This year, we’re celebrating a decade of Newton’s Apple bridging the gap between science and society. The landscapes of both the science and policy arenas are continually shifting, and we must work hard to keep up. We’ve been pushing hard to satisfy the demand for our workshops. Despite having reached over 1600 early career researchers with our “Introduction to Science Policy” workshops, we now find there is continuing demand for more advanced workshops. To meet this demand, we plan to bring scientists and policy makers together to explore specific topics of societal importance, such as food production, energy provision and data security. We hope that the advanced programme will be run in collaboration with Learned Societies, who could nominate topics, and have future research leaders as participants. We also intend to embark on a new project to develop a better understanding of science and the Scientific Method among policy makers.
Dr Michael W Elves, Newton’s Apple Chairman
Dr Ian Gibson, Honorary President of Newton’s Apple
As Newton’s Apple works toward to some new and exciting projects, we look back on 2014-15 in the Chairman’s annual report. The report includes a number of acknowledgements to those who have shaped the successes of the past year.
Acknowledgements from Dr Michael Elves, Chairman of Newton’s Apple:
“It is only through the support and active contributions of a number of people that our Foundation has been able to enjoy success with it’s activities. I am personally grateful for all the support and encouragement from other members of the Board of Trustees, and in particular to John Masters our Treasurer, to Dr Gillian Pepper for her work on the website, and to Andrew Miller MP, Julian Huppert MP, Stephen Metcalf MP, who have contributed to the workshops by providing meeting rooms in Westminster and being the “Science in Parliament” speakers at these workshops. I am also pleased to acknowledge the great support from Monica Darnbrough, Ian Gibson, Brian Iddon and Stephen Benn for their fairly regular contributions as speakers in our workshops.
It is also a pleasure to acknowledge the contributions to the workshops of Elizabeth Sturkovic, Chris Fleming, Chris Darby, Jon Elliot, and Andrew Greenway all of the Government Office for Science, Amanda Dickins of BIS, Alan Malcolm of the Parliamentary and Scientific Committee, Andrew Crudgington of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Alex Connor of the Institute of Physics and Sarah Main, Director of CASE. Without their support and contributions Newton’s Apple could not be the success it is.”
Just before the General Election, the Guardian published an update from Chris Chambers, Natalia Lawrence, Andrew Kythreotis, Jemma Chambers, Gerard O’Grady and Sven Bestmann on the proposed Evidence Information Service.
We have created a new page to help our visitors keep up to date with what’s happening in Parliament. It contains a live feed of Parliamentary debates via Parliament TV. It also shows the RSS feed for the Parliamentary debate calendar, so that you can see what’s coming up next. You can view the new page here, or go the Parliament Calendar for more details.
Today, Newton’s Apple gave a workshop for staff and students at Durham University. In addition to the open workshops in Westminster, we regularly run workshops that are commissioned by Universities. Every so often, it is good to capture the action. This blog post contains some of the highlights in pictures.
Our Chairman, Dr Michael Elves, giving an overview of science policy processes.
Andrew Miller MP, Chair of the Commons Science and Technology Select Committee, giving and overview of Science in Parliament. This included some fascinating insights into the work of Select Committees.
Chris Darby, Head of Energy and Earth Resources, Government Office for Science, explaining the complex web of Government Departments that use scientific evidence.
The panel debate in full swing, including insights on the importance of learned societies and professional bodies from Dr Stephen Benn and a special case study from Dr Ian Gibson on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act (2008).
Our December workshop in the Palace of Westminster was a landmark event for the Newton’s Apple Foundation. It saw the 1,000th workshop participant since they were started four years ago.
These events continue to be very much in demand with the target audience – PhD Students and Post docs – a significant number (25-30%) of whom now say that they are looking for careers in the Civil Service or other policy areas. After our January Workshop, and the one we will be running with UCL in February, we are still likely to have a waiting list of about 40 for a London Workshop.
Many thanks to those of you who have contributed to our workshops over these past four years and ensured their success.
Best wishes for a successful 2014.
Dr Michael Elves, Newton’s Apple Foundation Chairman
In a recent article in the Observer newspaper article Will Hutton has set the alarm bells ringing regarding the importance of postgraduate training in our Universities, and the likely impact upon it of accrued student debt. He points to the decline in the numbers of English graduates going onto study at postgraduate level. We share this worry, but are also concerned about whether the current provision of Doctoral training and training in the early postdoctoral research appointments, particularly in the sciences and engineering, take into account sufficiently the need to prepare the postgraduate for future employment. It has been pointed out, that with the present squeeze on university finances and research funding, only one in ten postdocs can now expect to find careers in the academic system as a senior Principle Investigator (PI). Something achieved only after years of acting as research assistants to their supervisors and supported by grant-dependant fellowships, and the like. In the future therefore much postdoctoral employment for scientists and engineers is likely to be in fields other than that for which their training, as currently carried out, prepares them.
In our 21st Century Society there is, and will continue to be, a great need for a better understanding of where, and how, science and technology fit into the cultural and industrial life of the nation. Furthermore the research community will need to become more active in providing advice, or comment, to government where proposed new policies involve new knowledge that their research gives them access to. Therefore for those that stay in the research arena we feel that there must be some preparation as part of their postgraduate training for this aspect of the scientist or engineer’s role in Society. In the rather narrow nature of current postgraduate, and even more so, postdoctoral training these young people deserve better than they are getting.
In the twenty first century our lives are being affected, for better or for worse, by developments in science, technology and engineering, or rely on these disciplines to meet present and future threats. Thus, for example, one may think of genetic modification to improve production of crops to feed an ever increasing world population; of developments in stem-cell biology offering better understanding of diseases and new treatments for otherwise serious and intractable medical conditions; of better understanding of embryology and its increasing contribution to reproductive medicine; and, of course, the response to climate change which is of concern from many different directions. Yet there is often an apparent disconnect between our policy-makers in Government and Parliament, on the one hand, and the scientific and engineering communities on the other. This needs to be corrected. There would be much to be gained for the nation if these two elements of our public life could be brought closer together to create some better more joined-up thinking. So where should we start?
First perhaps at the laboratory bench. Today the imperative, as far as research funding is concerned, is for our universities to focus on achieving “high research ratings” through their publications in premier league journals in order to attract greater levels of funding. This is of course not in itself a bad objective except that, in the process, development of the future careers of the PhD students and Postdocs, and therefore the long term health of the UK’s broader “science base,” receives scant attention. This is despite the fact that there are insufficient career posts in academia, as highlighted above, or in industrial research for them to fill. Many postgraduates and postdocs will inevitably therefore need to seek to deploy their skills in fields other than research. Because of this we believe that that there should be a widening of their training experience from merely focussing on the pursuit of the supervisors research, and the generation of point-scoring research papers for publication, to fitting them for roles as scientists outside of mainstream research.
Postdocs should be encouraged to think about other broader matters including how their scientific knowledge and understanding may have wider application in Society. They should be encouraged to see the relevance, political consequences and wider applicability of science and technology in general, and the relevance of their science in particular, to wider national policy issues. In particular, they should be making contributions by being proactive in providing understandable explanations of their science to Government ministers, MPs, and those arts – and humanities – based senior civil servants who ultimately make the policy decisions.
It would also be of enormous benefit if the applicability of the concepts behind the “scientific method” to other areas of life, and in particular the making and evaluation of policy, could be more widely appreciated. It is important that there should be a correct understanding by our policy-makers of the nature of scientific evidence. There needs to be an understanding that in many areas the published research is rarely black or white, and that there are still areas of enormous uncertainty and debate even among the experts. We can think, for example of the research in the areas of climate change, of the impact of insecticides on ee and other pollinator health the role of badgers in the spread of bovine TB. At best what the policy-makers have available is a consensus which may be based on many different views, rather than on a sound understanding of the science behind the area. The scientist therefore has a role in interpreting this evidence for them, and bringing some perspective, particularly in areas where there is a significant body of evidence pointing in a different direction. We suggest therefore that, as an essential ingredient of their training during their postgraduate and Postdoctoral years, these young researchers should be learn something of the way that policy is made and assessed – and the routes through which they may provide information and advice to the policy makers.
It was to make some contribution to bridging that serious gap between the science and engineering community, on the one hand, and the processes whereby policy is made on the other, that the Newton’s Apple Foundation was established. Over the last four years our organisation has run workshops in some universities, in Westminster and elsewhere to introduce young researchers to the world of policy-making. Through these workshops postgraduate students and post-doctoral researchers are brought into contact with politicians and civil servants, and others involved in policy-making. The main objective of the Foundation being to help the participants to understand that they can also have a part to play in the policy making processes. They are shown how they can help Government and Parliament to understand the scientific and engineering issues involved in policies being considered, or under development. Importantly, they are also given some positive examples of where scientists, often, but not exclusively, working through their learned Societies, have influenced policy thinking. For example the influence they had on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008, the control of light pollution and bringing about the reconsideration of an EU directive which would have had the effect of preventing the use of MRI scanners throughout Europe. Over this four years approaching 1,000 students have been taken part in these workshops, and the demand for them is increasing.
The feedback received from workshop participants has shown, firstly, that the great majority of the postgrads and postdocs come to the workshops quite unaware of how policy is made. Secondly, as a result of their attendance they feel that their knowledge of the policy-making processes has been significantly improved, and the workshops do awaken their interest in, and appreciation of, the importance of scientific and technological evidence and advice in policy-making. It is quite evident from the feedback that these young researchers do want to understand the workings of the policy makers, and become involved and make their own contribution where relevant. Some are even beginning to think about creating their future careers in these areas rather than in pure research. However what Newton’s Apple is doing is but a start to the process of widening the interests of our young researchers, and awakening an interest in the application of their scientific expertise to areas of Society other than pure research.
We suggest therefore that it is time that the value of PhD and Postdoc training needs to be recognised as a way of preparing scientists and technologists for careers outside the purely academic. What is now needed is the investment in the provision of wider training and experience for these young people in order to open up for them the vista of other areas of useful employment, outside the University and research environment. As an integral part of their training these young researchers should be made aware of, and even given exposure to, other career options. In areas such as, for example, in industrial research, in development and management, in the civil service – scientific or policy making branches, and even as scientists working in quite non-scientific roles in businesses and the professions. They can be the bringers of the scientific ways of thinking to other areas of analysis and decision making. In short they should be helped to understand where science and technology fit into the cultural and industrial life of the nation, and where they will find a useful role in which there knowledge and experience will be valued.
Finally there is the question of how many PhDs are being trained in our Universities, and serious the mismatch with the number of established posts in academia, where ambitions their usually lie, for them to fill.
Although the Newton’s Apple Workshops are making a real contribution to widening the students’ knowledge, and awakening an interest in those who attend, they inevitably can only scrape the surface. There should therefore be a wider availability of training of this sort as an integral part of the postgraduate scientist or engineer’s training whilst in Higher Education.
Dr Michael W. Elves, Chairman, Newton’s Apple Foundation (contact)
Dr Ian Gibson, President, Newton’s Apple Foundation (contact)