Article 7---2/28/2010

http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/2010/February/22021001.asp

The article I chose for this week is about funding science and budget cuts that science may be facing. The article was written by Anna Lewcock and entitled Funding Cuts Will "Damage A Generation" of Science. The article starts out by stating that cutting the budget cap on science is a bad idea. As stated in the article, "Cutting research budgets will harm science for an entire generation" is how the science world feels at this point. Not only will harm us from the progress we are making in certain areas that will not only better the US but the world in general. One of the areas they hit on was the fact that many aspiring scientists would loose interest in the field if there were budget cuts. This is because most of the projects that require a budget are very expensive, especially things such as cancer. This was better explained in the article by a nobel prize winner scientist Peter Agre by saying, "When we have booms in scientific funding, young people devote their careers to this, and then we have busts and they can't pay the rent." This is very true.

The article next talks about how science functions on an international basis and the funding that each country receives directly influences many other countries in the world. The US deals heavily with other powerhouses such as France, Germany and the UK. The UK is currently experiencing budget cuts and their economy is in about the same situation it was in before the cuts. The Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) furthers explores this by stating, "we should be investing in UK science to create sustainable employment and re balance our economy, instead of making damaging cuts which will have no discernible impact on the national debt."

I believe that we should continue to fund science, but only to a certain extent. Projects that really don't do much for society should not be funded nearly as heavily as projects that have a great influence on how our society functions.

Discussion 6---2/21/2010

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/articles/karle/index.html

This article was by Jerome Karle entitled The Role of Science and Technology in Future Design. The article was about how design in science has affected technology and society throughout the developing years of our country. He does this by focusing mostly on basic science and the support it gets from government funds. He explains how science is one of the most important tools for a normal functioning and growing society. He did research to find out if science was just as important to society as it was the government. To me, his results were surprising. He found that although the government and some private organizations heavily fund science in our society, the greatest amount of support was from public funds. Although this was a surprising find, it also makes me feel good that our society does focus on our scientific efforts enough to have that great of a support base. On the other hand, science has introduced some problems such as, but not limited to, religion issues. For obvious reasons I am not going into detail, but science has brought along many ideas that has steered this country away from what we were founded on. This is appropriate to discuss because it involves science, technology and society.

He then goes onto explain the different ways that our society has helped aid our scientific advances. As Karle explains, one of the most important ways we have done this is "through the technology that fundamental research generates." This is important because everything we have been able to accomplish and find is through the aid of science and the scientists that are involved. Karle also goes onto explain that the most evident reason society does this is because the return on expenditures is greater than the actual moneys spent.

He concludes the article by stating "there is no question that science and society will continue to co-evolve." The only things that will hold us back is funding. This was a very interesting article because is covered so many topics that really focused the role of how our society relates to science.

-Adam Traywick

Article 5 --- 2/13/2010

http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/cnews/article.php/3863106/Microsoft-to-Help-Scientists-With-Free-Azure-Use.htm

This article written by Stuart J. Johnston entitled Microsoft to Help Scientists With Free Azure Use is about a new type of Microsoft program that allows free access to members of certain science organizations such as, NASDAQ: MSFT and the NSF, among others to help aid in more efficient ways of organizing data. As stated in the article, "the variety of sheer volume of data collected by scientific researchers has grown exponentially in recent years;" this is one of the reasons that they are allowing scientists to accss this software for free. I think that this is a good idea considering most people probably dont know what Microsoft Azure is. Science has become one of the most prominent studies in America and allowing for free software to help with these studies is a good idea. The con of this idea, as stated by the article is like anything else, it "is an enormous and expensive task in itself." With our economy in the shape it is in right now, this could pose a possible problem. That just means more and more of our tax dollars would be going to something else that is not necessarily going to bring this country out of the predicament we are in. But, everything has its pros and cons, we just need to find out if we will benefit from this more than we would hurt. Another thing that may pose a problem with this idea is that all you have to do access this software is by "applying to the NSF with a supplemental request for an already-funded project." Allowing anyone that is conducting a project that is funded to apply for the software allows for many to take advantage of this opportunity. There needs to be tight stipulations to this project for it to work well, but I do think it could work for the better.

-Adam Traywick

Article 4---2/7/2010

http//:www.ifets.info/journals/12_3/13.pdf


This article entitled Reflections of Students in Their Use of Asynchronous Online Seminars is a study on the reflections of students taking online classes and how much they did or did not like them. It also examines to what extent a student actually learns compared to traditional classes with face-to-face interactions. The study showed that students actually learned just as much if not more than they would in a traditional classroom. The article states, "A key reason for the use of technology within a learning situation is to enhance the quality of learning and teaching." I agree with this. I have taken many online classes, including this one, and I really like them. I think it allows a student to still have the opportunity to learn and better themselves but without having to go sit in a classroom. I also think that it makes you a better student. This being the case because although you dont have to go to a classroom, you still have deadlines you have to meet. It makes the student stay on top of things and be a responsible student. Online classes have many pros and cons. But, overall I believe that taking an online class makes you a more rounded student because it makes you a more rounded student being that you have to stay on top of not only going to class, but also completing your online work.

-Adam Traywick