In a time when the science on climate change and vaccinations is dismissed by some as mere opinion — holding no more validity than any belief posted on social media — some academics say it is time to respond.
more information
But some also say there’s a danger that those who speak out may be viewed in the academy as lightweight pundits, more devoted to public discourse than to research.
Andrew Hoffman, director of the Erb Institute and Holcim (US) Professor of Sustainable Enterprise, says that while academics are trained to study and present facts to get to the heart of issues, they are not trained to command public attention and respect.
Maybe they should be, he says. In this time of exploding social media where opinions not grounded in fact are embraced by many — to the potential detriment of society — academics have a duty to get involved.
“If you’re doing work on stuff you really care about, I don’t know how you sit on the sidelines,” says Hoffman, also a professor of management and organizations, and of natural resources and environment.
He is a key organizer of “Academic Engagement in Public and Political Discourse,” a Rackham Graduate School Michigan Meeting set for May 13-15 in the Rackham Assembly Hall.
Although registration is full, organizers are accepting names on a waiting list. Additionally, the event’s two keynote addresses are open to the public. They are:
• “Delivering on Science’s Social Contract,” 7:30-9 p.m., May 13, with Jane Lubchenco, Distinguished Professor of Zoology, Oregon State University, and former administrator of NOAA and Undersecretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere.
• “Good, Bad and Maybe: Communicating Scientific Near-Certainties and Deep-Uncertainties to a Non-Scientific Audience,” 9-10:30 a.m., May 15, with Richard Alley, professor of geosciences, Pennsylvania State University.
A President’s Panel at 1:30 p.m. May 13 will feature President Mark Schlissel with Michael Crow, president of Arizona State University; Philip Hanlon, president of Dartmouth College; and Teresa Sullivan, president of the University of Virginia. This event is not open to the public, but will be available to view via a live webstream, along with the two keynotes. Access the live stream at graham.umich.edu/mm/stream.
Alley says most of his job is devoted to educating students in degree programs, and to research. But he says academics take seriously “the triumvirate of teaching, research and service — or, slightly rearranged and in different words, learning what no one else knows, sharing that knowledge with people, and helping them use the knowledge to do good things.”
In the broad fields of energy and environment, Alley says, the scholarship is clear. Wise use of our knowledge in these areas will pay off in terms of money and jobs as well as a cleaner environment, improved national security, and insurance against disasters, he says.
“Failure to communicate this risks a worse economy, fewer jobs, and so on. This is not a game. Science and engineering are essential to our well-being,” he says.
A 2013 survey of U-M faculty found 90 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that public engagement informs public discussions. But 56 percent believed such engagement is not valued by tenure committees. Hoffman said some are concerned they’ll be misquoted or otherwise misrepresented.
To promote effective communication, seminar attendees will be asked to consider if guidelines should be suggested for academics taking on a public profile.
“How do we develop rules on what is considered successful engagement? Should you be on the Bill Maher show, or the Rush Limbaugh show?” Hoffman asks.
He suggests that academics develop a broader perspective on what it means to be an academic. He says we need to consider how to create a culture where more professors are called upon by the nation’s leaders to advise and consult on current issues.
Further, Hoffman suggests academics should stand up for what they do. “If you’re an expert, just accept that. If someone says, ‘It’s my opinion that climate change doesn’t exist,’ you have the right to tell them, ‘You don’t have a basis for that opinion.’”
Hoffman warns academics who engage in public debate to be prepared for unfamiliar tactics and players. They should be committed to a protracted and messy engagement, in order to be heard.
“They need to understand you lose some control over the message. You don’t have the ultimate say about what is presented in the newspaper and said over the radio,” Hoffman says, adding academics must accept they may need to state their message in a way the public can understand — an approach that is uncomfortable for many academics.
“Recognizing that this is the nature of the game is a big first step,” he says.
