AsianScientist (Jul. 30, 2015) – Earlier this week, we had the privilege of holding the prize ceremony for the inaugural Asian Scientist Writing Prize at Science Center Singapore. Having read through the entries, I could see how much effort each and every writer took in putting their submissions together, and was glad that we could honor at least some of them for their hard work.
In many ways, holding this competition was the culmination of a long held dream for us at Asian Scientist. Apart from our mission to highlight the excellent science being done in Asia, promoting science writing in the region is very dear to our hearts. I was very heartened to see entries from people from all walks of life and all stages of life—with entrants ranging from age 13 to 86. We believe that science communication is not only for an elite group of experts, and are glad that so many of you think so too.
But other than the primary objective of giving us a chance to recognize great science writers in the region, running this competition has also yielded something valuable: data. And as a scientist, I couldn’t resist doing a quick and dirty data analysis. Here are some of the questions I asked, and some of our preliminary ‘findings.’
Who makes for a good science communicator?
If you take a look at our top three winners, all of them have PhDs. Does this mean that only scientists make for good science communicators? Not necessarily, given our small and slightly skewed sample size.
Take our merit award winners for example. These entries were in the running for the top three places, and their writers range from scientists to journalists to even students and one retail assistant. All of them were able to convey sometimes complex scientific issues in a way that was both accessible and engaging, whether or not they were scientifically qualified. What was evident was their passion for the topics they had chosen to write about, and the commitment to share what they had learnt with a wider audience.
In fact, most of our entries were from students in both pre- and post-tertiary education. Participants in the ‘Others’ category, which form almost 20 percent of all participants included people working as entrepreneurs, lecturers, lab officers and even marketing managers.
What makes for good science communication?
However, that is not to say that having a PhD confers no advantage at all. In the case of our second and third place winners, who both wrote essays on issues related to their discipline of study, their in depth understanding of the topic coupled with cogent, lucid prose made them stand out from the pack.
To me, this does not mean that post-graduate qualifications are required for science communicators, although it certainly doesn’t hurt. Rather, it tells us something about what makes for good science writing: namely that it shouldn’t simply be a textbook chapter on a broad topic, but that it should have an interesting angle focused on a specific issue that can be discussed in sufficient depth.
Narrowing the focus down from something as broad as ‘Cancer’ (with a capital ‘C’) to something more specific like the ethical and economic issues surrounding the search for treatments for extremely rare cancers such as gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors gives the writer room to explore issues and still keep within the attention span of the average reader. These more focused stories also tend to be much more interesting and informative from a reader’s point of view, steering essays away from over-simplification and sweeping statements.
When is the best time to start doing science communication?
The short answer is: right now, whatever age you may be.
As you can see from the graph below, most of the participants were in their twenties or thirties, with an average age of 29. Students roughly in their undergraduate years (19-24) were the most well represented group, followed by those likely to be at the start of their post doctoral or working years (30-39), although the differences between the four youngest groups are too small to make meaningful distinctions.
But writing about science is not only for the young. We were very pleasantly surprised to receive about five percent of our entries from people over 60, including Mr. Mohan Sundara Rajan, an 82-year-old freelance science writer who won an honorable mention for his entry on satellites and the use of GPS in India. As someone relatively new to the field, it was good to know that science communication is a career with great longevity, something that I can keep doing for a very long time.
What’s next?
So we’ve covered the who, what and when of science writing, which I hope will encourage more people to take up the challenge. Look out for the top three winning entries in our October print issue, as well as selected youth, merit and honorable mentions that will come online in the coming months. Watch this space too for details of the Best of Scientific Writing in Asia 2015, a book which will be coming out later in the year.
And of course, last but not least, keep on writing. All the best!
This article is from a monthly column called From The Editor’s Desk(top). Click here to see the other articles in this series.
—–
Copyright: Asian Scientist Magazine; Photo: Shutterstock.
Disclaimer: This article does not necessarily reflect the views of AsianScientist or its staff.
