Next post, I will deal with one of the main barriers to the implementation of blended learning: the fear that providing online content will lead to a drop in student lecture attendance or performance. However, the other side of the coin is that the academics who populate our universities simply do not want to have to learn new technologies to use in their teaching. In a bizarre state of affairs, those researchers who are at the forefront of the most technological fields consider themselves incapable of learning a basic piece of software. I’m going to try to make it clear how easy these tools can be to use, so that there are no such excuses! All of these examples will be based around the provision of online lecture recordings.Read More »
Category: Science
2012 in review
The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2012 annual report for me and insisted that I share it. The big milestone for 2012 was that I passed 25,000 views, which is far more than I was expecting! I published 33 posts that totalled around 20,000 views. That includes the top three posts for the year:
- Why are there imperfect mimics? [2227 views]
- Correactology – a very Canadian woo [2119 views]
- Sexist skeptics? Here’s how to find out! [1901 views]
Thanks for following/sharing/accidentally finding me over the past year!
Open Education I: Why is open access to education important?
I have blogged before about why I feel that open access to research and educational materials is an important step forward for society. This promotes the learning of those who struggle to access conventional learning modalities (e.g. lower socioeconomic groups who are traditionally excluded from universities) and those who are simply casually interested in learning something new without the need to commit to long-term and expensive courses. The release of data also helps to facilitate the verification of findings in the scientific sphere to avoid the problems associated with scientific publishing.
Climate change denial: advice for skeptical projects
To round-out this quick series on the climate denial project, I thought I would reflect on some of the aspects of the project in the context of skeptical activism. There are a wide range of these kinds of projects, and it is worthwhile attempting to share best practice when we can in order to make the most of limited (often volunteer-based) resources. I know that the Eschaton2012 conference recently had a panel on skeptical activism which probably covered the same points, so I suggest you check that out as well. Jeff Shallit has some interesting points for individuals, but this will consider what groups can accomplish. Which leads me nicely into…Read More »
Climate change denial: my experience with the media
This is my third post relating to a project that looked at climate change denial as it was being taught in a Canadian university (see here for background, and here for response to some criticism). We were expecting the skeptical community to pick it up, and the report was written mostly for that audience. What we were not expecting was international media coverage and a few dozen blog posts. Here, I will briefly reflect on what the media contact was like.
Sexist skeptics? Here’s how to find out
There has been an ongoing (and really rather bitter) argument over discrimination against women in the skeptical/atheist community – particularly over whether or not conferences are preferentially selecting old, white, male speakers. Arguably this could be expanded to include discrimination against youth and against different races, but the sexism issue is that which has been front-and-centre over the past year. The allegations have been that the organisers of various conferences (particularly TAM) have not been inclusive when considering female speakers and that this has contributed to an unwelcoming environment at skeptical conferences.Read More »
Climate change denial: a response to some criticism
This is my second post on the climate change project (see my earlier piece on the background to the story). In this post I’ll talk briefly about some of the negative response that was raised to the project, primarily by the researcher who developed the course, Tim Patterson. It is worth noting that the course is being taught again in January 2013. I’ll follow this up with posts on (i) experiences with the media, and (ii) advice for skeptical campaigns in general.
Climate change denial: my part in its downfall
In March 2012 I was involved with a project that sought to make public some poor science that was being taught at a Canadian university. I have been busy with other things since then (like getting a job…) but now I find myself with a few minutes to reflect on the experience. I have a tendency to write long posts which I’m sure nobody ever reads, so I’m going to write three short posts on this topic. In this post I’ll talk briefly about some of the negative response that was raised to the project, primarily by the researcher who developed the course, Tim Patterson. It is worth noting that the course is being taught again in January 2013. I’ll follow this up with posts on (i) a response to some criticisms, (ii) experiences with the media, and (iii) advice for skeptical campaigns in general.
PhD opportunities for UK/EU/International students at the University of Leeds
There are a couple of PhD opportunities coming up in my department at the University of Leeds for UK/EU/international students. Anyone who is interested, or knows someone who might be, get in touch. Areas of interest are around (i) insect ecology/evolution, (ii) biological responses to climate change, or (iii) aquatic ecology. The competition is fierce, but you have to be in it to win it! Get in touch if you are interested in applying and we can discuss ideas.Read More »
Why does breast cancer research receive more research funding than prostate cancer?
“Men’s Rights Activism” (MRA) is a dirty phrase in many circles. The MRA movement is a fairly diverse beast ranging from claims of inequality in child custody cases to accusations of full-blown, societal-scale misandry typified by higher death rates in men and lower levels of social investment. One claim in particular that the MRAs make is that breast cancer (a cancer that predominantly, though not entirely, affects women) receives substantially more money in terms of research funding than prostate cancer, despite similar numbers of people dying from each. First I’ll review some of the specific claims made, I’ll look at the data on funding, then we can delve into a few stats on the impacts of these two cancer types (bear with me!). I’ve also included some more detail on whether younger men are more at risk from prostate cancer as an appendix for those who are interested.Read More »
Katatrepsis 