video demonstrates, “science” might be a catch-all word for the processes of collecting data, testing data to the point that it can be considered knowledge, and then critically evaluate that information. Moreover, the link round-up post, by presenting them with a few mainstream science news articles, lets students test their science senses and begin to understand how and where distance is created between scientists and the general public, or between science and science journalism.

Resource: The Annotated Bibliography

What is an annotated bibliography?

Annotated bibliographies provide basic bibliographic information in a standard style of documentation, as in a traditional bibliography or “works cited” page; the only difference is that each source is “annotated” with a statement about the text. This statement can range in length from 150-250 words and should provide insight into your primary source(s).

What are the benefits of an annotated bibliography? 

There are several benefits to creating an annotated bibliography: for one, an annotated bibliography essentially functions as a “go-to” sheet of sources that you’ve used, the info that each source contains, and a ready-made bibliographic citation. Moreover, writing an annotated bibliography helps develop critical thinking and writing skills because you are distilling the source’s key points. In other words, writing an annotated bibliography requires more than just receiving information but actively analyzing the source’s argument and how the information is presented to you. Key skills such as paraphrasing are essential when writing an annotated bibliography!

What information should an annotation contain?

A basic annotation will include a bibliographic citation and an overview of the source’s contents. Provide the author’s thesis statement, main points, evidence supporting main points, and conclusion, and how this information is organized and presented to the reader. Report if the author uses any visual evidence (charts, graphs, photographs, etc.) and if those are relevant to the overall argument. When writing your annotation, avoid including direct quotes from the source; the annotation should be written in your own words and demonstrate your own understanding of the source’s information.

Some annotations are evaluative, meaning that the annotation will offer an assessment of the source’s information, argument, targeted audience, or relevance to certain topics. An evaluative annotation helps you decide which sources you will eventually include in your final project, aids in developing your own argument rather than repeating someone else’s argument, and helps prevent plagiarism.

Writing the annotation: some prompts to get you started. 

It can seem intimidating to boil down a complex article or an entire book to 250 words so here are some questions that might help you organize your thoughts. As with any research project or paper, an annotated bibliography may undergo several drafts so the best place to start is just getting started! 

Analyzing the argument

  1. What does the author want you to believe? What (or who) does the author seem to be responding to?
  2. What is the author’s main claim? What reasons and evidence support that claim? Can you determine the author’s methodology? Is there a theoretical approach underpinning their argument?
  3. What type of evidence is used in the article (statistics, field research, quotes)? What kind of visual information is used — charts, graphs, photographs, etc.
  4. Does the visual evidence add or detract to the argument?
  5. Does the author’s evidence support the claim? Does the conclusion make sense given the progression of the argument?
  6. Glance at the bibliography: what kinds of sources does your source use? (This is an excellent way to get an introduction/layout of a topic and its research history!)

Analyzing the source’s source: the author and the publisher

  1. Who is the author? Are they well-known in their field? Have they published on this topic before?
  2. If this is an article: it should be clear to your reader if the article comes from a newspaper or magazine or peer-reviewed journal; if necessary, look up the editorial guidelines for the newspaper/magazine/journal — usually found at the publisher’s website. This all helps you determine the context of your source and how the article’s argument and information fits in with the overall editorial philosophy of the source. For example, note the difference in descriptions for these two peer-reviewed journals: HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory and Journal of Contemporary Ethnography.
  3. Similarly, If the source is a book you may want to indicate if this book is a mainstream or academic publisher, any editorial guidelines or philosophy, or if the book is part of an ongoing series.

Determining the source’s relevance to your topic

  1. Who will benefit the most from this source: people looking for an introduction to the topic or specialists in the field, or somewhere in between?
  2. How will the information in this source relate to your own research project? Does it provide additional evidence to support your idea(s), offer a counter-argument, point you towards additional sources, or something else?

Resources

Research methods & primary sources

Brooklyn College Library

Annotated Bibliography Sources

Reading and Analyzing Sources

 

Link round-up: how does science & scientific thinking intersect with other disciplines?

This post aggregates links around some of the ideas and issues that have been discussed in class the past few weeks as well as some articles the intersections between science and other disciplines.

Art and Science

Art21 "Ecology" episode with a view of Mark Dion's installation titled Neukom Vivarium
Art21 “Ecology” episode with a view of Mark Dion’s installation Neukom Vivarium (2006)

Science & other industries and disciplines

Critical Thinking, Intelligence, and the Nature of Knowledge

 

Part I: Writing About Dance – Some General Guidelines

This post aims to give students a starting point for writing about dance and other forms of art by offering guidelines and practical tips to help students when beginning a project or when finding themselves “stuck.” Accompanying the guidelines are excerpts of writings by dance critics and historians to help students “see” the guidelines in action and therefore better understand the benefits of the information in the post. Most importantly, with practice, students will become comfortable enough to modify the guidelines, tips, and activities to use when writing regardless of the assignment, subject, or discipline.

  1. Be a generous and objective observer in addition to being a good audience member.
  2. Describe what you see using specific examples so that your reader understands what you saw.
  3. Explain cause and effect to your reader.

Keep reading for more information about these guidelines as well as practical examples and tips to help you in the course. Part II contains a specific activity to help you practice putting these guidelines into action.

Read more

science & science fiction

Science in the news

Science in entertainment

Science satire

Video Playlist: Choreographer Pina Bausch (1940-2009)

[videogallery id=”playlist_pina”]

Video Playlist: Choreographer Pina Bausch (1940-2009)

Useful Links

Link round-up: scientific knowledge & the general public

Some links to articles that relate to the topics covered in the first day of class:

Slate in particular has several pieces related to scientific literacy and the problems facing both the general public and scientists:

 

Images Used for the Site & Scientific Literacy

Below are some excerpts from the descriptions of the original pictures that, depending on the eportfolio theme, show up as the site header and logo. I picked these images for their relatively simple compositions that wouldn’t compete with any text. For example, each work has a repeating single geometric shape (square, circle) and limited color palette, which creates the appearance of negative space when text is placed on it and therefore won’t be too busy for most screens.

When looking for pictures to use, I checked two places, Bing Homepage Gallery and NASA. Every day, each site showcases a high-res photograph of nature, science and tech, or architecture, and often makes the work available for download. I also like the descriptions used for the images – each site or space is very specific location, graphic, or with the case of NASA, taken with unusual equipment – meaning that most of the photos require some kind of explanation.

While these might simply be understood as a caption or description of what the pictures depict, it might be useful to think about these descriptions as an example of science journalism. What kind of scientific literacy is required for someone to understand these descriptions? Are these good examples of writing for a general audience? What could be improved? Read on to see the full-sized images and their descriptions!

Read more

Two articles from The Atlantic about communicating research to the general public

Given the recent posts about mainstream media as the conduit between scientific research and the general public, I thought these two articles might be of interest to our class. “The Needless Complexity of Academic Writing” by Victoria Clayton adds another layer to the class discussions about science literacy among the general public: not only is there a lack of understanding of scientific vocabulary or certain topics but how academics (and not just scientists!) write about their work adds to the barriers to the publics’ understanding of research. The second article, “Where Science Meets Magic” by Julie Beck, contains an interview with science journalist Matt Kaplan about his book published this week, Science of the Magical: From the Holy Grail to Love Potions to Super Powers.

These two articles address two central issues explored in Science Forward: how does the general public get access to scientific research? What are some of the barriers to their understanding of scientific research? 

Clayton’s article describes the problem of “needlessly complex writing” in academia that has “become something of a protected tradition.” She quotes several academics and discusses various initiatives intended to rectify this problem. One particularly interesting issue that her article raises is the conflict between open-access resources and academics’ language – while the former grants public access to the materials (usually behind paywalls) it is researchers’ language acting as as a linguistic paywall that prevents people from understanding their work:

“Some research funders, such as National Institutes of Health and The Wellcome Trust, have mandated in recent years that studies they finance be published in open-access journals, but they’ve given little attention to ensuring those studies include accessible writing. “NIH has no policies for grantees that dictate the style of writing they use in their research publications,” a spokesperson told me in an emailed statement. “We do advise applicants about the importance of using plain language in sections of the application that, if funded, will become public on theRePORT website.”

So even if the general public has access to the latest research, how can they understand it? Is it the job of the NIH to edit submissions for more accessible language or should that be the responsibility of the researchers? 

In the interview with Matt Kaplan about his book, Julie Beck highlights his source for quotes, The Lord of the Rings rather than scientists. Kaplan’s choice serves as a rhetorical framing device for the book’s overall argument: science and magic aren’t so far apart. While Kaplan’s book seems to be more about science history than scientific research, his approach seems like an effective means to increase the general public’s interest in scientific research. Here is an excerpt from their interview:

Beck: A number of the different things that you talk about in the book I kind of thought about as “close but no cigar,” where people kind of got the effects of something right, but got the causes wrong. Like with the Egyptians’ eyeliner, which they thought had healing powers bestowed by the god Horus, and it turned out it was helping activate their immune system, but they didn’t know why. In that way, can magic kind of be a step towards scientific understanding?

….

Another example of what I was thinking about from the book is how in the 13th century, people knew that breathing in the breath of a sick person would make you sick, and so then there were the old men who were like, “Let me just breathe the breath of young girls and it’ll make me young again.” It’s a step, but just the wrong step.

Kaplan: That’s the problem with magic, because when you use mythology and magic to explain the inexplicable, you end up in situations where you do things like that.

Beck: Right, that surprises me zero percent.

Kaplan: And to some extent you do have these things giving birth to science. I think a lot of the fascination with the philosopher’s stone, this stone of immortality, and seeking to find it and distilling it from different compounds, in many ways gave birth to what eventually became chemistry.

Do books like Kaplan’s serve as an important “middle step,” translating scientific research into more accessible language for the general public? If so, would a book like Kaplan’s be more likely to stimulate interest in the history of science rather than scientific disciplines like geology, biology, and chemistry?