Increasingly, write Ashley Frawley and Daniel Nehring, the waning societal valuation of the arts and social sciences is seen in these terms—if their value to a company’s bottom line is at all in question, then their entire raison d’etre is in doubt. Reversing this trend may involve some unpalatable decisions.
Having worked in academia for the past 30 years and currently serving as vice president of the Academy of Science of South Africa, Brenda Wingfield says she believes peer review and the publication process is perhaps more important than ever in this era of ‘fake news’ – and not just for scientists and academics.
Portia Roelofs and Max Gallien cite Bruce Gilley’s defense of colonialism paper published earlier this month to illustrate how deliberately provocative articles have the capacity to hack academia, to privilege clicks and attention over rigor in research.
Brexit and the concurrent increase in jingoism on the street raises questions about the extent to which British universities may continue to be an attractive choice for foreign students. What message should the UK broadcast on this issue?
In 1996 Erica Frank wrote a series of editor-reviewer “ideal” communications. Revisiting these suggestions, Michael Blades, editor of the journal Applied Spectroscopy, explores if over two decades later the notion of the “still-imperfect art” of peer review remains the same today.
Academics have been disengaged, disengaged themselves, or never been engaged with the challenges of working in, and for, very complex organizations, says our Robert Dingwall. Their distaste for administration in its various forms is a liability.
Largely missing from the debate about the growth of alt-right-ish movements and cultural currents, argues our Daniel Nehring, is sustained engagement with the consequences of the shifts that are currently underway in education.
So if markets are truly good for English higher education, as many seem to think, should we follow that train of thought to its logical conclusions?
An article in the journal Psychological Science, “The New Statistics: Why and How” by La Trobe University’s Geoff Cumming, has proved remarkably popular in the years since and is the third-most cited paper published in a Sage journal in 2013. The idea of an autonomous vehicle – i.e., a self-driving car – isn’t particularly new. Leonardo da Vinci had some ideas he […] Social sciences can also inform the design and creation of ethical frameworks and guidelines for AI development and for deployment into systems. Social scientists can contribute expertise: on data quality, equity, and reliability; on how bias manifests in AI algorithms and decision-making processes; on how AI technologies impact marginalized communities and exacerbate existing inequities; and on topics such as fairness, transparency, privacy, and accountability. If schools provide the proper support and resources, they will help educators move from anxiety to empowerment when integrating AI into the classroom. An article in the journal Psychological Science, “The New Statistics: Why and How” by La Trobe University’s Geoff Cumming, has proved remarkably popular in the years since and is the third-most cited paper published in a Sage journal in 2013. By carefully interrogating the system of economic incentives underlying innovations and how technologies are monetized in practice, we can generate a better understanding of the risks, both economic and technological, nurtured by a market’s structure.
EXPLORE
Impact
Paper Opening Science to the New Statistics Proves Its Import a Decade Later
READ MORE
A Milestone Dataset on the Road to Self-Driving Cars Proves Highly Popular
READ MORE
Why Social Science? Because It Can Help Contribute to AI That Benefits Society
READ MORE
Innovation
AI Upskilling Can and Should Empower Business School Faculty
READ MORE
Paper Opening Science to the New Statistics Proves Its Import a Decade Later
READ MORE
To Better Forecast AI, We Need to Learn Where Its Money Is Pointing
READ MORE
