Register Now! UNESCO’s Online Media and Information Literacy Course for Youth

Register Now! UNESCO's Online Media and Information Literacy Course for Youth

UNESCO, in partnership with Athabasca University and in cooperation with the UNESCO-UNAOC University Network on Media and Information Literacy and Intercultural Dialogue, opens a third call for registration for online course on media and information literacy (MIL).

This entry-level online course will provide youth with basic media and information competencies to become critical citizens and agents of change. The course is designed to enable youth to:

• Understand why media and other information providers are important to development and democratic societies;
• Recognise a need for information and to locate, access, organise and carefully evaluate information and the content of media and other information providers;
• Use and share information based on moral principles or accepted standards of social behaviour – in light of opportunities and potential risks;
• Interact with media and other information providers to freely express themselves, share their culture and learn about other cultures, promote gender equality, and participate in democratic and development activities.

The course is based on the MIL Curriculum and the Freedom of Expression (FOE) Toolkit published by UNESCO. A central theme throughout  this 10-week course is how media and information literacy can enable youth to be actively involved in intercultural dialogue, advocating for equality between women/girls and men/boys, and freedom of expression. 

The course is offered through Athabasca University's online e-Lab, using the learning management system, Moodle.  Most sessions will be self-directed, with ongoing interaction with the course presenters in the online space. Athabasca is a Canadian university that holds a UNESCO Chair on open education resources. Athabasca University is an associate member of the UNESCO-UNAOC University Network on Media and Information Literacy and Intercultural Dialogue.

Applicants should be youth (females and males between the ages 15-25). Participants who successfully complete the course will receive a certificate from Athabasca University.

In order to successfully complete this course participants will need regular access to a computer and Internet access to download documents, listen to podcasts and view online videos.

To apply, please click here. Application must be completed by 20 April 2015. There are no associated fees to participants who wish to do this course.

This MIL course includes a research component being carried out by UNESCO.

Online Media and Information Literacy Course Units

Unit 1 – Media and Information Literacy (MIL): An Introduction

Unit 2 – Media and Information Literacy and Intercultural Dialogue

Unit 3 – Media and Information Literacy: Evaluating and Using Information and Media Content

Unit 4 – Media and Information Literacy: Using Research and Analysis to Produce Your Own Information and Media Content

Unit 5 – Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Information, Freedom of the Press

Unit 6 - Representations of Gender in the Media, Books, on the Internet and in History

Unit 7 – Media and Information Ethics in Relation to the Needs of Big Business, Politics and Development

Unit 8 – Understanding and Evaluating the World of Advertising

Unit 9 – The Challenges and Opportunities of Media, Libraries and New Technologies for Youth

Unit 10 – Engaging with Media and Using New Technology and Information for Social Action

 

You can read the article also here: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/communication-and-information/resources/news-and-in-focus-articles/all-news/news/register_now_unescos_online_media_and_information_literacy_course_for_youth-1/

 

IE OpEd "Higher Education, Higher Meddling: No quick fixes can help public universities if successive government exercise power unbridled by reason"

"Higher Education, Higher Meddling: No quick fixes can help public universities if successive government exercise power unbridled by reason"
by Shahid Amin , Shobhit Mahajan | The Indian Express, April 4, 2015

Garib ki joru sab ki bhaujai (A poor man's wife is fair game). If anything captures the goings-on in the HRD ministry since the reign of Kapil Sibal, it is this saucy peasant proverb from the cow belt. Irrespective of the shade of the successive Central governments, the HRD minister and functionaries display a propensity, Alice in wonderland-like, for exercising power unbridled by reason and reasonableness. This has come to the fore most recently in the refusal of Anil Kakodkar, the respected nuclear scientist, to play ball with the minister in arbitrarily overruling an earlier consensus and interviewing no less than 36 candidates for the post of IIT director in a single day. "IITs are centres of excellence. They should be left alone," Kakodkar has responded in defence of having left the important task of choosing heads of these premier institutions to the minister and her epigones.
Six years ago, a UPA minister unrolled a plan to create 14 world-class universities ("universities of innovation") "unencumbered by history or culture of the past" — something that no world-class institution would dare boast. The underlying idea is to build islands of excellence by relying on "the highly skilled Indian diaspora". Now, fast on the heels of a Council of Scientific and Industrial Research's diktat making it mandatory for all research scientists in its employ to put in 12 hours of gyan-daan in educational institutions outside their research labs, comes the news that US President Barack Obama has accepted the GIAN proposal mooted by the Modi government. As with other "smart" acronyms, when unravelled it yields the cumbersome phrase: Global Initiative of Academic Network. Under this programme, top-notch scientists will teach in Indian institutions from between two weeks to 20 days. This is clearly an India-specific movement of global academic talent, following on the heels of Sibal's still-born scheme to invite premier universities from the UK, Europe and the US to set up off-shore subsidiaries in our country.
The normal flow of international and inter-university academic talent is, however, for such outstanding academicians to hold regular joint-appointments for a semester each in two universities. Ronald Dworkin, the late professor of jurisprudence (the US and the UK) and the brilliant social historian Carlo Ginzburg (Italy and the US) are leading examples from the social sciences. We lost one of our most innovative sociologists, Veena Das, the author most recently of Affliction: Health, Disease, Poverty — an ethnographic study of the urban poor, the "aam admi voter" of north Delhi — to the US, as "under the rules" Delhi University could not allow its faculty such intellectual freedom to benefit from and contribute to knowledge globally in a sustained way.  The new fortnightly GIAN idea of the Modi government, by contrast, envisages a veritable "fly-by-night" rapidfire igniting of Indian students' minds. More significantly, there has been no discussion. In fact, an earlier HRD minister was opposed to the idea of enabling India-based academics (Veena Das worked under the legendary sociologist M.N. Srinivas during the golden days of the Delhi School of Economics) to hold joint appointments in "foreign" universities. For its part, the US government allows Indian academics to teach semester- or year-length courses in American universities under a visa regime meant to facilitate "skill development", requiring a time-bound return to the home country for putting the skill gained to domestic use. The visiting Indian academic, one would have thought, gets paid because she contributes value to the particular US university, which invites her, so to speak, for her "skill-imparting" qualities!
The present government is equally keen on pressing the high visibility insta-cook button, while stirring the slow bubbling gruel of higher education with the ladle of ill-thought, top-heavy recipes. A one-size-fits-all uniform course content across the country is to be matched by a single Central Universities Act riding roughshod over historical specificities; students could now move effortlessly, with scant regard for compatibility, from one university to another, as teachers could be shunted out, the intrepid Haryana IAS officer Ashok Khemka way, wherever and how so many times the Indian state deems it fit for them to serve the educational requirements of the nation, and in whichever part of the India that is Bharat it deems fit.
It is interesting that the question of institutional autonomy catches public attention when, as in the case of the Kakodkar story, it concerns flagship institutions such as IITs. By implication, for the rest of us wallowing in the mud of public universities, there seems scant possibility of more than a few stunted lotuses blooming. Equally, due to the structure of almost magisterial authority allowed under the colonial dispensation to vice chancellors, the professoriate in these institutions fails signally in its fiduciary obligation to uphold academic and moral norms. Not for nothing were the fellows and professors of Oxford University able to out vote their VC's attempt to award an honorary degree to a controversial politician from the subcontinent. And some paid a price for it, as when Richard Gombrich, the renowned Indologist, was denied the chair at Oxford that S. Radhakrishnan had once held, as he had successfully opposed the honouring of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto by Oxford University, citing his inglorious role in triggering the 1971 war.
For their part, desi institutions such as Delhi University cannot quite effect Bertolt Brecht's sardonic suggestion — if dissatisfied with the existing lot, "elect another people". For the usual vishwa vidyalayas, the parameters are given: a national intake of students from unequally diverse backgrounds and a sudden doubling of enrolment and influx of first-generation students. And most crucially, a system that gives the faculty no say whatsoever in choosing its own colleagues.
No amount of quick-fixes can help our public universities meet the new challenges as long as the cavalier and top-heavy system of faculty recruitment is allowed to continue.
Amin is a retired professor of history and Shobhit Mahajan is professor of physics, Delhi University.
Source: http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/higher-education-higher-meddling/

Online Comments
Katyal: The article does not make much sense. However, given the fact one of the authors is Shobhit Mahajan, the famous charsi student from St. Stephens, it is no wonder he was able to create such a mishmash of drug induced literature.
Gopal: It's shame for academics to write so poorly. I am inclined to agree with them anyway on this issue but all they done is to offer a few anecdotes. My guess is that the real problem is - balancing of two concerns: the heavy handedness of centralization and the poor quality of management with decentralization. How can we balance one against the other so that we can get good governance? It's a question that bedevils India.
SP: Not sure if author is blowing up some issues or has chosen wrong examples. Sabbaticals are possible for our faculty. Many cases people going to a job with much higher pay at times do not come back. So there may be reasons for existing rules. Nothing wrong if HRD Minister takes a hands on approach in recruitment of IIT directors, as long as it is part of her job. I think we should be hasty in prejudging issues. The GIAN program may be more convenient to international faculty, as many may not want to leave their position in University for a full semester.
Sanket Sudke: There are so many universities in India with millions of students. Why is everybody focussing on IIT's, IIM's etc. ? Better reform the university system instaed of setting new IIT's.
K M: Wonderful point. Every one is obsessed with IITs snd IIMs whose products are ultimately selling syrup water or working in finance markets. The real people who are providing the technical muscle are the students coming out of the second rated and third rate universities. it is the students from private Engg. colleges who migrated to US and other countries and brought laurels to the country. The Govt should concentrate on the other universities where masses are studying.
B. SRIDHAR: It is an undeniable fact that our educational system has been systematically polarized by leftist intellectuals and needs urgent course correction. All the educationalists are leftist liberals mostly from Du or JNU. Anil's resignation was indeed stupid and unnecessarily hyped by the media. He could have sought time to interviewing and the reason cited by him is stupid to say d least. If educationalists seek to do the same things they were doing for the last six decades then the author is living in a fool's paradise. It will be morally correct for people like Romila to keep safe distance because time has come to correct the wrongs
V.S.Malhotra: How can we throw blame for meddling on those in whose make up we all are involved. Were they not at one time sitting in front of us in our class rooms like "clean slates' - to use John Locke's phraseology - on which we could write any thing we wished.
Farhan Ansari: We should educate farming to children in every school in india. America searching these childern to become farmer. The Mechanic
K M: Are you ready to send your son to do farming or to do the job of mechanic?

NBR Report "Innovate in India: Global Perspectives on the Continuing Evolution of India's IP Policy"

THE NATIONAL BUREAU of ASIAN RESEARCH   NBR Special Report Innovate in India Global Perspectives on the Continuing Evolution of India's IP Policy ROY KAMPHAUSEN The National Bureau of Asian Research As Prime Minister Narendra Modi works to return India to high rates of economic growth, he has notably prioritized the "Make in India" campaign to build up India's domestic manufacturing sector, engaging both indigenous and international firms in the process. Yet at a policy level, the success of this campaign will partly depend on how quickly India can strengthen its intellectual property (IP) regime. In this NBR Special Report, Roy Kamphausen (NBR) argues that stronger IP protection will reduce business uncertainty and increase investor confidence, benefiting both Indian stakeholders and the international community. While over the past year, the Modi administration has taken important first steps to address the country's IP policy challenges, more needs to be done. The report examines India's IP and innovation environment and presents policy options for India, the United States, and the international community. Read the full report   About the Author Roy Kamphausen is a Senior Advisor at the National Bureau of Asian Research. Related Initiative: India's IP and Innovation Policies This program aims to examine efforts to strengthen innovation environments in India and highlight recommendations for public policy in the United States, India, and globally. Over the course of 2014-15, NBR is commissioning research with leading scholars across the globe; convening ongoing dialogues with representatives from industry, policy, and research; and holding a series of high-level workshops and events across the Asia-Pacific and in Europe. For more information on the initiative, please visit our website. About NBR The National Bureau of Asian Research is a nonprofit, nonpartisan research institution dedicated to informing and strengthening policy. NBR conducts advanced independent research on strategic, political, economic, globalization, health, and energy issues affecting U.S. relations with Asia. Drawing upon an extensive network of the world's leading specialists and leveraging the latest technology, NBR bridges the academic, business, and policy arenas. Media inquiries: Rachel Wagley, Assistant Director of Outreach, at (202) 347-9767 or media@nbr.org Follow us

THE NATIONAL BUREAU OF ASIAN RESEARCH -- Seattle and Washington, D.C. 1414 NE 42nd Street, Suite 300, Seattle, Washington 98105 | 206.632.7370 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 305, Washington, D.C. 20004 | 202.347.9767 Support NBR | Twitter | Facebook | You Tube | www.nbr.org | nbr@nbr.org

A Talk related to Indian Birds, April 21;

A Talk related to Indian Birds

Trevor Price on Speciation

Event Overview

April 21, 2015
5:30-7:30pm
Chicago Center in Delhi, C.P.

RSVP here.

Abstract How do two species form from one? Labeled the mystery of mysteries by Charles Darwin, we have made considerable advances in our understanding over the past 20 years, as a result of ecological, behavioral, and, most recently, genomic studies. I will describe how ecology, behavior and genetics interact to create new bird species, drawing on Indian examples.  I will ask how the tremendous diversity of birds has built up in the Himalayas and also consider an example where speciation is actively going on at the present day.

Trevor Price is a Professor in the Department of Ecology & Evolution, working with the Committee on Evolutionary Biology and the Committee on Genetics, Genomics & Systems Biology.   The current focus of his research is on the determinants of bird species diversity along the Himalayas, notably the question of why there are twice as many species in the eastern Himalayas as the west.  He continues to do field work in the states of Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, West Bengal, Himachal Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh in collaboration with the Wildlife Institute of India.

In 2014, Trevor Price gave a joint lecture with Dr. Dhananjai Mohan of the Indian Forest Service on Climate Change, Conservation, and the Birds of the Himalayan Region.

http://www.uchicago.in/events/show/speciation

SANDEE Call for Research Concept Notes on "Managing Environmental Changes"

Call for Research Concept Notes "Managing Environmental Changes"
Deadline: May 31, 2015
The South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics (SANDEE) is currently inviting concept notes for policy research on Managing Environmental Changes. Concept notes on the following thematic areas will be considered, and, may lead to an invitation to submit full proposals.

• Policies and Instruments for Greener Growth: Governments put forward a variety of policies and regulations to manage environmental problems. In order to understand whether these strategies enhance sustainable development, this thematic area evaluates: a) the role of regulatory and market mechanisms in policy compliance; b) the impacts of environmental programs and policies; and c) the development of cities as sustainable engines of growth.
• Ecosystems Management: Ecosystems provide provisioning, regulating, supporting and cultural services that are being lost at an accelerating rate. Ecosystems research examines: a) contributions of services to livelihoods, particularly of vulnerable groups; b) scale and institutional issues in managing trade-offs associated with resource use; c) policies for conserving services such as biodiversity that are not substitutable.
• Economics of Climate Change: With climate change, South Asia is expected to get warmer and experience more extreme events. SANDEE's climate portfolio focuses on: a) the effi cacy of alternate adaptation strategies and their local co-benefits; b) programs, institutions and policies that support low carbon growth and long-term adjustment to climate change; and c) access and distributional issues related to renewable energy resources.

Priority Considerations

• Selected research concept notes may be provided proposal development support to enable teams to understand cross country issues, if any, and travel to study areas for developing full proposals. SANDEE will also try to facilitate cross-county team development.
• Innovative proposals outside the three themes listed above may be considered if these have strong policy implications. All proposals have to include a strong economics component.
• Grants are likely to be in the range of USD 20,000-50,000 over a 12-18 month period. Research ideas will be evaluated on their intellectual rigor and policy signifi cance.
• Please review guidelines and upload concept notes (approximate length 1500 words) on www.sandeeonline.org by May 31, 2015 to be considered for the next grants window. For any additional queries, please contact us at research@sandeeonline.org

CfPs: Special Issue Critical Perspectives on Innovation, Technology and Learning for Development; Journal of Learning for Development

CALL FOR PAPERS

SPECIAL ISSUE: Critical Perspectives on Innovation, Technology and Learning for Development

Submission Deadlline: 26 April 2015

Guest Editor: Prof Paul Prinsloo, University of South Africa

Journal of Learning for Development

RATIONALE FOR SPECIAL ISSUE

Learning and its contribution to development, whether in open and distance learning, or other educational delivery modes (formal, informal or post-formal) can be explored through many possible lenses, which do not only point to a variety of research designs and methodologies, but also to different philosophical and ideological approaches.

While there are many journals dedicated to learning, curriculum development, assessment, and so forth, and others dedicated to issues regarding development; the JL4D   specifically engages with the nexus between learning and development.

This special issue will provide a platform to engage with firstly, the notion of innovation in learning in the context of, and in relation to socioeconomic and human development; and secondly, critically engage with broader claims and practices in the context of learning for development. Learning for development is therefore in many respects an assemblage of different associations that produce agency as well as "ideas, identities, rules, routines, policies, instruments and reforms" (Fenwick & Edwards, 2010, p. 3). We also have to recognise the impact and different nuances of asymmetrical power relations and configurations on learning for development as assemblage and how it is informed by, for example,  gender, race, language, culture, and geopolitical location (e.g. developing vs. developed and the Global North vs. the Global South). (See for example, Avgerou, 2010; Baijnath, 2013; Collins & Rhoads, 2010; Czerniewicz & Wiens, 2013; Gulati, 2008; Heeks, 2010; Islam, 2011; James, 2010; Keengwe & Malapile, 2014; Lumumba-Kasongo, 2011; Oyelere, 2010; and Tikly & Barrett, 2011).

Education is often lauded as the "powerhouse for development", and as an "incubator for social and economic change" (Naidoo, 2008, p. 248). The collaboration between education and development is therefore portrayed as addressing the origins of, and decreasing the impact of social and economic disparities. While there is no question that education plays a crucial role in socioeconomic and human development, the relationship between learning and development is more complex than generally assumed. The fact that actors, actions and practices in the nexus of education and development are mostly embedded in asymmetrical, socio-material relations necessitates a critical exploration (Apple, 2010; Bauman, 2012; Benavot, 1989; Comim, 2007; Epstein, Boden, Deem, Rizvi & Wright, 2008; Giroux, 2003, 2014; Hountondji, 2000; Hoppers, 2000, 2001; Mensah, 2007).

Teaching and learning are indisputably social, political and ideological acts and the relationship between learning and development is shaped by various factors and discourses such as globalisation, development and the interconnected flows of populations, information, data, capital, knowledge, and differential power (Apple, 2010; Castells, 2009). The relationship between learning and development therefore finds itself located in the nexus of various asymmetric relations of power and mostly contradictory dynamics. Learning and/for development are caught up in the "double logic of inclusion and exclusion in the global networks that structure production, consumption, communication and power" (Castells, 2009, p. 25). Against the complex backdrop of a variety of societal fault lines informed, perpetuated and sustained by dominant market ideologies and educational initiatives by global organisations such as the World Bank; there are increasing concerns about the inability of current market ideologies to address social injustice and disparity and collateral damage of "development" (Apple, 2010; Bauman, 1998, 2004; 2011; Chomsky & Barsamian, 2013; Davis, 2006; Giroux 2014).

The purpose of this special issue is not only to bear witness to how much of the current discourses on learning and development may be connected to various relations of exploitation and domination, but also to de-naturalise many of the assumptions about learning and/for development. This issue therefor hopes to point not only to the complexities and contradictions, but also to spaces for possible counter-hegemonic action and hope (Apple, 2010).

Central to many of the discourses on learning and/for development are claims of how technology and technological developments will, or at least have the potential to, somehow, erase hundreds of years' structural injustice and inequality (Daniel, 2009; Morozov, 2013; Selwyn, 2014). Digital technologies are lauded to herald "a tectonic shift that will bring the benefits of learning and knowledge to millions" (Daniel, 2009, p. 62). There are also claims that through technology and the benevolence of educators and institutions in the global north "education for all" will become a reality for those previously excluded from education (Lillie, 2012). In stark contrast to these claims, is the need to understand technology and more specifically educational technology "in terms of its complicated and often unjust connections to the larger society" (Selwyn & Facer, 2013, p. 4). "While undoubtedly of great potential benefit, it is clear that educational technology is a value-laden site of profound struggle that some people benefit more from than others – most notably in terms of power and profit" (Selwyn, 2014, p. 2). (Also see Morozov, 2013). Technology in the context of learning and development is best understood "as a knot of social, political, economic and cultural agendas that is riddled with complications, contradictions and conflicts" (Selwyn, 2014, p. 6).

Gray (2004) posits the notion that there is no basis for the wide-spread belief that progress in knowledge and science will necessarily result in a more just and compassionate society. He warns that knowledge and science cannot (and will not) "end the conflicts in history. It is an instrument that humans use to achieve their goals, whether winning wars or curing the sick, alleviating poverty or committing genocide" (Gray, 2004, p. 70).

This issue of the Journal of Learning for Development proposes that we consider the relationship between learning and development as both problematic and agentic (Emirbayer and Mische, 1998). Amid the hype, disappointment and hope regarding learning and/for development, we invite contributions that map, explore, contest, critique but also frame alternative praxis in the following foci:

• Learning for development as assemblage
• Issues of gender, race, culture in the context of learning for development
• The growth and impact of the growing privatisation of education on the need for education
• Social justice
• Curriculum, and learning theories and pedagogical praxis
• The role and discourses of technology and development
• Alternative forms of education, assessment and accreditation
• The reconfiguration of the boundaries between formal, informal and post-formal learning
• Graduate literacies and competencies
• Stakeholder engagement
• Globalisation and the role of global multinational organisations
• The internationalisation of higher education
• Scholarship/research of teaching and learning for development
• Teacher and student identities, roles, responsibilities and trajectories

SUBMISSION AND PUBLICATION SCHEDULE

26 April 2015	Closing date for submissions
10 May 2015	Outcome of the review process communicated to authors
25 May 2015	Resubmission by selected authors plus final selection
29 June2015	Accepted contributions to copy editor
26 July2015	Last date for queries to authors
3 September 2015	Finalisation
1 November 2015	Publication

 

Submission Process (Important):

To submit papers for the special issue, please register at the journal site and submit your paper choosing the option Special Issue (SPI) as the Journal Section. Please write the specific section of the Journal to which your submission is more suitable in the box for Comments to the Editor. All submissions to the Special Issue will be Peer Reviewed as per the policy of the Journal.

Contact details of Special Issue Editor:

For enquiries related to the special issue write to:

Prof Paul Prinsloo (Guest Editor)

University of South Africa; pprinsloo59@gmail.com

Further Details: http://www.jl4d.org/index.php/ejl4d/announcement/view/3

CSSP Talk on "Blockbuster Diagnostics? Reflections on the Political Economy of Diagnostic Innovation" by Dr. Stuart Hogarth; on Tuesday, 7th April

Centre for Studies in Science Policy

School of Social Sciences, JNU

Special Lecture Series

 

Talk on

"Blockbuster Diagnostics? Reflections on the Political Economy of Diagnostic Innovation"

By

Dr. Stuart Hogarth

Department of Social Science, Health and Medicine at King's College London

 

Abstract: A decade after the Human Genome Project, major public and private investments continue to fuel expectations that 'omics'-based diagnostic tools will unleash a biomedical revolution, redefining disease taxonomies, transforming clinical practice and revitalising the diagnostics industry. However, there is considerable uncertainty about how public policy should steer this new wave of diagnostic innovation. Much of that uncertainty revolves around three questions: what sort of clinical evidence do we need before a new diagnostic test enters medical practice; who should generate that evidence, and how can we ensure it is rigorously evaluated? In this talk I suggest that three inter-related trends characterise contemporary diagnostic innovation: the corporatisation of R&D; the emulation of pharmaceutical industry business models and marketing strategies, and regulatory expansion. Using cervical cancer screening as a case study, I will describe how development of the Pap smear in the first half of the twentieth century was led by the public sector (NGOs, academic scientists, government agencies) and contrast this with the development of a rival molecular technology in the late twentieth century: DNA diagnostics for Human Papilloma Virus (HPV). The HPV testing market has been dominated by a single company, in part because of a legal monopoly on HPV DNA patents, and in part because early-mover advantage has meant that the major clinical studies of HPV testing were conducted using their proprietary technology.

About Speaker: Dr Stuart Hogarth is a member of the Department of Social Science, Health and Medicine at King's College London. He is trained in the history of medicine, but now works at the interface between medical sociology, bioethics and science and technology studies. He is interested in understanding how post-genomic science enters clinical practice as personalised medicine and my research maps and analyses the emergent socio-technical regime which supports that translational process. In 2012 he was awarded a Wellcome Trust fellowship to conduct a three-year comparative study looking at how DNA patents have affected the development and adoption of HPV tests for cervical cancer screening in the USA, UK and India. Building on this project he is now leading the development of a new research group within the department focused on the molecularisation of oncology. His work combines empirical research in a political sociology framework with normative analysis of public policy and commercial strategy. He maintains a blog GeneValues.wordpress.com.

Venue:  Room No. 227, CSSP, SSS-1

Time:   4.00 P.M.

Date:    Tuesday, 7th April 2015

All are welcome to attend the lecture.

 

Saradindu Bhaduri, Anup Kumar Das

Coordinator, CSSP Lecture Series