BIG e-news: Issue 10 - July 2009

As the weather hots up, so does activity for the annual BIG event with registration forms flooding our inboxes. Some of the highlights from this year’s programme are:

• Share ideas and build skills: evaluation, programming, voice and presentation, PowerPoint that actually works!
• Debate: views on learning, the notion of ‘excellence’, the evolving direction of the field, and the role of impartiality
• Find partners: working with music festivals, nightclubs, corporations and other non-traditional partners
• Be inspired: the best of UK’s current science shows and the chance to analyse them with the presenters
• Learn: quiz representatives from 5 major public engagement funders on how to make your ideas happen
• Network: take part in a range of informal and formal networking opportunities in the BIG Event’s infamous atmosphere

If you get a last-minute urge to join us in London later this month, it's not too late to book one of the few remaining places.

Sarah Vining, BIG Administrator

The SciberBrain Project

Jane Thomson, The Biochemical Society

As a former science teacher, I often struggled with getting my classes of KS3 and KS4 pupils to discuss issues with ethical dimensions.

When asked by the Biochemical Society, “What resources would be welcomed by secondary science teachers?”, I suggested that an online framework for discussing opinions in science (either as part of normal lessons or as a workshop style event) might be helpful for teachers like me who find addressing controversial areas in science a daunting task. When my suggestion was echoed by other practitioners, they agreed to let me have a go at putting something together for them.

For my first topic (embryonic stem cell research) I came up with a variety of online activities aimed at pupils in years 9 and 10 including group discussions, campaign presentations, animated slide shows and interactive games. The materials are designed to be projected directly onto a screen by the teacher who can download and print free supporting materials as needed. 

I demonstrated some of my SciberBrain activities to delegates at the ASE annual conference in Reading who were delightfully enthusiastic about the 'time saving', 'useful' and 'clearly presented' materials. Almost a year after starting out on this project (I am very part-time!) the first topic in my ‘SciberBrain’ series is due to be launched with a further two topics (vaccinations and genetic engineering) scheduled for the year ahead.  

The Biochemical Society are pleased to announce that all materials will be freely accessible at www.sciberbrain.org from July 2009 for use by teachers, outreach volunteers, industry reps, or anyone with a mind to discuss areas of bioscience with young people.

The future direction of BIG

Noel Jackson, Chair of BIG

BIG started off as a collective of exhibit builders. These worthies are now but a tiny fraction of the membership and BIG needs to have a good think about what it wants to be.

One area where there is no doubt is the focus on individual members. BIG is not an organization for organizations. Some people have interpreted this to mean that it should only be people at the bottom of the hierarchies but there is no constitutional reason why this should be the case. BIG is currently open to those involved in interactive communication regardless of age, subject , employer or position.

In the recent survey, the members who replied strongly suggested that BIG was for people involved in informal science communication. This is a significant narrowing of focus which needs to be confirmed by the membership at the AGM but, if accepted, would make it easier for the executive committee to move the organization forward.

There is a groundswell of opinion that BIG has the potential to be a professional body for those involved in informal science communication. Accepting that this narrowness of focus needs to be addressed constitutionally, what form could this professionalism take? Is BIG a learned society, a chartered institute or a union? Elements of all three have been requested by members.

To explore this further, we have looked at other organizations to see how they evolved to exist in their current forms.

In the past learned societies awarded recognition of competency to practice but it seems unlikely that we will be able to decide who can be a science communicator in the future. Whilst the opticians and pharmacists still control their professions, most of the learned societies now use university degrees to assess suitability for membership. Perhaps we are already heading down that route with the MScs in science communication or perhaps the field is so broad that we will always need people with a diversity of qualifications to fill the broad range of niches we currently fill.

The next thought would be some form of chartered institute which would offer accreditation. This would be recognition of good practice rather than a licence to practice. We have looked at the possibility of running an accreditation scheme and the price to set it up would be something between £10k and £20k. Clearly this is completely out of our budget at present.

We have not pursued the idea of becoming a trade union for science explainers as the conditions of service under which our members work are too diverse for us to offer much by way of useful support. We are also cognizant that many of our most active members are freelancers.

So what is BIG? The nearest parallel I have been able to find is the recently formed Institute of Environment and Ecological managers (IEEM) which sees itself as the professional body for those who carry out wildlife surveys. They have no right to say who can carry out surveys but they do have the right to say who can be a member and publish standards against which members can be measured. As a result, use of the term MIEEM offers some degree of assurance to potential clients. I believe that this is the way forward for BIG. We are surely the best placed to define good science communication . We would similarly expect our members to aspire to delivery at that high standard. Perhaps we need a sub-committee to explore how those standards could be defined. It won’t happen overnight but I look forward to the day when membership of BIG is synonymous with a professional approach to science communication.

Sci-pop: Something for the Geek in You!

Hayley Birch, Sounds of Science

It was a freezing February afternoon. Three geeks sat on the floor of a basement room, surrounded by duvets. A dog was scratching at the door...

No word of a lie - this was how we recorded the highlights podcast for our science/music festival, Geek Pop, earlier this year. We only had one mic between us and soft furnishings for sound insulation. But who needs a professional recording studio these days?

If you’ve never heard of Geek Pop, it’s as bizarre an event as you’re ever likely to come across.  We take songs inspired by science – some written and performed by scientists, some by artists – and use them to create an online “festival”. Each of our bands is allocated a slot on a virtual stage (or web page), complete with biography, lyrics, images and videos. Most also drop by the virtual green room for a chat. So, as a festival goer, you might surf to the Tetrahedron stage to listen to Amateur Transplants and then head off to the Tesla Tent to hear an interview with Radium88.

Recording the highlights podcast - amid cries of, “Oh dear, I’ve stepped in some virtual mud” - we realised what an extraordinary collection of music we had put together. And all on a shoestring budget of... well... nothing.

What was most inspiring was the enthusiasm for both science and music shown by our artists. As Paul Lunn of Dalmatian Rex and the Eigentones told us, “I only write about things that I love,” and for each of our artists, that was science – even for those, like the boys from Intercontinental Music Lab, who had never studied science past school age. Equally, the scientists were excited about putting their creative talents to good use. It seemed science and creativity had collided in the most entertaining of ways.

Now, Geek Pop isn’t just about entertainment; it’s a science communication project at heart. And from our point of view, there are two main aims. The first is to challenge the notion that science and the arts don’t mix – clearly, given the catchy pop tunes we’ve featured on our website, they do.  The second is rather less serious: to give us all a place to properly geek out.

That’s right. Instead of fighting our geek urges, why not embrace them? Nowadays, geek culture is young, funky and happening (cf. Star Trek, for starters), so why not jump on the bandwagon and communicate some science in the process?

Incidentally, if anyone is interested in providing us with songs, geeky illustrations, web expertise or oodles of cash for Geek Pop ’10, please don’t hesitate to get in touch!

crew@geekpop.co.uk    www.geekpop.co.uk

A Question of Taste: New PCR Workshops Exploring Evolution

Stephanie Sinclair, The Wellcome Trust

As part of their Darwin 200 celebrations, the Wellcome Trust have funded the development and roll-out of a brand new molecular biology workshop for post-16 students.

From September 2009 At-Bristol, LIFE Science Centre and Nowgen will deliver A Question of Taste, a one-day workshop where students will investigate their own DNA and explore the process of convergent evolution.

A Question of Taste explores the evolution of an unusual trait in humans, where some people taste a particular chemical as being horribly bitter, while others can not taste it. The chemical in question is PTC (phenylthiocarbamide) and the ability to taste or not taste PTC is largely down to a gene called TAS2R38. This gene codes for a taste receptor on the tongue and differences in this gene prevent some people from tasting PTC.

The Question of Taste workshops allow post-16 students to taste PTC and determine their phenotype – either as a taster or a non-taster. They will then use molecular biology techniques such as PCR and gel electrophoresis to investigate their genotype at the TAS2R38 gene.

One of the reasons PCT was chosen to investigate is because it has an interesting evolutionary story. For decades scientists believed that some humans and chimpanzees share this trait (the inability to taste) as they had inherited it from common ancestors before the two species diverged in evolution. However recent genetic evidence has shown that both humans and chimpanzees have undergone independent evolutionary processes that have resulted in this shared trait.

This new evidence exemplifies Darwin’s theory: selection pressures have acted on both species, and each has adapted accordingly. In this case, the adaptation (inability to taste) has occurred via independent routes through a process known as convergent evolution. Why have we evolved these two different responses? What advantage could each have given us? Students will consider these questions during the Question of Taste workshops.

Note - This project will be presented in a session at the BIG Event on 23rd July.

World Conference of Science Journalists 2009
– Stories that matter to a changing world

Sallie Robins, Conference Co-Director

From 29th June – 3 July 2009, upward of 600 science journalists, scientists and science communicators from over 70 countries will arrive at Westminster Central Hall, in the heart of London for a week of workshops, debates, briefings, trips and networking/social events.

Programme Director Fiona Fox of the Science Media Centre hopes that debate will be the main focus of the Conference. “Our intention is to really hone in on issues that are key to journalism, and in particular science journalism, rather than just become yet another conference on science. We want to see people disagreeing, we want to see difficult questions asked and we want to help journalists shape their future.  We all have something to learn, we can all become more professional and expert in our roles and this is no different for science journalists. We want delegates to go away with new contacts, new ideas, new skills and new enthusiasm for their vital jobs.”

Key issues such as the balance of power between public relations and the media, the embargoes system, tabloid journalism and science on TV will all form part of the mix. With plenary, parallel sessions, skills building workshops, science briefings, lunch and breakfast briefings, press conferences, trips and parties the WCSJ2009 is essential for anyone with an interest in science and the media.

How Do Shapes Fill Space?

Edmund Harriss, Imperial College London

How do you get people interested in doing mathematics? Telling them that it is useful often does not work, unless they find the use themselves.

The answer, as everyone involved in BIG knows, is to get people interacting and playing.  Tilings, patterns and geometry are ideal for this as they allow a visual approach. This opens up the beauty of mathematics without the cryptic language of equations and formulae. 

Our exhibit entitled "How do Shapes fill Space?" will be showcased at the annual Royal Society Summer Science exhibition at the end of this month. Our exhibit looks at the history and modern mathematics of tilings and patterns. Starting with Greek geometry and Islamic tiling we arrive at hyperbolic geometry and modern work on aperiodic tilings like the Penrose tiling. 

Simple visual and physical questions about how shapes fit together and can be folded lead to deep mathematical questions. For example, consider what happens when you place seven equilateral triangles instead of six round a corner. This leads to a tiling of the hyperbolic plane.  

Though it is ancient, the theory of tilings has undergone a renaissance in recent years. The spark for this was the discovery that the tiling problem is undecidable.  In other words any algorithm that takes sets of shapes and tries to tell if they can fill the plane will run forever for some sets of shapes. The existence of such undecidable problems was discovered by Alan Turing and lies at the heart of theoretical computer science.

We are producing simple objects to ensure the essential interaction. The main interactive toys will be laser cut regular polygons and Penrose tiles.  Although these materials lend themselves naturally to structured work plans, people can also be let free with them. Who knows they might make something that surprises us! 

Science Festivals Workshop

Dom McDonald, Science Oxford

21 representatives from organisations involved in Science Festivals across the UK met in early June at the Wellcome Collection in London.

The morning session began with Savita’s groundbreaking “Festival Wiki”, where we all contributed to a list of what’s hot and what’s not in British Science festivals. This led us into a range of conversations about what Science Festivals are for, and the issues that we face in our attempts to get our Festivals bigger and better. Some of these barriers are specific to individual Festivals, but there are also a lot of shared problems, which are currently being solved by Festivals in isolation, and which would really benefit from the group of us working together.

The final part of the session was a discussion about ways forward – in particular whether BIG is the best home for a network of Science Festivals, or whether it is worth setting up a new network specifically for Festivals. This might be independent, or it might exist under the aegis of another organisation. We will be discussing this with the BIG Exec over the summer, and you will all hear the results of our discussions once they have occurred. Anyone with a view on this is, of course, very welcome to get in touch and I will feed their thoughts into our deliberations.

BIG People: Mark Lewney

Job: Patent Examiner and freelance Science Communicator

A typical day at work consists of: Judging whether inventions are new and non-obvious: Einstein referred to himself as a 'respectable federal ink pisser', but these days it’s more a case of sh*tting pixels. On my freelance days I tour schools and universities presenting the science of rock guitar, wherever possible taking in local geographical and historical attractions and getting mildly arseholed in country pubs.

What got you into this career?

Wendy Sadler, best friend of my lovely wife and now the WAL-MART of science communication, heard about a new competition called FameLab and suggested I enter. To my surprise, I won.

What is the best thing about your job?

Touring this beautiful, fascinating country and screwing with the minds of its schoolchildren by talking about String Theory and playing them Slayer.

... and the worst?

Being away from my lovely wife, and bemoaning the abolition of corporal punishment.

What is your favourite meal?

Anything cooked by my lovely wife.

What is your favourite smell?

Women’s hair, although I am now restricted to the hair of one particular woman, who is lovely.

What talents do you possess?

Excellent wife-choosing ability.

What talents would you like to possess?

The ability to make the universe precisely as I wish it to be merely by thinking it, and not be so crap at parking.

Which actor do you think should play you in the film of your life?

A disturbing cross between Ant and Dec, onto which are grafted my large asymmetrical nostrils.

Which living person do you most admire and why?

James Randi, for his inspirational lifelong intolerance of gobshites.

Most beautiful place on earth?

Any room with my lovely wife in it.

What is your Motto for life?

Marrying the BIG Administrator has consequences.

science made simple scoop another award

An innovative project that uses live shows to help inspire young people about engineering has been awarded a prestigious medal by the Royal Academy of Engineering.

Lord Robert Winston, an Honorary Fellow of the Academy presented the Public Promotion of Engineering Medal to Cardiff-based Science Made Simple for their Engineering Explained initiative, which looks at the relevance of engineering in all aspects of our lives - from the supersonic car Bloodhound, to music, to playgrounds, and even nappies.  Engineering Explained shows have since been performed to over 17,500 people at schools and events throughout Britain and overseas.  

Our Website needs You!

A reminder that the BIG Executive are discussing the website (www.big.uk.com) and want members' views. Feel free to comment on any of the issues raised below by email to admin@big.uk.com

At the simplest level, BIG needs to run a website to support its activities. For example: information pages; membership system and login; events bookings; the e-news; mailings; payments. But it can do much more. Different web features provide different opportunities - blogs, wikis, forums, email groups, social networks, video, podcasting, photo-sharing, tagging / social categories, feeds, newsletters. How should we develop the BIG site?

What do you want the website to do for you?

One example often quoted is to create a way for people (or just BIG members) to share information about how to do shows - 'BIG show info'. Would you use this? What other things would you like to see? And would you use them?

What should the BIG website not do?

Perhaps there are other sites that already do things well – what should we avoid duplicating?

What can the website do to support BIG?

Web things are not an end in themselves. How would new features of a web site help members or do for the 'field'? How would they help attract and retain members? Or add value to existing activities?

How do we get content for the site?

Getting good content is hard. We could borrow or re-use existing content that is elsewhere (eg: existing publications, centres' documents, edited big-chat posts, meeting reports etc.). Alternatively, we could use user-generated content (eg: forum, comments on a blog, wiki, news articles, big-chat posts. However, without editing, user-generated content can have lots of words and little information. Or we could pay people for content – if we had the money, or people would pay more for the new content. Or perhaps barter content for access to other content – eg tell us about your two shows in return for access to the rest.

Who should be able to access the site?

Our current site has some 'free access' pages, and some needing a BIG member login. Should Our site be 'members only'? Or for everyone? Or some 'taster' content and some restricted?

With best wishes from the BIG Executive 2008/09…

Noel Jackson, Chair
James Piercy, Vice-Chair
Rachel Mason, Treasurer
Natasha Verniquet, Secretary
Savita Custead, Event Organiser
and Sarah Vining, Administrator

Contact BIG