Logical Argumentation in Science: Publishing, Proposals and Pitching

Period (from-till): 7 February 2025 - 18 April 2025 (BMS_P3_A).

Faculty
Eric Kalkhoven, UMCU, CMM (50%), course coordinator
Christine Fox, UMCU, BMS (50%), course coordinator

Kim van Ommering, UU
Anna Akhmanova, Beta UU
Rachel Boddy, UU
Kristan van der Vos, Cell Press
Klaartje Spijkers, Patienten Federatie Nederland, Kees Recourt, Mibiton & InnovationQuarter
Devin van den Berg, Debatexpert
Jonathan Talbott, Talbott International Presentations

Course description
This course aims to highlight an essential but underappreciated aspect of being a successful researcher, the logic of scientific argument. The logic of scientific argument is a key aspect of various scientific activities such as publishing and writing project proposals –including the review-rebuttal process– but also when defending your data or pitching your work. For this, workshops on writing abstracts, on the review and rebuttal process, and on debating and pitching will be given. In addition, various aspects of the current scientific landscape, including societal impact and publishing will be covered. The overall goal is to provide tools that enrich your skillset as a researcher and complement the ones gained by hands-on experience in the lab or in an internship. These tools will set the foundation upon which you can continue building on later in your career as a researcher.

Literature/study material used
Materials will be distributed before/during the sessions.

Registration
You can register for this course via here on the Students' site. Minimum 12 participants - maximum 40 participants.

Mandatory for students in own Master’s programme :
No.

Optional for students in other GSLS Master’s programme :
Yes. Students enrolled in the General Research Profile will have priority.

Schedule
10 'live' sessions
7 February 2025 - 18 April 2025 Meetings on Friday morning form 09:00-13:00
Please note that this 3EC course requires an investment of another 40 hours.

Grading
Active participation pass/fail
Grant proposal 50%
PI interview 10%
Debate 5%
Pitch 15%
Peer feedback: abstract and draft proposal 20%

Examinations (dates tba)
PI interview
Peer feedback: abstract
Peer feedback: draft proposal
Debate
Pitching
Grant proposal

At the end of the course, students should be able to:

• Write a research proposal incorporating the newly learned tools and guidelines, linked to the logic of scientific argument
• Incorporate multidisciplinary collaboration and impact (e.g., for patients, society) in a research proposal
• Participate actively in a scientific debate
• Formulate an appealing and concise story, in writing (abstract) and verbally (pitch)

You will be enrolled for this course by administration of the programme of this course.