Bio Job Blog : Bio Jobs : Biotechnology Jobs : Biopharmaceutical Jobs : Bioscience, Biotech Jobs : Bio Job Blog : Biocareer : Bio-Business Training, Biotechnology Training : Jobs in Biology : Internships in Biology : Internships in Biotechnology

It is no secret that one of the greatest impediments to improving the public understanding of science is the inability of scientists to articulate the importance of their work and ideas to non-scientists. 

Early in my career I was guilty like most of the rest of you. The first hint that I was not getting through to lay people was their eyes glazing over when I attempted to explain what my research was about. I quickly realized that I needed to learn how to better present my ideas to non-scientists if I wanted to engage them in casual conversations about science. 

Unfortunately, most of the persons charged with training scientists see little or no value in teaching their students to communicate to lay persons about their research or science in general. After all, they wouldn’t understand it anyway so why bother? That justification may have been valid 30 years ago but with the advent of the Internet and more recently social media, it is vitally important that the correct scientific information is disseminated to the lay public. In case you hadn’t notices, there is an awful lot of scientific misinformation out there that is being taken as “the truth” by large segments of the American public.

Recognizing this, Pat Marsteller a biologist and science educator at Emory University in Atlanta developed a course entitled “Communicating Science” which is designed to tech graduate students to write for and talk to non-scientists. She teaches the course with two chemists, mainly because the majority of students who took the class last semester (the first time it was taught) were chemists. Apparently, most of the students were “volun-told” to take the class by a chemistry adviser. This became apparent to Dr. Marsteller during the first class meeting when a chemistry student quipped: “Why Should I want to talk to anybody who doesn’t understand carbon?” Go figure....

While the course is designed to eliminate jargon and science speak so it is more comprehensible to non-scientists, it also stresses the different ways in which scientific information ought to be transmitted to different audiences that a scientist may encounter during his/her careers. For an example of this click here.

Hat tip to Dr. Marsteller for developing such a forward-thinking and necessary course.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

This Week in Microbiology (TMiV)—created by BioCrowd founder Vincent Racaniello and sponsored by the American Society for Microbiology (ASM)—launched today, with episode #1 posted at microbeworld.org/twim. It will soon be available on iTunes and the Zune marketplace.

The first episode focused on the antibacterial properties of metallic cooper and the discovery that Neisseria gonorrhoeae, the causative agent of gonorrhea, had somehow acquired human DNA sequences. Stan Maloy, a past President of ASM, and Michael Schmidt joined Vincent (host) and me (co-host) for the inaugural podcast.  

Future TWiM topics include the emergence of antibiotic resistant bacteria, bacterial food poisoning, adaptation of microbial life in extreme environments and the use of bacteria in green energy production.

The goal of TWiM is to improve the public understanding of microbiology and related topics. To that end, we encourage listeners to contact us with comments, kvetches, suggestions and ideas for future podcasts.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Listening!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

BioCrowd co-founders Vincent Racaniello and Cliff Mintz (aka BioJobBlogger) today in association with Microbe World (sponsored by the American Society for Microbiology) created the first episode of This Week in Microbiology (TWiM), a podcast series that explores various topics in microbiology that have relevance for the lay public.

Following in the path of his successful shows 'This Week in Virology' (TWiV) and 'This Week in Parasitism' (TWiP), Vincent and his guests produce an informal yet informative conversation about microbes which is accessible to everyone, no matter what their science background.

This week’s show focused on the antibacterial properties of metallic cooper and the discovery that Neisseria gonorrhoeae, the causative agent of gonorrhea, had somehow acquired human DNA sequences. Stan Maloy and Michael Schmidt joined Vincent (host) and me (co-host) for the inaugural podcast.  

TWiM podcasts will be available at TWiV, Microbe World, BioCrowd and BioJobBlog. They can also be downloaded from iTunes and the Zune Store once we get permission to post them at those sites.

The goal of TWiM is to improve the public understanding of microbiology and related topics. While there are no exams or pop quizzes, TWiM does encourage interaction with the audience email and skype. Listeners can also use Microbe World to suggest topics for the show by submitting articles or papers to the site and tagging them with "TWiM"

I will post the first TWiV installment as soon as Vincent edits today’s podcast!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Listen to TWiM!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In 2005, The National Academy of Sciences issued a worrisome report entitled “Rising above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future” that warned that America is slipping in competitiveness in all areas of science.

While this ought to have been a wake-up call for all Americans, in 2010, the Academy issued an update entitled “Rising above the Gathering Storm: Approaching Category 5." Not surprisingly, the findings in the update indicate that the US is still lagging in its capacity to innovate and compete and that the trend continues to move in a downward direction. For example, in 2006 (the most recent year for which data are available) 16 percent of American college students received undergraduate degrees in natural sciences or engineering as compared with 47 percent in China, 38 percent in Korea and 27 percent in France. Recommendations in the original report called for creation of 25, 000 undergraduate scholarships per year in math, science and engineering. Although the updated report indicated that Congress had taken some steps to implement the recommendation, progress has been severely lacking in this area.

Almost all US colleges and universities require that undergraduate students have some instruction in science. Unfortunately, most of these courses are lecture driven and lack a laboratory component (mainly because laboratory instruction is costly and time intensive). This is problematic because science is a laboratory driven discipline that requires data collection and analysis; neither of which is taught in most lecture settings. Recognizing the growing lack of science literacy among American undergraduate students, Leon Botstein—music director and conductor of the American Symphony Orchestra and President of Bard College an artsy liberal arts college in NY—decided to do something about it. To that end, he created a program at Bard called Citizen Science; a mandatory science course conducted during winter break that all Bard freshmen are required to take for graduation.

Citizen Science is a two and a half week long program in which students spend six hours per day immersed in laboratory science. The 2011 program taken by 480 students focused on the molecular biology of infectious diseases. Using laboratory equipment, computer modeling and classroom discussions, student explored various aspects of infectious disease research including bacterial and viral detection, creation of vaccines and techniques that can be used to manage global disease outbreaks. The students were taught by two dozen scientists who were recruited from all over the country. There are no grades or credits received by program participants. This was done to promote learning for learning sake according to Brooke Jude an assistant professor of biology and the director of Citizen Science.

Botstein, who incidentally is the brother of David Botstein a world renowned geneticist at Princeton University, has been an outspoken critic about deficiencies in American education. He previously has taken many of his colleagues to task for “shirking their responsibility to create a well-rounded citizenry.” Botstein, with help from his brother, decided to “put his money where is mouth is” by creating Citizen Science. 

According to Botstein, “The most terrifying problem in American university education is the profound lack of scientific literacy for the people we give diplomas to who are not scientists or engineers.” He added, “The hidden Achilles’ heel is that while we’ve found ways to educate scientists in the humanities, the reverse has never really happened. Everybody knows this, but nobody wants to do anything about it.”

Not surprisingly, the Citizen Science Program has received mixed reviews from the 480 Bard freshmen who participated in the inaugural program. After all, a majority of the students who chose to attend Bard have a decided bent toward music and the arts, not science. Nevertheless, many students suggested that their two and half week scientific sojourn has taught them to think more critically about science. Next year’s theme for the Citizen Science program may be energy or climate change.

While Bard’s Citizen Science program is a fantastic idea, not all colleges or universities have the financial largess or scientific connections necessary to create similar programs at their institutions. Perhaps Congress ought to establish funding mechanisms (in addition to the 25,000 math and science scholarships each year) for post secondary institutions interested in replicating the Bard program.

Government officials can no longer deny what the data are showing them; science literacy in the US is plummeting and we are REALLY at risk of losing our competitive and innovative edges in math, engineering and science. Put simply, it is no longer a question of “if” but “when.”

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I just returned from the American Society of Human Genetics (ASHG) annual meeting that was held this past week in Washington, DC. On the surface, the meeting was not much different from the others that I typically attend—I was providing resume critiquing services and career counseling to graduate students and postdoctoral fellows. But, this meeting felt different to me than most and I couldn’t quite explain why! That is; until I read a blog post by Magali Charmot-Sauva entitled “Are Scientist Purely Rational”

The gist of the post was that scientists are not much different than non-scientists and like most “normal” people they do have emotions and secrets that have little to do with science! In other words, scientists are “just like everyone else” as Charmot-Sauva contends. But, she posits that society has convinced scientists that they are different and most have embraced the notion. 

After reading the post, I started thinking about the different feeling that I had at ASGH this past week. Many of the graduate students and postdocs that I talked with were folks engaged in rare disease research, genetic counseling, diagnostics and epidemiology. In other words, unlike most research scientists, they were working on serious “human” diseases and closer in many ways to the people who suffer from them. Put simply, the label “human genetics” rather than molecular or biochemical etc somehow permits these scientists to more easily express their humanity and ultimately their humanness! And, interestingly enough, the ASGH leadership sponsored a symposium for students and postdocs designed to improve their communication skills with the news media and the lay public. Clearly the ASHG leadership understands that scientists and “normal people” need to communicate with and get to know one another better.

The lack of emphasis on communication and interpersonal skills in most graduate programs sends the wrong message to graduate students and postdocs. Most interpret this to mean that they are not necessary or important for a successful scientific career. And it also helps to promulgate the myth it is okay for scientists to be different than other people. While this may be acceptable for some academics (they don’t get out much anyway), it is entirely unacceptable in the non-academic science world where a premium is placed on well honed oral and written communication skills. 

For those of you who may not believe me, take a look at some of the job ads for industrial scientist positions. Invariably, all require that prospective job candidates have outstanding written and oral communication skills. In the past, companies were willing to overlook these requirements in order to acquire the requisite technical skills that they needed. However, there is currently a glut of PhD-trained bioscientists in today’s market and life sciences hiring managers no longer have to sacrifice any requirements in order to hire the best job candidates. That said, I think it is time for scientists to “come out of their ivory towers” and learn what it means to communicate and be human again!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Communicating!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Vincent Racaniello, a BioCrowd founder and Professor of Microbiology at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons published an article on PLOS Pathogens entitled “Social Media and Microbiology.”

Vincent, a virologist by training, has spent the past 30 years at Columbia where he has been recognized for numerous achievements including identification and characterization of the human polio virus receptor, the creation of transgenic mice to study the neural tropism of the polio virus and the identification of viral virulence factors that contribute to the pathogenesis of a variety of viral infections. His contributions to the field of virology have resulted in a number of honors including the Eli Lilly Award, a Harvey Lectureship, a 10 year Merit Award from NIH and editor of the Journal of Virology and other peer reviewed microbiology journals.

While not conducting laboratory research and teaching virology to undergraduates and graduate students, Vincent spends a considerable amount of time writing for his blog the Virology Blog and creating podcasts for his award winning show entitled TWIV (This Week in Virology). He is a committed educator and firmly believes that his role as a scientist is to improve the public understanding of infectious diseases and science in general. 

The introduction to his article aptly describes his philosophy about social media and science education.

“Social media consists of Internet technologies that allow users to create and share content, and to foster dialogues among other users. Examples include software applications for communication (blogging, social networking, discussion forums), collaboration (wikis, social bookmarking), and multimedia (sharing photographs, video, and livecasting). In the world of science, social media is becoming an increasingly integral component of both research and education. My experience with two types of social media, blogging and podcasting, has convinced me that scientists must embrace these applications to enhance research, and to better communicate their work to the public.”

If you want to learn more about Vincent or chat with him, he can frequently be found at BioCrowd interacting with undergraduates, graduate students, postdocs and even colleagues from time to time.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Virologist and BioCrowd co-founder Vincent Racaniello, PhD recently gave a talk at the Spring 2010 meeting of the Society for General Microbiology in Edinburgh, Scotland.

The talk, entitled ‘Social Media in Microbiology Education and Research’ reviewed how Professor Racaniello uses blogging, podcasting, and other social media tools to teach the public about viruses.

To learn more about Vincent and how he uses social media to increase the publics’ awareness about viruses and other infectious agents, please visit the BioCrowd website.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I Am Biotech, the Biotechnology Industry Organization’s (BIO) outreach program is trying to promote the use of social media to spread the word about the importance of biotechnology and how it has changed the world for many individuals.

BioCrowd was invited to contribute to the social media section of the website. Like us, I Am Biotech believes that social media has an important role in promoting a better public understanding of biotechnology and other aspects of the life sciences industry.

Please check us out and learn more about the value of becoming a member of the BioCrowd by clicking here.

Until next time

Good Luck and Good Surfing!!!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

William Shakespeare wrote: "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." While Shakespeare apparently believed that names aren’t important, David Anderegg, a professor of psychology at Bennington College in Vermont feels otherwise. He contends that the mere mention of the words geek or nerd tend to perpetuate a stereotype. “The words are damaging, much like racial epithets and should be avoided” he said in a recent New York Times interview. He suggests that while the words are often used interchangeably, the connotations are a bit different. In today’s lexicon, the word geek usually suggests a person with special expertise, e.g., a computer geek, whereas the word nerd suggests social ineptness. Nevertheless, he contends that neither is perceived as a “cool” moniker.

Anderegg further asserts that in the US, math, science and computer science are courses that younger people too often associates with nerds and geeks. He adds that the negative connotations of these words are taking a toll on the US workforce. And, he may be right! Fewer college-aged Americans are majoring in science and engineering and US competitiveness in math and science has been steadily declining for the past 20 years or more. According to Dr. Anderegg the best way to combat these trends is to attempt to eliminate the words geeks and nerds from the American lexicon and “banish them to the linguistic dustbin.” To that end his most recent book, “Nerds: Who They Are and Why We need More of Them” may be a step in the right direction to convince young Americans that more engineers and scientists will be required for the US to remain competitive in today’s rapidly changing global economy. 

Not surprisingly, I think that science, engineering and technology are pretty cool and mistakenly get a bad rap because of the way in which science and math are taught at the primary and secondary educational levels. Put simply, many of the teachers’ currently teaching math and science don’t have sufficient breadth or depth to teach the subjects that they are asked to teach! One way to begin to change this is to convince some very hip, newly minted PhDs (you know who you are) that pursuing careers as high school biology and biotechnology teachers is—despite assertions to the contrary—a pretty cool thing to do! Call me crazy but I think this is what it is going to take to reinvigorate America’s competitiveness in science and technology! After all, nerds will be nerds, geeks will be geeks and scientists will be scientists....not that there is anything wrong with that!

Hat tip to David Anderegg!

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Teaching!!!!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Alan Alda, a well known actor and science enthusiast, is doing his share to improve the science literacy of Americans. His was the host of the Science Frontiers (which ran for 15 seasons on PBS until it was cancelled in 2005) and more recently the host of Wired Science which failed to catch on and was also canceled. Alda’s approach to science education is asking questions that nonscientists could understand while throwing in a bit of humor as well. In a recent interview he stressed that he always tries to “keep it a conversation.” Sometimes, he added, scientists and researchers would “lapse into lecture mode, and I’d have to bring them back into a conversation. This isn’t surprising because many scientists are unfamiliar or lack the necessary training to engage in conversational science. For the most part, scientists are trained didactically and exchange information via formal traditional channels which include: seminars, oral and written presentations at scientific meetings and congresses and publication of research findings in peer reviewed journals. In other words, science education has historically resembled a one way conversation rather than a dialog. Unfortunately, web 2.0 and social media is all about conversations and one way conversations are becoming less acceptable, even in science circles! To that end, Alda just finished teaching a six-week course of workshops at Stony Brook University on Long Island instructing scientists how to use improvisational acting techniques to express themselves more clearly. “The idea is you can’t really communicate ideas unless you know what’s going on in the other person’s mind,” he said. 

Despite many incredible scientific advances in the past decade, the science gap in America continues to widen. Science is becoming increasingly complex and fewer Americans are capable of understanding it. Therefore, it is incumbent upon scientists to begin to understand that they have a critical role to play in improving the public understanding of science. This responsibility can no longer be relegated to primary and secondary school teachers nor should nonscientists like Alda,Ira Flato of NPR’s Science Friday, Robert Krulwich and Jad Abumrad of RadioLab (a great show), be expected to carry the banner and lead the charge! 

Interestingly, while listening to this week’s Science Friday, I learned of educational initiatives being sponsored by the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundations that are aimed at bringing more science into the entertainment fields. The computer systems institute also offers flexible programs as well.  While this is an important first step, it may be too little; too late. Throwing money at the problem won’t solve it: scientists need to step out of their comfort zones and learn how to better communicate and interact with the lay public. To that end, by way of a sport’s analogy “we scientists control our own destiny” We can choose to collectively learn how to better inform the American public about what we do and how we do it or allow the science literacy gap to ultimately become a chasm in the 21^st century.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Learning and Listening!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Several weeks ago, I blogged about a growing need to improve the American public’s perception and understanding of the life sciences if the US wants to remain competitive in science and technology. Much to my delight, there was an article this Sunday’s NY Times entitled “Microbes R Us” which explores the evolutionary relationship with bacteria and humans. It was written by Dr. Olivia Judson an evolutionary biologist and author of “Dr. Tatiana’s Sex Advice to All Creation: The Definitive Guide to the Evolutionary Biology of Sex,” which was made into a three part television program.

While the evolutionary relationship between bacteria and humans isn’t as titillating as the biology of sex, the article sheds light on the importance of bacteria and how genetic changes in bacteria that normally inhabit the human intestinal track can have a positive impact on human nutrition and health. Many lay people believe that bacteria are “bad” because certain species can cause serious and potentially life threatening diseases. However, the benefits, advantages and uses of bacteria e.g., to make food, antibiotics and other medicines, far outweigh their negative impact on society. 

Articles like the one written by Ms. Judson, offer the public unqique insights into  the amazing and often fascinating world of microbiology. I hope that a few aspiring young scientists read the article and tell all their friends about it!

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Reading!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link