Currents: Sarah Smaga & Tina Su
I’m ecstatic to announce a new mini-series under the Spectrum podcast! Our new initiative was produced by Gabriela Bosque, a first year PhD student in the MCGD track here at Yale and intrepid science communicator.
The three-part mini-series will tackle the intersection of how current events are affecting the scientific community, with the aim of broadening the conversation about political and scientific engagement past the bench.
Our first episode centers around the March for Science, and upcoming installments will discuss how undocumented scientists and those with refugee status in the United States have been impacted by recent decisions by the Trump administration.
Hope you enjoy!
Chris
-----
Subscribe on iTunes U and SoundCloud
Hi, I’m Gabi! For our first episode, I talked to Sarah Smaga and Tina Su about the March of Science and their interests and roles in science outreach. Sarah is a fourth-year graduate student in the MB&B department studying the structure of proteins from HIV and the human immune system. Outside of lab, Sarah is invested in making STEM more inclusive for women and minorities, and uses her scientific expertise to improve policymaking. She is one of the leaders of the Yale Science Diplomats, and has attended and organized several science advocacy and leadership conferences.
Also joining me is Tina Su, a first year student in the department of Immunobiology at Yale. Tina is also interested in STEM inclusivity and in creating a support network for women scientists at Yale. Through Women in Science at Yale (WISAY), Tina helps organize mentorship events for women in the Yale community.
During our conversation we talked about the March of Science: their expectations for the march, and why they were interested in participating. We also discussed paths to advocacy after the March of Science. As Sarah put it, she hopes that this will not be a “one day activism thing for scientists,” and that people will start “engaging the community around them” on a regular basis.
“It’s great that we engage policymakers, but those policymakers answer to constituents. The more that you talk to the constituents, the more likely you are to evoke a broader support for science”.
Finally, I think the conversation highlighted the importance of some of the official goals of the march: namely, to “humanize science” and to show that science tries to “serve the common good.” As Tina passionately put it:
“Science is human. I feel like oftentimes it is portrayed as coldly logical, very precise, almost inhuman, and removed. But I think creativity is very much within the sciences. I think science is done by humans and it has all the flaws of it but it has all the beauty of that as well and I hope that is something that this March can exemplify.”
Links
Editorial - “Nature supports the March for Science"
Dan Kahan - “What is the science of science communication?”
Open Science DB - easily digestible summaries of peer-reviewed publications