What would you want from a SciComm class?

In the Spring of 2014 I took a class that was required for my program: Workshop on Scientific Communication. While not knowing entirely what to expect, I was still a little disappointed in the content. This one credit, twelve session class was mostly long, text-heavy PowerPoint presentations on how to write papers, what the purpose of an abstract was, how to prepare figures, and similar topics. While these are useful topics, there seemed a lot missing from the class. Many slides were read to us on how to write an abstract, but we never actually wrote an abstract. We were required to do a ten minute oral presentation near the end of the semester, and received some valuable feedback. However, we never got a chance to revise and improve.

I approached the instructor, and asked to TA next time the class was offered. She said the class was a lot of time and effort, and she would love the help. I asked about including some extra topics, and got a very enthusiastic response.

Here are some things I would like to see added:

• Twitter: what it is, and why it can be useful
• Blogs: how they can improve writing
• Science policy: what is it and the importance of communication and advocacy
• Scientists speaking to the lay public: how to do this and why it matters
• More opportunity for feedback: we're often told the importance of good writing, but don't to practice.

And now I open it to you. What would you want to learn from a graduate level class on science communication? What do you wish other people would learn? This class is generally geared toward graduate students, but also attracts medical students, residents, and other people from the medical campus that were intrigued by the title.

What are your thoughts?

What I Study

In my Careers in Scientific Communications class, we were given the writing assignment below. I liked it enough to post my answer here. I would love to see yours too!

Write a short essay (125-175 words) about your lab research or a science topic of your choice. The essay should describe/explain the science so that it is understandable to the non-scientific public.

I study how stem cells make and use energy - stem cell metabolism. I don't use the controversial stem cells that get all the headlines. Instead, I use stem cells from bone marrow, also called mesenchymal stem cells or MSCs. Stem cells have two defining properties that make them stem cells. First, they can make more stem cells, exact replicas of themselves. Secondly, a stem cell has the ability to become a different type of cell. MSCs can become bone, fat, or cartilage. There are two main ways cells make energy. Glycolysis makes a little energy, and doesn't require oxygen. Oxidative phosphorylation does require oxygen, and makes a lot of energy. Stem cells mostly use glycolysis. Bone cells mostly use oxidative phosphorylation. Somewhere along the path from stem cell to bone, the cells switch how they make their energy. If you stop oxidative phosphorylation from happening, you also stop the stem cell from becoming bone. We don't know why or how this switch happens, and that's what I want to find out.