Intergalactic Planetary Research is Useful Too

Posted on June 4, 2013 by

Fellow blogger Michael posted this entry recently, and rather than just write a comment, I thought I would chime in on this issue as well. I won’t try to summarize completely his relatively short blog entry, but to put it briefly, Michael reminds scientists that to solicit funding from the public or public policy-makers, scientists must engage the public and inform them of the content and benefit of their scientific work.

I think a fair amount of what Michael said applies across-the-board to any variety of scholarship, and on the whole, I very much agree with his point and support it. However, I would like to pose a question. Scientific work may suffer a lack of funding due to waning interest, familiarity, or other such motivation on the part of the public and/or policy-makers, and I would agree that there is some onus on scientists to reinvest in relations with said parties. But is it not also true that statements such as “I personally don’t see the benefit, or “understand” or “like or “appreciate” this research (or science as a whole)” are not an excuse to fail to support the endeavors of scientists that work toward the public good, be it through basic or applied science, research or education?

I agree that public relations, outreach, etc. are very important, and raising awareness of the importance of science (or any other type of scholarship) would very much help bring back much-needed public support to the policy debate regarding funding for research. I suspect improving public education would do likewise. But I don’t think efforts to gain public support should hinge on whether the public is properly educated about a specific scientific endeavor, nor on whether this endeavor has an immediate & direct impact on the public good (e.g. climate change or healthcare). Basic research science and mathematics has sometimes been described as a money-pit into which we dump millions of dollars and get no “products” or “solutions” because researching bugs or quasars or quarks or Lie groups seems to be useless. This belies the fact that the applied sciences, as well as most fields of engineering, technology, communications, etc., rely heavily on the existing and expanding body of research in basic science and mathematics.

NASA is one example of a publicly-funded institution that supports not only scientific research but also its own space-exploration program. It has been a leader in the scholarship of astronomy, engineering of many types, and scientific leadership. Now its funding has been cut because policy-makers (and perhaps the public) think space exploration is not important.  And there are many reasons this is the case, among which I do count Michael’s important and very agreeable point. One role of scientists (or any researcher, publicly funded or not) is to communicate effectively the nature, role, and importance of his/her work to the general public. However, I am arguing that this should not extend so far as to require researchers to educate the public on the entirety of science, as this is impractical and infeasible.

Research is a long-term endeavor that navigates twists and turns, hinges on unknowns, and takes long spans of time. It also requires us to accept that projects may fail to produce good results, or that the results may not lead immediately to new solutions to applied problems. The same is true of funding scholarship and research — not every researcher will be successful as an “investment” in the short term, and some may leave research altogether, but we do not subject every first-year graduate student to an inquisition to determine if they will solve a world-changing real-life problem in 10 years and only fund those who demonstrate this. In aggregate, it is important to fund research (and researchers) sufficiently well without demanding guarantees of success, or an accounting of immediate gains from this investment.

Posted in funding, research | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Of Academic Sociability and Disastrous Storms

Posted on June 4, 2013 by

Reflecting on this past school year, it is clear to me that the social aspect of being a graduate student is nearly as important as academic production.  While research is often a monastic endeavor, the occasions in which we do get a chance to socialize with other academics allows us the opportunity to form new connections with key players in our disciplines, as well as to further solidify existing relationships.  Leaving the cloister of solitary scholarship also has the benefit of opening you up to unexpected adventures, such as hurricanes and other natural disasters.  Last October, during Super Storm Sandy, I realized how sociability and disaster can work together to form valuable, multi-faceted life experiences.

Academic conferences are typically social events that provide a venue to have a few cocktails and banquet meals, show off your research, and perhaps, most importantly, make the necessary connections that will one day (hopefully!) land you that nice tenure-track job at a top-tier research university.  My experience at the American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIST) conference Baltimore last October is perhaps an outlier in this regard, particularly because much of the conference was overshadowed by the most significant natural disaster to befall New Jersey in recent memory.  This conference just happened to take place precisely as Super Storm Sandy was hitting the East Coast.  I had decided to stay in Baltimore for the duration of the conference, figuring that a large conference hall likely had generators and would be safer than returning to my home in Jersey City.  In fact, the storm barely disturbed Baltimore, with a broken umbrella the extent of my personal loss of property.  And, after the storm’s passing, the local brew pub was up and running again and things were just fine.  The New Jersey and New York coastline was not so lucky, of course, and finding transportation back to the New York metropolitan area with train service suspended became a challenge for me.  My solution was to rent one of the last cars at the nearby Hertz rental agency, and accompanied with another stranded Rutgers friend, make our way north, as quickly as possible, on I-95.  The landscape seemed virtually untouched, but when night began to fall and we crossed the Delaware Memorial Bridge into NJ, all lights remained dark.  We did not see a single street lamp glowing on our entire journey up the Jersey Turnpike.

Driving across the arched span of the Newark Bay Bridge into Bayonne, which normally provides an unobstructed view of the New York Bay area, revealed only a ghostly archipelago of darkened landmasses, with the opulent glow of midtown Manhattan and its radiant Empire State as the sole beacons of visible illumination on the horizon.  Driving through the darkened streets of Jersey City, we encountered dazed and lumbering storm-survivors, seeking out food, water, and perhaps most importantly, electricity with which to charge their digital devices.  This surreal environment resembled a scene from the zombie-serial, The Walking Dead, with city streets abnormally darkened, and slow-moving pedestrians lurching into oncoming traffic.  Fortunately, everyone maintained peace and civility, and surprisingly little crime occurred during this ordeal.  And when I finally returned to my apartment, my girlfriend was fine, cooking up some excellent stir-fry and sipping wine with friends.  So, thankfully, my fears of a zombie apocalypse turned out to be unfounded, but it would be about six days before we saw our electricity fully restored.

The experience of my trip down to the ASIST conference was clearly instructive as life experience on multiple accounts.  I was able to show off and discuss my academic research, and socialize with new professors, established luminaries, and friends just entering the job market.  Okay, so maybe a calamitous weather event that precipitated loss of life and billions of dollars in damage was not the ideal background for such an experience, but it did prove that traveling away from home and expanding one’s horizons does make the return home an entirely new experience.

Post Script:  Having just returned from a weekend at the Jersey Shore, I can report that there has been considerable work done on moving towards recovery from the damage wrought by Sandy.  There is still much work to be done, especially for private residences, but it is heartening to see how much has already been accomplished.  Even the Pinball Museum in Asbury Park, which is precipitously positioned right on the boardwalk is back in business!

Posted in activities, balance, life, networks, social | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Fight for your right — no, your privilege — to do science

Posted on May 23, 2013 by

At the American Physical Society March Meeting a few weeks ago — the biggest confluence of physicists in the world, with over 9000 in attendance — there was a session titled “American Science and America’s Future.”  Now, who could miss a session with a grandiose name like that?  Well, it seems that a lot of people could, since the cavernous ballroom they reserved for it was less than 10% full.  To be fair, I attended a similar session last year, which featured much better attendance.  Having a Nobel Prize-winner on the panel probably helped.  But this year’s disinterest disturbed me, as did the small number of people who signed the periodic form letters APS prepares for members to send to Congress.

The fact of the matter is that most of us do science at the pleasure of the public.  We as a society have decided that scientific research is something we value — ostensibly because of its future economic dividends but also because, frankly, it’s one of the things that makes a civilization great — and since it’s something the market won’t carry out on its own, we pay for it with taxes.  So our ability to continue the scientific research enterprise that has made the United States the most powerful economic, cultural, and intellectual force in the world rests squarely on taxpayers, and more importantly, their political representatives, continuing to value what we do.  If they don’t, our privilege could be taken away.

My fear is that many scientists view this support as an entitlement, a right to follow their scientific curiosity wherever it takes them on taxpayer expense.  This hubris is not only selfish, but dangerous.  Without proper advocacy and education, the public and the political leadership are at serious risk of losing sight of science’s value to society.  There is already frequent grumbling about cuts to federal funding agencies, widespread ignorance of scientific issues affecting society like climate change and healthcare, and the growing weaknesses in science education in the U.S.  While the NSF and NIH aren’t going to shut down anytime soon, it’s very possible that science funding could face gradual cutbacks or at least radically slowed growth, especially in the face of competing funding priorities.  If and when this happens, scientists shouldn’t blame the ignorant public or politicians — they will have to blame themselves, because that ignorance is our fault.

So the time is now for scientists to take action.  Get in touch with your political representatives, both local and federal.  Write letters to the newspaper.  Be active in your community, so your neighbors can be in that small minority of folks who know a real, live scientist.  Get involved in public outreach.  But whatever you do, don’t take your research support for granted.  Let’s get the science that we all pay for with our taxes into the public consciousness.

Posted in funding, professional development, research, teaching | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Grad Student Experiences in Leadership

Posted on April 15, 2013 by

scrollThis will be a different type of blog post. This is actually a blog post from 14 graduate students who are about to graduate (or graduated) from the Rutgers Pre-Doctoral Leadership Development Institute (PLDI). This post is composed of short notes about their experiences and serves to thank the Faculty and Staff involved in PLDI.

What is PLDI?

Rutgers’ Pre-Doctoral Leadership Development Institute program (PLDI)  is designed to teach doctoral students aspiring to careers in academia how to navigate the challenges of academic leadership and thrive in the university environment. In this two-year certificate program, our professors shared a very precious gift with us – their experience. We created this blog in order to share our experience with them, with respect and appreciation for the gift they have so graciously given us. We hope that this will continue to serve as a reflective space for affiliates and future cohorts to share their perspectives.

-The PLDI Class of 2013

Tara Coleman: Program in Comparative Literature

When I first started the PLDI program and told my Dad about it, he looked at me strangely and asked why I needed leadership training if I was going to be a professor. He doesn’t know it, but I have already benefitted from my training a great deal, in ways as simple as being able to participate meaningfully in debates among my family and friends about Rutgers, the challenges facing higher education, and how I see my future in this field.

Continue reading →

Posted in academics, Guest Posts, networks, organizational skills, PhD, professional development | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Be yourself and don’t take things too seriously

Posted on April 9, 2013 by

It’s almost a year since I came Rutgers as a graduate student, and I have to say: “Oh, I love it here!” To new graduate students, I’d like to share my experience here with you: don’t take things too seriously, and I bet you’ll love Rutgers too!

Enjoy your time at Rutgers!

There are smiles and tears in this first year.  I enjoy the knowledge I get from my courses – I want to learn. I’m happy to be a good TA, and I make the effort to improve each recitation I give. It’s always great to meet cute and kind people, and at Rutgers you’ll meet many.

Sometimes I distance myself from the crowd, not because I am too shy to show my friendship, on the contrary, it’s exactly because I want to develop friendships. It’s important to maintain friendship with people in your work circle, which is a key element in guaranteeing efficiency and cooperation in a research project, and a happy environment for study and working. Always keep in mind that studying and doing research is why you have come to Rutgers.

Be yourself and don’t take things too seriously.

Maybe you have a general goal for yourself when entering graduate school — you know what you are interested in and ready to dedicate yourself to research in your area of interest, however, life is not always as you expect it to be. It’s not always how hard you’re willing to work — there are many things that you cannot control — but what you can do is to find a balance between your goals and the environment you are in.

Maybe you like a research group very much but decide that it would not further your research goals; maybe you have found a suitable group but realize that you have not sufficient passion for the particular project and need to dig out a topic that you like.  Be yourself, and don’t hesitate discussing the project with your professor, letting him/her know what you want to do and getting suggestions. Everything is changing very fast — just remember to keep your goal in mind and be ready to adjust it as necessary to stay in balance with your environment.

Think a second time before making decisions, try your best to accomplish everything you decide to do, keep in mind your life goals, and find balance with the changing world — that’s it —  nothing to regret, and enjoy every day. Like an old song said “whatever will be, will be”.

Posted in advice, at Rutgers, balance, first year grad, life | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

What are community land trusts, anyway?

Posted on March 20, 2013 by

For the last five years, I’ve been reading, studying, and working with a form of tenureship called the community land trust (CLT).  I’ve become very personally involved, serving both on the research and policy development committee for the National Community Land Trust Network and as a board member for the Essex Community Land Trust in Essex County. But what are they, you might ask?

A CLT is a participatory, community-based nonprofit organization that owns and holds land in trust for the common good. It leases that land to households that purchase the improvements (houses and whatnot) located on the trust’s land. When these households sign the ground lease, they are granted all the rights of more traditional homeownership. The main limitation in the lease comes with the resale of the home. They can only realize a certain percentage of any increase in the home’s value (usually between 10-15%), and can only sell the home to a household that falls within a certain income range. This allows them to realize a certain amount of equity while keeping the home affordable for the next low- to moderate-income household.

It was originally created in the late 1960s as a means for black farmers in rural Georgia to gain and control land. While it remained on the fringe of the affordable housing scene for a few decades after that, its star has been on the rise for the last ten years or so. It has attracted the attention of HUD, the Ford Foundation, and a few other major players on the community development scene. Why did I get interested in it? After spending time walking through neighborhoods in Essex County that had been hit hard by the housing/foreclosure/credit crisis, I became interested in forms of tenureship that would prevent housing from being entwined in the volatility of finance markets and speculative ownership. CLTs and another form of tenureship called limited equity cooperatives caught my eye, and the rest is history. My research is currently focusing on how CLTs are handling their emerging popularity and whether or not their radical ideological heritage as the means to fundamentally altering property relationships will survive the attempt at making them a viable alternative to traditional homeownership.

Any questions? Feel free to leave a comment! I love talking about this stuff.

Posted in academics, dissertation, research | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Towards Clarity

Posted on March 12, 2013 by

I recently presented a paper at the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC) Southeast Colloquium held at the University of South Florida, Tampa.  It is fairly typical within my discipline of media studies to project slides to illustrate various points of your paper rather than reading directly from the paper itself.  I find this method much more engaging as a presenter and as an audience member, but after this conference I realized this kind of presentation forces something else in my work, namely better organization.  I now know how to improve the structure of my paper after doing the work of deciding how and what to present.  Some aspects must be cut for time.  I will leave these nuggets in the paper itself, but the process of presentation hones my approach resulting in (fingers crossed) more clarity and perhaps publication.  I tell myself that I have 20 minutes or less to tell a story.  I guess I work much better under pressure.  I have decided that come the first or second draft of any given paper, I am going to go through the process of presentation even if I am not presenting it to an audience–right down to making the slides.

Image

Here I am presenting my work in the standard hotel ballroom. My kingdom for better lighting. The carpet is a lost cause.

The conference also reminded me of the value of feedback for the paper itself.  A questioner from the audience asked me how I defined diversity.  I confidently gave a two-pronged answer.  No problem!  Hit me with more!  But of course, the problem was that the question should have been unnecessary.  I am grateful for the question because I realized an opportunity or perhaps a demand to be explicit about a key term in my presentation, but most important in my paper.  Defining terms is one of those obvious academic priorities that countless professors rant about, right up there with “read the <expletive> syllabus,” but when we get too close to our work slippage occurs; the obvious becomes obscured.  Academic conferences, at their best, offer paths to clarity.  The Florida weather in February did not hurt either.

Posted in conference presentations, presentations | Tagged | Leave a comment