This is a great discussion topic that I have been following with great interest. I recently launched a website to communicate ocean science to the world in a clear and concise manner. It has been a an interesting road as I am learning to speak science in a non scientific manner so that people will understand. I also find that much interest comes from relating ocean science to activities, or topics, that interest readers such as SCUBA diving.
I am always wearying for scientists who would like to contribute their expertise to my mission. If you are interested, check out www.speakupforblue.com and contact me. Best Regards, Andrew Andrew Lewin, MSc, Adv. Dipl. GIS Founder, Speak Up for the Blue www.speakupforblue.com President, Spatial-Conserve Inc. www.spatialconserve.com On 2011-04-08, at 6:53 PM, Lisa Dawn Cox <[email protected]> wrote: > Whoa! Not every member of the public who isn't a scientist is a journalist or > politician. (Thank God!) > > I have been watching this thread with a great deal of interest. In February I > had the honor of attending the ConFor West grad student meeting in Jasper, > Alberta, and there just over a hundred grad students from all over the NW US > and Canada had many interesting discussions that developed from questions > asked after sessions in which we made brief presentations of our research. it > was stimulating to see conversation diverge from the specifics of particular > studies and into deeper and broader questions like, "How can scientists > better communicate with the public?" > > As some have noted here, scientists do indeed put their research results out > there, but often this is either in 1) scientific journals which are very > specific to a particular science audience or not readily available to the > public even if people had time to wade through them to get to the stuff of > interest to them or 2) language that is difficult for those not schooled in > scientific thought to decipher. > > Let's face it: not everyone is going to be a scientist when s/he grows up, > just like not everyone is going to be a journalist or politician (again, > thank God.) > > I've picked up frustration from some here that the public isn't interested in > science, or is openly hostile, even. Does this have to be the case? What can > scientists do to make scientific thought and material more accessible and > interesting to the public? (And less threatening?) > > Some ideas we came up with in the group discussion in Jasper that I recall > are: publish in popular science and trade publications; get involved with > extension, local and county agency and college and school outlets; maybe > offer a class that introduces scientific method to those who are dumbfounded > by or scared of science. Talk to people on their level. I think someone said > earlier that trans- and cis- fats structures and so on above the heads of > some people and suggested "dumbing down," or simplifying, the language. I > balk at the term "dumb down" because I think it assumes the person to whom we > are speaking cannot rise to certain expectations, but again, not everyone is > going to be a scientist. People also have mentioned blogs and other more > generally available media. > > Does that mean those people don't care about their health? Their gardens? The > weather and climate? Hardly. So, then, does it behoove the scientist to make > his or her findings understandable to those who don't have the same > educational background and experiences? > > Well, I would argue that not only does not everyone grow up to be a > journalist, politician or scientist; not everyone grows up to be a teacher. > > Laura, as a long time teacher, I agree with you 100% on your comment: I think > scientists should be wary of judging what the general public care about. I am > constantly inspired by what the public is willing to learn about science, and > the questions they ask about science. Unfortunately, often the school system > (K-12) does not give a proper treatment of the process and nature of science > for non-scientists to understand how and why scientists conduct science. > > And yes, post-secondary institutions should be supportive of public outreach > efforts. It's far too easy for research institutions to focus on research and > not the dissemination of results. I knock my head against a wall at my own > university constantly to see study after study conducted... to what practical > end? > > Maybe that's why I am seeing double right now. Perhaps, as it's Friday late > afternoon, it's time for a beverage. > > Have a good weekend. > Lisa > Lisa Cox, Graduate Research Assistant > Soil Science and Reclamation & Restoration Ecology > University of Wyoming > Department of Renewable Resources, 3354 > 1000 E. University Avenue > Laramie, WY 82071 > [email protected] > 307/760-0438 > ________________________________________ > From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news > [[email protected]] On Behalf Of William Silvert [[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 1:51 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Disseminating scientific thought to the general > public: are scientists making science readily accessible? > > I think that this discussion has overlooked the fact that there is a lot of > hostility to science and scientists who reach out are likely to get their > knuckles wrapped. Remember Sen. William Proxmire and his Golden Fleece > awards? Politicians and journalists love to pounce on scientists. > > Working on biological control? Reproductive strategies might get by, but sex > lives of wasps? No way! > > Bill Silvert > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alison Lipman" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: quinta-feira, 7 de Abril de 2011 22:56 > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Disseminating scientific thought to the general > public: are scientists making science readily accessible? > > >> Many scientists try to make their findings available to the public, but >> they >> largely fail in doing so. Why? Because they mostly publish in scientific >> journals, and when they do approach the real public they don't know how to >> leave scientific jargon behind and speak in "normal speak." They (we) >> don't >> know how to filter what is interesting to the average person, from what is >> only interesting to us. >
