So you’ve decided that you want a career or at least a job
in academia; what’s next? Imposter
Syndrome is something that makes applying to lots of interesting jobs seem like
a risk; when should you take the time to apply?
How can you leverage curiosity to broaden your job search? This single
session course will cover some of the basics of the academic job search: how to
decide whether to apply for a particular job and then how to make your
application pop. As the cover letter is
the first thing that most hiring committees see, we will focus on how to make
yours strong. CVs, research statements,
teaching portfolios, and interview questions will also be touched on.
This class will be discussion-based. Please come with your questions! Also, if you want to submit a cover letter to be (constructively!) critiqued by the participants, please send it to me over email.
The participants should leave with a better idea of how to choose where to apply and then how to successfully apply. (Reward!)
Emily King is a professor of mathematics at Colorado State University, reigning IK Powerpoint Karaoke champion, an avid distance runner, and a lover of slow food / craft beer / third wave coffee. Her research interests include algebraic and applied harmonic analysis, signal and image processing, data analysis, and frame theory. In layman’s terms, she looks for the best building blocks to represent data, images, and even theoretical mathematical objects to better understand them. She also has a tattoo symbolizing most of her favorite classes of mathematical objects. If you are curious, you should ask her about it over a beer.
This course will focus on aspects of ethics in science and that “scientific curiosity” is not without limits although ethical standards may vary in different cultures. We shall focus on the relatively new field of neuro-ethics. Another important topic will be concerned with good scientific practice and its implications for the performance of science, and what kind of rules apply. To follow these rules of good scientific practice is among the key requirements for scientists worldwide as well as for any autonomous artificial intelligent systems and, thus, is one of the pillars of trust into scientific results. The participants will be confronted with examples of fraud in science, ethical problems and decisions as well as good scientific practice. The outcome of such ethical decisions and questions around good scientific practice will be discussed.
Ethics in (Neuro)Science
Fraud in Science? Is it a problem? Introduction to a few exemplary cases. Task for each or a group of participants (pending on number of attendees): Internet search for cases of fraud, offenders and reasons to commit fraud.
Good Scientific Practice Are there obligatory rules for performing experiments, keeping records, storing data? Are there any laws having to be considered?
Publishing and Final discussion What are hybrid journals, open access journals and what is the future of publishing? Are there also “dark sides” of open access?
The course should teach participants the rules of good scientific practice, how to implement them in their own work and how to teach others. The participants will also be made aware of ethical problems that may arise with designing and carrying out experiments on animals or humans.
Ahlgrim et al. (2019) Prodromes and Preclinical Detection of Brain Diseases: Surveying the Ethical Landscape of Predicting Brain Health July/August 2019, 6(4) ENEURO.0439-18.2019 1–11
Greely et al. (2018) Neuroethics Guiding Principles for the NIH BRAIN Initiative. The Journal of Neuroscience, December 12,2018 • 38(50):10586–10588
Global Neuroethics Summit Delegates, Rommelfanger et al. (2018) Neuroethics Questions to Guide Ethical
Research in the International Brain Initiatives. Neuron 100:19-36, October 10, 2018
Kreutzberg, GW, The Rules of Good Science, EMBO reports, vol. 5, 330-332, 2004
Hans-Joachim Pflüger is a retired professor of Functional Neuroanatomy/Neurobiology at Freie Universität Berlin who is still active in basic neurobiological research where he is interested in the neuronal basis of locomotory behaviour in insects such as pattern generation, sensory reflex circuits and neuromodulation. He studied Biology and Chemistry in Stuttgart, obtained his doctoral degree from the University of Kaiserslautern and was a postdoc in Cambridge/UK. He was an assistant professor at the Universities of Bielefeld and Konstanz before his habilitation in Konstanz in 1985. He moved to Freie Universität, Berlin in 1987 and spent several sabbaticals in Tucson (Univ. of Arizona), Tempe (Arizona State Univ.), both USA, and Christchurch (Univ. of Canterbury), New Zealand. He was a visiting scientist to Ben Gurion Univ., Beer Sheva, Israel and received the Ernst-Bresslau guest professor award of the Universität zu Köln. He has served on several DFG-reviewing panels, was treasurer and president of the German Neuroscience Society (NWG) and also treasurer for both FENS (Federation of European Neuroscience Societies) and IBRO (International Brain Research Organization).
Teaching is a very complex, multilayered activity, going far beyond transfer of knowledge. The three main topics of this IK help to understand important aspects of teaching in higher education: Teaching is risky (which is not a defect but at its core), teaching is a reciprocal, social and interpersonal practice, and teaching is often a gendered practice. The course covers these three aspects with a mix of theoretical input and reflection. In the first session, we will reflect on our cultural, disciplinary, and personal understanding of teaching and then cover the three aspects risk, reward, and, finally curiosity.
The objectives are to reflect on culturally common, but wrong or at least lopsided views on teaching (including teaching problems), to understand how teaching actually works and to gain a view on teaching that is both inspiring and realistic. A further objective is to understand the discipline-specific nature of teaching and how it is practiced in different fields.
Biesta, G. (2014). The beautiful risk of education. London: Routledge.
Kreber, C. (2013). Authenticity in and through teaching in higher education: The transformative potential of the scholarship of teaching. London: Routledge.
Kreber, C. (ed.) (2008): The university and its disciplines: Teaching and learning within and beyond disciplinary boundaries. New York, NY: Routledge.
Ingrid Scharlau studied psychology, philosophy and pedagogics at Bielefeld University and Bochum University. She is professor for Cognitive Psychology and founder and head of the Academic Writing Center as well as the Mentoring Program for Female PhD students at Paderborn University. Her research interests cover cognitive psychology (visuo-spatial attention, time perception, modelling, history of psychology), academic writing (understanding and fostering academic writing in the different disciplines), and higher education didactics (disciplinary cultures, discipline-sensitive education, liberal arts education). Although being mainly an empirical researcher, she has a strong background in meta-theory (history, philosophy of science).