Could Distributed Peer Review Better Decide Grant Funding?
The landscape of academic grant funding is notoriously competitive and plagued by lengthy, bureaucratic processes, exacerbated by difficulties in finding willing reviewers. Distributed […]
The “US effect”: problems with social science research in America Boston. Tech companies turn to social science The Missoulian Boys whose fathers […]
The censuring of an academic in the US for sending out an offensive tweet has led many university tweeters to pause for thought.
A study of 11,000 alumni from the University of Oxford has shown that humanities graduates went on to work in the UK’s major growth sectors. The Oxford study can’t tell us much about the fate of graduates at other universities around the UK. But it does prompt a closer look at the stigma surrounding humanities subjects in the UK.
As academics, we are not usually trained – or even encouraged – to seek an audience for our research beyond the world of peer review. This leaves us ill-equipped for the policy world, a competitive place in which scholars enjoy few advantages. To bring our ideas and findings into the policy arena, we must adopt a style of engagement that enable us to compete effectively with these other groups for the attention of decision-makers.
Every so often the internet is set ablaze with opinion pieces on a familiar question: Are “soft” sciences, like psychology, actually science?
Social Science Research Symposium – McGill Reporter Funding NIH behavioral research is a waste of money – Baltimore Sun Study maps the future of […]
Do the Humanities not have an intellectual basis as legitimate and rigorous as that of the natural and social sciences? And are not the Humanities in fact an essential part of higher education? Try considering the Humanities as a form of Human Relations.
Music, violence, politics, integrity: Feminist contradictions or an editorial in the form of 18 tweets From European Journal of Women’s Studies ‘No […]