Award Nomination?!

It turns out that not only does WordPress make blogging pretty simple, but also that the WordPress blogging community are pretty damn supportive.

Amazingly enough people are reading, liking and even following a science communication blog – THIS science communication blog to be exact.

Thanks Jonny from sci.casual  and The Biology Yak for nominating me!

oie_transparent-11

The rules attached to this award are that you have to:

  • Show the award on your blog
  • Thank the person that nominated you
  • Share 7 different facts about yourself
  • Nominate 15 blogs of your choice
  • Link your nominees and let them know of your nomination

So here a little about about me:

  1. I do “real” science too. I have a Bachelor of Sustainable Environments, an Honours degree in Environmental Science and am currently working through a PhD in Environmental Science… can you see a trend?
  2. My current research is all about urban food production (urban agriculture). I’m actually about to launch the Edible Gardens project (more on this soon) where people can sign up to collect data on their own gardens! The project will investigate both the social value and the productive capability of urban food gardens.
  3. “Quiero aprender Espanol” – I want to learn spanish. Or several languages, that would be cool too. Duolingo has been helping.
  4. I love art and at various times can be found painting, drawing, embroidering, sewing, planting things in patterns and collecting (artistic) junk.
  5. I was a complete daydreamer, reader and tree climber as a kid…. not a lot has really changed – I just tend to pack waaaay more into my days.
  6. I want to help change the world. For this I blame my parents, who always told me that I could and would… funny how it seemed like such a simple easy idea as a kid!
  7. Living on Mars would be incredible. But I also know I would miss some pretty important things – like feeling wind, and rain, and being able to go outside when ever I want without having to put on a big ole’ spacesuit.

The next trick is to nominate 15 other blogs for this award. I think I follow at least 15 blogs… ah well here are my favourites:

Emily, Stephanie, Anna and guests (@wildlifesnpits) If you’re interested in seeing some amazing wildlife photos, in addition to reading great posts on conservation, communication and new research then this is a blog for you.

Yanhao and Harvey (@thenexusscience) – just reading their About page made me laugh. They write about some very cool and complicated (made not complicated) topics.

Heather (@heatherstuffnthings) – besides having a brilliant post about how you (yes you) can better keep up to date with science communication research, she also writes about public understanding and the impacts of public perception.

Dr Kirsty MacLeod (@kjmacleod) – She has a photo of herself with a Meerkat on her head (Do I really need to convince you anymore?). Read all about her fieldwork, research travels, publications and (@realscientists) connections.

Matt Shipman (@sciencecommunicationbreakdown) – Matt writes both about the science of science communication, and the practice of science communication. I greatly appreciate the distinction.

Meandering Matt (@bordersandbackpacks) – thanks Matt for letting me vicariously travel through your posts! Brilliant photos, stories and reviews.

The South African Young Academy of Science (@SAYASblog) – They have a collective page for the most recent posts from winners of their 2016 contest to find the best PhD bloggers in South Africa. Read away!

Natalie (@butwhy) – I love the idea of questioning everything. “Why?” is the simplest and most powerful question out there. (Don’t worry Natalie I know you’ve already been nominated for this!)

Matteo (@matteofarinella) – Here is a wonderful comic journal with some of the best illustrations. I wish all science infographics could look like these amazing images.

So thanks to everyone who follows/reads/occasionally likes this blog – it is a wonderful feeling to try to contribute to a topic and know that someone is listening.

Cheers! – Georgia the Urban Ag. Scientist

P.S Both my grandmothers in the featured image thank you too.

Confronting the 3 Minute Thesis

I finally sat down after the first School of NBE round of the 3 Minute Thesis (3MT) and thought, “Well I tried but I don’t think I’m getting through.”

This was because I have never been so overwhelmingly nervous during a presentation ever before in my life. At one point I even remember thinking, “If I just lie down right here on the ground… will everyone just go away and leave me alone?”

So thank goodness I did better than I thought I did.

The 3MT was developed by the University of Queensland and has been running since 2008. It’s a deceptively simple concept:

Can you take your 4 (or 5 or 6 or even 7 years!) of PhD research and explain it to a non-expert audience in under 3 minutes? Oh and you’re only allowed one slide behind you, with no moving parts or sounds. Sounds like a reasonable challenge yes?

In that first school round I came second (which I was not expecting at all).

Three weeks later in the Division round, the presentations were part of an all day Division Information Day. This means it was held in a large sunken lecture room with more than 100 academics coming and going throughout the day.

Again I was very nervous. But thank goodness I was still slightly less nervous than the last time. I tried to set myself up to succeed by leaving the room about three presentations before my own, and using some of the warm ups and voice exercises I learnt in voice training. By the time I returned to the lecture hall – it was time for me to present.

As I was slightly calmer I was able to use my hands to gesture more, I was able to smile more and even move around a little. However I still stumbled on some words and when trying to move on to the next part or my talk.

The others who were also presenting did mostly really well. Everyone stayed within the three minute mark. Some had brilliant voice projection, and some were a little hard to hear in this large padded room. Most of them moved around while they spoke, and used hand gestures to great effect.

What I took away from this was that not only should you practice a lot, but you really should try to practice in front of as many people as you can muster. With only three minutes to present, you don’t have any time to relax into your talk once you get going. You need to start already relaxed.

For anyone interested in watching the 3MT Final Round for the University of South Australia, it’s on Wednesday the 17th of August from 10-12 at the City West Campus. Good luck to all the presenters!


And does has anyone had a similar experience with the 3MT? Or do you have any ideas or suggestions for how to begin a talk calm, instead of having to calm down during your talk? Let me know!

Book breakdown – “Don’t be such a Scientist” Part 3

Here we cover the third instalment of Dr. Randy Olson‘s book which gets a little deeper into the “arouse and fulfil” tactic of getting people interested in the point you’re trying to make. And although that simple two-step process can work just fine, one way to mix it up is via storytelling…

Part 3: Don’t be such a poor storyteller

By now you may have noticed… many scientists aren’t brilliant storytellers. They can be passionate and big picture oriented, but also long-winded, detail obsessed or even dull. In Hollywood, people study for years to learn how to tell a good story. Scientists study and train for the complete opposite – to always constructively review whatever they are told, and to keep an eye out for any inaccurate details. But to get your information across to a non-academic audience… you have to be able to tell a good story

You begin with your raw material. For scientists this is your data, results, interviews, conclusions or realisations (admit it – there’s a lot). It may be in a jumble, or you may have it in the standard scientific structure: introduction, methods, results, discussion and conclusion. Although that structure is perfect for the scientific world, it isn’t great for anyone else.

While working on his film, “Flock of Dodos”, Olson figured out that to go forwards with all of his raw material – he would have to go back to one of the simplest stories there is: there’s a man, a journey, a damsel, a dragon and a larger evil in the land. Then all of his raw material suddenly worked together like magic.

The trouble is, the simplicity of a good story is both its greatest strength in engaging people, but is also the biggest sticking point for those who cannot (or will not) suspend disbelief, and believe in the story they’re told.

Olson tells of his trouble when showing some of his films to scientists, how they simply could not stop themselves from constantly questioning what was occurring – “Could that really happen?” or, “I don’t think that detail is correct”. Olson goes so far as to call them the “designated drivers” of the storytelling audience, while everyone else sits there drinking in the wonder of the story.

I find this habit of constantly looking for flaws in everything a little inflexible. Yes, stories can be simple and tend to follow patterns we already know. But they’re not just for children. Most of us became scientists because we never quite lost our childlike fascination with the world. Scientific research begins with a simple curiosity that drives us to ask, “Why…?”. So why on earth can’t we accept the power and necessity of a good story sometimes?

The book then shifts to the challenge of Accuracy vs. Boredom. Scientists care most about how accurate something is. Almost everyone else cares slightly more about whether they’re bored or not. Olson goes so far as to call this, “The fundamental dilemma facing the world of science today”.

One way to overcome boredom is by introducing  a source of tension or conflict. Something to think around or overcome. By denying any challenges made to science, scientists are missing out on a potential opportunity where they could fight the source of conflict and triumph!

Olson winds up this chapter by unreservedly championing the fact that,

“Being concise” is not the same as “dumbing down”.

Yes, you will have to work harder to get down to the relatable true essence of what your research is about. But surely you will become more confident and comfortable in your own understanding, and your ability to share what you do. So see if you can’t weave a little storyline through your work the next time you have to talk to those outside the academic sphere.


Once again, if you’re interested in reading, “Don’t be such a scientist” yourself, you can purchase the kindle edition from  Amazon.com.au for $13.03, or get the paper version for $26.50 from Booktopia.com.au, or from Angus&Roberston.com.au for $26.99. Happy Reading!