Hi,

I've just seen this post, whilst browsing this site and think that it is a really interesting debate. Coming from a science background myself, I think that the poster is such a logical way to present scientific research, and is so suited to using visual aids such as diagrams, graphs and maps. Also, I know that when I made posters it really made me think critically about my research and evaluate its direction and purpose. As you say, this makes them so crucial to the research process.

I suppose this is the value it might have as an exercise for arts and humanities too. Therefore I don't think they are totally disregarded in those subjects. Also, perhaps the arts and humanities students that can put their research ideas into a poster are actually the best communicators, as they have to overcome the difficulty of visualising creative ideas to present an engaging poster to hook people in.

I also think that you cannot compare posters and peer reviewed papers because they are such different forms of research communication and should go hand in hand rather than fighting for importance.

Yeah, I read the Browne review. The focus on the 'priority' subjects doesn't seem fair really - it shows that the government don't think the two are linked. They are basically saying that the creativity, innovation and philosophy cultured from the arts and humanities is of smaller value to the country and the economy than STEM subjects, and that it is not relevant to the advancement of science and tech itself.

I read a comment on the THE website, which said that the cuts were actually fair as arts are cheaper to teach - even if they are, does the funding deserve to be cut disproportionately? Surely this will just lead to a massive bias in who studies for which courses and the quality of facilities offered for arts courses as well as the suffering of specific arts based institutions.

Also has anyone noticed that the Browne review only very briefly mentions postgraduates? I always feel that we are a bit pushed to the side in contrast to the undergrads - especially as this report says that most of the energy should be focussed on undergraduates and assumes that there will be a magic filter effect to postgraduates. I found this post on a blog though, which focuses on what the Browne review means for postgraduates
http://postgraduatetoolbox.net/posts/48