ASC2018 - 11-15 Nov, Sydney

by

Communicating Climate Change and other Complex and Contested Content

When: Tuesday 13th November, 4:00pm – 5:30pm
Where: Theatrette, Level 2 behind the registration/foyer area
Hashtag: #T13

Join climate change communicators to discuss the latest approaches to communicating controversial research. The panel will draw from perspectives and case studies from university centres of excellence, government research organisations, communication consultancies, and non-profit organisations. You’ll obtain specific suggestions on the use of infographics, video and other innovative communication approaches, ideas about campaign timing, and guidance on drawing from a robust foundation of science to effectively communicate in complex and contested domains.

MC

Simon Torok, Director, Scientell

Panel

Paul Holper, Director, Scientell

Karen Pearce, Director, Bloom communication, and communicator for the National Environmental Science Program’s Earth Systems and Climate Change Hub

Martin Rice, Acting CEO and the Head of Research, Climate Council

Alvin Stone, Media and Communication Manager, ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes

by

New Role for Science in Science Communication – Lessons to learn from analyzing CCS media coverage in Germany

When: Tuesday 13th November, 4:00pm – 5:30pm
Where: Theatre, Level 2 down the stairs to the right of the registration/foyer area
Hashtag: #T12

The analysis of the media coverage of CCS in daily newspapers from 2004 to 2014 of CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage) provided new insight into the role of science and science public relations (PR) within the public debate. While CCS is linked to various industry sectors, such as cement and steel production, the German debate predominantly focused on the coal and energy branches. CCS, while it is an important issue within the context of climate-change mitigation options, has played a major role in the agendas of scientists, researchers, and engineers. Nevertheless, CCS media coverage in Germany was dominated by other stakeholder groups. The analysis showed, that science has lost its role as a proactive actor within science communication. It seems, that new approaches for future science PR has to be deduced to strengthen, once again, the role of science communication. Among these approaches, it is important to pursue a more differentiated understanding of target audiences and regional concerns. Science PR has to accept that science itself is no longer the only stakeholder and actor within science communication.

Session

Evidence-based scicom: Research exploring new and social media

Presenter

Simon Schneider, Universität Potsdam, Institut für Erd- und Umweltwissenschaften

 

by

Inquiring science minds want to know: A visual-material approach to understanding the applied practice of interactive science reporting and audience engagement

When: Tuesday 13th November, 4:00pm – 5:30pm
Where: Theatre, Level 2 down the stairs to the right of the registration/foyer area
Hashtag: #T12

Abstract
This presentation looks beyond geospatial technology and considers a new, innovative approach to visual communication, interctive science reporting, and public engagement. Introduced is the concept of visual-material rhetorics as an effective mode of inquiry that situates story map journals (inclusive of geospatial narratives) as an emerging genres of interactive new media science reporting.

Introduction
New media platforms inclusive of interactive and geospatial technologies are emerging as multimodal artifacts in the field of science communication and journalism. With the addition of geospatially driven technologies in STEM industries, science communicators and journalists must look to innovative and multiple modes of inquiry that investigate how new media genre conventions in interactive science reporting engage public audiences. Amy Propen’s (2012) applied concept of visual-material rhetorics is introduced as an innovative method of inquiry in visual and science communication research. Her method of inquiry presents a new understanding of digital text and technology in relationship to space, place, and geospatial mapping and situates the spatial dimensions of scientific texts alonside multimodal components including interaction design and cartographic, geospatial technologies.

Methods/Approach
A genre analysis of existing interactive story maps journals used in STEM industries guided by visual-material rhetorics as an effective mode of inquiry. The study also recognizes how interactive story map journals could be theorized through the concept of visual-material rhetorics alongside traditional and contemporary understandings of new media genres and interaction design in science communication (Andersen, 2015; Caquard and Cartwright, 2014; iText working group, 2001; Propen, A., 2006, 2007, 2011; Villanueva, Dolum, and Belen, 2018).

Insights
This study identifies the effectiveness of visual-material rhetorics as an innovative mode of inquiry in the study of emerging new media, interaction design, visual communication, and multimodal environments used in science communication (Arola, Sheppard, and Ball, 2014; Fraiberg, 2018; Kelly, 2017; Miller and Kelly, 2017; Reid, G., 2017).

References
Andersen, J. (2015). Genre theory in information studies. Emerald Group Publishing.
Caquard, S., & Cartwright, W. (2014). Narrative cartography: From mapping stories to the narrative of maps and mapping. The Cartographic Journal: Cartography and Narratives – Special Issue (51)2, 101-106. https://doi.org/10.1179/0008704114Z.000000000130 Fraiberg, S. (2018). Multilingual and multimodal practices at a global startup: Toward a spatial approach to language and literacy in professional contexts. English for Specific Purposes, 51, 55-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2018.03.003
Hiippala, T., & Tseng, C. I. (2017). Media evolution and genre expectations. Discourse, Context, and Media. 20, 157-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2017.11.001
iText Working Group, Geisler, C., Bazerman, C., Doheny-Farina, S., Gurak, L., Haas, C., Johnson-Eilola, J., Kaufer, D.S., Lunsford, A., Miller, C.R. and Winsor, D Winsor, D. (2001). IText: Future directions for research on the relationship between information technology and writing. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 15(3), 269-308. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F105065190101500302
Miller, C. R., & Kelly, A. R. (Eds.). (2017). Emerging genres in new media environments. Springer International Publishing.
Propen, A. D. (2012). Locating visual-material rhetorics: the map, the mill, and the GPS. Parlor Press.
Propen, A. (2011). Cartographic representation and the construction of lived worlds: understanding cartographic practice as embodied knowledge. In M. Dodge, R. Kitchin, & C. Perkins (Eds.). Rethinking maps: new frontiers in cartographic theory. (pp. 131-148) Routledge.
Propen, A. D. (2006). Critical GPS: Toward a new politics of location. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 4(1), 131. Propen, A. (2007). Visual communication and the map: How maps as visual objects convey meaning in specific contexts. Technical Communication Quarterly, 16(2), 233-254. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572250709336561
Reid, G. (2017). Shifting Networks of Science: Citizen Science and Scientific Genre Change. In Scientific Communication (pp. 17-38). Routledge.
Villanueva, L. S., Dolom, M. A. C., & Belen, J. S. (2018). Genre analysis of the “about us” sections of Asian Association of Open Universities websites. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal

Session

Evidence-based scicom: Research exploring new and social media

Presenter

Susan Rauch, Lecturer, professional writing (science and technology), Massey University, School of English and Media Studies

by

Comparing science communication models with a long-term participatory case study: The Climate Champion Program

When: Tuesday 13th November, 2:00pm – 3:30pm
Where: Theatre, Level 2 down the stairs to the right of the registration/foyer area
Hashtag: #T8

Over the last 20 years, scholars and policymakers have called for science communication to move beyond linear engagement to participatory engagement, especially with publically contested science. However, there has been little scholarly reflection on long-term participatory science communication practice. My study compared the theorised science communication models with a seven-year case study: the Australian Climate Champion Program, where scientists and farmers jointly addressed the problem of climate risk. I investigated scientists and farmers’ objectives for participating, the nature of their interactions, and the relationships between them. I analysed how they valued different sources of knowledge and acknowledged risk. Respectful, open and trusting relationships developed between most of the farmers and scientists participating in the program resulting in upstream engagement and co-learning. This case study demonstrates that a long-term participatory program can enhance co-existing linear forms of communication (deficit and dialogue) to help achieve participatory outcomes.

Session

Evidence-based scicom: Research exploring knowledge, beliefs and perceptions

Presenter

Jennifer Metcalfe, Director, Econnect Communication

 

by

I’ll see it when I believe it: motivated numeracy in Australians’ perceptions of climate change risk

When: Tuesday 13th November, 2:00pm – 3:30pm
Where: Theatre, Level 2 down the stairs to the right of the registration/foyer area
Hashtag: #T8

People don’t form attitudes about Anthropogenic Climate Change (ACC) risks just by empirically considering the likelihood of harm, the consequences of failing to act, and the costs and benefits of mitigation. If that was the case, there should be little disagreement about these quantifiable outputs of scientific research. However, when people consider controversial topics of decision-relevant science like ACC they often defer to their political beliefs, rather than using their cognitive abilities alone, leading to polarised groups. Counterintuitively, Kahan et al. (2017) found that more numerate people, who have the cognitive ability to interpret scientific data, were more polarised than others about the effectiveness of gun control laws on crime in the United States of America.

In our conceptual replication of this important study we investigated whether the motivated numeracy effect found in Kahan et al. (2017) also applies to people when assessing ACC risks. This randomised controlled experiment (N = 504) of Australian adults, extends the motivated reasoning thesis by finding evidence that some people who consider topics of ACC risk use motivated numeracy to rationalise their interpretations of scientific data in line with their beliefs.

Session

Evidence-based scicom: Research exploring knowledge, beliefs and perceptions

Presenter

Matt Nurse, Masters degree candidate, CPAS, Australian National University

Co-Author
Will Grant

by

What would a national framework to coordinate STEM outreach/engagement look like?

When: Monday 12th November, 1:55pm – 3:25pm
Where: L3, Level 2 to the left of the registration/foyer area, down the hallway and through the doors on the right
Hashtag: #M13

STEM outreach/engagement in Australia has changed dramatically over the last decade. All of a sudden it seems that STEM (and ‘innovation’) has become a hot topic. There are now numerous organisations that provide STEM outreach/engagement, especially in the schools context.
There have been some great initiatives over the years to collate and coordinate outreach/engagement but, overall, with limited impact.
This session will reflect briefly on where we have been, provide opportunity to share where we are at the moment, and be focused on proposing a path into the future for STEM outreach/engagement efforts.

Session Producer, Session Chair

Terry Burns, Science Communicator, University of Newcastle

Presenter

Christina Chun, CEO, iScope

Regina Crameri, AIR4

Janine McIntosh, Australian Mathematical Sciences Institute

Bruce Ritchie, Senior Manager Communications and Events, Office of the NSW Chief Scientist & Engineer

Justine Romanis, Engineers Australia Directory

Sally-Ann Williams, Engineering Community and Outreach Manager, Google Australia

Jackie Randles, Manager Inspiring Australia NSW, Inspiring Australia

John Philllips, Manager, Education Projects, The Warren Centre for Advanced Engineering

by

Speed mentoring: short shots of career tips

When: Tuesday 13th November, 2:00pm – 3:30pm
Where: L3, Level 2 to the left of the registration/foyer area, down the hallway and through the doors on the right
Hashtag: #T11

Meet senior science communicators from all parts of the industry and find out their tips for success.

Mentors include Dr Karl Kruszelnicki, journalists from ABC, Fairfax and Nature, people from large organisations like Questacon and Universities, successful freelancers, senior ASC figures and more.

In small groups of similar interests you’ll spend ten minutes with a few mentors, getting their thoughts and asking some questions.

Could be the inspiration for your future career!

** Spaces strictly limited, RSVP for this session during registration. **

** All attending this session will be listed on this session page as they register to attend. **

Session Producer, Workshop facilitator, Presenter

Dr Phil Dooley, Galactic Commander, Phil Up On Science and ASC national vice-president

Mentors

Karl Kruszelnicki (Broadcaster and author) was given this good advice early in his media career: “Avoid opinions, stick to the facts”. Sometimes, you’re lucky.

Broderick Matthews (Acting National Programs Manager, Questacon) began his sci comm journey playing security guard Max Power in a CSI-style murder mystery. Since then he’s travelled from Broome to Bourke with Questacon, exploring the science behind bagpipes, the technology in game controllers, the engineering in play dough and the maths of catapulting cream pies.

Craig Cormick (ASC National President) has been a science communicator for over 25 years, working inside government agencies like Questacon and the CSIRO, as well as outside and around them, and now runs his own company – specialising in risk communication and community engagement.

Stephen Pincock (Nature) was a science journalist at Reuters, The Scientist and the Financial Times before writing popular science books and working as a science book publisher. He now leads a global editorial operation that includes Nature’s careers and supplements journalists and a team that helps institutions tell their science stories on the world stage.

Dr Bobby Cerini (Deputy Director and General Manager, Science and Learning A/g, Questacon) is currently the acting Deputy Director and General Manager of Science and Learning at Questacon. She works to ensure that science learning and engagement outcomes throughout Australia are met through the programs and exhibits run by Questacon.

Penny Palmer (Catalyst, ABC) As an ex-BBC now ABC science television programme maker, the secret to Dr Penny Palmer’s success is her curiosity and desire to understand how the world ticks – she studied parasitic Crustacea living inside starfish for her PhD. That’s a keen sense of curiosity.

Genelle Weule (ABC Science) started out with a health sciences degree. Then she became a journalist and embraced the internet when it was still spelt with a capital “I”. Today she is a senior science reporter, editor and digital producer at ABC Science covering everything from astronomy to zoology.

Jenni Metcalfe (Director, Econnect Communication) has been a science communicator for almost 30 years because she couldn’t decide what to be when she grew up: scientist or journalist. She still can’t decide and she still hasn’t grown up, but she loves bringing science to life through words, images and good old fashioned conversation.

James Hutson (Explanation designer, Explanovision) is a writer, illustrator & animator who creates clear & engaging explanations of complex information for non-experts and has been involved in the visual communication of science for over 20 years.

Lisa Bailey (Exhibition Manager, MOD & ASC National Vice-President) has worked in cultural institutions in the UK and Australia.  At the Royal Institution of Australia she helped design hundreds of science engagement events for communities across Australia, including producing the SCINEMA International Science Film Festival.  She’s now at MOD. at UniSA, designing exhibitions for Australia’s leading future-focused museum, provoking new ideas at the intersection of science, art and innovation.

Lizzie Crouch (Senior Coordinator of Engagement, SensiLab, Monash University) still finds it incredibly difficult to define what she does, having worked as documentary maker, journalist and presenter, art season producer and public engagement consultant (among others things!). But she’s committed to interdisciplinary approaches that create inspiring, engaging opportunities for new conversations around scientific content!

Marcus Strom (Media Advisor, University of Sydney) has a science degree but accidentally became a journalist while living in London last century. Recently was science reporter for Sydney Morning Herald.

Marina Hurley (Director, Writing Clear Science) In the distant past, Marina did a PhD on Stinging Trees. She now specialises in teaching how to write clearly, concisely and efficiently – and plays flamenco percussion on her days off.

Phil Dooley (Phil Up On Science and ASC National Vice-President) As a freelancer and in research institutions Phil has run physics workshops for thousands of high schoolers, written for publishers such as Nature and Cosmos, and told bad science jokes in pubs.

Toss Gascoigne (Visiting Fellow, ANU) walked into a job with CSIRO knowing nothing, but ended up running 1700 communication training workshops for scientists, inventing ‘Science meets Parliament’, running a national advocacy body for science and helping establish Australian Science Communicators.

Jen Martin (Senior Lecturer in Science Communication, University of Melbourne) used to study the sex lives of possums. A decade ago, she founded the scicomm teaching program at UniMelb. She’s been talking science on 3RRR radio for the last 12 years, writes a popular science blog and also loves writing about science for kids in Double Helix magazine.

Attendees

Andy Stapleton, CEO and Founder of verbalize.science
Anna Attard, Research Assistant and Masters Student, University of New South Wales
Anne-Sophie Dielen, The Australian National University
Dr Astha Singh, Vice President | ASC NSW, ASC
Caleb McElrea, University of Melbourne
Catharina Vendl, University of New South Wales
Dr Catherine Dorey, Consultant, Fish & Fisheries | Science Communication | Campaign Strategy
Catherine Healy, Science Communication Advisor, Environment Protection Authority Victoria
Catherine Somerville, Doherty Institute
Clare Watson, NSW Office of Environment and Heritage
Emma Saville, EPA Victoria
Errol Hunt, FLEET: ARC Centre of Excellence
Jackie Randles, Manager Inspiring Australia NSW, Inspiring Australia
Jane Ilsley, Econnect Communication
Jessica Heinemann, Centre for Biopharmaceutical Innovation – UQ
Jun-Ting Yeung, University of Melbourne
Kimberly Cullen, Managing Director, Crafting Astronomy Communication
Laura McCaughey, UTS
Lee Byrne, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre
Matt Nurse, Masters degree candidate, CPAS, Australian National University
Meagan Vella, NPWS
Melina Gillespie, Communication Advisor, CSIRO Energy
Micaela Jemison, Science Communicator, Smithsonian Institution
Michael Helman, Communicatrium
Michelle Neil, Australian Citizen Science Association
Michelle Riedlinger, Associate Professor, University of Fraser Valley, Canada
Naomi Koh Belic, University of Technology Sydney
Nicole Fetchet, Questacon – The National Science and Technology Centre
Rachel Rayner, Science Communicator, Australian Volunteers Program
Rebecca Blackburn
Ruth Redfern, CRDC
Sally Grosvenor, CDPC, University of Sydney
Sarah Buchan, The Mullion Group
Sheryn Pitman, Programme Manager Inspiring South Australia, South Australian Museum
Susan Rauch, Lecturer, professional writing (science and technology), Massey University, School of English and Media Studies
Tyrone Anderson, ASPIRE – UNSW

by

Mapping the science writing and communication landscape in Canada using new media and traditional survey research tools

When: Tuesday 13th November, 4:00pm – 5:30pm
Where: Theatre, Level 2 down the stairs to the right of the registration/foyer area
Hashtag: #T12

The social media landscape presents new challenges for science communication that have not yet been fully understood. This Canadian government-funded project, conducted by researchers in partnership with ASC’s sister organizations in Canada (the Science Writers and Communicators of Canada, SWCC, and the Association des communicateurs scientifiques du Québec, ACS), aimed to identify who is currently communicating about science in Canada and how they are doing it. Using emerging new media research tools (Altmetrics and Netlytics) and commonly-used hashtags (i.e. #scicomm; #commsci, and #sciart) we identified 256 dedicated social media science communicators (197 Twitter and 59 Instagram) located in Canada. We surveyed these social media communicators about their communication practices and compared their survey responses to survey responses gathered from association members (254 SWCC members and 309 ACS members). Findings show that, compared to association members, the social media communicators we identified through new media mapping were younger (26-36 years of age), paid less (or not at all) for their science communication activities, and had been communicating science for fewer years (2-5 years compared to 10 years or more). More members of the social media group had a science background (rather than communication, journalism or education background). Fewer of the social media communicators were members of related professional associations, however, more were members of informal science writing/communication networks. The social media communicators used a greater diversity of media tools to communicate when compared to association members. We will discuss how the findings from this research project are being used to inform professional member association policies, training and outreach activities to improve the quality of public engagement with science in Canada.

Session

Evidence-based scicom: Research exploring new and social media

Presenter

Dr Michelle Riedlinger, Associate Professor, University of Fraser Valley, Canada

Co-Author
Germana Barata
Alexandre Schiele

by

A sea of deficit: The science communication landscape in Australia

When: Tuesday 13th November, 2:00pm – 3:30pm
Where: Theatre, Level 2 down the stairs to the right of the registration/foyer area
Hashtag: #T8

Science communication has been predicated on the deficit model —top-down, one-way communication from scientists to public audiences seen as “… empty vessels – as minds in deficit that need scientific information in order to be replete” [1]. This model has been discredited for 30 years, with research showing that more scientific information does not lead to the desired objectives of increased scientific literacy or public acceptance or agreement with science [2, 3]. And so a new mood for dialogue was identified in the U.K. House of Lords 2000 report [4], which consequently led to the UK’s Committee on the Public Understanding of Science (COPUS) closing itself down stating: “We have reached the conclusion that the top-down approach which COPUS currently exemplifies is no longer appropriate to the wider agenda that the science communication community is now addressing” [5].

Despite the above, our research suggests that the deficit model not only persists in Australia — it prevails. This study examines the science communication landscape in Australia, specifically during National Science Week in August 2018. Approximately 1300 activity organisers across Australia were asked to complete a short online activity profile survey. Based on the Generic Learning Outcomes (GLO) framework [6] and the CAISE Informal Science Education project framework [7], the survey contained questions about individual activity objectives, style and format. A total of 305 individual activity profiles were collected and categorised using the CAISE project framework.

The results show that across Australia, 71% of National Science Week activities classified as deficit model, while only 3% classified as dialogue or engagement model. This result is higher than the almost 60% of 411 activities categorised as deficit model in the Inspiring Australia audit in 2012 [8]. Based on the research discrediting this model, we argue that the prevalence of the deficit model in Australia may be impacting the effectiveness of science communication efforts in achieving desired objectives.

References
1. Gregory, J. and S. Miller, Science in public: Communication, culture and credibility. 1998, New York: Plenum.
2. Durant, J.R., G.A. Evans, and G.P. Thomas, The public understanding of science. Nature, 1989. 340(6228): p. 11-14.
3. Thomas, G. and J. Durant, Why should we promote the public understanding of science. Scientific literacy papers, 1987. 1: p. 1-14.
4. House of Lords, Science and Society. 2000, House of Lords: London.
5. Copus, Statement on Copus by the British Assiciation, the Royal Institution and the Royal Society. 2002, The Royal Society: London.
6. Hooper-Greenhill, E., et al., Measuring the Outcomes and Impact of Learning in Museums, archives and Libraries. 2003, University of Leicester: Research centre for Museum and Galleries.
7. McCallie, E., et al., Many Experts, Many Audiences: Public Engagement with Science and Informal Science Education. A CAISE Inquiry Group Report. 2009, Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE): Washington, D.C.
8. Metcalfe, J., K. Alford, and J. Shore, National audit of Australian science engagement activities. 2012, Inspiring Australia: Canberra, Australia.

Session

Evidence-based scicom: Research exploring knowledge, beliefs and perceptions

Presenter

Isabelle Kingsley, PhD candidate, Science Communication, University of New South Wales

Co-Author
Dr Carol Oliver, Senior Research Fellow, University of New South Wales

by

Writing Poetry Scientifically or Science Poetically

When: Wednesday 14th November, 11:55am – 1:25pm
Where: L2, Level 2 to the left of the registration/foyer area, down the hallway and through the doors on the right
Hashtag: #W13

Can poetry be used as a tool to communicate science? There is a science to poetry: poetic forms have strict formulas and measurement systems. Conversely, science is full of poetry – it is creative, imaginative, and inquisitive. This interactive workshop aims to decompartmentalise “poetry” and “science”, with a view to discussing the availability of poetry as a tool for communicating science to a wide range of audiences. Poetry will be deconstructed and various poetic forms analysed, giving you the techniques to debate and create your own science-inspired poetry. When scientific concepts are expressed in verse, perhaps the aesthetics, intuition, emotion, and poetic devices that characterise poetry will enrich the inductive reasoning, logic, pragmatism, and precise terminology that characterise science. Perhaps there are many ways in which the humanistic nature of poetry can be shaped for scientific purposes and messages. In turn, maybe the creative and descriptive nature of science will influence new poetic themes. Bring along your favourite poem or discover some new ones (perhaps even of your own making) as we explore science poetry and its future. Two examples, composed by the workshop’s facilitates, are here to get you thinking!

“This hemisphere leans
Sunward as winter breeds spring.
Hibernators rise.”

“The shy Higgs Boson’s strange decay
Happens, it seems, almost right away.
And it’s a loop of Tops
From which the shy Higgs pops,
Into a dual Photon array.”

Session Producers/Workshop Facilitators/Presenters

Dr Michael Leach, Adjunct Research Associate, School of Rural Health, Monash University

Rachel Rayner, Science Communicator, Australian Volunteers Program

The facilitators are currently working on a science communication paper around the topic of poetry as a communication tool. Elements of the results and discussion from this workshop may be incorporated into the paper.

Australian Science Communicators

About ASC.

@auscicomm

ASC on Facebook

Questions? Please contact Kali on asc2018@asc.asn.au.

Acknowledgements

© 2018 Australian Science Communicators

Editor Login.

SPONSORED BY

SUPPORTED BY

TRADE EXHIBITORS