2nd Annual Public Engagement and Science Communication Symposium

When Roald Hoffman initially told the audience that his powerpoint presentation was not working, my reaction was not pleasant. I have had professors (not in Comm 285), who either do not make Powerpoints, or fail to use them. This situation often results in the professor rambling on and on – often to the point where I am so bored I do my French homework. However, I was pleasantly surprised and fascinated by the improve actors Hoffman used as a visual aid. It reminded me of Lablit, and its ability to entertain and educate simultaneously.

I also found the panel discussion intriguing. I agreed with Hoffman when he stated, “science has filled the world with things we don’t understand – from CD players to our cars.” In addition, I thought this was a great analogy for what I have learned in Communication 285 – the importance of science communication. Often at Cornell, I have questioned the relevance of the classes I am taking, and their applicability in real life. However, this symposium, and in particular the panel discussion, illustrated the relevance of science communication in today’s society. The relevance of effective science communication is especially relevant now that so many environmental and scientific issues are coming under public and governmental scrutiny.

One of the more salient issues discussed was the balance between keeping science unfiltered, and presenting generalized versions to the public. Nesbit pointed out that in many cases, the public wants to be challenged by “real” science, as opposed to any watered down version that the science community may offer to the public. I considered this while viewing the posters on display. Some of the posters I thought might have been too complicated. While I cannot remember these off the top of my head, on poster, in its comprehensive yet simplistic manner, caught my attention. Poster #8, “Making Manure an Environmental and Economic Asset” was in my opinion, one of the more effective communicators of science among the posters. While some posters were large and more detailed, #8 struck an important balance between being comprehensible and comprehensive. I did not stay until the winners were announced, but if “Manure” had won, I would not have been surprised.