Sunday, June 2, 2013
Friday, May 10, 2013
Johns Hopkins Graduate Science Writing Program to Close
May 01, 2013
On Monday, the science writing program's director, Ann Finkbeiner, e-mailed alumni of the program to announce that there would be no 2013–2014 class.
For 30 years, the Writing Seminars Department at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, has offered scientists and science-minded journalists the opportunity to hone their writing and communication skills through its master's degree in science writing. The program was one of the big five graduate science-writing programs in the United States. (The others are the University of California, Santa Cruz; the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; New York University; and Boston University.*) Graduates of John Hopkins University's program have gone on to staff positions with Scientific American, Science News, New Scientist, Time,USA Today, NPR, Radiolab, NASA, Science, and many others—including Science Careers. (That would be me, your humble correspondent.) On Monday, the science writing program's director, Ann Finkbeiner, e-mailed alumni of the program to announce that there would be no 2013–2014 class. The program is shuttering.
Science writing has long been considered one of the main "alternative" science careers, ideal for scientists with strong writing skills who have tired of spending their days in the lab running experiments. Some science writing graduate programs, like the one at the University of California, Santa Cruz, offer their degree exclusively to applicants with at least a bachelor's degree in science, while others, like the Johns Hopkins program, are open to anyone who demonstrates sufficient aptitude in science and writing.
The Hopkins program isn't the first to go. In 2009, Columbia University announced that it was closing its earth and environmental science journalism program because of "current weakness in the job market for environmental journalists." While the job market for science journalists is indeed crowded, due in large part to the downsizing of staffs at newspapers and magazines, Finkbeiner doesn't believe that's the reason why the Johns Hopkins program is closing. Apparently, she tells Science Careers in an interview, the primary motivation for ending the program was the low ratio of number of applicants to class size—in other words, the fact that the program isn't selective enough, which reflects poorly on the university's reputation as a competitive institution. Katherine Newman, dean of the School of Arts and Sciences, confirmed that as the reason that she decided to close the program.
Finkbeiner, who resigned from the university after learning the program was ending, says that the program typically received between 20 and 30 applicants per year and accepted four to six. Over the past few years, though, the number of applicants has been at the lower end of that range, she says. The same is true at other major graduate science writing programs, she says, citing conversations that she's had with other program directors.
Because science writing is a small niche and the number of graduate programs catering to science writing is small, the programs tend to share the same pool of applicants, Finkbeiner says—which leads her to believe that fewer people are applying to such programs than in the past. Whether that's a reflection of would-be applicants' awareness of the weak job market in science journalism, Finkbeiner isn't certain, but she thinks it might be a factor.
Finkbeiner believes that the program's closure is tied to a larger university initiative emphasizing its undergraduate curriculum and deemphasizing its graduate programs.** Newman disagreed with that characterization, but confirmed that the School of Arts and Sciences is working to expand and improve its undergraduate programs. There are plans to expand science writing courses for undergraduates beginning this fall, she says, with the goal of building up an extended undergraduate science writing program that would award a master's degree after an extra year of study, with concentrations in brain science, environmental science, and public health. Eventually, the standalone graduate program may be restored. "I consider this to be a hiatus more than anything else," Newman says, adding in an e-mail that it "is a considered decision to build where we think we have the greatest strength and then reconstitute our Master’s program at a more competitive level."
Finkbeiner chose to step down instead of overseeing this transition, contending that an undergraduate degree would be insufficient for a science writer to succeed professionally.
* Since posting this article, we've received a number of e-mails (and seen several tweets) from alumni and writing-program directors objecting to being left off the list of top programs. We also heard from the director of another Johns Hopkins science-writing program, the online program based in Washington, DC, which isn't closing. We're comfortable with our list of top programs—but there are many excellent science writing programs in the United States and beyond. No disrespect was intended in leaving them off our short list.
** When this article was first published, this sentence read, "Finkbeiner believes that the program's closure is tied to a larger university initiative emphasizing its undergraduate curriculum at the expense of its graduate programs." Finkbeiner contacted us to request a change, since she felt that this was a mischaracterization of her views. We decided to honor her request.
Michael Price is a graduate of the Johns Hopkins University Master of Arts in Science Writing Program.
Michael Price is a staff writer for Science Careers.
10.1126/science.caredit.a1300091
Thursday, May 9, 2013
Dear Science/Humanities group,
Very briefly: Together with Jim Abbott, Curator and Director of Evergreen Museum & Library, I am exploring the possibility of expanding how we at Hopkins can take fullest advantage of the wonderful resource that Evergreen--on 25 splendid acres just a scant mile north of the Homewood campus--offers our faculty and students.
Jim and I are interested in tapping into these grounds as a resource for new course/research/project initiatives in areas the might include biology, environmental science, engineering (there is a problematic stream and bridge combination on the grounds), history, and the fine arts.
We are looking for a diverse group from campus, from a range of departments and backgrounds, to join us for a picnic/supper, tour of the Evergreen grounds, and conversation/brainstorming around how we might use the grounds in research and teaching.
If you are interested and available to do this over the summer, please drop me a quick note, along with a broad sense of your schedule. And, if you have colleagues whom you think might take a specific interest in Evergreen's grounds, pass their names on to me. I would be glad to include them.
Many thanks,
Elizabeth
Very briefly: Together with Jim Abbott, Curator and Director of Evergreen Museum & Library, I am exploring the possibility of expanding how we at Hopkins can take fullest advantage of the wonderful resource that Evergreen--on 25 splendid acres just a scant mile north of the Homewood campus--offers our faculty and students.
Jim and I are interested in tapping into these grounds as a resource for new course/research/project initiatives in areas the might include biology, environmental science, engineering (there is a problematic stream and bridge combination on the grounds), history, and the fine arts.
We are looking for a diverse group from campus, from a range of departments and backgrounds, to join us for a picnic/supper, tour of the Evergreen grounds, and conversation/brainstorming around how we might use the grounds in research and teaching.
If you are interested and available to do this over the summer, please drop me a quick note, along with a broad sense of your schedule. And, if you have colleagues whom you think might take a specific interest in Evergreen's grounds, pass their names on to me. I would be glad to include them.
Many thanks,
Elizabeth
____________________________________
Elizabeth Rodini, Ph.D.
Teaching Professor, History of Art
Director, Program in Museums and Society
The Johns Hopkins University
Gilman Hall, rm. 363 (mail: rm. 301)
3400 N. Charles St.
Baltimore, Maryland 21218
410-516-4827/fax 410-516-7502
http://krieger.jhu.edu/museums/
Elizabeth Rodini, Ph.D.
Teaching Professor, History of Art
Director, Program in Museums and Society
The Johns Hopkins University
Gilman Hall, rm. 363 (mail: rm. 301)
3400 N. Charles St.
Baltimore, Maryland 21218
410-516-4827/fax 410-516-7502
http://krieger.jhu.edu/museums/
Sunday, May 5, 2013
This Annual conference at Columbia University is close to what we are talking about:
Rethinking the Human Sciences
Each year the Institute for Comparative Literature and Society hosts an annual conference that brings together the finest scholars in the world to discuss issues of historical and contemporary relevance, joining the reading practices of comparative literary studies to those of the social theoretical disciplines.
The generally cultivated skepticism about the contemporary pertinence of humanities-based education to current problems in social achievement and capacity to compete in a global sphere has energized the ranks of the Institute to seek new venues of re-conceptualizing and re-articulating the human sciences.
Indeed, the point is to rethink the humanities in broader fashion in order to address, not merely modes of learning that characterize the social sciences (historical methodologies, sociological and geopolitical conceptualizations, or anthropological figurations of culture), which has been the work of the Institute since the outset, but increasing tendencies in all disciplines (including the life sciences) that problematize the permutations and boundaries of the human - an enormous range of scholarship that includes meta-empirical discussions in neuroscience and cognitive science, the complex intersection of biotechnology, biopolitics, and bioethics; the geopolitical dimensions of epidemiology, public health, and human rights; the media and imaging technologies of human bodies; the emergent fields of ecology and ecocriticism, posthumanism and animality, and a great deal more.
Rethinking the Human Sciences
Each year the Institute for Comparative Literature and Society hosts an annual conference that brings together the finest scholars in the world to discuss issues of historical and contemporary relevance, joining the reading practices of comparative literary studies to those of the social theoretical disciplines.
The generally cultivated skepticism about the contemporary pertinence of humanities-based education to current problems in social achievement and capacity to compete in a global sphere has energized the ranks of the Institute to seek new venues of re-conceptualizing and re-articulating the human sciences.
Indeed, the point is to rethink the humanities in broader fashion in order to address, not merely modes of learning that characterize the social sciences (historical methodologies, sociological and geopolitical conceptualizations, or anthropological figurations of culture), which has been the work of the Institute since the outset, but increasing tendencies in all disciplines (including the life sciences) that problematize the permutations and boundaries of the human - an enormous range of scholarship that includes meta-empirical discussions in neuroscience and cognitive science, the complex intersection of biotechnology, biopolitics, and bioethics; the geopolitical dimensions of epidemiology, public health, and human rights; the media and imaging technologies of human bodies; the emergent fields of ecology and ecocriticism, posthumanism and animality, and a great deal more.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013
Lecture:
Thursday, May 2, 2013
"Why Humanist Scholarship in an Uncertain World: Reflections from the German Tradition"
A lecture by John Smith, University of Waterloo / UC Irvine
Location: Gilman 138-D
5:00-7:00PM
John H. Smith is currently preparing a book on
- The Infinitesimal Difference: Calculus and Philosophy in Modern German Thought
Monday, April 29, 2013
François Jacob, Geneticist Who Pointed to How Traits Are Inherited, Dies at 92
In The Possible and the Actual (Le Jeu des possibles, 1981), French Geneticist François Jacob draws connections between science and myth. Scientific enquiry, he says, begins with inventing a possible world. The same happens with the creation of Myth.
Myths and science fulfill a similar function: they both
provide human beings with a representation of the world and of the forces that
are supposed to govern it. They both fix the limits of what is considered as
possible.
— François Jacob
The
Possible and the Actual
(1982), 9.
Four articles reflecting the constant exchange between science, art and ...being human
suggested by Brenda Rapp:
Noticing: How To Take A Walk In The Woods by ADAM FRANK
A few excerpts:
As the poet Rilke once said,
Try to love the questions themselves, like locked rooms and like books written in a foreign language.
Questions raise our pulse and sharpen our delight. [...]
Refining our capacity to notice is an act of reverence that we can bring to everywhere and everywhen. It's an invitation, bringing the world's most basic presence into view, opening our horizons and restoring our spirits. And that is what science is really there for.
How To See The World In A Grain Of Sand
More than two centuries ago, the great poet William Blake offered the world the most extraordinary of possibilities:
To see a world in a grain of sandAnd a heaven in a wild flower,Hold infinity in the palm of your hand,and eternity in an hour.
Yeah, that would be nice.
Unfortunately, most of us don't know how to hold eternity in the palm of our hands. In fact, most of us feel lucky if we can just hold it together until the end of the day. The problem, of course, is that mostly we've lost our minds. And I mean that literally. Our attention is endlessly lost in the endless blur of appointments, to-do lists, worry, concern and agitation that makes up modern life.[...]
Can we really see the whole world in a grain of sand?
Through the lens of science we can see how even the smallest thing can be a gateway to an experience of the extraordinary, if only we can practice noticing.
There are deep connections between meaning-making and object-making. Those connections are exactly where the resonances between art and science find their potency.
The Getty Conservation Institute's exhibit From Start to Finish: De Wain Valentine's Gray Column details the creation of one twelve-foot high, eight-foot wide, 3,500 lb. work with the appearance of a gigantic burnished prism.
Taking in the "Gray Column" from all angles of the gallery, it's clear that Valentine's work is, essentially, a protracted experiment in the relationship between light and matter. As the artist once said, his goal was to "take a big saw and cut out a piece of sky."
Fundamentally, both art and science are about encounters with the real world — the one we live in and experience as colors, textures, shapes and sounds. Every artistic creation and every scientific study is a record of experimentation. At their best those experiments are rooted in two vital qualities: interest and attention.[...]
Interest and attention allow us to live lives that are rich in meaning, lives that are passionate about noticing the everyday miracles right in front of us. No wonder, then, that both science and art have such power over us.
From A Tennessee Forest, Singing The Beauty Of Nature And Science by BARBARA J. KING
David Haskell conversed with me about his experiences in the forest. Here are some highlights from our exchange, starting with his observation that the most numerous woodland creatures were not the most obvious:
The forest is ruled by the inconspicuous small creatures. Birds and mammals are more eye-catching, but the vast majority of the animals present were tiny insects, snails, worms and other invertebrate animals. Getting down on my belly with a hand lens pressed to my eye was the best way to see this.
But it's not only the animal species that are inter-connected; Haskell, too, became part of the forest ecosystem.
A deer walked right up to me — I was sitting very still and it did not see me — then took alarm and snorted. The deer's call was picked up by chipmunks, then squirrels above me, then wood thrushes downslope, spreading like a wave from a rock thrown into a lake. It took more than an hour for the wave to settle, especially for the chipmunks. From then on, I could tell when hikers were approaching by the bow wave of alarm that preceded them
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


