A lot of problems with how the institutions of science and research are organized range from difficulties replicating research,

A lot of problems with how the institutions of science and research are organized range from difficulties replicating research, bad incentives for promoting research integrity, gaming the system of scientific prestige and status, privatization of research funds, distortion of research agendas through funding, conflicts of interest, too little (or too much) democratization of participation in scientific decision making.

What do you think is the biggest thing “wrong with science”? It might be one of these listed, some combination of them, or something else. The task of this prompt is twofold.

First, identify and define something that you think is wrong with science.

Second, what do you think is the best way to confront this problem.

As you build your argument you should do two things.

1) Make sure that you describe “what’s wrong” using readings provided and attached

2) Try to think like a real policy maker or policy analyst in proposing your solution. Address some of the tradeoffs, pros and cons, and possible pitfalls of your proposed solution. Explain why it is better than the situation we have. Also, consider factors to make it realistic: For example, if it involves new rules or norms, who will implement those rules and norms, who has that authority to make changes? Or if it will impose a bunch of costs on people, who will bear those costs, where will the resources come from, and why are these new costs superior to the way resources are being expended now? Or if it involves an implementation, what are the motivations to get this done, how will you convince people? As usual, you don’t have to answer all of these questions, they are meant as prompts to get you to think practically about how one goes about making a social or institutional change.

The paper should be 900-1500 words, citations not included.

It will be evaluated on

A) Clarity and correctness of the writing

, B) A clear and well-made argument,

C) Full and clear description of your materials (i.e., the examples in the podcast you’re analyzing)

D) Correct and insightful application of course ideas and readings to your analysis. When you submit your paper be clear to label the prompt used.

Please read the directions carefully and use the sources I attach!!! Please use at least 3 of the sources as citations in the paper and rather than rephrasing please analyze the text and provide useful feedback and input.

5 attachments