With great trepidation, I criticize Dan Sarewitz
Dan Sarewitz worries about creeping bias in science (emphasis added): Alarming cracks are starting to penetrate deep into the scientific edifice. They threaten ...
Category: Academia
Is a science PhD worth it, part II
Let me expand on the closing sentence of my last post, which got some attention in the comments (emphasis added): The upshot of this is that national data-sets ...
Is a science PhD worth it?
Daniel Lametti gives it a resounding yes: The pharmaceutical industry, the Washington Post reported, has cut scores of chemists. Even so, the American Chemical ...
Do we need more scientists?
Though I’m not convinced, most of the folks at Slate.com disagree. Here’s Derek Lowe backing up his even-handed argument with data: I very much doub...
A very obvious answer
While asking presidential candidates to engage in a meaningful science policy debate, G. Pascal Zachary wonders: Is there a way to discuss efficiency and outcom...
Rise in scientific misconduct
The Times attributes the sharp rise in journal-paper retractions to a hyper-competitive environment: Dr. Fang became curious how far the rot extended. To find o...
Scientists and the economic crisis yet again
David Bruggeman’s sharp comment is worth reprinting in full: From where I sit, both Stilgoe and Macilwain are attempting to remind the community of two th...
What should all us PhDs do?
A roundup of links discussing whether a PhD is worth it: 1. Nate Kreuter at Inside Higher Ed says no one should get a PhD 2. Erik Loomis thinks that goes too fa...
Data-sharing and open-access
Michael Nielsen suggests greater use of data-sharing and open-access as the path forward: Why don’t scientists share? If you’re a scientist applying...
The academy as a political entity
I almost titled this post “Wherein I admit to being a hypocrite” because of this passage in my last post: Going forward, I hope we can finally follo...