Back to LOCAL CHAPTERS: ACTIVITIES, OUTREACH, AND RESOURCES

Up to Table of Contents

Ahead to INHERIT & CONSERVE THANKS YOU

CONSERVATION EDUCATION: STRATEGIES FOR EFFECTIVE PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS

Can non-scientists understand complex scientific data? Must statistics be weeded out of presentations to the public, popular writing, and introductory undergraduate courses? I think that most people can understand complexity if the speaker or writer understands his or her material and can explain it clearly either without technical language or by explaining technical terms. The danger of oversimplifying communications with the public is that the public then fails to understand the complexity of data, the uncertainty of results, and the process of synthesizing information that may be applied to public policy. Perhaps worse, the public receives a subtle, unstated message that science is too complicated for them and that they should leave the thinking to the experts. Which means the experts need not think at all.

Recently, a land trust asked me to present information on my study system for the second year in a row. This year, I decided to include slides on statistical results. Last year, when I gave a similar talk, I noticed that a stockbroker in the audience became animated when I showed a data slide. This year I included more tables and figures in my presentation. After my talk, a retired biochemistry professor offered me some pithy suggestions for improving one of the models I presented.

I also received many interesting questions from other members of the audience who were not academics, but understood the content of my presentation. The complexity I added apparently enhanced the quality of their experience; they felt they were participants in the process of discovery rather than merely recipients of inert facts.

It struck me that scientists often underestimate their audiences or overestimate the complexity of their data. When I think of the informative popular science writings of Lewis Thomas, E.O. Wilson, Stephen Jay Gould, and Richard Dawkins I realize that these writers must have had a high regard for their readers' intelligence. They tackled, deconstructed, and reconstructed complex biological systems to present the systems in engaging and intelligible ways. In fact, the grandfather of these communicators was Charles Darwin, who had to communicate an entirely new, biologically-based paradigm of humanity to a skeptical public.

In the same way, teachers who underestimate their students do them a disservice. John Taylor Gatto, an influential New York City schoolteacher, suggested in his book Dumbing us Down that public education in general is pulling its punches. Likewise, scientists who need to communicate complex data to their client-public should take the time to communicate the deepest complexities in order to bring levels of public scientific literacy up to those of scientists. Citizen science projects actually engage the public in the process of discovery, and, if well-managed, produce both usable data and a more scientifically literate citizenry (see the citizen science projects at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology's Web site). Only in this way will the public develop skills that will help them critically evaluate the science behind legislation, public school curricula, and conservation initiatives presented by the broader community of conservation biologists. Graduate students who are encouraged to interact with the public, as I have been, will develop skills in interpreting even the most complex data for general audiences.

Rob Baldwin
Rob_Baldwin@umenfa.maine.edu.

The members of the Education Committee and of SCB thank Steve Trombulak for his tireless efforts in organizing, promoting, and guiding the Education Committee for the past six years. Steve recently stepped down as chair of the committee in order to focus more energy on his new role as President of the North America Section.

Back to LOCAL CHAPTERS: ACTIVITIES, OUTREACH, AND RESOURCES

Up to Table of Contents

Ahead to INHERIT & CONSERVE THANKS YOU