blog.emergingscholars.orgEmerging Scholars Blog - InterVarsity's Emerging Scholars Network

than non-majors. Majors are usually taking your class because they genuinely want to learn the discipline of study. Non-majors are likely taking your class to fulfill a requirement that they may or may not be interested in. But I would like to advocate on behalf of our non-majors and our intro-level courses. They are important both for the students we are teaching and for ourselves as educators and growing communicators. If we want to grow in communicating with lay audiences, we need opportunities to interact with them. What better way than to work with non-majors who are not experts, and oftentimes hesitant learners? It can be a great opportunity to practice explaining complex things to them and seeing what’s most effective. You can even ask them for feedback directly on student evaluations. Teaching intro-level classes and working with non-majors not only helps us grow as communicators,. iIt can give us a heart to reach those outside of academia. Learning to do this well can impart knowledge that yields dividends in unexpected ways. 4. Use Metaphors and Analogies. When it comes to breaking down technical information to audiences, metaphors, and analogies are your best friends. Metaphors and analogies will always have limitations, but that shouldn’t stop us from using them. If a metaphor helps someone better understand something that they wouldn’t understand without it, this is a win. Lay people will likely never understand the full complexity of what experts do when it comes to a topic, but that is never really the point. The point is to help them grasp it a little better. Importantly, just because metaphors and analogies are useful, doesn’t mean that all are helpful. Some are more helpful than others, and some are just plain unhelpful. Consider the often overused analogy about mitochondria being the powerhouse of the cell.” In this case, it isn’t the use of metaphor that is the problem, it is the choice of metaphor. We must be strategic with the metaphors we choose and analogies we use. They should be rooted in relevance with our intended audience. The word powerhouse” is dated, and thus further disconnects us from our audience and them from us. 5. Start with the Bottom Line. Lastly, in a science communication class I teach, I share a communication toolkit from the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). This toolkit uses a diagram adapted from Nancy Baron’s Escape from the Ivory Tower , that models what science communication should look like to fellow scientists vs. what it should look like to lay audiences. It is a simple diagram that gets a very important point across: however you communicate in your field of study, you generally should do the exact opposite when communicating with lay audiences. In a research talk to scientists, I might begin by giving a technical yet relevant background to help them understand my work. While everyone in my audience may be a scientist, scientists are a diverse group. We study different things, often using different tools and models. We are not experts in everything, mostly only on the very specific protein or pathway we are studying. Yet we are critical thinkers and can follow complex research talks not related to our own work, if provided enough background that is delivered well. After giving sufficient, but not exhaustive background in a research talk, I would then typically proceed to discuss my data, and end with the bottom line, what it all means, and broader impacts. With lay audiences, we cannot afford to do all that. We will lose them the moment we start. Instead, we have to invert our model. We have to start with the bottom line. What does it all mean? Why does what we are working on matter? Who or what will be most impacted by our findings? Why should they care? Concluding Thoughts While these communication tips are not distinctly rooted in a Christian perspective, our motivation to use them should be. As Christians, the Gospel calls us to be communicators and to care deeply for those who need access to information. We are called to share the Gospel, which admittedly, isn’t always easy. It carries its own sets of challenges and barriers to its intended audience. We are called to be messengers of the Good News to a world that desperately needs it. Why shouldn’t we extend this calling to share our God-given passions and scholarly pursuits with those outside the academy who could benefit from that knowledge too? In the spirit of Romans 10:14, how can we expect others to understand unless they hear? How can they hear except with a messenger? There is a particular need for scholars of faith to be messengers to lay audiences. The World but especially the Church needs us. We need scholars in the body of Christ to speak truth and knowledge with grace and conviction. By doing this, we can promote the flourishing of all, those in and outside of the Church. Sharing our knowledge and expertise glorifies God, and is an extension of love to others. May God give us a heart for those outside the academy, equip us and grant us opportunities to reach them. Resources: Hemingway App: https://hemingwayapp.com/ AAAS Science Communication Toolkit: https://www.aaas.org/resources/communication-toolkit Share this: Email Print Facebook More Twitter Tumblr LinkedIn Reddit Pinterest The Faculty Roundtable at Ohio State: Finding Hope Amid Suffering Dr. Curt Thompson addressing OSU faculty at the Faculty Club. Photo: Bob Trube for InterVarsity/USA Imagine faculty on your university gathering across disciplinary and religious lines to discuss important questions common to the human experience. On March 22, over a hundred faculty and other guests gathered to do just that over dinner at the Ohio State University’s Faculty Club, preceded by a reception. University Provost Karla Zadnik opened the evening with a warm welcome expressing interest in the topic of suffering and learning from one another how we engage this common human experience. Our main speaker for the evening was Dr. Curt Thompson, author of the recently published The Deepest Place. Thompson spoke about material covered in the book, particularly his work with patients who have suffered trauma or suffer in other ways. He discussed the importance of secure attachments with others to help rewire” our responses to suffering, including confessional communities” of others who suffer. He referenced Romans 5:1-5 which speaks of a sequence of suffering, perseverance, character, and hope. And he pointed to how, for him as a Christian, being justified through faith and loved by God was the ultimate secure attachment. Two other university faculty also responded. Dr. Asma Mobin-Uddin, who holds appointments in Pediatrics and with the Center for Bioethics at Ohio State, shared a Muslim perspective on suffering as God’s refining process. She also remarked at how she was pleased to find a setting where she didn’t need to mute her religious convictions. Finally, Dr. Paul Granello, a cognitive psychologist who works in the area of suicide prevention spoke on the importance of hope for those contemplating suicide and how this hope is a cognitive process, rather than an emotion, and that people could learn to be hopeful and exercise agency in their situations. This was followed by 20 minutes for table discussions and then a similar period for questions for the speakers. A list of discussion starters were provided at each table and table discussions were animated. Participants were invited to share their feedback on the event. Here are two comments that were representative: This kind of space is a special and significant gathering to nurture and curate–particularly in American society today.” I really enjoyed the presentations and the conversation at my table. We had a stage 3 colon cancer survivor, a MD and a med student just beginning residency, so we had a rich conversation about suffering and how hope might be a cognitive process.” Faculty Roundtable Reception....