FOR NJOSH ONLY

According to Melissa Marshall, scientists and engineers live in a fascinating world but that due to their poor communication of what is in it, the other people are unable to understand them (Marshall, 2017). For the rest of society, Scientists and engineers remain as “nerds” who are preoccupied by their science things and the rest of the population has no way of understanding the intricacies of their fascinating scientific world. In her TED Talks, Mellissa speaks on ways through which the scientists and engineers can “talk nerdy’ to us through simplified communication strategies for everyone to understand. In this paper, the focus will be on simplifying scientific presentations without losing the meanings attached to the jargon or scientific words. In addition, useful tips from Melissa and other relevant sources will be discussed so as to bring clarity to scientific presentations and also language of communicating with an ordinary audience on such matters. Comment by Cochran, Andrew: This material could be cut and the sentence wouldn’t lose anything. Cutting unneeded words often results in increased clarity. Comment by Cochran, Andrew: This citation looks like as if it is APA rather than MLA. Comment by Cochran, Andrew: lowercase Comment by Cochran, Andrew: singular Comment by Cochran, Andrew: For academic writing, use the author’s last name. Comment by Cochran, Andrew: Good job of asserting what you will focus on in the essay.

Marshall says that scientists should subtract the use of bullets from their work when presenting it to an ordinary or non-scientific audience (Marshall, 2017). This is because such an audience finds the same boring while at the same time they are willing to see the fascinating part of science without the monotonous bullets. Whereas people are fascinated by the work of scientists, they also need to understand in basic simple terms what is going on. She illustrates through an example where she says that a scientist may speak of “trabeculae” to mean the bone structure in parts of the body and this may cause misunderstanding to the laymen. Instead, the scientist should aim at showing how this bone structure relates with strength and how such strength is useful in combating osteoporosis as the end aim of the presentation (Marshall, 2017). The science has not been dulled down when simpler explanations are used but rather the audience of ordinary, non-scientific listeners becomes aware of the importance of concepts being discussed as opposed to being left out of the discussion. Comment by Cochran, Andrew: For MLA, give the times at which certain points are made. I believe that Purdue OWL’s online MLA guide has a section on in-text citations that shows how to format citations for sources that have a clock. Comment by Cochran, Andrew: I’m not clear about what “bullets” means in this case. Bullet lists? Comment by Cochran, Andrew: In this paragraph, you do a good job of summarizing the speaker’s ideas.

The use of bullets is discouraged by Mellissa because it focuses on the language area of the brain and thereby such information causes this area of the brain to be overwhelmed (Marshall, 2017). Instead she advices the scientists to use simple and readable sentences that can be used by the audience members to ‘Key” in supposing they find themselves lost at any point of the scientific presentation. She has essentially, come up with a simplified formula for addressing the described audience where she says that scientists should subtract bullet points from the presentation. In addition to the bullets, jargon should also be subtracted, and passion should be multiplied while at the same time, dividing the presentation by what is relevant. This formula will then ultimately lead to understandable interactions between the nerds and the non-scientific audience. Comment by Cochran, Andrew: Word form Comment by Cochran, Andrew: Perhaps discuss jargon and passion a bit more?

Mineau on the other hand suggests that scientific information should be organized into simple research categories to enable ease of understanding especially for those who do not belong to the scientific fraternity (Mineau, 2014). Generally, she observes that the scientific traditional journals and books are highly technical especially those published for peers (Mineau, 2014). As a result, the information contained therein become inaccessible to non-peers and makes it difficult for the general audience and even some students when it comes to understanding the content. Comment by Cochran, Andrew: coma

Mineau speaks of useful science to mean that scientific information and knowledge is not just for the use by peers but also it has the benefits potentially helpful to ordinary people. She has pioneered a simplified science website where she uses colorful and minimalist sentences to enlighten her lay audience concerning difficult scientific aspects or concepts. Through the same platform she has been able to ‘socialize” most of the content by enabling it to be shared through social media platforms such as twitter and Facebook as well. To illustrate the success of such simplification, she informs that a few short months after its launch, the website had attracted thousands of ordinary people who became interested in the many scientific concepts discussed in an understandable format over the site (Mineau, 2014).

Munger supports this direction of simplified communication in so far as scientific information sharing is concerned. He informs that scientific research that is formulated in an interesting manner becomes of interest not just for scientific peers but also to the general public as well (Munger, 2017). The key to attracting this audience, therefore, is to come with interesting research topics because these are better at catching their attention.

Munger further informs that interesting research does not mean new research as many writers have often mistook. He instead informs that interesting research may not necessarily be based on the latest front-line gadget or science principles but it becomes of interest to people once its relevance to their everyday lives has been brought out (Munger, 2017). The general audience does not go out of their way to scrutinize details of the latest scientific developments but rather they are moved by items that touch on their lives on a personal level and space. Comment by Cochran, Andrew: Compelling

According to Burke, it is important for scientists to learn the journalistic language so as to be effective at communicating with the general readership or audiences (Burke, 2017). There is need for the scientific writers to stay out of academic writing that involve too much jargon and instead assume a journalistic tone especially when addressing the public or lay members of the audience. When such terms have been inevitably used, the focus of the writer should be to make the work generally relatable and also memorable so that it can also be trusted by the readers. Astore additionally, points out at the importance of using social aesthetics that shape society for millennial purposes (Astore, 2017). Comment by Cochran, Andrew: Good job of introducing a source while also giving a sense of what its main idea is. Comment by Cochran, Andrew: Perhaps discuss this source in greater detail?

In conclusion, all these informers, beginning with Marshall in her TED Talks, have pointed to the cold and competent nature of traditional scientists. They have argued that such an approach in their writing has served to alleviate them from the lay public which is also considerably interested in science and its publications. It is therefore, imperative that scientific writers avoid bullets and jargon while simplifying their academic writing to suit a more journalistic approach when informing the general audience. Comment by Cochran, Andrew: Abdulaziz, Good work on your essay. You’ve chosen an interesting topic and you give it a pretty good treatment. The discussion is at its best when it is packed with details. Some developments could be made in a few key places, and some other minor revisions could be made. Please use MLA format for in-text citations Overall, good work. 83/100

Works Cited

Astore, William. Observing God: Thomas Dick, Evangelicalism, and Popular Science in Victorian Britain and America. Taylor & Francis, 2017.