Continuing with the introductions to the sessions on the Program, here is what will happen on Saturday, January 16th at 3:15 - 4:20pm:
A. Government 2.0 - Anil Dash
Description: Introducing new tools for scientists to give feedback to the Obama Administration and asking for feedback on making it work, and work well. Discuss: here.
B. Open Access Publishing and Freeing the Scientific Literature (or Why Freedom is about more than just not paying for things) - Jonathan Eisen
Description: Open Access (OA) publishing in science has and continues to spread. We will discuss a variety of issues relating to OA publishing including different types of OA, why "open" and "free (as in no cost)" mean different things, the latest government and university mandates on OA publishing, financial aspects of OA, and the interdependence of OA and other forms of open science. Discuss here.
C. An Open History of Science - John McKay and Eric Michael Johnson
Description: We will be talking about how the history of science and the history of the open-access movement have intersected. Steven Johnson touches on this theme in his latest book, The Invention of Air, in that 18th century British polymath Joseph Priestley was a strong advocate of publishing scientific data widely in order to create a greater dialogue between scientists. While Johnson only mentions this briefly in the case of Priestley, this theme runs strongly through the history of science and is what makes the debate over the patenting of genes or the availability of open-access journals such important topics today. Discuss here.
D. How does a journalist figure out "which scientists to trust"? - Christine Ottery and Connie St Louis
Description: We will talk about how science journalists can know which scientists to trust based on a blogpost by Christine Ottery that made a splash in the world of science communication. As a relative newcomer to science journalism and blogging (Christine) and an award-winning broadcaster, journalist, writer and scientist (Connie), we will be bringing two very different viewpoints to the discussion. We will be touching on peer review, journals, reputation and maverick scientists. We will also examine how journalists and scientists can foster good working relationships with each other, find out what is best practice when it comes to sources for science journalists, and turn the premise of the talk on its head and ask "Which journalists can you trust?" of the scientists. Discuss here.
E. Science Education: Adults - Darlene Cavalier
Description: "Cavalier's site Science Cheerleader aims to increase adult science literacy through a variety of channels including a partnership with GMU's Prof James Trefil, efforts to involve adults in science policy discussions, and by directing adults to "on ramps" where they can find opportunities to volunteer to "do science" as part of formal or informal science activities." Discuss here.
Education
Politics
