Search

Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education research and physics education research, in particular, are currently struggling with a dearth of research into understanding the experiences and identity development of neurodivergent students. In addition, an even larger gap in research exists looking into nonacademic members who have left the field and still strongly identify with their disciplinary identity. As valued members of our physics community, these colleagues provide a unique perspective as to how identity and participation are nurtured and developed, particularly among rising disabled physicists. To resolve these current issues and aid in future research, we operationalize our new Critical Disability Physics Identity framework and present results from interviews with three neurodivergent post-baccalaureate nonacademic physicists (those who have left physics and retain a strong affinity toward their identity as a physicist). As the first paper in a four-part phenomenological study into the identity development of neurodivergent physicists, we also present an analysis of each interview through a Critical Disability Physics Identity lens and discuss the implications of their Critical Disability Physics Identity development. We find that neurodivergent students experience very little outright discrimination and violence but experience structural ableism in the form of assessment that is not constructed for how neurodivergent physicists perform physics-related tasks. Additionally, we find that neurodivergent physicists seem to ground identity in having a strong interest in physics, something that is only shaken by professors and others in power being neutral toward the discrimination experienced by neurodivergent people. We find that there are very large power imbalances between professors and neurodivergent students and that only when professors and others in power are actively anti-ableist is this power imbalance remedied and neurodivergent students begin to feel that they are physicists.

Copyright of Archives of Civil Engineering (Polish Academy of Sciences) is the property of Polish Academy of Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The scientific impact and rankings are considered important metrics for determining national recognition and prestige, as well as for determining scientific priorities and funding. This paper analyzes the distribution of leading scientists across all scientific fields and countries, examining the similarity graphs between them. Our analysis also reveals further regional and continental patterns. By measuring the correlation between top scientists with GPD data, we show that the ratio of scientists maintains a high correlation with the GDP per capita. We also study the link between the scientific performances of a country (in terms of top research personnel it hosts) with its economic wealth. Finally, we analyze the case of Greece and show that the scientific impact of a country changes significantly when we take into consideration its scientific personnel that has migrated abroad (i.e., brain-drain). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The terms "offshore" and "open ocean" have been used to describe aquaculture sites that are further from the coast or in higher energy environments. Neither term has been clearly defined in the scientific literature nor in a legal context, and the terms are often used interchangeably. These and other related terms (for example "exposed", "high-energy") variously refer to aspects of a site such as the geographic distance from shore or infrastructure, the level of exposure to large waves and strong currents, the geographic fetch, the water depth, or some combination of these parameters. The ICES Working Group (ICES, 2024) on Open Ocean Aquaculture (WGOOA) therefore identified a need to define the terminology to reduce ambiguity for these types of aquaculture sites or more precisely, to: (1) promote a common understanding and avoid misuse for different classifications; (2) enable regulators to identify the characteristics of a marine site; (3) allow farmers to be able to assess or quantitatively compare sites for development; (4) equip developers and producers to identify operational parameters in which the equipment and vessels will need to operate; (5) provide insurers and investors with the terminology to consistently assess risk and premiums; and (6) circumvent the emergence of narratives that root in different cognitive interpretations of the terminology in public discourse. This paper describes the evolution of the use of the term "offshore aquaculture" and define the most relevant parameters to shift to a more definitive and robust term "exposed aquaculture" that can inherently relay clearer information. Adoption of this more definitive definition of "exposed" will allow the user to define a site with more than just distance from shore. Key differences and the importance of these terms are discussed that affect various interest groups. Follow-up articles in this compilation from scientific members of the WGOOA as well as other scientists outside ICES are incorporated that develop a set of definitions and a rigorous exposure index. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The role of personality in shaping engagement with aesthetics in science has been almost entirely unexplored. Whereas artists and arts settings (e.g., museums) are well-studied from a psychological perspective, the practice of science has often been seen as purely rational or dry. In response, this study presents novel findings on the critical role of scientists' individual differences, which shape their engagement with aesthetics, such as the frequency of their experiences of beauty, wonder, and awe in their scientific work. Methods: Based on a very large and representative four-country study of scientists in the fields of biology and physics (N = 3,092), this study analyzed the associations of Big Five personality traits among scientists with (i) dispositional aesthetics (DPES-awe), (ii) the frequency of aesthetic experiences in scientific work, and (iii) aesthetic sensitivity in science. These survey-weighted OLS regression models included extensive statistical controls for sociodemographic factors. Results: As hypothesized, openness is positively, and neuroticism is negatively linked with dispositional aesthetics, the frequency of aesthetic experiences in scientific work, and aesthetic sensitivity in science. Unexpectedly, agreeableness and conscientiousness (but not extraversion) are highly significant and strong predictors of the three trait and state aesthetic engagement variables. Discussion: The aesthetic engagement and personality framework of this paper is empirically supported and demonstrates the importance of personality types of scientists in the practice of science. The unexpectedly strong association of agreeableness with aesthetic engagement points to the importance of cooperation, collaboration, and communication to maximize scientific creativity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the post-pandemic era, lifelong learning (LLL) emerged as the key to professional development and the core competency of all disciplines. Even globally, there is a dearth of evidence based bibliometric analysis, notably on LLL. This study addresses this gap by examining the data retrieved from the Elsevier Scopus database. A systematic search method was adopted to retrieve 1806 publications from 790 journals from 1963 to 2022. The R package, Biblioshiny, was used for data analysis, including productivity/performance analysis, citation analysis, and collaboration network analysis of social structure. The findings showed that the number of publications has significantly increased over time. A large number of studies were published in 2022. Overall, 85 countries contributed to LLL. Among them, the United States was the most productive with 787 publications, and the United Kingdom was the country with 4731 citations. Learning was the trending topic, and skill development was an emerging theme in LLL. The results will aid the stakeholders in identifying largely unexplored areas of research that need more attention and funding. This study outlines not only the current scientific developments but also the potential future of LLL research. This study will also be used as a resource for researchers and teachers in LLL. Future research directions in this area of knowledge are also outlined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction. The rapid accumulation of genomic data and their widespread reuse in clinical and scientific practice demands more effective description and organization of genomic information, which poses new challenges in developing metadata schemas. Based on a previously developed taxonomy of metadata requirements, this paper reports the results from a survey that addresses these new challenges. Method. The survey gathered empirical data from 156 genomics scientists to identify context-sensitive metadata functional models for genome curation. The study further investigated the metadata elements from four well-known genomic metadata schemes against the functional requirements for genome metadata. Analysis. The survey data were employed the statistical package STATA, to produce descriptive statistics, factor analysis, Fisher's exact test, and related reports. Results. Analysis of the empirical results revealed that genomics scientists recognize specific sets of criteria for metadata needs in the genome-curation context. Twenty one metadata requirements were reduced to five factor constructs. The ranking of these constructs in decreasing order is: portability, reusability, manipulability, sufficiency, interoperability, extensibility, and modularity. The Fisher exact test results revealed that the genomic community required rich context and technical related metadata elements to facilitate data exchanges and experimental operations in genome curation. Conclusion. The findings indicated that genomics scientists developed metadata to meet the needs in genome curation activities related to data wrangling, integrations across platforms and databases, and data reuse. Architectural layout as flat file needs extra administrative metadata to support data sharing and documentation. The resulting metadata requirement model can serve as valuable resources to genome scientists, data curators and administrators for designing metadata schema and developing data-curation policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Algae, an important foundation of aquatic ecosystems, can become a nuisance or harmful when it grows in excess. Many government agencies have a role in monitoring, responding to, and confirming a harmful algal bloom (HAB). HAB scientists have important information to share, however, given the complexities of HABs, which often involve decoupled drivers from observed impacts, presents challenges to outreach and engagement. Understanding key audience information needs can help scientists prioritize key science communication and engagement opportunities to maximize the impact of such efforts. Scientists may need additional science communication training or support for scientist‐community partnerships. This will be evermore important into the future with the likely range expansion of HABs due to climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The professions of science and law have traditionally been siloed paradigms, operating often in tandem with each other but rarely intersecting in the interdisciplinary pasture which separates them, a pasture from which an abundance of synergistic collaboration and ensuing creative concepts might sprout. However, the erstwhile never the twain shall meet situation is neither realistic nor even tenable in the current century, a century increasingly dominated by science, technology, invention, innovation, and intellectual property. Simply put, whereas lawyers are risk averse and build constructed realities to argue points and serve clients, scientists seek an objective assessment of truth and accept a shifting appraisal of reality. As a harbinger of global challenges which will likely define this century, the COVID pandemic and the rapid development of efficacious vaccines vividly illustrates the necessity, importance and indeed urgency of building interdisciplinary bridges between the legal and scientific profession, i.e., a paradigmatic bridge. This cannot be accomplished bythe time-honored ad-hoc approaches which typify prevailing programs. Instead, it must be strategically approached via institutional commitment. The Franklin Pierce Law Center was a pioneer in this regard, and the University of New Hampshire Franklin Pierce School of Law carries that tradition forward into this century. Under the inspired leadership of two eminent dynamic thought-leaders in the field of legal education, Professor Leah Plunkett and Dean Megan Carpenter, the Powerhouse embodies this vision and commitment, with an innovative implementation of a paradigmatically synergistic model for legal education, forging the interface between law and science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While modern science and technology have produced astounding advances, their contributions to social welfare often fall short of expectations. This Article provides a holistic framework for promoting "socially responsive" innovation that increases the social benefits, decreases the social harms, and improves the distributional effects of massive investments in science and technology. Traditionally, policymakers have relied significantly on centralized governance regimes such as mission-based science funding and technological regulation to guide the development and use of new innovations. While valuable, centralized approaches feature several shortcomings, and this Article proposes a distributed model of innovation governance to supplement them. In so doing, it draws on the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, which bolstered the National Science Foundation's longstanding practice of considering the broader social impacts of proposed research projects when awarding research grants. Building on these reforms, this Article proposes a model of distributed innovation governance that extends beyond central policymakers to confer greater authority to promote socially responsive innovation on a wide range of public and private stakeholders, peer reviewers, scientists, and engineers. This Article argues for orienting various innovation gatekeepers--including federal funding agencies, scientific journals and conferences, and the Patent and Trademark Office--toward considering the broader social impacts (not just technical merit) of innovative projects when awarding key resources. By tying research funds, publication and presentation opportunities, and patents to assessments of social impact, this proposal creates a powerful incentive for scientists and inventors to consider and improve the contributions of their work to social welfare. This Article shows how government action can shift norms in the innovative community--including among private actors--to embrace socially responsive science and technology. This distributed governance model offers several benefits, including preserving scientific autonomy, guarding against the overpoliticization of innovation policy, and exploiting significant amounts of private information distributed among scientists and engineers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Brecht's Life of Galileo provides elements for elaborating what I call "a theory of the encounter of practices". The concept of the encounter pushes back against teleological theories that predestine modern science to operate as an instrument of domination. I argue that Life of Galileo stages the missed encounters in modernity between science, politics, and art at the same time as it foregrounds the emancipatory power of science. I trace the encounter of practices from the play's opening scenes -- highlighting what I call Galileo's "double life". Then, I turn to the most important scene of the play, Scene 10, in which political and artistic practices repurpose Galileo's novel inventions for their emancipatory desires. In the virtual potentialities of this encounter, that is, despite the missed encounter between Galileo and "the people", Brecht's Life of Galileo continues to be fruitful for theorizing the emancipatory power of science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Nauki o Wychowaniu. Studia Interdyscyplinarne is the property of Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Lodzkiego and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

IntroductionThe role of personality in shaping engagement with aesthetics in science has been almost entirely unexplored. Whereas artists and arts settings (e.g., museums) are well-studied from a psychological perspective, the practice of science has often been seen as purely rational or dry. In response, this study presents novel findings on the critical role of scientists’ individual differences, which shape their engagement with aesthetics, such as the frequency of their experiences of beauty, wonder, and awe in their scientific work.MethodsBased on a very large and representative four-country study of scientists in the fields of biology and physics (N = 3,092), this study analyzed the associations of Big Five personality traits among scientists with (i) dispositional aesthetics (DPES-awe), (ii) the frequency of aesthetic experiences in scientific work, and (iii) aesthetic sensitivity in science. These survey-weighted OLS regression models included extensive statistical controls for sociodemographic factors.ResultsAs hypothesized, openness is positively, and neuroticism is negatively linked with dispositional aesthetics, the frequency of aesthetic experiences in scientific work, and aesthetic sensitivity in science. Unexpectedly, agreeableness and conscientiousness (but not extraversion) are highly significant and strong predictors of the three trait and state aesthetic engagement variables.DiscussionThe aesthetic engagement and personality framework of this paper is empirically supported and demonstrates the importance of personality types of scientists in the practice of science. The unexpectedly strong association of agreeableness with aesthetic engagement points to the importance of cooperation, collaboration, and communication to maximize scientific creativity.

Spectroscopy is publishing a series of feature articles highlighting the lives and careers of the most influential spectroscopists over the past 100 years. These individuals were selected by our Editorial Advisory Board and the editors to represent the leading figures in spectroscopy over the century. Our first featured Icons of Spectroscopy Laurate is Professor Gary Hieftje., Gary Hieftje's scientific journey began at the young age of 10, and was inspired by his neighbor, Marvin Overway, the chemistry teacher at Zeeland High School in Michigan. Overway fueled [...]