BIG e-news: Issue 11 - September 2009

Ten years ago, on September 1st 1999, the Exploratory in Bristol closed its doors for the last time, some 12 years after opening. How quickly a decade has passed!

The Exploratory certainly helped inspire a new generation of science communicators and anyone attending the recent BIG Event in London will realise how booming our industry still is. BIG membership has more than doubled in the past two years and continues to grow.

Later this week, almost 40 ‘newbie’ science communicators will take part in BIG’s first ever Little Event, to be hosted by Thinktank. Modelled on the 'BIG event' the 'Little Event' is aimed at those relatively new to the field of STEM communication. This mini conference aims to pass on the background to how we work and give a taste of what BIG can offer to newbies in the field.

BIG expresses its gratitude to Graphic Science and NESTA’s Planet Science for providing bursaries to make the event accessible to those starting out in the field.

Sarah Vining, BIG Administrator admin@big.uk.com

BIG Event

This year’s BIG Event was another great success! The hosting honours went to the Royal Institution who did an amazing job taking care of the UK’s science communicators over the three-day event in London.

Take a look at a selection of photos of the Event on Flikr and feel free to add your own.

Noel Jackson, our outgoing Chair summed up his memories of the Event in the form of a poem - hope you enjoy reading it...

Memories from BIG at the RI 2009

Noel Jackson, Centre for Life

David in his elephant suit.
Green Park coppers! What a hoot.
Justin words are far from funny
BIS poor value for gov’ment money.
Danger High Voltage took some knocking
But their Tesla coil was really shocking.
AGM, we agreed BIG’s focus
On scientific hocus –pocus.
Sir Mark Lewney made us fear
Plate armour essential protective gear.
Are they learning had folk hissing,
The blood and gore they wanted missing.
Science Oxford raised some smiles
With super-hero destroying wiles.
The conf’rence dinner, very convivial
Science comedian, far from trivial.
Although the beer cost LOTS of money
Writing our own jokes was very funny
Elin’s Flame On! Calm, collected,
Faraday’s spirit resurrected,
Debbie’s paperclip, I nearly died
A Death by PowerPoint personified.
Richards’s breeches, quite alarming
But renaissance astronomy, really charming.
Laser beams and funny handshake,
Best demos entries made us quake.
Lees English rockets made some panic
but Ian’s torch was simply MANIC.
And as the burning bacon cleared,
We all vowed to return next year.

Top Tips for Finding Funds

Karen Bultitude, Science Communication Unit, University of the West of England

At this year’s BIG Event we were privileged to have four representatives of various funding bodies provide their insights on top tips for success with grant applications...

Caitlin Watson (Institute of Physics), Tom Zeissen (The Wellcome Trust), Kate Miller (EPSRC) and Phaedra Neal (RCUK) had the tough task of maintaining interest and attention during the Friday 9am session – which they succeeded in admirably.

The final list of Top Tips for writing grant applications were:

• Read the guidelines carefully
• Talk to the funder to discuss initial ideas / ask questions raised by the guidelines
• Get someone who's never heard of your project to read the application
  • Can they tell you the where / what / when / who / why of the project?
• Clear aims, objectives and rationale
• Make it clear what will be experienced
• Should be enthusiastic and easy to read
• Clear well justified budget
• Make sure you have the right expertise (including partners)
• Think about what reviewers are asked to assess when writing your proposal
• Don't be afraid to be innovative
• Contact the grant-giving body to discuss proposal ideas before applying
• Be creative and engaging
• Check the criteria!

Fingers crossed that these new insights lead to large funding successes for BIGger’s in the coming year!

Pride and Prejudice

Ben Brown, Explorer Dome

“Excuse me, how do the Star Signs actually affect your character?” asks a well-meaning parent. Then there’s my favourite from a young child “Will I go to hell if I believe in the Big Bang, because that’s what my daddy says?” Potentially awkward questions are an everyday staple for science presenters and the BIG Event’s Pride and Prejudice gave us the chance to explore different ways of approaching our answers.

We have pride in our training and expertise, but may hold personal prejudices about our subject matter, so Pride & Prejudice asked whether science communicators should be impartial. Is it our job as ‘scientists’ to dispel irrational viewpoints, or do we have a responsibility as ‘communicators’ to listen, understand and find a middle ground? Of course there’s no single answer – the conclusion of those present was that it all depends on good old-fashioned context, and the skill of a good presenter is knowing what that context is.

So, we looked at the pros and cons of two extremes. On the one hand playing Devil’s Advocate, ignoring the cultural background of the question and standing up for the science. On the other hand, the Appeaser might look to give the answer the questioner wants to hear, even if it compromises the science. Here’s an example from our planetarium “Did my mummy turn into a star when she died?” the Devil’s Advocate might respond with a certain lack of sensitivity “No, humans can’t turn into stars; stars are actually huge balls of exploding gas many trillions of miles away; whoever told you your mummy was a star is wrong.” Tears… The Appeaser might go for “Yes, when people die they turn into stars and shine down on us from heaven so that we can remember them forever.” Aaaaah – very sweet, but not very scientific.

In this instance a middle ground is surely the correct approach, but what if your questioner has prejudice, perhaps an astrologer or young-Earth creationist, or a passionate believer in the moon landing hoax conspiracy theories? What if they love the idea that aliens build crop circles? Should you contradict their beliefs and stand up for the science, or let them have their say in front of an audience? Understanding the context of a question could involve second-guessing the questioner’s motive. Do they want to find out more, clarify an uncertainty, practise using recently-acquired knowledge, show off in front of others, take advantage of a public platform, or maybe just challenge the presenter?

Here are a few thoughts from the session:

The Devil’s Advocate

• The Devil’s Advocate doesn’t compromise on science, however it’s a dangerous stance to take if you’re not 100% sure of your subject – the questioner may have a point, even if it’s based on a misunderstanding, such as an exaggerated press report
• You have the opportunity to correct bad science and stand up for the scientific process
• Being controversial as a presenter could either encourage or discourage open debate
• Giving your own opinion can be good, but might be dangerously influential
• You could alienate your audience, maybe even loose bookings for your organisation
• It can be good to be firm, especially if a scary scenario is suggested to young children
• You can get away with it if your approach is friendly and light-hearted

The Appeaser

• You get to keep the audience happy and bond with them as a presenter
• We should always be respectful – many great scientists hold strong personal religious beliefs, but that doesn’t necessarily make them less scientific in their professional work
• You could come across as patronising
• Audience may not realise it’s a ‘science’ show, they’re just here to join in
• The customer’s always right; maybe we have a duty to agree with them

The Impartial Presenter

• Best of both worlds!
• Are you answering for yourself personally, or as an ambassador for science?
• Expressing both sides of an argument may indicate that the scientific community is divided, even if overwhelming opinion is on one side, e.g. climate change
• Being too impartial may not answer the question – your audience may leave dissatisfied

It was great to hear so many different opinions from a range of professional backgrounds and I hope that these musings are useful to the BIG community, at least as food for thought. The next step is to hear more of the real thing, so please feel free to share any amusing or awkward questions you’ve encountered yourself, along with any top tips for getting the right answer in that all-elusive context.

Evolving Science Communication

Helen Featherstone, Science Communication Unit, University of the West of England

The ‘Evolving Science Communication’ session at the BIG Event aimed to explore new developments in science communication and how the BIG community is responding to those developments.

This session was an extension of the Evolving Science Communication Symposium held in Bristol, March 2009, for which a final summary report will be published in September 2009.

This session covered a wide variety of topics: frameworks of different science communication activities, the roles we undertake as science communicators, evaluation and storing and archiving reports. People felt there was value in using a framework for identifying different types of science communication activity (Deficit, Dialogue and Participation) and that this could be useful when planning and delivering activities and programmes.

When discussing the roles that science communicators undertake participants felt their roles encompassed:

• advocate
• administrator
• facilitator
• interpreter
• creative
• entertainer

There were mixed feelings about the roles of scientist and teacher, with some delegates strongly identifying with these roles, while others strongly rejecting them. The strong identification with creativity and with advocacy had links to discussions held in other sessions at BIG09: particularly around measuring quality. For example, if we strongly identify with creativity and recognise that a significant part of being a science communicator is about producing creative works then should we turn to the creative fields to help us measure quality to improve our practice?

There was a lively discussion about evaluation which was stimulated by quotes from reports and academic journals. The key outcomes from the discussion included:

• Evaluation is hard, and non-trivial.
• The academic literature can be difficult to understand.
• There is a distinction between evaluation and academic research.
• Evaluation of process and evaluation of outcomes are different beasts.

A whole-group discussion about tools for storing and archiving reports (evaluation or otherwise) highlighted these two points:

• a repository is useful but needs to be searchable in a useful manner
• being honest is essential

Storing and archiving reports references

• The Visitor Studies Association event database
• ISOTOPE (Informing Science Outreach and Public Engagemen) (see article below)
• CrescENDO (Creative Science Engagement Networking, Development and Organisation)
• Informal Learning Science portal

ISOTOPE (Informing Science Outreach and Public Engagement)

Rick Holliman, The Open University

ISOTOPE is an open access website for those interested in engaging with the sciences. The site contains resources added by science communicators, for use by science communicators.

If you have an interest in science communication and public engagement please visit the site and register as a member. (To submit resources to the site you must first register as a member of ISOTOPE.)

Using ISOTOPE resources

From the ISOTOPE Home page (isotope.open.ac.uk) you can navigate to the various sections of the site. In each section you can scroll down to browse the resources, or look for something specific by using the Search function. The sections are:

• Members: a list of current ISOTOPE members and their interests
• Activities: descriptive accounts explaining how to run science communication activities
• Events: short summaries of upcoming science communication and public engagement events
• Funding: short summaries of funding opportunities in science communication and public engagement
• Gallery: holds images from previous science outreach and public engagement projects
• Websites: short summaries of websites that address the related fields of science communication and public engagement
• Training: has descriptions of training opportunities and a list of training resources for science communicators
• Evaluation: includes a number of evaluation resources
• Further reading: short summaries, reviews and links to relevant publications

Becoming a member of ISOTOPE

To register, please select Create new account from the homepage and complete the registration form. You should provide a valid email address so the ISOTOPE team can validate your account and make contact with your initial password.

Once you log in as a member of ISOTOPE you will find additional instructions on how to add content, and revise the resources you submit.

If you would like to know more about ISOTOPE, or send feedback and suggestions to the project team, contact science-engagement@open.ac.uk

BIG People: Bubblz Ainslie

Job:

Mathematical Clown

A typical day at work consists of:

Amid much laughter and major hard work, Bubblz visits primary schools, starting with a whole school assembly, followed by 4 or 5 sessions for smaller year groups.

Highlights of a day include working with the littlies and enjoying their squeals of delight at the sight of giant soap bubbles and a count down followed by a balloon rocket shooting around the nursery classroom.

It’s also great watching the “tough” year 6 group relax, as they remember that they are children and they allow themselves to play with the clown.

What got you into this career?

I had an epiphany! (Well, I DID!) In October 2004, at the ripe old age of 42, I realised I was a clown after I sold an item on eBay to a clown and boy, did that explain a few of my annoying behaviours! Once hit by the lightning bolt, I knew exactly what I wanted to do with it and confirmation that I was on the right path came when I attended a session at my first clown convention: A woman stood up, announced that she was a mathematical clown, she wanted to retire and hadn’t been able to find anyone who was interested in being trained to take over from her, in a daze, my hand shot up and the rest, as they say, is history.

What is the best thing about your job?

Laughter.

... and the worst?

Complaints… yes, I have had schools complain that I wasn’t “serious” enough!
Can anyone explain this to me?

What is your favourite meal?

Oh boy! THAT’s a personal question!...
Self-prepared? Cheese and beans on toast! (sorry Mum!)
Prepared by my mother (the saint)… liver and onions with mashed potatoes, YUMMY!
My boyfriend? Waking up to a freshly baked Danish bread breakfast…WITH candles :o)

What is your favourite smell?

Rose

What talents do you possess?

I am a balloon artist, I am learning how to juggle bubbles (want to see it? Attend the BIG event next year!), magic, and I decorate very creative birthday cakes. I can also peel an orange in one strip (without a knife) WOOOWOOOOW!

What talents would you like to possess?

Singing and dancing – I am sadly lacking in both departments.

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

Victoria Wood, DUH!

Which living person do you most admire and why?

I really can’t name just one. In my new life I am surrounded by dozens of extraordinary people including so many BIG members, talented maths educators, clowns, magicians, puppeteers and inspiring “normal” people.
Famous person? Barack Obama. I pray for his safety!

Most beautiful place on earth?

The English countryside

What is your Motto for life?

Make a difference and take time to stop and smell the roses.
Oh yeah! Don’t take yourself seriously!

Smilez and gigglz
Bubblz

Time for a change?

There are lots of lovely new jobs out there on the BIG website so please don’t forget to take a sneaky peak.

You can also get your opportunities seen by over 800 professionals in the STEM industry by adding your own job vacancies - free of charge. Some current jobs featuring on the site are:

• Science Communications Officer, Understanding Animal Research
• Communications Manager (Maternity Cover), MRC Collaborative Centre for Human Nutrition Research
• Press and PR Officer, British Antarctic Survey, Cambridge
• Displays and Interpretation Volunteer, The Centre for Alternative Technology, Mid Wales
• Education Officer, Satrosphere Science Centre

With best wishes from the BIG Executive 2009/10...

James Piercy, Chair
Andy Lloyd, Vice-Chair
Rachel Mason, Treasurer
Natasha Verniquet, Secretary
Savita Custead, Event Organiser
and Sarah Vining, Administrator and enews Editor

Contact BIG