Writers' Lab: Improving narrative in multidisciplinary projects through blogging

As a starting point for today's post, I've chosen Maria Konnikova's excellent blog post on "Why grad schools should require students to blog".

Previously, we've looked at the benefit of blogging for your scholarly work, and how it can be valuable for every single academic. Moreover, we've discussed the possible reasons for blogging - there are many different paths you can take to blogging as an academic.

Earlier on PhD Talk, we've looked at how academic writing can make us better writers. Maria Konnikova shows us how popular writing can make us better academic writers, and how that can increase your chances for success in graduate school, or in her words:

And partway through another all-nighter (I was working under some tight deadlines), I had an epiphany: thank god I’ve spent the last few years blogging, writing a book, and doing freelance journalism. Otherwise, I’d be lost. Truly.

During that epiphany, she realized there is not much of a difference between on the one hand researching for an article for a magazine, bringing material together from different sources, and on the other hand writing about multidisciplinary research, reconciling two different fields of study and their own vocabulary.

As Konnikova explains how she came to an article that turned out to be a goldmine for her research, it is once more clear that it is not through sheer luck that she stumbled upon this piece, it is because blogging thought her to research widely. By the same token, it strengthens my belief that reading sparks creativity, and that grazing around in the literature, wandering off on undiscovered paths might lead us to unexpected goldmines. In Konnikova's words:

To me, as a blogger, cross-citation is standard practice. I have to do it every day when I research a new blog topic or look at the background for a new piece. It’ s natural to include anything that may potentially be helpful—and to put areas in dialogue even if they don’t normally cross over. I don’t feel compelled to stay within any arbitrary academic boundaries; I just use what seems most, well, useful.

She also proposes the following:

I’d go a step further: incentivize students to blog and to write for a popular audience on topics that go beyond their immediate area of interest. At Columbia, for instance, we can write a grant for one of our comprehensive exams. Why not let a series of published blog posts count as well?

Taking this idea one step further, we could recommend multidisciplinary research groups to write posts on a group blog, and practice writing in a style and language that is accessible for all different backgrounds involved in the project. We could invite groups to learn to speak eachother's language by sharpening their narrative into a common ground.

Five Lessons for Science Teachers

Flickr Image under CC license by ceolm

Teaching science, especially to teenagers, should be an opportunity to share our love for science with curious and young people. But too often teachers simply end up boring their students to death. (I, too, dreaded the science classes in school and just rolled into engineering because I enjoyed solving math riddles).

But in his TED talk, Tyler DeWitt shows us how to teach science, and make it fun. From his short presentation, there are four lessons for all of us that love science and want to share this love with possible future scientists.

1. Avoid jargon.

you should avoid jargon at all times when you talk about your research or interests to friends, family or students. I'd even say that you'd better avoid as much jargon as possible when you talk to other experts, because we all have very narrow and deeply defined fields of research.

2. Science is fun.

We know that science is fun. Now it's our turn not to keep that little secret to ourselves. Nature is beautiful and filled with smart hacks. Our inventions can go beyond our imagination. Asking "What if?", drawing connections and simply playing in the sandbox are all vital parts of science. That's the story we should tell young children.

3. Show your enthusiasm.

If you are passionate and enthusiastic about your field of expertise, then it's completely OK to overflow and express this feeling to others. One of the brilliant parts of Tyler DeWitt's talk is the absolute joy he seems to find in talking about bacteria and viruses. If I'd have had someone with so much zeal in front of me in school, I would have listened.

4. Tell a story.

It's OK to simplify an explanation, as long as the gist of the idea is crystal-clear to the audience and learners. Telling a story, creating analogies and relating concepts from science to situations from everyday life are all different ways to grab the attention, to build eagerness to learn and to foster curiosity.

5. Display visual information.

Another brilliant part in Tyler's story are the simple, yet clear drawings that he uses. These drawings tell students so much more than a few lines of text. Visuals bring our stories to life, and that is exactly one of our goals in the classroom.

Here, you can watch Tyler DeWitt's talk:

The Creative Process: Creativity Without Borders

Floris Visser postulates that scientists are artists – and his opinion hit a nerve for me. An opinion that also fits perfectly in my series about the Creative process.

Too often, we seem to draw a line between the professions and interests. However, when we take a step back, there are common grounds. Just like artists, scientists need to be very creative people in order to make discoveries and advance their field.

The very essence of science is as creative as art – but also the outcome and the observations in science can show an artistic beauty. You might think, for example, of beautiful repetitive patterns in nature, which can either inspire scientists and researchers to take a similar step (remember the bacteria in self-healing concrete that are inspired by the terraces of Pamukkale?) or can inspire artists to achieve, amongst others, the perfect proportions which we see repeated in nature.

You can improve your creativity by developing your creative habit. But today, I'm asking you to take this idea one step further. I'd like to invite you to share a link between art or nature and your profession or research topic in the comments section below. Please share, and inspire others!

This post is an adaptation of an earlier post for TEDx Delft

Why Blogging is for Every Single Academic

In my vision of the future, blogging is as much a part of the academic world as peer-reviewed journal articles.

There are several reasons for blogging, and blogging as well as more online sharing, could tackle publication bias.

But at the same time, I notice a lot of reluctance when it comes to blogging. Two years ago at the PhD Event, the Online Networking and Social Media workshop ended up in a long list of complaints and reasons why to stay away from the Big Scary Interwebz. This year, the workshop I intended to give at the Network Day of Utrecht University had 0 interested persons.

So, scholars 2.0 should acknowledge the fears and doubts of their less-internet-oriented peers and address these fears more specifically.

I'm giving you my 2 cents here, hoping that I can spark some interest in doubting academics:

1. Privacy

Online identity protection and concerns with regard to privacy are a major concern. However, if you are active online, you really have more control over your online identity than when you try to fully stray away. In a way, if you try to avoid to have anything about you or your work online, you fully depend on others who might still distribute content that contains your name.

If privacy, or not publishing of your contact information, is your main concern, then you can think deeply in advance on how much of your data you want to provide when you write something. The key here is to always think twice when you fill out a form online and check if your data will not be shared with others.

2. Fear for writing something "stupid"

A fear I can fully relate to... In the past, I've deleted complete blogs (like the blog I kept on my MySpace), because I didn't like the contents anymore. I've also wondered if it can happen that I write something about my research, which then would venture out into the interwebz and lead a life of its own, grow teeth and come and bite my in the ankles.

However, if it turns out I wrote something that turns out to be discredited by other research, I'd be more than willing to discuss it here. Sharing knowledge leads to advancing the entire body of knowledge, and I prefer to write, and fail if necessary, than to keep my thoughts to myself.

3. Lack of time

We're all more than busy: research, education, administrative tasks, preparing a trip for a conference and some more activities all keep our schedules more than full. However, when you consider starting to write online as a blogger, you should reflect before you start. If you don't have the time to keep a blog alive, having your own website or blog might not be the way to go for you.

But that doesn't mean blogging wouldn't be suitable for you! There are many ways in which you can still contribute online, even though you don't have the time for your own page: you can guest blog, or your faculty or research group might start a blog in which all involved researchers can take turns and provide content when their schedule allows them.

4. Lack of ideas

Another commonly-heard grumble is "I don't have good ideas to write a post". You don't really need to sit with a coffee and cook up a Great Idea. There are many ways in which you can share your knowledge online. In this post, you can find a few ideas on which contents you can quickly turn into a post. I'd add to that, writing a post to discuss a conference you visited, to share a presentation you gave (slides and a brief summary), write an entry when you have a new publication and -specifically for PhD students- giving an update of your work every now and then.

How would you convince a fellow academician to take the plunge and write online?

Science is Fun, Science is Play

When I went for my PhD Start-Up training course, I learned to know the expression "Science is fun".

In the end, as a researcher, you are in the privileged position to play around with ideas, use your time to explore different paths and -most likely- in one way or another carry out experiments nobody has ever done before.

You are not required to follow existing flow charts to solve a problem, but are instead encouraged to explore possibilities, and you are given the time to truly explore the research question in order to advance your field. 

The basic character trait you need is just curiosity: the ability to ask yourself why are things the way they are? And then, in order to study the implications of this question, you need to set up a game. When described in these terms, research is something that is absolutely suitable for children as well. Beau Lotto tested the scientific method with a group of school children - and ended up having the kids become published scientists. This video is one of the best insights in science I have seen in a long time - please enjoy, share, and -if possible- go and spread the love for science to young children.

More than "Science: It's a girl thing!" in which science is Barbified, I think that we need young girls to learn that "Science is fun" by actually exposing them to true science, such that they can experience what it is really like.

Ideas - and Feynman (TEDxDelft)

This blog was originally written live at TEDxDelft 2011

When I woke up this morning, all excited about today's event, I started thinking about "ideas worth spreading". Somehow, and not surprisingly, I thought of Richard Feynman. His way of thinking, and him being a top-notch scientist, are both a lasting inspiration and a close-to-home link to TEDxDelft



Feynman on the environment for ideas

In "Surely, you're joking Mr. Feynman", Feynman explains his way of working, developing ideas and the necessary conditions for developing ideas.

Feynman's way of working reflected his love for solving riddles. He loved breaking locks, solving puzzles and taking part radios. He loved a challenge as well, and was fueled by curiosity (when lecturing in Brazil, he ended up playing in a samba band).

When Feynman "got stuck" in research at a certain point, he saw a certain object falling down, and wanted to write down the equations of motion. Just the fact that he started working on "something", and he started developing equations again, he managed to get his thoughts and research back on track.

Feynman challenges the idea some scientists have that you need the ideal conditions to do great work:

When I was at Princeton in the 1940s I could see what happened to those great minds at the Institute for Advanced Study, who had been specially selected for their tremendous brains and were now given this opportunity to sit in this lovely house by the woods there, with no classes to teach, with no obligations whatsoever. These poor bastards could now sit and think clearly all by themselves, OK? So they don’t get any ideas for a while: They have every opportunity to do something, and they’re not getting any ideas. I believe that in a situation like this a kind of guilt or depression worms inside of you, and you begin to worry about not getting any ideas. And nothing happens. Still no ideas come. Nothing happens because there’s not enough real activity and challenge: You’re not in contact with the experimental guys. You don’t have to think how to answer questions from the students. Nothing!

In fact, Feynman told that he liked working from strip clubs and bars.

Understanding in order to build up an idea

When Feynman thought he could not understand another researcher's presentation and paper, his sister sent him upstairs with the paper and told him to work on it himself. When he started to break down the paper and work through it himself, equation by equation, he could understand and even take the ideas a step further. Some argue that he could not accept any idea at all, and that he needed to break everything down and then build it up from scratch in his own mind. Others write: "I think Feynman had a healthy respect for how our minds actually work — as opposed to how they might work if they were ideal reasoning machines."

Fully breaking down a concept into its core elements, understanding these elements and then using them for your own ideas, is a true challenge, but it is the fuel which drives ideas fundamentally progressing science and our society.

Feynman and TEDx

An example of how closely TED(x) and Feynman are related, can be seen here. The university where he spent most of his career, is organizing a TEDx event on Feynman's vision.

Also, Feynman's ideas just appeared a few moments ago in Leo Kouwenhoven's TEDxDelft talk.

Space: Research and Tourism (TEDxDelft)

I originally live-blogged this post from TEDxDelft

The first Dutch-born astronaut ever, Lodewijk van den Berg, gave an inspiring talk about research in space, and how he went from being a crystal growth scientist to becoming an astronaut.



From scientist to astronaut

The dilemma was: "Should we train a scientist specialized in crystal growth to become an astronaut, or should we make an astronaut study crystal growth?"

From thinking he would never have a chance to be selected because of his age and bad eyesight, Lodewijk van den Berg ended up becoming the prime crew member for the experiments on crystal growth in zero gravity. During his talk, he made the critical remark that for space travel and research, emotions override the rational considerations. The wish to participate in such research become stronger than the rational notion of the risks involved.

Being able to carry out research in zero gravity requires us to understand the effect of gravity on our lives and society. With some movies shot in space (showing a crew member in continuous rotation around his axis, and a bubble of grape juice, and the remark you need perfect table manners in space), Lodewijk van den Berg moved to the motion of fully living three-dimensional in space.

Satellites can be considered as the most basic device for the exploration of space, or wifi over very large distances. These devices allow us to make observations, but they are limited: they cannot carry out experiments. Humans in space, on the other, can both carry out experiments and serve as experimental animals, influencing the practice of medicine on Earth.

The necessary requirements for space research

Three elements are required for research in space:

1. A scientific base:

Obviously, you need to design experiments, understand the scientific issues involved and carefully prepare for an experiment.

2. Coordination:

One of the challenges is to make different groups, of different disciplines and different backgrounds and nationalities work together. A free flow of information is required.

3. Budget:

An adequate budget, sometimes providing research funding for several decades, is necessary to go from an "idea" to a "finished experiment".

Current problems and solutions

Nowadays, three regional groups dominate space research and exploration: US, Russia and the EU. Together, and with the help of Japan, Australia and Canada, they have contributed to the ISS, thus fulfilling the second criterion on coordination.

However, three problems are putting borders to the progress of space research:

1. Space shuttle:

The termination of the space shuttle program by the US cuts away one of the ways of transportation between Earth and the ISS.

2. Malfunction of the Russian spacecrafts:

Recently, mechanical problems with the Russian spacecrafts, has taken away the redundancy to get people up and down to the space station.

3. Decentralization of the European space program:

Instead of bringing the European researchers and scientists working on the space program together (and thus fulfilling the second criterion), the institutions are more and more being distributed over the different regions, and thus taking away the daily interaction between the major players in this field.

4. The crisis, always the crisis:

No money, no budget. Research, science and education are among the first victims of the crisis.

However, Lodewijk van den Berg had a positive message and solutions to these problems as well, and gave us an outlook on the future of the space program:

1. Commercial space travel

Soon, when commercial space travel will be available, a new stream of revenue will be created and this will create an additional source of funding for space research.

2. A real global view

We should think as a planet, not as rivaling nations anymore. The major players should open up and work together with China. A real global program, in which all research findings are shared is necessary. He suggest the creation of a UN space office, that really operates on a global scale. (This did remind me of when I watched the debate for the Republican nomination two weeks ago, in which all candidates were defending the idea of the US cutting back on its support to the UN). The only way to move forward is to create a planet-wide space program.

A personal note

As you might have noticed from my emphasis on this talk, I love everything related to space exploration. In fact, at the age of 18 , I was doubting between studying engineering in Belgium, or coming to Delft to study aerospace engineering.

Here's a few places where I've been, and which I highly recommend to everyone interested in rockets and space exploration:

1. Space Camp and the Euro Space Center

As a 10-year-old kid, I had a blast at the camp - and I would encourage all parents to send curious kids to this camp.

2. International Space Camp and the US Space and Rocket Center

My first trip to the US (I was 16 then) took me to Huntsville, AL, where I spent a week with students from all over the world, learning about space research, space missions and the work of astronauts. I went back to the US Space and Rocket Center when I was living in Atlanta, GA and I felt the same excitement I had felt 8 years before. I think every scientist, every engineer and every dreamer can't dislike a wonderful place like that.

3. Cape Canaveral

Bad planning and a lack of time resulted in me only seeing the outside of this holy place for space exploration, but passing by was still an inspiring moment.

4. Noordwijk

The closest to Delft, is the Space Expo in Noordwijk. If you haven't been there, and liked today's talk, you might like to go and visit. I remember enjoying it very much.

5. National Air and Space museum, DC

This museum is the most recent addition to my space-related trips and visits. I spent more than 4 hours there, reading and taking in sights of the rockets. If you're in DC, it's worth t stop by and learn.