Category — Science and Technology Policy

Change Magazine Article(s): A Tectonic Shift in Global Higher Education:

For two decades, worldwide enrollment growth in higher education has exceeded the most optimistic forecasts. A milestone of 100 million enrollments was passed some years ago, and an earlier forecast of 120 million students by 2020 may be reached by 2010. If anything, enrollment growth is accelerating as more governments see the rapid expansion of higher education as a key element in their transition from developing to developed countries.

That is the situation in China, where enrollments doubled between 2000 and 2003. With 16 million students enrolled by 2005, China had overtaken the United States as the world’s largest higher education system. Malaysia also illustrates the trend. It plans to increase enrollments in higher education by 166 percent in the next four years, from 600,000 to 1.6 million, to achieve college participation rates similar to those of developed nations. Mauritius has recently passed legislation to create a third university for its 1.2 million people, having added its second only five years ago.

—–

Some would say that this will ruin…. the american university… I say… contrarily that the key is to encourage learning and that doesn’t have to be ‘american’

Final Report of the Invitational Workshop on the Comparative Analysis of National Research Systems:

Read the full final report (PDF, 24 pages.)

The Forum on Higher Education, Research and Knowledge examines how research and knowledge are generated, how they are organized and how they play a central role in national development.

—-

This is an interesting, if short comparative report

I made it to newark airport… My only hangup of course is that is did something to my back yesterday afternoon and basically haven’t slept much, but eh, that only caused me to walk up and down 34th street for 10-15 minutes wondering where the heck the penn station door was, because I’d never been in before, eventually i just decided to walk against traffic and voila, it was at the end of stream of people. Beyond that, the symposium looks interesting, I’m really happy that I was invited even though… it means flying across the u.s. 2 times in 48 hours so that i can be back in time for the digital archives class.

Governance and conflict resolution in probably a better construct for the Linden Lab meeting, but I think that I’ll easily fit in, and make some of my points. The symposium is all day tomorrow. Tonight I’m trying to meet up with my friend and colleague David Silver, whose teaching until 8pm.

Print:
British sociologist Harry Collins asked a scientist who specializes in gravitational waves to answer seven questions about the physics of these waves. Collins, who has made an amateur study of this field for more than 30 years but has never actually practiced it, also answered the questions himself. Then he submitted both sets of answers to a panel of judges who are themselves gravitational-wave researchers. The judges couldn’t tell the impostor from one of their own. Collins argues that he is therefore as qualified as anyone to discuss this field, even though he can’t conduct experiments in it.

—–

Harry Collins, noted sociologist, learns physics as well as or better than some physicists, is able to discuss and describe physics similarly. This experiment shows, to some extent, that one does not have to be inside of a scientific field in order to study and understand a scientific field. That is to say, one can know science without being a scientist. (Which we all knew to some extent) However, more importantly what it seems to indicate is that Science and Technology in Society researchers in their understandings of science and scientific practice could be, and likely are, just as correct as scientists in their observations of science. Now, as a justificatory act, this is important, but it is also important because external observation,outsider research, ethnographic, is generally thought poorly of in the sciences as a result of the ’science wars’ . However, everyone had a sneaking suspicion that the science wars were not about science as much as policing the boundaries of a culture of expertise. What this paper then says in that light… is that the boundary, unless well policed, is a fiction, and knowledge of a science or discipline can be had without specific participation in that discipline.

Guardian Unlimited Technology | Technology | Andrew Brown: on how much we divulge to Google & co :
Every time you use an internet search engine, your inquiry is stored in a huge database. Would you like such personal information to become public knowledge? Yet for thousands of AOL customers, that nightmare has just become a reality. Andrew Brown reports on an incident that has exposed how much we divulge to Google & co
——–
unfortunately, i don’t think the populace at large really cares…..

TPAC – Technology Policy and Assessment Center at the Georgia Institute of Technology:
NSF Workshop on Social Organization of Science and Science Policy

Draft Agenda

NSF Workshop on
The Social Organization of Science and Science Policy
July 13-14, 2006

National Science Foundation, Room Stafford II-555
All participants must sign in at the main NSF building, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA

The workshop will explore the social science foundations of science policy in the context of today’s complex, global, and technologically-mediated society. Understanding the fundamental social processes involved in the structure and organization of science policy are crucial for maximizing the ability of science policy to enhance scientific development and innovation. This understanding requires more than an examination of economic inputs, outputs and the rational deployment of economic resources towards scientific goals; these criteria are necessary but not sufficient. In order to fully understand the formulation, acceptance, dissemination, and impacts of science policy, we also need to understand its social organization and the political, economic, and sociological context within which science policy and science succeed or flounder.

———

the papers are here…

In Search Of Scientific Excellence: L’Oréal USA Announces Call for Applications for 2007 Fellowships for Women In Science Program:
NEW YORK, NY, August 14,
2006 – L’Oréal USA announced today the start of the application period for its esteemed L’Oréal
USA Fellowships for Women in Science program. Now in its fourth year, this national program
aims to annually recognize, reward and support five women post-doctoral researchers in the U.S. who
are pursuing careers in the life and physical/material sciences, as well as mathematics,
engineering and computer science. As part of its commitment to further help exceptional women
scientists reach their goals, L’Oréal USA has doubled the value of its fellowship grants from a
current $20,000 to $40,000 for the 2007 program.

——

this looks like a great program, I think we need more programs like this. science starts with having a plurality of scientists with a plurality of life experiences and modes of understanding the world. intellectual diversity is the backbone of science, because it rounds out the ways people can understand and use scientific knowledge. With a heavily male oriented scientific practice, you end up cutting off many of the possible insights about the world, this programs that support increasing the number of women and minorities in science are, in my mind, important.

Arden L. Bement on International Science:
“On the international scale, our value will be measured by our global research networks and our partnerships with fast-growing research economies. On the West Coast, you are in an excellent position to collaborate with Asian nations in biology, chemistry, physics, and materials science.” Arden Bement at Harvey Mudd College, January 14, 2006.
Dr. Bement has demonstrated a strong interest in international scientific cooperation, and given that the National Science Board has a task force in operation on International Science to advise the NSF, it seems useful to consider his statements on the topic. His views are especially relevant to UNESCO since he is Arden Bement, Vice-Coordinator of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Committee of the U.S. National Commission for UNESCO.

———–

now, if they would just do this in the cultural sphere, we’d be set.

e-passports cloned…:
This was on Wired yesterday (posted on Slashdot). I think it highlights the importance of thinking deeply about how these proposed identity systems work. The other security flaw is the ‘integrity’ of the databases that the passport system is built on.

A German computer security consultant has shown that he can clone the electronic passports that the United States and other countries are beginning to distribute this year.

The controversial e-passports contain radio frequency ID, or RFID, chips that the U.S. State Department and others say will help thwart document forgery.

“The whole passport design is totally brain damaged,” Grunwald says. “From my point of view all of these RFID passports are a huge waste of money. They’re not increasing security at all.”

——–
it is worse than not increasing security… the blind promotion of this technology is actually lowering security. much like libraries and rfid… the use of the technology does not in the end enable the library or the passport holder as much as it enables anyone with a bit of technical savvy to make a mess of the library or passport system.

http://www.prattsenate.org/nytimes_07_02_06.htm
http://www.internationaled.org/mathsciencereport.htm
http://www.pekingduck.org/archives/003837.php

to the NYT articles and letters above…. I respond thusly:

I tend to agree more with the Letters, than with the nyt article and even less so with the report.

I think we have to be very careful about accounting for the cultural institutionalization of learning in China and the U.S. We need to be much more careful than the 29 page report. The report does not do that very well at all, it basically assumes a ‘most similar systems’ model of society and culture to make its comparison. This model is not justified in my mind. The U.S. and China are involved in fundamentally different projects in their educational systems though they have similar goals. Time on task type training, which is ‘efficient’ in China, might not be ‘efficient’ in the U.S. where we likely focus on a different sense of freedom, creativity and progress in learning.

I think it would be far more productive, policy-wise, to actually address the issues within the u.s. in regards to graduation and retention rates. Achievement measurement is grossly affected when there are an overwhelming percentage of people who are being ‘left behind’ or ‘unaddressed’ by the school systems in the u.s. In fact, i think we can probably fairly easily show that the single norm distribution basis for ’science and math education measurements’ is actually multi-modal and the arguments based on the covering norm are actually hiding very serious social and educational issues. If the needs of the people represented in the lower achieving modes of the population were addressed and they were taught and graduated, I think you would see the measured norm of science and math education change dramatically in the u.s.

What then is the real politics and policy behind the report? It seeks to legitimize national standards and national testing, taking away a power that has been relegated to local democracies and replacing it with national bureaucracies. It seeks to remove teacher control of the curriculum. It seems better teaching of teachers (ok, i agree with this one, give us educated and inspired teachers). It seeks to replace the open system of education and admissions with examination based access to education, (given what we know about cultural biases in the sat and act … ), etc. etc. In short, I think what we have is just a document that seeks to expand the currently promoted educational regime, which in the last 7 years or so has demonstrated significant problems addressing the needs of all students in the U.S.