We’ve had an exciting quarter here at the Black Hole, with a brilliant series of posts on scientists becoming entrepreneurs from Jonathan, a progressive post from guest UBC blogger Jan Klimas on writing more useful rejection letters, and along the same theme a series from me related to what scientists can do to make things better. These posts are listed below:
Guests blogger Jan Klimas
Jonathan:
- Building on the accelerator model – MassChallenge
- Building on the accelerator model – introduction
- Academic scientists need to create their own social networks
- Academic scientists and Plato’s Allegory of the Cave
- Scientist entrepreneurs: go ahead, jump!
- Looking south: The NIH’s 2015 fiscal outlook
Dave:
- Scientific research needs scientists to undertake research – who knew?
- On research priorities, don’t let the tail wag the dog
- Is science losing public support?
- Scientists have the power to change the publishing system
The post on changing the publishing system was the most hotly debated, but also the one with the least clear and least simple way forward – we’ve banged on about it for some time now that the publishing system needs to change. However, the journey to changing the way in which we evaluate papers (and scientists) and communicate their work will not be an easy one. But it does not mean that individuals do not have a part to play.
The biggest and easiest start is to listen to Jan Klimas – make your reviews productive and constructive, fight the good fight with editors and other reviewers. Secondly, consider open-access options and journals with new models of peer review. Have a listen when someone tries to make science open and free for everyone and pushes the most likely answers forward – not just the ones that build careers. Have the courage to work on the non-obvious questions in your field. I’m sure this is not all that Jonathan and I will have to say on the subject – stay tuned.
In the meantime, Dave also continued to write for Signals blog with five new entries, three on science and two that may be of significant interest to our readers interested in the value of scientific networks:
- Such a long journey – Europe approves retinal cell therapy based on decades of good science
- No more monkeying around – promising results using stem cells to treat Parkinson’s disease
- Cell Therapy 2.0 – warts and all
- Reflections on the Stem Cell Network Part 2: Building a broad talent base
- Reflections on the Stem Cell Network Part 1: Establishing the next generation of stem cell academics
Thanks to all of our readers. It’s been over five years for the Black Hole now and we owe a lot to our readers for great ideas and great discussion. I hope guest bloggers will continue to feel that this is a forum for them to join with their opinions.
