Feed of Latest U-M Research News
Search & Discovery Home
(reposted from Associate Dean Thomas Zurbuchen’s Blog with permission)
Research institutions, such as the University of Michigan, generally underestimate the necessity to communicate their progress and their challenges they are encountering.
I remember discussions with colleagues as a graduate student. “Why do we have to communicate? We are doing important things even if people don’t see that yet.” There is some truth to this. Science does not follow the rules of democracy – the majority is not always right! And, progress takes unexpected turns. Who would have guessed that fundamental research in stimulated emission would lead to entirely new industries based on the Laser – DVD players, and medical devices? Who would have guessed that communication protocols needed for a huge international elementary particle physics experiment will lead to protocols at the heart of the internet today? In many ways, the most exciting part of research is that it cannot be predicted. I love that!
But, I believe that this argument is fundamentally flawed – we need to communicate about research. In fact, communication is absolutely critical. We are currently suffering from the lack of communication. There is insufficient understanding of research, and we struggle to attract talent into science and engineering. In fact, we cannot at the same time complain about the lack of understanding of science and engineering research and refuse to make it our responsibility to communicate both progress and also the challenges we face as researchers. In the absence of our communication, the only people who are talking to the public are quasi-scientists and pseudo-researchers who sound rather intelligent, but, upon scrutiny, fail to exhibit knowledge or insight.
It is easy to talk about progress and victories – how cool: the first measurement of Mercury’s atmosphere; the first DNA analysis on a chip; a novel remote-controlled bumble-bee… An organization like the University of Michigan should have 10 stories like that each week! And, many stories are indeed written. I believe we have even more stories and we should tell them, sometimes informally, perhaps just with a cool picture and a caption, perhaps on YouTube, and perhaps on TV.
But, I think there are two types of stories we do not tell often enough. 1) the story of the person behind the research, and 2) the story that focuses on the challenges, the issues before they have a resolution.
I have given many talks about science all around the US and beyond, and I noticed that people relate to science much more if they relate to the person who performs the science. I have therefore done research learning about the scientists and their personal challenges – about Einstein’s free spirit, Euler’s strong beliefs or Parker’s resilience in the face of resistance to his theories. Many of the scientists and engineers working today have great stories. Some of them grew up in the most challenging environments, and they are wonderful individuals. (Most) researchers are not the weird, badly dressed, pocket-protector-wielding individuals who are removed from anything so-called normal people care about. They are caring mothers, energetic aerobics instructors, volunteers to charities, avid mountain-climbers, base-jumpers, singers, runners and jazz-musicians. They are cool and smart people!
But, you would never know that if you grow up in Detroit or upstate Michigan. Why become an engineer? Why become a scientist? “They don’t think like me – I am cool!” Well, so are they!
It is also important to talk about the process of science – the challenges, the lessons we learn, and also the opportunity to improve. To my surprise, many of our PhD students don’t understand that most of the science has not been researched yet and most discoveries have not been made yet. That is because we focus so much of our discussions and classes on every detailed result of things that have been found, to the exclusion of things we don’t know and things we don’t understand. Not every researcher is built the same way, but I would rather work in a field with opportunities, rather than being stuck with dotting I’s and crossing T’s. And, I suspect that many of the future leaders feel the same way. By the way, I very much recommend “How the Laser Happened” by Nobel-prize winning physicist Charles Townes, which focuses on new science in an old field of research!
The future of science progress depends on a broad acknowledgment of the importance of research and the availability of the next generation of top-talent to push research to a higher level. Stories of victories, challenges and also stories about the people behind research will help both objectives, at least in the long run.
Communication about science is a lot simpler now than it used to be. We can put up a website, we can start a blog, a Facebook group. But, these tools are only as good as the quality, quantity and originality of the updates that are being provided. Let’s make this a priority at the University of Michigan – we cannot ignore the importance of communication!