Many people in the science communication field have an educational background in natural sciences (in my case biology), and subsequently found a passion for science communication.
I had my insight during the time I was working in a botanic garden. I had begun to do guided tours, outreach, and public engagement activities, when I realised that I would like to focus my career on connecting people with plants/nature. Thus, I commenced studies toward a PhD in science communication.
I explored a range of options for such study and the Science Communication Unit (UWE Bristol) stood out among all of them. The quality of modules and teaching offer, fields of expertise, among others, particularly caught my attention. And so, I moved from Portugal to Bristol to explore “botanic gardens as hubs of science communication”.
Moving from natural sciences to social sciences presents several steps to overcome; the field of science communication research is different from both the practice of being a science communicator and that of being an academic biologist. Firstly, I was introduced to the world of epistemologies and other unfamiliar subjects. I needed to expand my vision of what science/knowledge is and leave positivism behind. Secondly, I had to embrace the idea that concepts/terminologies are plastic. At the beginning I was bewildered, since as a biologist I was used to working with exactness. But now, I recognise that it gives me freedom to conduct my research. For example, for my thesis, I can construct my definition of science communication in the context of botanic gardens (with due justification), which allows me to approach the wide range of science communication activities that I am interested in.
However, there are similarities between natural and social sciences that I was not expecting. At the beginning, I thought since I am not conducting research with all the variables a botanist might experience, such as a fungus appearing and compromising the seed set or goats eating the plants, I would not face issues out of my control. I was wrong. Although distinct, social sciences research have their own conundrums. For example, after doing a content analysis of a huge set of documents to answer a research question, I realised that these documents did not provide all the information that I was looking for. But of course, in retrospect this makes sense; the documents were not designed to capture all the information I needed. Another learning experience for me was to understand that while I can design my research with a specific sample in mind, ultimately, we are limited to the people willing to participate in our research (and I am very grateful to those willing to participate in my study).
Overall, I am delighted with my switch from biology to science communication. I feel thrilled when I undertake an interview, and I am given the gift of listening to different perspectives and approaches of science communicators/educators in botanic gardens across the U.K. and Portugal. I enjoy exchanging knowledge and ideas with them. Beyond my research itself, I have had a worthwhile journey. The interactions with colleagues and professors, attendance at conferences and taught courses, have contributed mightily to my knowledge of science communication and public engagement.
I value the opportunity to undertake this research because I believe that the role of botanic gardens in helping connect people to nature is an essential one. The science communication, public engagement, and science education these organisations provide plays a vital role in promoting nature conservation, whether directly or indirectly.
Andreia Jorge, PhD student, Science Communication Unit, UWE Bristol.