2nd Annual Public Engagement and Science Communication Symposium

I found the Public Engagement in Science Communication Symposium to be quite interesting and informative, and regret not having more time to spend at the event. I especially found the exhibit entitle “Discover the Microbes Within: Students Partnering with Research Scientists” (#5) pertinent to many of the topics covered in the course this semester. Although Jeff Doyle, the man I discussed the project with, said that it is not necessarily citizen science but rather “citizen science” (quotation marks). This is because many of the teachers participating are in fact science teachers, and involved in the field of science—arguably “scientists” themselves. The students, however are certainly citizens participating in science, contributing to research, defining the phrase “citizen science,” and I found the program quite inspiring. I also found some rough statistics Dr. Doyle gave me that day impressive—over 400 teachers are now involved in the program, creating a network of teachers from across the northeast. Furthermore, the program has been established for 16-17 years, indicating its success, and hopefully statistics such as these will inspire the development of more programs that help to increase the public's involvement in science and research.

Some other observations I made that I thought contributed to the communication of the complex information to a general audience—the goal of the program—were some “catchy” or “ironic” titles, such as “What Do Cocaine Inhibition of Brain Proteins and Plague Formation in Alzheimer’s Disease Have in Common?” Some other examples of "catching the interest of readers" were those posters that used everyday examples to compare their projects to, to help the audience relate to the topic. An example of this was the opening paragraph of the poster, “Understanding Cancer by Mathematical Analysis of Complex Molecular Networks,” which compared cells in the body to a desktop PC—when cells in the body crash, this is what initiates cancer. Other contributing factors to those exhibits that best communicated their science were those that used large pictures and graphics and those that bolded major ideas and conclusions. All in all, the symposium was very interesting, and I look forward to attending next year. Upon leaving, I found myself wondering what the posters outside the lab with complex scientific information look like in comparison to the posters presented at the symposium. Along the same lines as this, I would have liked to hear an expert’s opinion, who was judging the posters, and thoroughly understood the science behind them, because whether or not the information was re-worded in such a way to convey truth, and reliable knowledge, could potentially pose a problem, as discussed in class, and having the verification that the knowledge I was gaining at the symposium would have been interesting.