The American particle physics community is in jeopardy and may end up drowning in a boundless sea trying to grasp at non-existing funds, dragging US physics and science as a whole to the bottom. This is a price the most powerful and high-tech country of the world cannot afford, as warned by the editors of a report published in late April by the National Academy of Sciences1. Behind so much alarm is the International Linear Collider (ILC) – a large particle accelerator facility which, according to the report, should be built on American territory, if research on the elementary constituents of
The Department of Computer Science and Engineering and DO-IT IT (Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking and Technology) at the University of Washington propose to create the AccessComputing Alliance for the purpose of increasing the participation of people with disabilities in computing careers. Alliance partners Gallaudet University, Microsoft, the NSF Regional Alliances for Persons with Disabilities in STEM (hosted by the University of Southern Maine, New Mexico State University, and UW), and SIGACCESS of the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) and collaborators represent stakeholders from education, industry, government, and professional organizations nationwide.
Alliance activities apply proven practices to support persons with disabilities within computing programs. To increase the number of students with disabilities who successfully pursue undergraduate and graduate degrees, the alliance will run college transition and bridge, tutoring, internship, and e-mentoring programs. To increase the capacity of postsecondary computing departments to fully include students with disabilities in coursers and programs, the alliance will form communities of practice, run capacity-building institutes, and develop systemic change indicators for computing departments. To create a nationwide resource to help students with disabilities pursue computing careers and computing educators and employers, professional organizations and other stakeholders to develop more inclusive programs and share effective practices, the alliance will create and maintain a searchable AccessComputing Knowledge Base of FAQs, case studies, and effective/promising practices.
These activities will build on existing alliances and resources in a comprehensive, integrated effort. They will create nationwide collaborations among individuals with disabilities, computing professionals, employers, disability providers, and professional organizations to explore the issues that contribute to the underrepresentation of persons with disabilities and to develop, apply and assess interventions. In addition, they will support local and regional efforts to recruit and retain students with disabilities into computing and assist them in institutionalizing and replicating their programs. The alliance will work with other Alliances and organizations that serve women and underrepresented minorities to make their programs accessible to students with disabilities. Finally they will collect and publish research and implementation data to enhance scientific and technological understanding of issues related to the inclusion of people with disabilities in computing.
DATE:
-
TEAM MEMBERS:
Richard LadnerLibby CohenSheryl BurgstahlerWilliam McCarthy
When thinking about this contribution, an homage to John Ziman, one question occurred to me repeatedly: what would John have made of the European Research Council? Here is a newly established institution with the sole objective to fund ‘frontier research’ at EU level, based exclusively on scientific excellence and subject to pan-European competition of the best researchers. Would he have interpreted it as a vindication of academic science as a culture, a deliberate turning away from ‘post-academic science’ or even of overcoming it? Or, would he have seen it as the establishment of a small
This paper will outline the very successful initiatives to define common communication strategies amongst the world’s high energy physics laboratories. These initiatives have been extremely successful in changing the communication practices of a worldwide community of high energy physics labs and these practices are now expanding to the community of synchrotron radiation laboratories. The payback has been extremely encouraging, with a much higher regard for the importance of communication in senior management and, perhaps coincidentally, major increases in funding of physical sciences in the
In last times scientific PR activities are increased by number and quality. Especially in United States and, more recently, in Europe all the most important research institutions and universities have been equipped with communication officers able to circulate their own information through mass media. This is undoubtedly a positive news for science. In spite of this, it’s necessary to think about which effects can be created by marketing activity on scientific communication. In this commentary we asked some scientific professionals to tackle these problems from different points of view.
The attacks of September 11 2001 and in particular, the sending of letters containing anthrax spores the following October had a profound effect on society, and at the same time on science and its communicative mechanisms. Through a quanto-qualitative analysis of articles taken from four publications: two daily newspapers, the Corriere della Sera from Italy and the New York Times from the United States and two science magazines, Science and Nature, we have shown how the aforementioned events provoked the emergence of media attention regarding bioterrorism. A closer reading of the articles
The Royal Society published in late June a report entitled «Science Communication. Survey of factors affecting science communication by scientists and engineers». It is an in-depth survey on the communication addressed to non-specialist audiences that was carried out interviewing a wide and representative sample of UK scientists and engineers.
Organized creationism is not widespread in Italy. It is a rather limited resource politicians and columnists draw upon when wishing to stir up a “debate”. Judging by its results, Italian creationism is old-fashioned, still comparing Darwin’s theories with the Bible, hoping to find the wreckage of Noah’s Ark, holding conferences on the origin of apes, questioning fossil dating and distorting science debates with out-of-context quotations from disparate sources. It is not a lobby that could obtain considerable electoral support, win favour or drag scientists to court.
“In a totally sane society, madness is the only freedom”, writes J.G. Ballard in his novel Running Wild. This is a dark and at first sight enigmatic statement, but it could be interpreted as a stunning synthesis of the relationship between health policies and the practices of freedom in modern history. A game that is not yet over and the results of which must therefore still be deciphered. What do we do when faced with policies that act only for our good, which preserve life, improve the conditions of health and safety? And besides, what does it mean if these policies are seen as a threat and
Do we have to drag in the thought of Michel Foucault to show the political (and not neutral), partial and local (and not universal and non-historic), active (and not merely transmissive) face of science communication? Do we need the work of the controversial French intellectual to dispute the anxious search – almost a quest like that for the Holy Grail – for the “best practices” in the dissemination of scientific culture? If we read over the pages that Foucault dedicated to words and things, to the archaeology and genealogy of knowledge, to biopolitics, we have few doubts. Two elements, on the
The people of Val di Susa (Italy) blocked the construction of the new high-speed railway line that should connect Turin with Lyons (France). This project is regarded as a strategic achievement for the economic development of the European Union, but local communities have a different concept of development and are asserting their rights through ad hoc experts’ reports and the production “from the bottom” of new specialised knowledge. We shall describe these events as a case study to put ecological democracy to the test of facts, also through a comparison with the experimental actions taken in
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Yurij CastelfranchiGiancarlo Sturloni