A happy 4th of July

Hope everybody had fun this independence day weekend. The weather here in San Francisco was gorgeous! And the annual SFO jazz festival was on! Ah, the good life!

With regard to the focus of our blog, I am happy to mention that nationally renowned and respected journalists, especially op-ed column writers of the New York Times, have started paying a lot of attention to our education woes. Paul Krugman graces the topic regularly, and so do others. One influential voice that has joined the bandwagon is Nick Kristof, a Pulitzer prize winning columnist famous for his highly visible coverage of the human rights violations in Darfur. Since the beginning of this year, I have noticed Kristof writing more about education, with the hope, I think, that by keeping the issue in our sights, the current administration will do something to solve our problems. Read some of his posts on the topic:

Our Greatest National Shame

Rising Above I.Q.

Education’s Ground Zero

The Best Kids’ Books Ever

Other interesting reading: An article in the New Yorker about ‘Green Dot’ schools in LA
(registration is required to read the full article):

Now for some other thoughts

Over a period of time, I have realized that I am a part of the ‘too much talk, not much walk’ bandwagon, which is comprised of a group of professionals who care to regularly express their thoughts about the current state of affairs through blogs and such, but who dare not take part in community activities that really make a difference. Consequently, I decided in June of this year to start a small foundation to address various societal issues that I think need to be addressed in our communities. For a while, I was trying to come up with a good mission statement that would describe the goals of the foundation. My statements only got bigger and more complicated as tried to include multiple areas. Oddly, I woke up the 4th morning with a single thought in my head, that I don’t really need a complicated mission statement, but something really simple, along the lines of, The foundation aims to address societal problems by proposing innovative solutions.

So here goes. I had thought of a good name, but turns out that there is another religious foundation by that name in India. So had to default to The Date Foundation (the website is parked, but not active). The foundation started with acquiring of the website on July 4th, 2009. I will post more as work progresses.

Cheerio!
-Shailesh

About Genentech, Inc.

I took another very long break from the blog, but I have a good excuse. I work at Genentech, which was recently taken-over/taken-private by Roche. There was a lot of anxiety and lament over the loss of independence, but hopefully things will work out. Roche has certainly made it a priority to retain the talent and keep the work culture as it is.

A bit more about Genentech, in case you didn’t know: The company, founded in 1976 by Bob Swanson, a venture capitalist, and Herb Boyer, a UCSF professor of biochemistry, over a beer, is considered the first biotechnology company in the world. From the very beginning, the company has fostered a unique culture, mixing elements of academia, the excitement of a small start-up, and focused drug development, to great acclaim. Genentech has remained one of the best companies to work for in the Fortune 100 list for a number of years. The company has performed exceptionally well over the past decade, a tribute to all the people who made the company a great place to work, and of course, the leadership, with people like Art Levinson and Sue Desmond-Hellmann, who have inspired and guided it so well.

With this merger, a big chapter in Genentech’s history is now over. The company is now part of the Roche family of companies, and will continue to develop medicines for unmet medical needs. Art will continue to advise Genentech, and Sue has taken up a new job, as the chancellor of UCSF. Genentech’s independence will be missed, but the opportunity to serve patients still remains.

Who would you rather have, a cop or a teacher?

In a recent conversation, Eric Brown, one of our senior directors at Genentech, Inc., posed an interesting question: Who would you rather have, a cop or a teacher? We were talking about California’s record budget gap of $15 billion, which has the state government all tangled up. And Gov. Schwarzenegger seems incapable of resolving it any time soon. What happens if the issue is not resolved? Some consequences of the deficit are inevitable, such as reduction in state services and some trimming of spending on public programs. But what is more important is the potential for a devastating effect on the public education system. Will we have to lay off teachers? Will we have to shut down schools? How will the crisis affect aid to the University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU) systems? Will we have to choose between a cop and teacher?

California is not the only state facing a crisis, but given its image, the state’s problems appear to be much more famous. Other states are facing similar problems. Overall, since the collapse of the housing bubble, the general unraveling (or ‘resetting’ in Steve Ballmer’s words) of the economy has revealed many sore spots, both national and local, and the situation is really forcing our politicians to act quickly. The federal government is racing to our aid in the form a stimulus bill that is expected to provide federal money for some much need programs, and also create jobs, and also help the environment, and also help homeowners, and Joe the plumber and …

But lets keep our eye on education for the moment. According to the New York (NY) Times, provisions in the bill will provide up to $150 billion in aid to school districts and universities. Arne Duncan, the newly appointed education secretary hopes that this will avoid laying off hundreds of thousands of teachers. What’s the holdup? Well, the republicans don’t like the bill very much, and are objecting. Why would anybody have any objections to the spending bill, given that we are in such a dire situation with everything from the economy to the environment? The key word here is ‘spending’, which goes against the credo of the Republican Party. Hence the debate, the party-line votes (meaning no republican in the house voted for it), and the trimming of ‘pork’.

Surely the republicans wouldn’t object to spending some money on education, would they? Well, unfortunately, education is no longer a republican priority (guess who the college educated, latte drinking, NY Times reading, Prius driving folk voted for). The party has lost all connection with reality, guns are more important, as is drilling for oil. Every other issue is a distant third, not worth debating. The GOP would rather believe Rush Limbaugh than a doctor. So will they cut out education spending? We can only hope. It will be a shame if they do.

Coming back to California’s education woes, propping up the education system using federal money may be an okay idea in the current situation, but the events that brought us to this precipice have to be closely examined. What should we do to ensure that this does not happen again? While there aren’t many clear answers, a few resonate and appear to rise above the din. For instance, why should the government be responsible for educating its population? Should it ensure that basic education is available to all? Yes. Should it ensure that it is affordable? Yes. Should it attempt to make it free? Well, the answer to that is not very straightforward. I was schooled in India, which has a mixture model: you will get free basic education, but if you are willing to pay a bit extra, you can probably go to a better school where the teachers are a bit better trained and there are a few more learning aids. Could such a system be effective and successful here in California? Someone will have to give it a try. And the good thing is I am sure we could get the republicans on board with this cost cutting idea.

What is going to happen next? Wait and watch, the next few months are going to be interesting. Experts are suggesting that the spending bill’s failure or success will most likely be judged on how the money is used in California.

Tracking California events: California Progress Report

-S

Epilogue:
I know I have been bashing republicans in this post, but there is something I should clarify: I really don’t care for either republicans or democrats. They are politicians, and they will behave badly. The ‘Outpost’ blog of the NY Times has an interesting post, on why people dislike and distrust politicians, as exemplified by events surrounding the mayor of Portland, Oregon, a man by the somewhat unbelievable name of Sam Adams (yes, as in the beer), who lied about his affair to ensure his victory in the mayoral election. I sometimes feel sad for all those blokes who turn up for political rallies believing that their candidate is best thing since sliced bread. Tch, tch.

Transitioning to the future: New science policy and education picks

If you are like me, you must have been following Barack Obama’s cabinet and policy picks very closely. This last week was an important one; Obama announced that the superintendent of Chicago schools, Arne Duncan, who is also the president elect’s longtime friend, will be his secretary of education.

Obama and his team also announced the selection of four scientists- John Holdren, Jane Lubchenco, Harold Varmus and Eric Lander, for various positions, either as advisors or section heads. If you are interested in knowing more about the details, you can search for these topics within the NY Times website: http://www.nytimes.com (free registration is required).

Overall, these picks indicate there will be no dearth of scientific acumen in the administration, but it can only be hoped that some of the egos that will also come along with the acumen will not hinder good decision making. There is no doubt that the new president will be dealing with a host of issues, including recession, rising unemployment, and record deficits at nearly every level of government, but ideally, he should continue to emphasize the need for improvements in the way the next generation is being educated, along with other essentials, such as increases in teacher salaries (a career in education will never make you a millionaire, but it shouldn’t make you a pauper either).

There are other issues that too that are close to my heart and need to be addressed, such as the current NIH pay scales for postdocs. Postdocs are the backbone of our science, and for too long, their needs have been deliberately neglected. Bad pay has always been a big issue, not to mention lack of benefits in some instances. It is tempting to assume that Obama’s advisers will look at ancillary issues in science as well, but only time will how far the administration takes its message of change. It will be nice to see, at some point, the agenda laid out clearly in print.

Let us end on a brighter note. This is the time to take a break and enjoy the festivities. Leave the lab, you lab rats. The gel can wait and so can telescope time (well, I know, sometimes it cannot). But try.

Wishing you all a merry Christmas and a happy new year!

-Shailesh

Obama nation: Expecting the expected!

November 4, 2008 was truly a historic day, not just for the United States, but for the whole world. Change came to the USA; voters decided to elect Barack Obama, an African American, to be their 44th president. Unless you have been living in the land of Oz, the significance of this moment cannot be emphasized enough. For many African Americans who went through it all, who fought for their rights, Mr. Obama’s election was the single-most, biggest achievement they could have ever hoped for. No wonder people cried.

And the whole world was watching. Just as he carried the hopes and dreams of African Americans in the USA, Mr. Obama also carried the hopes and dreams of the peoples of the world. To many, he represented all that is good and fair and just in our society, and what can be achieved in today’s world, no matter what color you are. Welcome to the new world, folks!!

I am overjoyed that Mr. Obama won this election, not just for the symbolism, but for what he plans to bring to the table. While the US and the rest of the world face an economic crisis, there is no doubt that Mr. Obama will have his plate full when he starts his new job. But I am excited for what he plans to do when he does start tackling issues. By now, you must have read in this blog, and others, as to how Mr. Obama plans to reinvigorate our science and reorient our science policy. Let us hope that he does bring about a couple of quick changes, such as increasing the NIH budget.

They used to say that faith-based groups struggled to be heard in the government, till they realized that the president himself, George W. Bush, Jr., was their point man! Well, lets hope that Mr. Barack Obama is the point man for us scientists.

Good luck to him. We are expecting a lot!!

Election Day USA

Election day here in the United States is exactly a month away (elections will be held on Nov 4, 2008). Facing off are Barack Obama (Democrat), John McCain (Republican), and other insignificant politicians.

The public will decide who they like (yes, who they like, not who will make a better president), and this decision has the potential to make a huge impact on the way science is funded and science policy implemented over the next few years. In this context, a number of organizations have been making efforts to understand candidates’ attitudes towards science and get a feel of the likely state of US science in the near future.

Barack Obama accepted Nature’s invitation to answer 18 science policy related questions, while John McCain, the other candidate, refused to participate. Reading the answers does leave one with a feeling that both candidates actively support expanding the science budget, but as expected, differ in their priorities, and only one of them appears to have really thought the issue through (I don’t have to tell you which one).

There is also a ‘concerned citizens initiative’, now co-sponsored by the AAAS, which runs a website called Science Debate 2008 , which has been trying to gauge public opinion on various science and public policy issues. According the website, about 43% of sampled registered voters want public policy decisions to be based on science. I can only hope that the poll is right, and the margin of error is less than 40%.

If you are in the field of education, and would like to get more information about the US presidential election, visit the KQED site for a bunch of really usable facts- Election resources for educators

The website also has an interactive ‘You Decide’ section on the ‘No Child Left Behind’ act.

If there are any undecided among you, now is the time to make up your mind. Remember though, that the candidates are politicians; about face is always an option.

-Shailesh

PS: Corie Lok also has a blog post on this topic here

I'm back!!

Sunday, September 21, 2008

12:35 PM

Apologies to my readers again, my absences have been long. Well, this last one had to do with job finding. That is now done (I accepted a position at Genentech in San Francisco, wooohooo!), and I thought it would be good to get back to the blog. That and prodding from Corie who mentioned that they might as well shut the blog down for inactivity.

I have been keeping an eye out for bits of information that have to do with one of the central themes of the blog – education. I read an interesting article in the Atlantic (http://www.theatlantic.com), which talked about the ability of individuals to grasp college-level concepts in literature (in introductory courses). For the longest time, I had assumed that given the right resources, encouragement and time, most students would be able to complete task p, whether p had to do with sculpture, calculus or fitting square pegs in square holes. The atlantic article argues that this might not be always true, and in fact, some people might not be able to grasp some concepts at all, at least over a period of one academic semester.

Writes Professor X, “The bursting of our collective bubble comes quickly. A few weeks into the semester, the students must start actually writing papers, and I must start grading them. Despite my enthusiasm, despite their thoughtful nods of agreement and what I have interpreted as moments of clarity, it turns out that in many cases it has all come to naught. Remarkably few of my students can do well in these classes. Students routinely fail; some fail multiple times, and some will never pass, because they cannot write a coherent sentence”.

The article talks about teaching English literature, but do some of the conclusions hold true in the area of science education as well? Is the apathy of some people towards science indicative of their experiences in school? Are teachers partly to blame? I know people are wired differently, and some connections predispose them to convergent or divergent thinking. Should such predispositions be taken into account when students are assigned tasks?

The answers are not obvious. Your thoughts are welcome.

Read the full atlantic article here: In the Basement of the Ivory Tower

-Shailesh