Listening via social media - prioritizing conversations

I recently wrote about the listening (versus talking) side of science communication. For me, listening is practice, one that I am always working to deepen.

Social media presents a particular challenge in terms of listening. On one hand, it can be a great space to listen in to lots of different conversations, and many people interact with it in that way. I personally find it to be a great struggle.

Storytelling: the stories we don't tell

I am slightly wary of the storytelling wave that has taken over these days. I worry about appropriation - the question of whose stories we tell and whether they are ours to tell looms large for me and oddly doesn't pop up that often in the workshops I've been in on the topic unless somebody asks. But, one thing I'd not given a lot of thought to was the stories that we don't tell - particularly the ones that we do or don't tell about ourselves.

The power of intuition in science communication

In the science communication research world over the past year or so, there seems to be an assumption that working from an intuitive place = bad and that working from a data-driven, research-based place = good.** It is in many ways difficult for me to actually hear research results when they are framed that way, even though I do appreciate the place I think it's coming from, which is that there is a lot to be gained by understanding social science research in science communications. But, I'd also like to think there is a role for intuition *and* for data - I mean, why we gotta be so old-school dualistic?

On listening in science communication

It is heartening to see more discussion of the listening side of science communication world of late. I first wrote about the topic in a 2012 article on moving toward relationship-building and engagement in science communication. A discussion with a beloved and wise person in my life spurred me to better define what I meant by listening. The result was that in the article I said:

Exposing the underbelly - the hidden curriculum in the natural sciences

One thing that I find prevalent in the legal and medical literature is reference to a "hidden curriculum" in higher education. The concept originated in the 1970's and refers to the idea that as part of training, we are all subject to social and academic norms that might be quite different from the content of what we are being taught, which can be problematic on many levels.

Careers outside academia: After the science policy fellowship

I have been involved in discussions of non-academic careers (yes, it's problematic wording - substitute "diverse" or your favorite term of art as you wish) for longer than I'd like to admit. As a graduate student 10-15 years ago, I started a student section of the Ecological Society of America (ESA), my primary professional society. As a student, I also organized a career workshop for several years at the annual meeting, and the tradition continued beyond my tenure with the section (which is super awesomely active these days). Increasingly, I find myself on the same kinds of panels I once organized - including one at ESA this summer.

All about science outcomes - thoughts from the evaluation world

I had the opportunity this year to attend the 2013 annual meeting of the American Evaluation Association. For me it was a good insight into a different professional world. I’ve been exposed to evaluation concepts and done some metric level work, especially with the web and social media, and strategic goal setting and what-not, but nothing too rigorous. Increasingly though, evaluating programs and projects is part of my professional world and seems to be a good trifecta of skill when combined with science communication and project development. So, some intellectual grounding in the topic seemed useful.

Toward a more expansive view of being a scientist

So, I tried to write an editorial for a science journal this summer, and a few things about the experience were very interesting. First and foremost was the back and forth with the editor about whether or not what I had written about was actually "science". For me, this gets to the heart of the matter what it means to be a scientist and what is considered science (not to mention how hard it is to publish as a practitioner). I deeply believe that we need be more expansive in how we think about both.

Why I'm trying this blogging thing again

I am a scientist-practitioner specializing in issues related to the environment (a description of my actual work is here). There has to be a better way to describe my professional identity, but my inability to do so is, in my mind, reflective of the state of the field.