SCOM1001 Lecture Notes - Lecture 5: Penicillin, Syphilis, Beetroot
28 May 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Midterm Exam Revision
PT 1: SCIENCE COMMUNICATION
Elements of Good Science Communication
1. Audience: Understand them, respect them, foster trust, use appropriate language. Don’t
be condescending, and don't use impenetrable jargon.
2. Aim: Know why you’re there, why your audience is there, clearly acknowledge it to all
concerned. Make sure your expectations and their expectations about communication is
clearly aligned.
3. Content: Make content appropriate by understanding what your audience already
knows, what is relevant to them, and how they can meaningfully use your information.
4. Mode/Medium: Choose one suitable and accessible for communication with your
audience.
5. Context: Social, political, cultural environment of the science you are communicating and
the limits of science more generally.
Contexts of Science Communication
Social: Society’s organisation, institutions, demographics, structures, groupings,
interactions
Political: The use of power, who makes decisions for whom and why, who has authority
Ideological: Ideals, visions of future society, what we want to be like and how to get
there
Cultural: Beliefs, habits, ways of interacting with the world. Language, expectations and
values
Economic: the exchange value we place on things, what they cost, benefits we get in
return.
Purpose of Science Communication
Inform interested audiences
Inspire new audiences
Persuade people to improve their lives
Persuade people to improve the world
Benefits of Science Communication
Improves grant writing
Increases public involvement in science
Improved impact and uptake of research by end-users
Improved their own understanding of their work
Enhanced communication skills and confidence
Hindrances of Science Communication
58% workplace issues, e.g. lack of time, incentives, peer criticism, sensitivity or
confidentiality of research
22% negative public attitudes and distrust of the media
17% lack of confidence, skills or training
3% awareness of gap between science and the public
What is the Public?
The ignorant masses?
So-called ‘gap’ between science and the public
Science literacy a key focus of many science engagement policies, e.g. Inspiring
Australia, NISA
Regular surveys to test the public’s literacy in STEM
Poor results cause widespread panic and despair
Why? Baseline literacy assumed to be necessary to function in society and make
informed decisions
Does Science Literacy Matter?
Depends on context and purpose
More knowledge is great as an end in itself
More knowledge when you think it will change someone’s beliefs/ attitudes/ behaviours/
habits in a way you want is often counterproductive and ill-advised
To ‘bridge the gap’ between science and the ‘public’, can be condescending and
alienating
Where did this ‘Gap’ Come From?
According to Bensaude-Vincent, it is a 20th Century invention
As science became more professional, institutional, secular, specialised, “knowledge is
clearly divided into two categories: that of the scientists, who hold the monopoly of true,
valid statements, and that of the rest, the numerous, anonymous, and amorphous mass
forming the public.”
The Gap
Public reason and opinion no longer valued
Scientists take monopoly on knowledge production
Communication can only go one way
Clever Science ! ! Ignorant Public
What is Science?
Gieryn (1983) says there is no fixed way to define science
Scientists and science promoters engage in boundary work to separate science from
other things
Change its traits strategically each time
Probably not one true definition
Often defined by what it isn’t in any given context, e.g. pseudoscience, emotion, religion,
‘pure culture’ when compared with mechanics, practical utility when compared with
philosophy
For example
“scientific knowledge is empirical when contrasted with the metaphysical knowledge of religion,
but theoretical when contrasted with the common-sense hands-on observations of mechanicians
[engineers]…”
Or:
“...science is justified by its practical utility when compared to the merely poetic contributions of
religion, but science is justified by its nobler uses as a means of ‘pure’ culture and discipline
when compared to engineering.”
A Historical Definition
Cunningham and Williams (1993):
The ‘idea’ of science has a historical origin, just like everything else, invented between
1760-1848
People treat science as ahistorical and try to define it by universal traits ¡Rather than
imagining science as this linear, ‘big picture’ from the beginning of time until now, find the
historical origin of the things characteristic of science as we understand it today
Science is a Specific Thing
Human pursuit of knowledge is universal, but ‘science’ as we know it is:
White
Western
Euro-centric
English-speaking
Professionalised
Specialised disciplines
Secular
Institutionalised and located
Problem with Conflating Science and All Knowledge Seeking
Science is particular method: many forms of even what we consider science doesn’t
use the scientific method
Science as inherently good and progressive: feminist theory and environmental
movements challenge ‘goodness’ of oppressive weapons, technological advancements
Document Summary
Elements of good science communication: audience: understand them, respect them, foster trust, use appropriate language. Don"t be condescending, and don"t use impenetrable jargon: aim: know why you"re there, why your audience is there, clearly acknowledge it to all concerned. Social: society"s organisation, institutions, demographics, structures, groupings, interactions. Political: the use of power, who makes decisions for whom and why, who has authority. Ideological: ideals, visions of future society, what we want to be like and how to get there. Cultural: beliefs, habits, ways of interacting with the world. Economic: the exchange value we place on things, what they cost, bene ts we get in return. Improved impact and uptake of research by end-users. 58% workplace issues, e. g. lack of time, incentives, peer criticism, sensitivity or con dentiality of research. 22% negative public attitudes and distrust of the media. 3% awareness of gap between science and the public. Science literacy a key focus of many science engagement policies, e. g. inspiring.
