This is the second of three posts detailing my experience of the Science Blogging Conference held at the Royal Institution, London, on 30th August. The first part is “here”:http://network.nature.com/blogs/user/rpg/2008/09/11/on-science-blogging-2008—part-1.
——————————
Parallel Sessions
The first three parallel sessions dealt with ‘microblogging’ and aggregation tools, advice on how to set up and improve a blog, and creativity.
Microblogging tools (Twitter, FriendFeed) were used by delegates to discuss all sessions of the conference as they happened, and to include interested parties not physically present.
Science is not usually considered a creative activity, but one role of creativity is to challenge assumptions, a necessary part of hypothesis formulation and testing. If blogging challenges assumptions and exposes one to different viewpoints then it becomes a valuable tool in unlocking scientific creativity. Writing about on-going research not only documents the scientific process for posterity but can actually enable a scientist to view their own problems from a different point of view. In an environment where creativity is encouraged ideas can be aired and tested with potential benefits for the scientific endeavour. Polaroid photography was used to illustrate how ‘stupid questions’ can lead to innovation.
I won a book for insulting Henry, but gave it to him because my suitcase was already too heavy.
The second set of parallel sessions included a talk on the virtual world ‘Second Life’ and the exhibitions and events hosted by Nature.
Another session looked at the use of blogging as a teaching tool, although only one of the panellists (a graduate student) discussed blogs in the context of a university. The benefits of blogging were summarized as solidifying knowledge through explanation, becoming a member of the scientific community and developing communication skills. On the other hand, forced participation in mediated online communities was something that students did not appreciate.
One of the three described how the Central Medical Library in Münster is using a blog to communicate with its customers, and the third talked about an online journal club set up to study examples of ‘good’ writing in scientific papers.
Perhaps the most telling moment was when a journalist from Times Higher Education asked how popular teaching blogs already are, only to be told that Admin and Faculty in general do not even know what a blog is. That blogging, and especially science blogging, is not mainstream even among scientists was a recurring theme throughout the conference. Furthermore, most students appear not to be interested unless they receive class credit, and there was very little discussion of how blogs might be used to teach students.
The third and most popular session discussed the use of blogs as a means of communicating primary data among scientists. Issues covered included the concept of the ‘minimal publishable unit’, being scooped, the permanence (or otherwise) of blogs, ring-fencing research ideas for oneself and electronic lab notebooks. The relevance of this to blogging is that not only do some group leaders oblige their scientists to keep blogs about their research, but others make all primary data available as it is generated. More on this from Cameron, Jean-Claude, etc.
A unique feature of the conference took place in the afternoon. ‘Unconference sessions’, proposed by delegates, were voted for on the day and the top three run in parallel. The discussions that took place were Why do we blog?, Bored of blogging and Tracking conversations through the blogosphere. The first two covered personal reflections on why people blog and how they maintain motivation. The third concentrated on the ‘Semantic Web’, and the difficulties of keeping abreast of what has been said on particular topics in many different places all over the world.
Thanks, Richard. Good write-up (I’m gradually picking up more about the sessions I necessarily missed).
I have powerpoint slides of mine and Euan’s presentation (“How to set up and improve your blog”) which include some resources. I have not yet seen these slides be put up in a conference report so if anyone wants them please email me at m dot clarke at nature dot com and I will send them. I have already sent them to a few people who asked me for them at the conference, but unfortunately I don’t think I have remembered everyone.
Did the Times Higher run anything as a result of their reporter attending the meeting, do you know?
I’ve been looking at THE since I got back and not seen anything relevant by Zoe Corbyn. I think she phoned Jenny for an interview at some point. But then again, THE only just seems to have woken up to the PowerPoint is shite meme, so maybe we need to wait another five years?
Can you not upload your slides to slideshare.net? It seems to be where all the cool kids are hanging out. After FriendFeed of course!
Edward Tufte published an interesting analysis of PowerPoint several years ago. We’re kind of stuck with it in graduate and professional school education, but applying Tufte’s principles to the design of PowerPoint slides makes it feel less corrupting, IMO. Nevertheless, sometimes I worry that a few of my cortical neurons die, each time I prepare a new PowerPoint presentation.
It was Tufte I was thinking of, thanks for reminding me.
I have ranted at length about this subject elsewhere.
Agh, that’s giving me a flashback to that horrendous Powerpoint slide you posted before.
Shudder
“improve your blog” – hm, I may have to email Maxine…
Bloody asterisks. I didn’t ask for bold.
*mutters darkly
For goodness’ sake, why doesn’t this use regular html?
Mind-numbingly awful Powerpoint blogpost by rpg, possibly even linked this time.
bq. For goodness’ sake, why doesn’t this use regular html?
We’ve been asking that for years, winty.
On the PowerPoint theme, one of the commenters on the THE piece gave a link to what might have been if Abraham Lincoln has used the program to give the Gettysburg address. It’s hilarious!
I won a book for insulting Henry, but gave it to him because my suitcase was already too heavy.
I read it. It wouldn’t have been worth the excess baggage. I now consider myself doubly insulted.
You think you’ve problems with it Henry – I’ve got another 23 copies to offload.
I just posted slides from Maxine and Euan’s session here. Sorry for the delay!
Great stuff Anna—thanks!
On Powerpoint(TM). I was mentioned in dispatches once for being one of only two people at a conference not to have used Powerpoint(TM).
@ Brian: If I were you, I’d shred the books and turn them into bedding for your hamsters. Hamsters can’t read, and that paper looks fairly absorbent.
I try to vary my lab talks — sometimes I use Keynote (PowerPoint, but better), other times overheads and sometimes I’ll just use a whiteboard.
I’m trying to convince the students that they should be able to give a talk without any pre-made slides.
Thanks, Anna! Quite a few people have uploaded slides to Slideshare now (and I’ve today signed up to it and am connecting madly over there), but some of them don’t seem to be using the “sciblog” tag. Mind you, I cant find a search by tag feature on Slideshare so I am making every presentation I can find a “favourite” to collect them on my page.
By the way, the reason I didn’t upload my slides to Slideshare previously is
because I didn’t know about itbecause I thought all the presentations were going to be uploaded together somewhere, and I was not sure where. I can email mine to anyone who does not want to get into all this Slideshare malarky (m dot clarke at nature dot com, personned monday to friday only).Right, now I can’t find you on Slideshare. Bah.
Richard – agreed. A chalk talk should be mandatory for all graduate students.
Ok, whiteboard, whatever.