I mentioned this talk a couple of months ago and finally gave it last week. I’ve been ‘processing’ my thoughts from the experience for the last week before writing about it.
I’m happy to put my slides online if anyone is interested. They are currently on my LinkedIn profile, and I put them on slideshare. (Any mistakes/errors/oopses in these slides are my own doing, and I apologise if they offend anyone or if anyone was misrepresented)
I talked about several aspects of blogging – the history (briefly), what a blog is, then I looked at several uses of blogging. These were researchblogging.org , Jean-Claude Bradley’s Useful Molecules , NatureNetwork and Rosie Redfield’s Research blogs. I also gave a list of interesting blogs at the end and should really have produced a handout due to the large number of links I included.
Note: Eva’s preparing a talk on a related subject at the moment, discussions on a forum here.
Putting the rest of this below the fold…
Let’s talk about the good, the bad and the ugly of the whole experience!
The good: it was a fairly decent talk, not my best, but not my worst.
The bad: I think I overestimated how engaged the folks in my department were with internet technology. I felt like I was pitching a little too high (and perhaps a little evangelically) and should have spent a little more time on basic aspects of the whole concept of blogging. I think the image problem of blogging is one that will take a great deal of time and effort to overcome.
The ugly: The more extreme form of the bad came from a couple of questions that made it clear that people didn’t ‘get it’. There were a couple of questions that confused the hell out of me, and then a few that alluded to the usual notion of blogging being time away from other stuff. I didn’t explain some concepts well, and should have covered fewer aspects of the topic in the time I had. When I came up with the whole idea, I thought I’d have a 45 minute seminar, but I had to split the session with another talk, so I only had 20 minutes. I think that showed.
I should note that because of scheduling issues there were only a handful of faculty there, the audience was mainly grad students and postdocs. The most interesting conversation was around the idea of what is a good blog and how would you know it when you see it. I described finding good blogs like walking into a library where all the books have had their covers removed: you have to read and assess the writing to judge quality. There is no correlation between how professional a blog site looks and the quality of the materials presented.
In general, I think people are wary of blogging for a number of reasons that include the stereotypical ideals perpetrated by the media. The other reasons are about assessing the validity of the writing, and engagement with technology.
Last updated:
Friday, 20 Feb
2009 - 16:12 UTC
Thanks! This is pretty similar to reactions a friend of mine got when she talked about blogging to her department (she doesn’t have a science blog herself, but reads them). She said they mainly didn’t get the point of it – why bother, etc.
Yes, this is the reaction to a lot of scientists I meet/speak to. They basically have not heard of it or if they have think it is trivial. There was a brief time, I think, when people’s teenaged children were doing it, so there was some hope, but they’ve all moved on now to even more instant forms of online interaction so that particular window of education has passed, I suspect.
I teach undergrad premeds scientific writing and began requiring a class blog with my neuroscience students this semester. Initially, they voiced the same opinions as stated above, but having been motivated by attached grades…well, they’ve come around somewhat. Two encouraging reactions have been “I’m kind of getting this blogging thing” (at least as far are reading goes) and a couple who commented that blogging (posting/commenting) was influencing their writing — they were both more honest and more concise, both of which are good qualities in a writer, regardless of discipline. However, when we began class this semester, none of them had heard of “science 2.0”, “web 2.0” or even open access publication. Maybe starting ’em young is the ticket…
oh Dr. Redfield!
Some friends of mine had her for some 1st & 2nd year courses at UBC. She suggested blogging about their thoughts on concepts and lab work, saying it helps with the thinking process, and it’s something to go back to in the future. Most of her lab members got their own similar blogs as well.
Bloggin could also be useful in teaching, i remember one TA got frustrated with getting the same questions from her students. So she set up a blog of the most frequently asked questions about the course and had her students direct all their questions there.
@Mickey, “maybe starting’ em young is the ticket..” I think so too, esp since most undergrads have Facebook. Recently some students convinced Australia’s new Chief Scientist to get a Facebook page
Katherine – well, kudos to you for trying! It’s a hard thing to explain to people and I don’t expect many will be converted on the spot. I always reckon it takes a couple of years for people to change their information gathering habits, so keep plugging away. Is anyone in the Univ Library interested? Maybe they can help spread the message more widely.
When it comes down to it, a blog is like a diary, with knobs on. The purpose of keeping a diary, said Oscar Wilde, is to have something sensational to read on the train. He’d havee adored mobile technology…
Regardless of the criticism, you should be proud of having gone out there to engage in the discussion. You probably won’t convert anyone but you’re likely over time to find a few like-minded people that will end up in constructive conversations and projects.
Thanks for the comments and encouragement! I’m probably going to give it another shot at a conference later on this year so we’ll see how that turns out!
@Linda – I met Rosie Redfield briefly whilst involved with a postdoc task force at UBC. She was quite extraordinary!
@Mickey – I’ve got a class that I think might lend itself well to having a class blog so will see how that works out.
@Frank – good point about the library, we just got a new science librarian so maybe I should make a trip to the library. There are a couple of other people that I’ve met who ‘get’ blogging a bit more.
I should also mention that one of the reasons I decided to volunteer for this talk (and not use the time to talk about my research) was that I wanted to get a little positive PR going for blogging and scientists within my department. I may not have totally achieved that, but every little bit helps.
Nature has an editorial on blogging this week. Katherine and others, the editors would be most interested to know what you and fellow online-savvy scientists think about it and the issues it raises, so please share your views with us in the Nature Opinion forum. Thank you.
Thanks Maxine, it is a great editorial and made me smile a lot last night when it came up on my FriendFeed. There may also have been cheering, but that may also have just been the wine ;-)