by Claire Packman, Egenis Communications Officer
#egn13
Catherine Lyall (Genomics Forum), chairing, opened the session by remarking that “The research conducted by the EGB has had an impact way beyond academia.” We couldn’t, she said, demonstrate the full scope if its global reach in one short session – but the speakers had a jolly good go.
Joyce Tait (Innogen), herself no slouch when it comes to speaking truth to power, or to policymakers, at any rate, introduced Michael Oborne, formerly of the OECD. In 2006, Innogen was contracted by the OECD to develop scenarios of healthcare in 2030, a project which, Professor Tait said, was “quite formative” for the centre. The scenario report, Health Biotechnology to 2030, considered the pathways that health biotechnologies could follow, the future trajectory of the bioeconomy primarily in the context of human health, and the likely societal, economic and policy impacts of these projected outcomes, positing two potential scenarios . Outlining some of the report’s key points, Dr Oborne said one scenario in particular underscored the necessity of changing regulatory systems to control conditions under which innovation can take place – regulators are the gatekeepers to innovation.
Christine Knight (Forum) spoke about a joint project between the Forum and the Human Genetics Commission (HGC) in 2008, a ‘Citizens’ Enquiry into the forensic uses of DNA and the National DNA Database’. The report identified 10 topics of particular concern, which were subsequently used by the HGC as the basis of a public consultation. Sarah Cunningham-Burley, at the time a member of the HGC, made a video contribution (the film was made by the Forum’s very own filmmaker-in-residence, Cameron Duguid – isn’t it handy to have a filmmaker in the house? You never know when you might need one), praising’s the Forum’s expertise, particularly its efforts to engage groups generally regarded as ‘hard to reach’.
Cesagen’s contribution was a reflection on the interface between academia and Parliament, focusing particularly on the benefits of policy placements. Sarah Bunn of the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST), gave an overview of the work of POST, mentioning particularly POST fellowships, which give postgraduate or early career researchers the opportunity to work with POST on a specific briefing or project. She also said the POST is to recruit two social scientists, which has to be seen as something of a surge of recognition for the field. Richard Watermeyer (Cesagen), talked about his own experience of a short POST placement, part of his impact and engagement research. “I can’t tell you what an eye-opener it has been,” he said, although he did a pretty good job of telling us. Richard is soon to take up a two-year secondment in the office of the Chief Scientist for Wales, the first time a social scientist has been offered such an opportunity. Keep this up, Richard, and when Wales realises it needs a Chief Social Scientist you’ll have to be in the frame.
As if the excitement of having representatives from the OECD, the Human Genetics Commission and form Parliament at an EGN conference weren’t enough, the session finished with a media celebrity. John DuprĂ© (Egenis) discussed the role the media can play in communicating social science with Today Programme presenter Evan Davis. Luckily for John, Evan displayed none of the rottweiler interviewing technique for which that programme is famous. He focused first on ‘metaphorical mythbusting’, citing John’s work on deconstructing the ‘tree of life metaphor, and the notion of the genome as ‘blueprint for life’. “Understandings of science do congeal around these metaphors,” said John. “To advance understanding and improve discussion, we need to get rid of them.” Following more discussion about metaphors and their use and abuse, Evan returned to John’s work on evolution, remarking that it had upset some by appearing to give comfort to creationists. John described the reaction of some scientists to the debate as ‘circling the wagons’: “The shocking thing is if science becomes as dogmatic (as creationism), because then the opponents have won.”
The upshot of this session, however, has to be: Round five to the EGN, and a victory on points.
Welcome to the Genomics Forum blog
Based at The University of Edinburgh, the ESRC Genomics Policy and Research Forum is part of the ESRC Genomics Network and pioneers new ways to promote and communicate social research on the contemporary life sciences.
Showing posts with label academia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label academia. Show all posts
Wednesday, 8 May 2013
EGN Conference 2013 – Plenary Four: The “people legacy” of the Genomics Network
by Christine Knight, Genomics Forum Senior Policy Research Fellow
#egn13
People power
The ‘people legacy’ session at the EGN Conference came at an interesting time for me personally. I’m about to be made unemployed, and to go along to a session celebrating the capacity-building function of the network – its ability to launch its graduates and postdocs on successful careers – brings mixed feelings. The rather significant unsaid at this week’s conference is that the end of a major research council investment, such as the Genomics Forum and the ESRC funding for the three EGN centres, brings at least the potential for large-scale unemployment.
#egn13
People power
The ‘people legacy’ session at the EGN Conference came at an interesting time for me personally. I’m about to be made unemployed, and to go along to a session celebrating the capacity-building function of the network – its ability to launch its graduates and postdocs on successful careers – brings mixed feelings. The rather significant unsaid at this week’s conference is that the end of a major research council investment, such as the Genomics Forum and the ESRC funding for the three EGN centres, brings at least the potential for large-scale unemployment.
I can’t speak for the other centres in the Genomics Network.
But at the Forum, although the threat of mass unemployment has receded, several
staff (myself included) still don’t know where we’ll end up next. That’s not
quite true – I know I’ve got a well-deserved and well-planned summer break
first of all. But come the autumn, I may or may not have my dream fellowship
funded elsewhere at the University of Edinburgh. And if I don’t, who knows?
Planning a career break is not something I’ve done lightly,
and I certainly wouldn’t change the decision. But there are moments when I do
question my faith in my own employability, such as when I talk to other
research fellows who’ve interviewed for the same fellowship schemes I’ve
applied for, and then been turned down. Am I just demonstrating breathtaking
levels of Gen-Y arrogance? Will I find myself locked out of academia for good,
REFability or no REFability?
At gutter-gazing moments like these, it’s always good to go to
a conference session dedicated to the stellar success of former EGN PhD
students and fellows. 89 PhD students completed during the lifespan of the EGN
– a very considerable achievement, as chair Steve Sturdy pointed out, on top of
the core research outputs of the centres. Of these, 4 spoke about their
postgraduate and postdoctoral experiences in this session.
Heather Walmsley studied at the Lancaster branch of Cesagen and
is now Banting Fellow and Postdoctoral Teaching Fellow at the University of
British Columbia. Hristina Petkova did a PhD in health economics at Egenis and
now works at King’s College London. Farah Huzair studied agricultural biotech
innovation at Innogen at the Open University, moved to Canada for a postdoc at
Dalhousie, and has now returned to Innogen at the OU. Jonathan Suk, a former Genomics
Forum Research Fellow, now works for the European Centre for Disease Prevention
and Control.
These are sparkling stories and they go some way towards
justifying my belief that I should dry-clean my interview suit and polish my
shoes, just in case. But there are also stories behind these stories that I’d
like to hear. All 4 of the speakers in the session had made significant moves –
across the pond, the North Sea, or the country. Were these upheavals wanted?
Were they planned? Are even the most successful junior academics subject to
circumstance, and the assumption that we can pack our bags and our lives at a
moment’s notice and traipse across the world to follow a job? What becomes of
friendships, relationships and family ties in these situations?
There are certainly rich personal gains to be had out of
academic adventure, and I’m not (just) talking about money and professional
success. But are there other personal costs? What is gained and what is lost
when Dr 20-Something packs up and ships out? These aren’t just gains and losses
for the individual, but for the institution that has invested time and money in
her or his training.
One of the reasons I believe the EGN has been so successful
– and we heard much about its success from Paul Boyle, Chief Executive of the
ESRC, in his closing remarks later in the day – is the employment security it
has offered to junior and senior staff alike. My own 5-year postdoctoral contract
is extremely unusual, and my peers across the network have been similarly
fortunate. This security has nurtured capacity and careers, allowing enormous
scope for creativity in research, knowledge exchange and public engagement.
At this uncertain moment, I can only express two hopes. First,
I hope that this investment pays off, for me and others in similar positions across
the network. Second, I hope the EGN’s ‘people legacy’ reminds the ESRC and
other research funders of the value of investing in early-career security and
stability.
Labels:
academia,
employment,
esrc,
investment,
legacy,
students
Thursday, 1 November 2012
Blogger’s Block
by Lindsay Goodall - Documentary Filmmaker in Residence
I have been a bit blocked recently when I’ve tried to write
my blog. I think it’s because I’ve been so busy over the past few weeks. I’ve
been to a convergence workshop, a STIS seminar on Syngenta, the Innogen coffee
morning, a Changing World lecture, an anthropology seminar on sperm banks in
China, I’ve been reading a lot and trying to participate as much as possible.
Now the challenge is to wade through all this new-found information to find some
clarity and focus. Yet the more I discover the more I need to know, and the
research phase of my residency could easily continue exponentially. I
sympathise with the scientists working on the ENCODE Project. How do you know
when to stop searching for new information and start to process the raw data?
While carrying out my research, I’ve become as fascinated by
academia as I am with all things genomics, and surprisingly I’ve realised there
are so many similarities between university life and the film and TV industry.
For example, there is the constant pressure to seek funding, produce new work
and keep on top of new developments and technology; the uncertainty about where
your next project or commission will come from or where it will be based; there
is a need to network and make contacts both locally and internationally; and
there are lots of opportunities to travel and work with new partners and
collaborators.
Labels:
academia,
convergence,
film,
genomics,
interdisciplinarity,
research,
tv
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


