In the age of virologist podcasts, the question of how science is conveyed has become more explosive. But it is not new. In 2019, members of the Young College of the Bavarian Academy of Sciences took part in a training course on this topic. This gave rise to the idea of founding a working group within this funding program for young researchers to develop interdisciplinary strategies for science communication. Because the next generation of scientists is encouraged not to put research results in the showcases of the ivory tower, but to make them public.
“But you are thrown into the deep end,” says Astrid Séville, political scientist at the Ludwig Maximilians University in Munich and one of the spokespersons for the working group. It is expected that the research will be made public, but in which way and with which language you have to find out for yourself. The exchange in the working group is all the more important. Eight employees from Bavarian universities, between Munich and Bayreuth, from law and musicology, chemistry and psychology, think about things, meet once a year and talk about their experiences.
How do you manage the balancing act, on the one hand not to embarrass yourself in front of the professional world, on the other hand, to make the contexts understandable to a large audience? Which channels are suitable for this “translation”? And how do you represent the process that is needed to arrive at a scientifically sound judgment? Scientific knowledge is preliminary, but it is by no means an opinion; it has been examined several times. You have to know that in order to appreciate the quality of this work.
“Skills need to be developed at all levels,” says Anna Stöckl from the University of Würzburg, a zoologist member of the working group. This development of competencies is a prerequisite for ensuring that trust in science does not break away, but that the limits of expertise remain defined. A chemist speaks competently for his subject, but no valuable statements about vaccines can be expected from a philosophically interested Germanist. A museum that exhibits not only information but also previous research efforts would be a place to communicate this dynamic of scientific work. And the academy’s working group is a place to reflect on the success and failure of science communication. During a (presumably digital) fireplace evening, your ideas will be presented as a discussion, the next time on Monday, January 31st. More information in due course under www.badw.de/veranstaltungen.html.