Tag: Science Writing

To Futurum and Beyond: The first steps of a UWE Science Communication graduate

Author Science Communication Unit | Posted on

In the autumn of 2022, with my MSc Science Communication at UWE Bristol drawing to a close, I found myself caught between a rock (my looming dissertation deadline) and a hard place (a highly competitive and unforgiving job market). An interview with Bristol-based science education magazine, Futurum careers, provided a glimmer of hope. However, while my master’s ended on a high, the interview ended in rejection, and I found myself in the confusion of a post-grad, post-COVID job hunt.

Not long after the interview, Futurum contacted me to ask if I would be interested in doing some freelance work for them as a writer, a situation that the scicomm master’s had prepared me well for. Over the next couple of years, I developed a close working relationship with the Futurum team, writing articles, producing podcasts and gaining experience until, finally, they offered me the job I had originally applied for.

All this to say, when one door closes, loiter outside for a couple of years until it opens again.

Graduating from the UWE science communication master’s in November 2022.

Futurum Careers is a free online resource and magazine aimed at introducing 14-19-year-olds to careers in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) and SHAPE (Social Sciences, Humanities, Arts for People and the Economy). We collaborate with academics from all over the world and translate their research into open educational resources such as articles, activity sheets, podcasts, animations and PowerPoint presentations. Our resources connect curriculum subjects with real-world research projects and the people behind them, showing students that anyone and everyone can find their place in STEM and SHAPE.

As an editorial assistant at Futurum careers, I spend my days editing articles, creating educational resources and producing podcasts. Every day is an opportunity to use and continue to develop skills that I first learnt on the UWE Bristol MSc Science Communication.

Looking back through my coursework, I can read my first clunky attempts at science writing and cringe at my first awkward, stilted podcasts. We all have to start somewhere, and as the course progressed, my confidence grew and I honed my technical skills. I learnt how to tailor my writing to a target audience, how to build flexibility into a structured interview, and how to sift through heaps of complex information to find the golden nuggets needed to build a narrative. Putting these skills into practice and receiving expert guidance and feedback was invaluable and allowed me to take my first steps as a freelance science communicator with a sure foot. 

As well as skills, I also gained knowledge. I learnt about the deficit models and its downfalls, about trust in science and how to instil (or impair) it, and about science capital and the impact it can have on a young person’s prospects. Learning about these ideas gave me the context I needed to understand Futurum’s mission and find my place in the company.

A selection of Futurum careers resources.

Although I started working for Futurum as a writer, it is my work on the Futurum careers podcast that I am most proud of. As host of the podcast, I have interviewed all sorts of researchers from historians and philosophers to physicists, ecologists and even a marine bioacoustician. Chatting to these people about their research, their careers and their advice for students is the best part of my job. As I said in our recent editorial episode of the podcast, “[The podcast] is a really nice opportunity to get to know the researchers a bit better. And then I get to just sit back and listen to these people talk about their amazing lives and their amazing work. And it’s inspiring for me, so I hope it’s inspiring for the students that listen to it as well.”

Currently, I am working on an episode of the podcast with ethnomusicologist Dr Marcia Ostashewski and her team at the Centre for Sound Communities (CSC) in Unama’ki (Cape Breton), Nova Scotia. Marcia and I have been collaborating on a suite of educational resources over the past year, highlighting the diversity of researchers working at the CSC and the communities that they serve and support.

In September 2025, Marcia invited me to present these resources at a course on world music pedagogy in Halifax that explored the role of music in teaching and learning through diverse cultural perspectives and in relationship with diverse local culture bearers and communities. While public speaking is not my favourite thing to do, I was excited to travel somewhere new and push myself out of my comfort zone.

Presenting a Futurum careers PowerPoint at the World Music Pedagogy course hosted by the Centre for Sound Communities at Dalhousie University, October 2025.

In the end, half an hour of sweaty palms and stammering speech was well worth it. Not only did I get to listen to Julian Kytasty, a world-renowned bandura player, perform, but I also got to chat with him and learn about his musical heritage and traditions. Not only did I get to experience the joyful teaching of Mamadou Koita, a virtuoso balafón player from Burkina Faso, but I also got to play djembe alongside him and Afua Cooper, a slam poet, author and scholar.

To take part in this event was a truly special experience, and it’s just one of many highlights that I’ve had while working for Futurum. It’s a privilege to be able to say that I love my job and that I’m proud of what I do. In these uncertain times, it’s hard to know where my science communication career will end up, but I do know that it started in the Science Communication Unit at UWE Bristol, and I will always be grateful for that.

Playing djembe alongside Daniel, Mamadou Koita and Afua Cooper at the World Music Pedagogy course hosted by the Centre for Sound Communities at Dalhousie University, October 2025.

By Joe Aslett, UWE Bristol MSc Science Communication student 2022.

Learning Lab: BBC Science Focus Magazine

Author Science Communication Unit | Posted on

By Matilde Marques

From a young age, I always found myself torn between two passions: science and writing. For years, I thought I had to choose between them, not realizing that they could actually go hand in hand. When I discovered Science Communication, I was thrilled to learn that I could combine both loves. And as much as I enjoyed every bit of my MSc Science Communication studies, the Learning Lab at BBC Science Focus Magazine felt like the cherry on top.

Throughout my week-long placement, I had the opportunity to shadow several members of the editorial team and dive headfirst into the fast-paced world of science journalism. I got to write news articles and received invaluable feedback from the editors that pushed my writing to new levels. It was reassuring to see that the skills I’d been honing throughout my studies were well-suited to the demands of professional science writing. But more importantly, I was reminded that we never stop learning, and there’s always room to grow.

Beyond writing, the placement allowed me to develop several key skills that will be essential in my future career, including conducting thorough background research to ensure accuracy and depth, understanding the target audience, and learning how to tailor content to match their interests. 

One of the most rewarding parts of the experience was having an article I wrote published—an honor I’ll never forget! By the end of the week, I was tasked with writing an “Everything You Need to Know” guide on NASA’s OSIRIS-REx mission—a topic I knew almost nothing about. I won’t sugarcoat it: hearing that I had five hours to research and write my first piece was nerve-wracking. But I thrived on the adrenaline of it all. That challenge sparked something in me: I knew this was exactly what I wanted to do with my life—write about science to help inform others while constantly learning myself.

A highlight of the week came toward the end of the placement when I had the chance to sit down with the Editor. We had an encouraging and insightful conversation as he provided advice on how to carve out a career in science writing. It helped me see that my aspirations weren’t just a far-off dream—they were entirely within reach. His guidance gave me a clear sense of the next steps I needed to take to achieve my goal.

Another great takeaway from the week was the network of professional contacts I built. The connections I made have already been invaluable, providing advice and even career opportunities. Plus, having published work to show at interviews is a massive boost for my CV.

I loved every moment of my time at Science Focus, from gaining a deeper understanding of the magazine’s inner workings to working with an incredibly talented and supportive team. I wholeheartedly recommend the Learning Lab placement to any MSc Science Communication student at UWE Bristol. For those who are unsure of their career path, it’s an excellent way to explore different roles within science communication. As for me, it cemented my desire to become a science writer. The placement gave me the confidence to believe that the career I once thought was out of reach was not only possible but something I was fully equipped for, thanks to my academic background, and offered a crucial bridge between academic study and real-world application

My only regret? It was just one week long—I could have stayed for months. 

Matilde Marques, MSc Science Communication student, UWE Bristol

Diving into Digital Publishing with a Placement at SelectScience

Author Science Communication Unit | Posted on

By, Magaret Sivapragasam and Aleksandra Peliushkevich 

We kicked off our placement with a scenic but unexpectedly strenuous climb up Corston, a village near Bath, to reach Church Farm Business Park where the SelectScience office is located. Let’s just say we definitely got our cardio in for the day! However, as with any ascension, we were rewarded for our efforts. At SelectScience we were met by a friendly team, delicious coffee, and beautiful natural scenery from the office window. It was the perfect setting to catch our breath and settle into the day. 

We were undertaking a placement at SelectScience as part of the Learning Lab scheme run by the Science Communication Unit, which offers short-term placements to students on their Masters’ course with businesses and other organisations in the industry. The people at SelectScience were inspiring. We were introduced to the editorial team, client service specialists, and a product and review editor. It was a perfect opportunity to explore their roles in real life, ask questions and get useful advice for job hunting and future careers in science communication. Informal chat allowed us to better understand how the work of a digital publisher is organised and to see job responsibilities from the inside, through the eyes of an employee. That’s how we learnt that editors can be authors of articles, client service specialists often are event managers, and review editors communicate with clients as well. 

We have once again seen that work in science communication is intense and diverse and a variety of opportunities are waiting for us. To avoid getting lost in this diversity, it is important to pay more attention to the specific job responsibilities instead of the job title and to communicate with people who already work in the field. Despite the diversity of tasks all employees shared the company’s vision –

“accelerating science by connecting scientific communities with trusted solutions”

– their professionalism and passion for work were inspiring. 

Once we were clear about the vision of SelectScience, we were tasked with writing tags for their website. What initially seemed like a straightforward task turned out to be something more complex than we anticipated – it required an eye for detail. Generally, tags are used by online users to navigate searches. The key is to make them as concise as possible while being a helpful tool for users to locate information they need. Our goal was to develop a short paragraph that describes this tag’s content effectively.  

We then carefully analyzed the editorial articles, product reviews and news pieces to summarise them into an impactful paragraph. Along the way, we also learned how SEO’s (search engine optimization) and web trends play a crucial role in impacting web traffic and engagement. A few well-chosen words do go a long way! 

As we crafted each tag description, we found ourselves reflecting on what we had studied during the MSc Science Communication course. It was important to strike a balance between technical precision and accessibility, ensuring the tags are suitable for both experts and general users. It was indeed very satisfying to see our academic knowledge being applied so practically in a professional setting. 

By the end of the placement, we had developed a profound appreciation for the intricacies of digital content management and the vital role that science communication plays in bridging a gap between science and its audience. We left the placement with a big smile, knowing that (even though it was a small task), the work we completed will have a big impact on making scientific content available to those who need it. 

And of course, our trip would not have been complete without some sightseeing in Bath. After wrapping up our 3-day placement, we treated ourselves to a lovely stroll around the city and some yummy Thai food, because let’s face it- nothing fuels the brain quite like a good hearty meal. 

Learning Lab: Science Focus magazine

Author Science Communication Unit | Posted on

I was sitting near the cascade steps in Bristol City Centre when I had a rare epiphany. A guest on a podcast I was listening to mentioned that she worked as a freelance science writer, and it sounded like the dream job. Two thirds of an MSc in Science Communication later, and there I was, only a hundred metres or so from that spot in the City Centre, entering the Our Media building that houses the offices of one of the most successful popular science magazines in the UK, Science Focus.

Over the course of my week-long work Learning Lab placement, I was able to shadow a few different members of staff. On my first day, I spent time with the Online Editor, learning how to put an article online, and how to set up the daily newsletter Instant Genius. She talked me through all things SEO which was absolutely fascinating, and I helped compile the weekly report, looking at which articles have been most popular over the previous week.

By the end of my first day I was completing an ‘Everything You Need to Know’ guide to NASA’s Artemis programme. It was different to the kinds of articles I’d written previously, as it’s a style of article that’s designed to be updated regularly, but it was a format I was familiar with, having been a regular reader of the website. It just goes to show how important it is to really get to know the work of a magazine, online or print, before trying to pitch to or write for them.

I got to practice more familiar skills from my Writing Science module on the Master’s course, by writing a news article about how people with the ‘Dark Triad’ personality traits use humour, and another about using human sweat to power wearable technology. After I’d finished writing, the Commissioning Editor spent time going through my work with me, which was invaluable. It showed me that the skills I had learnt as part of the module had already prepared me well for professional science writing, and that we can never stop learning. I also had the opportunity to offer suggestions for edits for pieces by regular contributors; it was encouraging when the editor agreed with me, and even more useful to understand his thinking when he disagreed.

Near the end of the week I met with the Editor, who listened to my ideas and gave me some valuable advice and insight into making a career out of science writing. Our conversation made me realise that it was an achievable goal for me and helped to focus me on my next steps.

I’d recommend the Learning Lab placements to any student on the MSc Science Communication at UWE Bristol. For those that aren’t sure exactly what they want to do, it would be a great opportunity to explore different options and get a feel for what roles are available. For me, it gave me the confidence that a career which had previously felt like a distant dream could be a reality, thanks to the skills and knowledge I had gained on the MSc.

Rebecca Landon, MSc Science Communication student at UWE Bristol.

MSc Science Communication – Learning Lab placements

Author Science Communication Unit | Posted on

Have you heard of Learning Lab placements? They are placements are offered to students studying a MSc Science Communication with UWE Bristol’s Science Communication Unit. They are a great way to gain industry experience and network with some fantastic organizations.

My name is Laura Thomas, and I am a recent postgraduate student who studied Science Communication at UWE Bristol. I have recently finished two placements as part of the Learning Lab scheme, and I fully recommend seizing this opportunity.

I did my first placement with ecancer, a charity which communicates advances in cancer treatment and patient care to professionals, such as doctors, academics and patients.

I was an editorial assistant for a week, where I wrote tweets for ecancer’s Twitter feed to promote ecancer’s content, posted videos and news stories on ecancer’s website, produced a reference pack for a scientific article and wrote a news article to communicate an advance in oncology research to doctors, nurses and oncologists.

My interests lie in conservation, but I decided to communicate a new topic to challenge myself, test my boundaries and see if I enjoyed communicating cancer research.

Writing the news article was a really useful exercise as it allowed me to develop my portfolio and improved my ability to translate a scientific research paper into a news release for professionals. I learnt a lot about writing for this kind of target audience. Additionally, I was able to receive valuable feedback from my line manager, who was very experienced in the field, which will be useful for future projects.

My second placement was with Films@59. Films@59 is a Bristol based TV production company that mainly focus on post-production. They cover a variety of genres – their most famous being reality and natural history (for example, The Great British Bake Off and Planet Earth).

I was a runner for a week where I ran errands for clients, such as making tea and coffee, and sat in on three sessions with clients. I attended sessions on offline editing, dubbing, and grading. During the sessions I was able to watch people at work and ask them questions. It was interesting to learn how all these different elements contributed to the story and how one small tweak can massively influence the piece.

During my placement I was able to network with people and learn about the variety of career journeys employees had been on to get where they are. There really were a whole range of pathways – both planned and unplanned. Overall, it was a really valuable experience, and I learnt a lot about the industry.

I found the Learning Lab placements extremely rewarding. They are a fantastic way to evaluate your career choices, develop your skills, network, and explore the career paths you could take. I would definitely recommend applying for a Learning Lab placement – you never know what you might gain from it!

Laura Thomas, MSc Science Communication student.

Graduating and working during the COVID-19 pandemic

Author Science Communication Unit | Posted on

Finishing our MSc in Science Communication and graduating during a pandemic and national lockdowns was not how any of us expected it to go. But despite that I managed to get a job a few months after submitting my thesis. Not only that, but what I learnt, the work I did and the experiences I had on the MSc helped me to get the role along with my previous experience working in NHS roles.

I am working as content coordinator for NHS Blood and Transplant, the organisation which is responsible for the supply of blood, organs, tissues and stem cells. Most of my role is about developing and producing content for The Donor, a newsletter which is sent to everyone who is registered as a blood donor four times per year. We share donor stories, recipient stories, updates about the donation process, information about different blood types and types of donations, how important blood and organ donations are etc. Whilst not every article is super sciency, the aim is to engage the readers and keep the donors donating to meet the constant demand for blood products.

My writing improved so much during the masters and I think that has definitely helped me get the role as I had to write an article as part of the interview process. It has also helped in my day-to-day work. I go back to the news structure we learnt in the Writing Science module again and again when writing articles at work. It’s currently on a sticky note stuck on the wall above my desk.

Starting a new job whilst working from home in lockdown wasn’t without its challenges but in the past year and a bit I have:

  • Contributed to five editions of The Donor
  • Learnt the editorial process and house style of writing; spoken to/interviewed donors, recipients and internal/external stakeholders
  • Built confidence and developed my personal style
  • Learnt about blood donation, blood components and treatments
  • Chosen supporting images, designed articles and uploaded them onto the content management system

Researched and written a new regular scientific feature called functions of blood. Each article focuses on a different key role of our blood: transport, immunity and clotting. Did you know that the body has 60,000 miles of blood vessels? This is long enough to circle the globe more than twice.

I’ve also donated blood three times so far and counting!

By Morwenna Bugg

Morwenna was a student on the MSc in Science Communication at UWE Bristol in the 2019-2020 academic year.

How open are we as science communicators?

Author Science Communication Unit | Posted on

Photo credit: Marten Newhall, Unsplash

Words: Andy Ridgway

When I started teaching science writing after spending years as a journalist, I wanted to share my experience, my way of doing things, in the classroom. But I quickly struck upon a problem. What did I actually do? How did I find and research stories? How did I choose interviewees? I had been doing all of these things for so long (and often at speed) that the process I followed had become automatic – not the stuff of conscious thought. It took a fair bit of reflection to unravel the processes that had become so hardwired so I could try to explain them in the classroom.

When we are conducting research as science communicators, a lot of our decisions come down to who and what we trust. What sources can we rely on for fact and who can we rely on for opinion? In reality, faced with the pressures of time, as communicators we typically rely on a limited range of sources – the likes of peer reviewed papers, the scientists directly involved with the research (or at least someone in their field) and possibly the odd press release. But how many of us give conscious thought in our working day to what we trust and why? How often are we open to ideas, perspectives and knowledge that come from outside our usual circle of trust?

It’s questions such as these that are at the heart of the latest report from the European Commission-funded RETHINK project. This report synthesised research we had already done to consider the ‘openness’ and ‘reflexivity’ of science communicators and also of citizens; those who read, watch or listen to what we create. How open are we to a wide range of information, ideas and perspectives? And how reflexive are we, consciously thinking about where we search for information, how that influences the information we find and then how choices we make influence what we write or create?

A guiding principle of RETHINK is that openness and reflexivity on the part of communicators, citizens, scientists and everyone else for that matter are a good thing – helping to create a more effective exchange of ideas and knowledge. On their own, all of these principles sound straightforward. Source information you can trust. Be open. Be reflexive. It’s just that when you put all those ideas together, things start to get complicated.

A survey of the working practices of science communicators we conducted earlier in RETHINK shows that academic journals, university press releases and personal contacts are consulted widely during research. After all, these are sources we can trust for the most part. But if this is what we always do as communicators, often without conscious thought (or reflexivity) it limits the opportunities for readers, viewers and listeners to be exposed to different information and perspectives.

So it is in the implementation of these principles that things get challenging. How prepared are we as communicators to step outside our research comfort zone and take information from sources, from people, we wouldn’t usually consult? When would we want to do this? Are there circumstances when it’s more appropriate than others? After all, openness on the part of science communicators doesn’t necessarily mean that we’ll simply report information and opinions from anyone. There’s a widely circulated quote (that’s been attributed to several people) that may apply here: “Let us keep our minds open…but don’t keep your minds so open that your brains fall out!”

Our new RETHINK report also explores how open and reflexive citizens are when they are interpreting information about science. Specifically, it looked at their ‘sensemaking practices’ in relation to coronavirus – sensemaking being the process by which we develop an understanding of something complex. It showed that there is some evidence of openness, with people consulting a range of newspapers and websites to help them triangulate information and understand what’s happening. But in many instances, citizens’ sensemaking practices are understandably heavily influenced by their context – they speak with friends, family, find information from online social media groups they’re part of and have a limited range of online sources they trust. They are also unlikely to shift from pre-existing beliefs during this sensemaking process. In other words, some sensemaking is not particularly open, or particularly reflexive for that matter.

So what we can do about all this? How can we as science communicators become open and reflexive in what we do in a way that’s compatible with the need to source trustworthy information? And is there anything we can do to encourage others, those who watch, listen or read what we create, to be open and reflexive too? Let’s have an (open and reflexive) conversation about this – tweet us at @SciCommsUWE @RETHINKscicomm with your thoughts and ideas.

From MSc in Science Communication to Science Writer…

Author Science Communication Unit | Posted on

When deciding where to study a Master’s degree, employability was a huge factor for me. I was keen to study somewhere that would teach me how to get stuck straight into the world of Science Communication. From day one in the Science Communication Unit (SCU) at UWE Bristol, we were treated like professionals and encouraged to present ourselves as so to the rest of the sci-comm community.

Since graduating, I have taken on regular freelance writing projects which have been a great way to practice the skills I learned at UWE Bristol. I have also recently started a full time job as a Science Writer for a small company in mid Wales who specialise in Cellular Pathology. My day job now includes writing articles for pathologists about new research and developing ideas to create multimedia content for our website.

I was already interested in Science Writing when I started the course so was grateful to learn a lot about this topic whilst studying and to meet several industry professionals. One of the key skills I am now using on a daily basis is learning how to filter through academic papers- as a communicator you may need to sort through huge quantities of research to fully understand an issue. I’ve also learned how to write more concisely. This really helps with sticking to word counts. My interview skills also developed very quickly on the course, something I’d never done before. I now use these skills to interview customers, researchers and colleagues both face to face and over the phone. Unsurprisingly, one of my favourite modules on the course was Writing Science and I still have the “Top Tips” we were given during the course and refer to them regularly for a refresher.

As much as I loved gaining the practical writing skills I now use in my full time job, I am also really glad I had the opportunity to learn more about the theory and history of the field as well. It has definitely broadened my horizons about more types of communication and how different media can be used to encourage science communication in a format accessible to everyone. Some of the other practical skills I gained through the course served to be valuable life lessons in team work, compromise and self-confidence. For example, I can proudly say I was part of a team to record an “as-live” radio show at the BBC- that’s a pretty memorable experience!

Finally, the teaching staff and my course mates from UWE Bristol have become invaluable sources of professional advice and encouragement as we all continue to support each other and celebrate our successes. Amongst my course mates we have shared a whole range of achievements including further study, international travel for fieldwork, BBC credits, conference attending and journal publication.

To find out more about the MSc Science Communication please visit our Postgraduate taught courses page.

Siobhan Fairgreaves, UWE Bristol MSc Science Communication student 2016/17

How to write a research synthesis report (or how I conquered my batteries mountain!)

Author Science Communication Unit | Posted on

The words on the screen are drifting in and out of focus… lithium-ion and sodium-ion, redox flow and redox couples… and, errrrrm, what does ‘roundtrip efficiency’ mean?

It’s April 2018.  I have just returned to work after a sleepless year on maternity leave and been tasked with writing a report on battery technologies and their environmental impacts.

It’s an honour to write about such an important topic – batteries are critical to renewable energy systems and e-mobility – and I am excited about the job ahead.

However, faced with this seemingly insurmountable, not to mention impenetrable, pile of scientific papers upon which to base the report, it’s also easy to feel a little daunted.

I pull myself together. I know that I can do this because I’ve been here before, having successfully delivered reports on a diverse set of topics, from green finance to fish farming – as baffling as some of these topics may have seemed at first.

And sure enough, six months later, Towards the Battery of the Future (as the finished report is now titled) is being handed out to warm approval at high-level international conferences and EU meetings, deemed worthy of attention by top-tier policymakers and captains of industry.

With a glow of satisfaction, I pat myself on the back for having mastered a topic that, initially, I knew very little about. I’m also chuffed to have played a role in sharing the science with wider society.

Research syntheses

Towards the Battery of the Future is one of a number of reports I have worked on for Science for Environment Policy over the past 8 years. It is an example of a research synthesis – a publication which weaves together research, often from multiple disciplines, to support or influence policy.

In Science for Environment Policy’s case, we distill research to help policymakers protect and enhance our environment.

I can tell you from my time on these reports that producing a research synthesis is a tricky business. I am just starting work on a new report which explores the wonders of pollinators, and it feels a good time to reflect upon how best to go about a research synthesis.

An increasing body of scholarly work is assessing the role and impact of research syntheses, and various techniques for creating them1. This has yielded some interesting principles and frameworks, which provide valuable food for thought and guidelines for action.

This blog post is my nuts-and-bolts contribution to the discussion and, below, we have a handful of pointers, drawn from personal experience. These helped me take the batteries report, and those before it, on the journey from a mystifying blur of pixels to a bona fide publication, and one which may just make the world a better place.

1. Talk to real people

A chat with a well-selected expert can clarify more about a topic than days of scouring through research papers (and certainly more than could ever be gleaned from Wikipedia).

Work on the batteries report really got going after some enlightening conversations with the commissioning policy officer in Brussels and my trusty scientific advisor in Germany. Both helped define what we really need to focus on.

Where does the weight of evidence sit? What are the big debates and unknowns? And, seriously, what does roundtrip efficiency actually mean?

Thanks these chats, the words on my screen start to snap into focus, and, armed with a list of useful keywords, I feel ready to take on the research databases and build this report.

(And, turns out roundtrip efficiency is really a very simple concept. Need to know: you don’t want your batteries to leak too much energy when recharging).

2. And talk to lots of different types of people

I lost count of how many people contributed to and reviewed the batteries report. These helpful souls not only offered useful details, but also balance with their diverse backgrounds, from transport to chemicals.

And it’s not just scientists and policymakers who can help. Businesses, consultants and community groups, for example, are all a treasure trove of information and perspective.

I have been transported from my desk in a grey suburb of Bristol to tropical forests of Central America and windswept fish farms of the Baltic Sea, courtesy of telephone conversations with astonishingly obliging contributors.

With my tabula rasa outset for each report, I do often feel a little ignorant during these chats.  I’ve not quite forgiven the guy who actually shouted at me for asking the wrong questions (owing to my ignorance on the particular topic of the report at the time), but I did come out of that conversation much more knowledgeable than when I went in.

A caveat: the more people involved in a report, the longer it takes – and the risk of missing publication in time for key policy events increases, diminishing the report’s potential impact. In practice, synthesis writers are often faced with the challenge of finding the best way to produce robust content within short timeframes (see also: limited budgets).

3. Your reference manager is your best friend

I’ve seen many a writer get in a twist attempting to manually manage the reams of references that make up a report. Problems often arise as a report continually shifts in form throughout its development; citations get lost, bibliographies get muddled.

I’ve adopted Mendeley to overcome these issues, and do all the awkward formatting for me. It’s not perfect, and I’m always keen to know how others deal with their references, but it sure makes life a lot easier.

4. Keep on truckin’

It is the research that goes into developing a report, and not the actual writing, that drains the most time and energy. A day spent filtering and reading papers can amount to just two or three short paragraphs of text. Producing a research synthesis report is, at times, frustratingly arduous.

However, as Towards the Battery of the Future gradually morphed into a rounded product, I was reminded of why I went into science communication in the first place: it’s the perfect excuse to learn new things. The process of translating between the languages of science and the ‘lay person’ is also something I find undeniably satisfying.

Indeed, as I submit the final draft, I’m wishing I could make my own efficient roundtrip – to go back and do it all again.

Michelle Kilfoyle, Science Writer, Science for Environment Policy

  1. Some recent examples:

The Royal Society & the Academy of Medical Sciences (2018) Evidence synthesis for policy: a statement of principles. https://royalsociety.org/~/media/policy/projects/evidence-synthesis/evidence-synthesis-statement-principles.pdf

Wyborn et al. (2018) Understanding the Impacts of Research Synthesis. Environmental Science & Policy. 86: 72–84. DOI:10.1016/J.ENVSCI.2018.04.013

2018 Max Perutz Science Writing Competition – winner announced!

Author Science Communication Unit | Posted on

The winner of the Medical Research Council’s (MRC) 2018 Max Perutz Science Writing Competition has been announced. The competition, now in its 21st year, was open to all PhD students funded by the MRC and entrants were tasked with writing about their own research, explaining to non-scientists why their research matters in just 800 words. Since the competition started in 1998, more than 1,000 researchers have submitted entries and taken their first steps into science communication.

Natasha Clarke winner of the 2018 Max Perutz Science Writing competition

This year’s winner is Natasha Clarke of St George’s, University of London with her article: ‘How artificial intelligence, and a cup of tea, could help diagnose Alzheimer’s disease’. Briet Bjarkadottir, of the Nuffield Department of Women’s and Reproductive Health at the University of Oxford was the runner up with her article: ‘Stopping the conveyor belt – cancer and fertility’. Fraser Shearer, of the Centre for Cardiovascular Science at the University of Edinburgh, was commended for his article ‘Keep calm and carry to term’.

Andy Ridgway, a Senior Lecturer within the Science Communication Unit, was among this year’s judges that also included the MRC’s Executive Chair, Professor Fiona Watt, Dr Claire Ainsworth, freelance journalist and science writer; Stephen Curry, journalist and science writer; Dr Roger Highfield, MRC Council member and director of external affairs at the Science Museum Group and Jennifer Rohn, journalist, novelist and scientist at University College London.

 

Andy said: “What really shone though in the shortlisted entries was the power of telling a relatable, human story when explaining the importance of medical research. By showing how a disease or condition impacts an individual and how this new treatment will change their lives, it conveys the impact of the research in a powerful, engaging way.

“It was a pleasure to read all the shortlisted entries and there are some gifted writers in the field.”

The awards were announced at a ceremony at the Royal Institution on 25 October by the MRC’s Executive Chair and Chair of the judging panel Professor Fiona Watt, alongside Professor Robin Perutz, son of the late Max Perutz.

Fiona said: “It has been a great pleasure to chair the judging panel of this year’s Max Perutz Award.

“The competition is a great way to highlight to early-career scientists the importance of science communication and to showcase their work.  This year we received a record number of entries, from about 10% of MRC-funded PhD students.

“The topics of the winning articles are artificial intelligence and Alzheimer’s disease; cancer and fertility; mental health, depression and stress. I’d like to thank everyone who entered the competition – the judges had a tough time making the selection. Our PhD students do a brilliant job at bringing their research to life – using everyday language, rhetorical devices and personal anecdotes.”

All of the short-listed articles, including Natasha’s winning entry, are now published.

 

Back to top

Follow this blog

Get every new post delivered right to your inbox.