Dr Sanna Fowler, Deputy Director of Development, EPFL (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) recently led a series of science communication workshops for researchers in Thailand looking to improve their science communication skills. These workshops were co-organised by EURAXESS ASEAN and Thailand’s National Science and Technology Development Agency (NSTDA) with the support of the Thailand-European Union Policy Dialogues Support Facility. On her last day in Bangkok, Sanna sat down with EURAXESS ASEAN and shared her views on science communication.
Please tell us how your interest in science communication developed.
I have always enjoyed the reporting side of science (presentations, reviews, posters etc.) but the big ‘revelation’ for me was during my PhD in Mucosal Immunology at Oxford. My funding body was part of an initiative called ‘Researchers in Residence’ that encouraged scientists to go into primary schools and teach three lessons on their subject. We got some basic coaching and then I was left on my own with 30 eight-year olds! I worked harder on those three lessons than anything else, and it was a real baptism of fire, but those kids had so much enthusiasm, it was infectious.
Why do you think science communication is important?
Research no longer happens in Ivory Towers – funding is increasingly competitive and from a wider range of sources. It could be described as a ‘buyer’s’ market, and if you’re trying to sell your science in this environment, you need a great pitch. I think it’s no coincidence that countries where a higher proportion of funding for universities comes from non-governmental sources, like the US and the UK, have a more developed science communication scene.
Upheavals like the 1998 autism-MMR vaccine falsehood have thankfully made scientists a lot more proactive about communicating and creating links with the public. But the continuous drip feed of pseudoscience on social media needs scientists to be constantly vigilant and counter with arguments that are relevant to people.
Lastly, improving science communication to non-experts can only be a good thing for communication between peers. After all, how many of us have sat through terrible scientific presentations given by colleagues or even world-leaders in our field?
What is the difference between science communication and journalism?
Science communication is extremely broad and encompasses anything from school’s outreach to diplomacy. In my opinion, good journalism is an essential tool for science communication as it focuses on the relevance of science rather than just the research itself. It also tends to have a more ‘birds-eye’ view of research which is important for joining the dots across disciplines and seeing how things fit together – for example the social and economic changes we can expect with increasing numbers of robots in the workforce.
“Fake news” is very much in the headlines these days. What impact is this having on science communication?
I think fake news is actually a huge opportunity for science communication on two fronts: Firstly, there is now a lot of research going into detecting, tracking and heading off fake news, so hopefully science will help us sift out the real information from the fake. Secondly, amid all the noise, reputable scientists are seen as trusted sources for information, for the media and public alike. But they need to step up and assume this responsibility.
In your opinion, what are some of the biggest challenges facing researchers in terms of science communication?
Finding the time! As science communication is not seen as an essential part of a researcher’s role, it gets pushed to the back after research, teaching, admin, conferences and all the masses of other things that scientists have to fit into a day. I also think it’s the responsibility of universities/research institutions to make resources for science communication available for their scientists. Both have a vested interest in promoting their science and having professional communicators working with experts is the most productive way of doing things.
How can young researchers strengthen their science communication skills?
Read, watch or listen to good science communication! There are some great popular science podcasts and blogs, and you could spend a lifetime surfing through talks on TED for example. Not only will this give you examples of how to communicate better, it will also widen your general scientific knowledge. Many scientists’ general knowledge can be pretty limited since they’re so focused on their particular research area.
What career opportunities are there in the field science communication?
I’m not sure I’m the best person to give advice here; I haven’t followed the ‘typical’ path, which would probably be to get a science communication qualification after your PhD. I took any opportunity I could get to widen my experience as much as possible, either through teaching, writing or public outreach, for example. I also left science for a few years to work in sports marketing. Ultimately, I think you have to just put yourself out there as much as possible, gain visibility and widen your experience.
Could you share some advice for researchers trying to communicate their research to the non-academic community?
Ask yourself why people should listen to you (and being a well-published/well-funded scientist is not an answer here!). Your audience needs to gain something – either information that is relevant to them, or something they’re never heard before that piques their interest. Above all, share your passion for your subject!
This is your third visit to Southeast Asia leading science communication workshops for researchers. What changes have you noticed in terms of the development of science communication in the region?
It’s always an immense privilege to come to Southeast Asia – it’s a region that is young, hungry for change and bursting with energy. The big change is seeing early-stage researchers realise the need to communicate their science. But, I think there is also a desire to give something back and to really change things for the better.
What impressions will you take back with you to Switzerland?
I’m always impressed by the creativity of the researchers I meet in ASEAN countries. Some are working very hard, in difficult conditions such as frequent power cuts, which we never have to deal with here. I’m really hopeful that collaborative initiatives between Europe and ASEAN, like the EURAXESS programme will combine expertise and experience from both sides to find solutions to the problems we face now and in the future.
Thank you Sanna!