BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 PRODID:-//wp-events-plugin.com//7.2.3.1//EN BEGIN:VEVENT UID:13@srpoise.org DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York;VALUE=DATE:20200706 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York;VALUE=DATE:20200710 DTSTAMP:20200612T182820Z URL:https://srpoise.org/events/srpoise-2020/ SUMMARY:SRPoiSE 2020 DESCRIPTION:SRPoiSE 2020 is Canceled\nWe regret to inform you that the Cons ortium for Socially Relevant Philosophy of/in Science and Engineering (SRP oiSE) has been forced to postpone the conference previously scheduled for 7-10 July 2020 for one year later\, 5-7 July 2021. The COVID-19 pandemic h as created many disruptions\, with an unclear timeline for when they will be resolved. Among the problems: many universities have employee travel re strictions of indeterminate duration\, the issuing of many visa types has been frozen or limited\, and it is simply not possible to do some of the n ecessary local conference organizing tasks at Michigan State University wh ile there is a stay-at-home order for all residents of Michigan.\n\nWe sin cerely apologize for the disappointing news. We too are very disappointed. However\, we are looking forward to July 2021.\n\nWith respect to the pro gramme for July 2021\, our plans are as follows:\n(a) There will be a new call for papers in the fall of this year\, because not everyone who planne d to attend the conference this summer will be able to come in 2021 (and v ice versa).\n(b) Those who had accepted contributions of any kind (e.g.\, individual papers\, symposia\, etc.) for 2020 will have the opportunity to resubmit the same proposals in 2021 and have their submissions receive pr iority review.\n\nFurther details on the 2021 conference will be forthcomi ng later this year. In the meantime\, we hope that you all remain healthy and safe.\n\nThe original conference information and CFP are below.\n\n\n\ nThe 5th Meeting of SRPoiSE: The Consortium for Socially Relevant Philosop hy of/in Science and Engineering\nConference Description\nThe mission of T he Consortium for Socially Relevant Philosophy of/in Science and Engineeri ng (SRPoiSE) is to support\, advance\, and conduct philosophical work that is related to science and engineering and that contributes to public welf are and collective wellbeing. We aim to improve the capacity of philosophe rs of all specializations to collaborate and engage with scientists\, engi neers\, policy-makers\, and a wide range of publics to foster epistemicall y and ethically responsible scientific and technological research.\n\nWe a re particularly interested in addressing complex social and environmental problems and in fostering the ability of researchers in science and engine ering to do so as well. We seek to understand and ameliorate conceptual an d institutional barriers to collaborative research across these groups. We work to cultivate strategies for training graduate students\, postdoctora l fellows\, and faculty on how to effectively collaborate across a variety of domains. We promote joint efforts among institutions and individual re searchers to conduct socially relevant research. We seek to partner with o ther groups from philosophy and allied science studies disciplines to fulf ill our mission. We are a welcoming and diverse organization committed to respectful and fair treatment of all of our members.\n\n\n\nCall for Paper s - Deadline Has Passed\nWe seek proposals for presentations\, panels\, an d discussions that further these aims for our 5th meeting\, which will ove rlap with the 8th Biennial Society for Philosophy of Science in Practice ( SPSP). We are especially interested in work done in collaboration with and fostering reflection by scientists\, engineers\, medical researchers and professionals\, policymakers\, science communicators\, or wider publics\; and work that reflects on how to collaborate more effectively across these groups and overcome institutional and conceptual barriers to collaboratio n. Previous SRPoiSE presentation topics have included: local decarbonizati on policy development\, smallholder farmers as agricultural innovators\, a nd epistemic injustice in the handling of children’s medical and legal t estimony. \nSubmitting to SRPoiSE vs SPSP\nSRPoiSE and SPSP will be held concurrently. You are welcome to submit to both conferences\, but if you p lan to do so\, you should submit substantially different proposals. \nPot ential topics include but are not limited to:\n\n Social justice issues i n science\, engineering\, and medicine\n The role of ethics and values in science\, technology\, and medicine\n Ethics education in science and en gineering\; socially relevant STEM education\n Public understanding of sc ience and medicine\; science communication\n The role of science\, engine ering\, and medicine in policy\n Issues with and new models of science ad vising\n Broader impacts and ethical\, legal\, and social implications of research\n Rethinking responsible conduct of research\n Coupled epistem ic-ethical issues and analyses\n Science and democracy\; democratization of science\; citizen science\n Creating and cultivating cultures for ethi cal and socially responsible STEM\n Involving stakeholders in research\; participatory action research\n Analyses of interdisciplinarity\, collabo ration\, and engagement\n Alt-ac careers for SRPoiSE scholars\n\nProposal Types\nTraditional individual presentations\nProposals for twenty minute presentations of original research. These proposals will be organized into thematic sessions with discussion at the end. If possible\, a discussant or commenter will be assigned for the session to synthesize the discussion . Please submit an abstract of 400-500 words. Submissions that are not acc epted for traditional presentation will be automatically considered for Li ghtning talks / open roundtables (see below).\nPanel discussions\nOrganize d panel discussions on a specific theme\, focused on original research. Pr oposals that include diverse disciplinary approaches and/or institutional locations (e.g.\, faculty/student/other affiliates\, different universitie s\, academics/industry/policy) will be given priority over more homogenous panels. We encourage innovations on panel format\, though panels with tra ditional talks are also welcome. Please submit an abstract of at least 500 words describing panel theme and format\, and attach 300-500 word abstrac ts for each presentation/contribution. Panel proposals should not be a loo sely grouped set of individual papers\; those should be submitted separate ly. Panels should have some compelling reason to be done together\, explai ned in the main panel abstract. Panels without a discussant to synthesize the discussion may be assigned one. Panels with traditional formats should be prepared for anonymous reviews\; panels with alternative formats\, inc luding author-meets-critics sessions\, should include information about pa nelists\, and will not be reviewed anonymously. Panels will typically be l imited to a maximum of 2 hours in length.\n\nLightning talks / Ignite sess ion / Open roundtables\nShort presentations (5-10 minutes). Exact format t o be determined by number of submissions and feedback. Lightning talks and Ignite presentations generally involve a series of rapid-fire presentatio ns\, perhaps with auto-advancing slides\, of roughly five minutes. Open ro undtables generally involve multiple simultaneous presentations of approxi mately 10 minutes with small groups\, with plenty of time for discussion. These formats are especially good for early-career scholars\, scholars exp loring a new area of research\, praxis-focused case studies and best pract ices recommendations. Please submit an abstract of 500 words describing th e topic to be presented.\nRoundtable discussions\nRoundtable discussions o f a focal topic or question. Roundtable discussions are more informal and dialogical. Roundtables should include a strong moderator\, a focal topic\ , question\, or series of questions\, prepared remarks from participants\, and plenty of time for cross-panel and audience discussion. Please submit a 250-word description of the roundtable theme or topic\, and an attachme nt including a 250-word description of the moderator’s qualifications\, 250-word biographies of the roundtable panelists\, and further details abo ut roundtable format. Roundtable discussions will be evaluated in part bas ed on the qualifications of the panelists\, and will not be reviewed anony mously. Roundtables will typically be limited to 90 minutes in length.\nBi rds-of-a-feather briefs\nBirds-of-a-feather sessions are networking opport unities in which presenters will lead an informal\, town-hall-style discus sion about a chosen topic for fellow practitioners\, with the bulk of the time reserved for audience participation and informal discussion. Proposal s should be in the form of an abstract of 250 words describing the topic t o be discussed\, and should attach 250-word biographies of the presenters. Birds-of-a-feather proposals will be evaluated in part based on the quali fications of the panelists\, and will not be reviewed anonymously. \nBook s-in-progress\nThose working on book manuscripts in some pertinent area of research are invited to discuss their idea with conference participants i n a session focused on constructive feedback about such projects. This inc ludes fresh ideas for books just underway as well as books nearing complet ion\, but does not extend to author-critics sessions on recently-published books. Please submit a 500 word abstract describing your book manuscript\ , and attach a 1-2 page document with additional information such as state of completion\, outline\, the content of your presentation\, and question s for discussion / feedback sought. Prepare this document for anonymous re view. In case there are not sufficient submissions for a full books-in-pro gress session\, your submission will be considered for presentation in a t raditional or short presentation format (see above).\nDissertations-in-pro gress\nGraduate students preparing dissertation proposals\, in the dissert ation-writing phase\, or approaching their dissertation defense are invite d to present their work at a special dissertations-in-progress session foc used on constructive and supportive feedback. Instructions: Please submit a 500-word abstract describing the content of your dissertation\, and atta ch a 1-2 page document with additional information such as state of comple tion\, outline\, and questions for discussion / feedback sought. Prepare t his document for anonymous review. We will work with you in advance of the session on general guidelines for preparing the presentation and what to expect. In case there are not sufficient submissions for a full dissertati ons-in-progress session\, your submission will be considered for presentat ion in a traditional or short presentation format (see above).\nExperiment s-in-progress\nWe invite presentations from those working on experimental research or teaching projects that don’t neatly fit under the headings o f traditional research presentations\, books\, or dissertations in progres s\, including experiments in public philosophy\, field philosophy\, scienc e-philosophy collaboration\, and X-phi. Please submit a 500-word abstract describing your project\, and attach a 1-2 page document with further info rmation\, including what stage the project is in\, the content of your pre sentation\, and questions for discussion / feedback sought. In case there are not sufficient submissions for a full experiments-in-progress session\ , your submission will be considered for presentation in a traditional or short presentation format (see above).\nWorkshop sessions\nThese sessions should be working sessions\, not just longer panel sessions for presenting research. As such\, they should aim to have a hands-on or how to element\ , to focus on professionalization and (traditional or alt-ac) career succe ss\, to help students and scholars gain skills or knowledge necessary to w ork in SRPoiSE areas\, or to make new connections between SRPoiSE scholars and thinkers in other fields or areas of philosophy not ordinarily associ ated with SRPoiSE. Please submit a 500-word abstract describing your works hop plan\, including the role and contribution of each participant\, and a ttach a document that includes 250-word biographies of the organizer and e ach participant and further description of the workshop format and activit ies. Workshop proposals will be evaluated in part based on the qualificati ons of the panelists\, and will not be reviewed anonymously. As many detai ls as possible should be included\, but we are willing to consider proposa ls that require some details to be filled in later. \nPlenary sessions\, keynotes etc.\nIf you have suggestions for additional plenary sessions\, b inary session dialogues\, keynote speakers\, Rogerian arguments\, etc.\, p lease email srpoise2020@easychair.org. \nSubmission Instructions\nPlease submit your proposal using our EasyChair submission form: https://easychai r.org/conferences/?conf=srpoise2020 (submissions will open on September 17 ). \n\nMultiple submissions will be considered\, but multiple appearances on the program will be limited. You will not be able to make multiple pre sentations of the same general kind\, but you may be able to\, e.g.\, pres ent original research and in a more informal or praxis-focused session. Pl ease see above regarding submissions at SRPoiSE vs SPSP.\n\nSubmissions ar e due by December 15\, 2019. We aim to have a decision by March 1\, 2019.  \n\nSRPoiSE works to foster diversity and inclusiveness. In light of tha t aim\, proposal authors and panel organizers will be asked to submit a 50 -100 word diversity statement to explain their contributions and commitmen ts to diversity\, as relevant to their proposal and in general. You are en couraged to explain how you will contribute to and support the diversity o f this conference. Conference proposals will be reviewed for quality\, but final programming decisions will be made with professional and social div ersity and inclusiveness in mind. \n\nIf you have any questions about the submission process or other questions related to SRPoiSE programming\, pl ease email srpoise2020@easychair.org. See below for questions related to f acilities. \nProgram committee\n\n Matthew J. Brown (UT Dallas)\, Progra m Chair\n Justin Biddle (Georgia Tech)\n Dan Hicks (UC Merced)\n Cather ine Kendig (MSU) \n Katie Plaisance (University of Waterloo) \n Sean V alles (MSU) \n Thomas M. Powers (University of Delaware)\n Daniel Susse r (Penn State)\n\nAccessibility\nConference meetings rooms are ALD compati ble and wheelchair accessible. Potential attendees should please feel free to contact Catherine Kendig (kendig@msu.edu) or Sean Valles (valles@msu.e du) with questions about faciliites.  LOCATION:Michigan State University\, 220 Trowbridge Rd\, East Lansing\, MI\ , 48824\, United States GEO:42.7210917;-84.48120670000003 X-APPLE-STRUCTURED-LOCATION;VALUE=URI;X-ADDRESS=220 Trowbridge Rd\, East La nsing\, MI\, 48824\, United States;X-APPLE-RADIUS=100;X-TITLE=Michigan Sta te University:geo:42.7210917,-84.48120670000003 END:VEVENT BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:America/New_York X-LIC-LOCATION:America/New_York BEGIN:DAYLIGHT DTSTART:20200308T030000 TZOFFSETFROM:-0500 TZOFFSETTO:-0400 TZNAME:EDT END:DAYLIGHT END:VTIMEZONE END:VCALENDAR