Given some high-profile situations in recent years, like the COVID pandemic, communication of scientific information and data has become a flashpoint in politics. The classroom is now fraught with potential conflicts, given the wide variety of different backgrounds of students. As instructors, it is up to us to decide how we want to navigate these topics and conversations. A temptation lies in wanting to share our own thoughts and beliefs, with the intention of guiding students into making the right decisions for their lives. Instead of just being tempted, I have gotten up in class, banged on the front desk, and pontification about what I thought was the right way to look at things like pseudoscience, misinformation, communication and scientific discovery.

I realized several years ago that I was turning some students off to me and to science in general. In some of the semester evaluation hinted that I was spending a little too much energy in persuasion about misinformation and less about the course material. Based on those comments, I did want to change how I presented that information, without changing the nature of the information itself. Scientific literacy is vital to every American citizen, and every world citizen for that matter, but being able to teach the skills of scientific literacy does not need to involve a soap box. I have already discussed getting off the soap box in one of the early podcast episodes (make reference), but having an effective STEM pedagogy and then adding on top some meaningful discussion of pseudoscience is quite a challenge.

It is important to mention here that I am constantly self-analyzing and then refining my craft as a teacher. This blog post is a form of self-analyzing, as I am sifting through my experiences in order to figure out what to share. One thing that I have realized is that connection to the audience is both the hardest things to accomplish as an instructor, and possibly the most vital. Most teachers have an incredible understanding of their material, and many can convey that material to their audience. The missing people is often the connection with the audience that establishes trust.

Establishing trust between instructor and student can be a lengthy process. Some students are shy and anxious and are very guarded during lecture times. Others actively resist authority and want to challenge the instructor and much of the material or concept being discussed. Others are just disinterested and bored. These types of students are typically well represented in college classrooms, but there are other types when you move outside of the classroom and into the public sphere for seminars and community presentations. Basic understanding of scientific concepts can vary wildly in the public, creating a challenge in determining what level to make the science concepts, let alone what tone to use. Resistance to science and increased skepticism shows itself in public, more so than in the classroom, based on my experience and in seeing other situations in the media.

So where does a potential instructor start? One might think that making the material relatable is the first thing to work on, but I believe it is the instructor making themselves relatable that is far more important. A teacher does not start any conversation or lecture with scientific information. There is an introductory period which is about sharing some personal information, sizing up the audience, establishing a tone and seeing where the conversation might go. I think there is a tendency just to skip that part of the experience and go right into the presentation, but if you do not establish yourself as a trustworthy person, the audience will not engage with the things you are talking about enough for an impact to be truly made,

I will go into one specific aspect of this process in a separate post, empathy, because it is so important it deserves its own space. But there are many others that are worth discussing. Tone of voice has a huge part to place, and I have worked a great deal on how I start speaking to an audience. As I have mentioned in the podcast, I used to be quite bold, speaking bluntly about topics that I felt truly passionate about, and did not check myself with language or tone. I got up in front of a classroom and started a political stump speech, complete with wild gestures and fist pounding. Once or twice, I even sat or stood on the lab bench, putting myself over the students as so weird sign of dominance. Little by little, I dialed this back, somehow knowing that it was the wrong way to approach my audience.

During this same period, I would do community lectures, which always have a different audience. More specifically, the seminar series which I participated in had an older audience, with some of my students added in since I offered them extra credit. I knew instinctively that I could not speak in the same way to people where my age or older, in the same way that I could to students who are typically younger than myself. When I thought about why I used different approaches to the two audiences, I realized that perceived a different level or respect needed to begin with each audience. Being older than most of my students, I assumed that I knew better and almost became a parent from the start, becoming the authority immediately and searching for respect and empathy later.

With the older audiences, I felt almost the reverse. I was the younger part of the dynamic, and defaulted to an initial respect level that I would give to an older family member, a parent, one of my own teachers. My tone of voice was softer, I went for more witty banter, I explained my background more. Without the immediate assumption of full authority, I think I was a little more relaxed in those situations and relied more on my personality, rather than any power that I might have in the room.

Slowly, I changed how I was in the classroom from being the complete authority figure, to something more like a cross between professor and empathetic parent. The first few days of class became about establishing trust and respect, rather than assuming it was already there because of my position and instructor. I listened more and spoke less, or rather I added listening and analyzing the room while also speaking as much as I needed to. Reading the room feels like something an actor or comedian would do, but it is vital for a teacher to do.

Establishing respect and trust in a very short amount of time can be difficult if not impossible. With a semester long class, there is no need to rush the process. A teacher can introduce themselves, meet the students, get to know them a lit, and build that connection slowly. In a community lecture, that must happen within a few minutes. I have found that a little personal background and humor can help with the process, along with using a firm, even tone of voice. This is in stark comparison to many politicians who go to rough language and voice to rile up their audiences. That is the opposite of what I want to do. My audience will accept me and what I am telling them is better if I let them know that I respect them, as much as I want them to respect me.

It can be as simple as starting with “Welcome, I want to tell you what I know, and I respect you coming to listen. I also respect your ideas and hope that you will share them with me so we can have a good conversation.” I do not want to just pontificate. That kind of speech does little to nothing for an audience that is skeptical. For my classes, many of my students come in being required to take chemistry and not wanting to or have any interest in it. Many are also incredibly anxious about the necessary math and the scientific concepts. Public audiences may be very skeptical of science overall, not have much scientific background and often resist authority. Even though there are a variety of different issues to overcome as an instructor, if you establish trust and respect, even if just a little, you can allow the audience to relax enough to give you a chance.