Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Science Communication Takes Over the 2020 Ocean Sciences Meeting

2020; Wiley; Volume: 29; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1002/lob.10375

1539-6088

Maha J. Cziesielski,

Arctic and Russian Policy Studies

Everyone is talking about it. There is not a single researcher who is not familiar with the term “science communication.” The urge for scientists to engage with the public as well as industry sectors and government institutions is continuously growing. Conferences are hosting and promoting science communication related town halls, posters, workshops, and sessions more than ever. Indeed, the Ocean Sciences Meeting (OSM), which ran from 16 to 21 February, hosted over 40 science communication related events, enough to fill a 4-page guide (Fig. 1) directing attendees to the various events. Among the many events at OSM were several organized by ASLO in collaboration with Jonathan Sharp (University of Delaware) and funded by the National Science Foundation. Now, as an ASLO conference tradition, Sharp and ASLO organized a broad range of events to motivate scientists to invest time into developing their communications skills. The objective was to offer interactive, engaging, and conversational workshops that would not only provide new skills and perspectives but also facilitate collaboration among the participants. In order to help scientists learn new ways to engage, Hollywood actor and Improv instructor Brian Palermo offered tips and activities designed to help participants break out of their unapproachable scientist-shell. Palermo emphasizes that communication is a two-way street: it requires listening to your audience and responding adequately to their needs. Improv work focuses stopping yourself from focusing on what you are going to say next and instead forces you to pay attention to what others are saying, tailoring your response to the cues provided. This involves one to actually listen before engaging. Palermo hosted a series of four workshops throughout OSM, focused on using Improv exercises to teach scientists skills of effective communication. The goal of it all? Learning to connect with people. Connections are made not only when we listen, but when we maintain an open mind. Scientists are trained to have healthy skepticism, which generally translates into rejection of information unless proven correct. Through a series of interactive game-like exercises, Palermo forced participants out of their own head and showed them a new perspective of approaching communication. The “yes, and” game significantly stood out to many participants. In this exercise, participants were asked to engage in a discussion of a given topic in two rounds with their partner (Fig. 2). In the first round, participants had to answer to each other's ideas with “no, because”; in the second round, participants answered with “yes, and.” The change in results was immediate. In less than 2 min of practice, scientists reported that conversations dictated by “no, because” felt cold, discouraging and unmotivating. On the contrary, attempting to accept what their partners had to say and building on these ideas together created a positive response among all. In another variation of this exercise, Palermo had participants respond with “yes, but.” In this exercise, participants said the “conversation” felt like a “friendly argument.” The simple gesture of approaching conversations with an open mind led to engaging, fun, and creative outcomes where participants generally reported feeling excited and, most importantly, connected with their partner and in a collaborative, not argumentative, state of mind. A simple game but one that had a significant impact on people's mind sets. Effective communication and positive connections are the foundations of good science outreach and also of productive collaborations with other researchers. Whether you are working with other scientists or local school teachers, understanding the interests and position of your collaborator enables the development of projects that benefit both interested parties, ensuring fruitful outcomes. Communication, connection, and collaboration, these terms appeared repeatedly in various forms throughout the events. During our “scicomm social hour,” it became evident that the “three C's” were the pillars of science outreach. In this social workshop format, we provided an informal setting for participants to discuss science communication, public outreach, and engagement strategies. Besides the opportunity to connect with peers over these subjects, participants were able to interact with science outreach specialists. Gerhard Kuska, former director of ocean and coastal policy for the White House Council on Environmental Policy under George W. Bush, and Misha Body, director of animal husbandry at the California Science Center, joined the group to share their years of professional insight with participants. Discussions revolving around outreach approaches, techniques and current short comings always linked back to one of the pillars. There were lively discussions regarding the use of arts, theater, and movies in science communication, how to grow efforts to work with journalists and contribute well informed news, opportunities for young scientists and early career professionals to expand their communication skills, and learning to understand what information to present to whom and how. Overall, participants' feedback for the informal workshop was incredibly positive. Of the 25 diverse attendees, mostly everyone took the opportunity to share their thoughts and ideas throughout the evening. While the take-home messages of connecting, collaborating, and practicing those skills as much as one can were easily accepted, concerns remained. Many younger researchers reported feeling discouraged to engage in science communication and outreach. This was often linked to either feeling unsure of where to begin, stating that they felt they had no skills to venture into these fields, or a lack of support from supervisors. Established academics mentioned time constrains as well as financial limitation to engage in certain projects. Finally, nonacademic participants felt that scientists have showed lack of interest improving collaboration efforts and that working together often came with a set of challenges. The benefit of these sessions was that participants felt inspired and encouraged to continue on their quest to communicate science with their new allies. Science communication and related skills are increasingly being recognized as valuable. Workshops taught throughout OSM clearly indicate that while we have come a long way, there is still much work left to be done. ASLO will continue to provide opportunities for scientists to feel inspired and expand their science communication involvement.