In my sophomore year of high school, I was an angry girl with access to a word processor a dangerous combination. At the urging of a mentor, I picked up the proverbial pen and freelanced op-eds for local, state and foreign newspapers, lambasting drug education programs, racial discrimination, workplace inequity and college admissions. I considered writing a temporary endeavor, because my real ambition was to eventually join scientific academia. I ultimately sought a more appropriate venue to channel my aspirations and earned an internship at a stem cell research institute. In shifting my focus to research writing, I expected to table my journalistic activities indefinitely.
That is, until I met the director of the University of Washington's Institute of Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine.
The director was a busy man he was a tenured professor at a research powerhouse, a father and a respected figure in his field. Yet he took time out of his busy schedule to speak on local radio stations, panel at undergraduate conferences and write letters to newspapers, all in an attempt to educate the general public about advancements within the field of stem cell research. While I admired his intellectual energy, I wondered why he took it upon himself to explain the intricacies of his lab's research to the average layman. Fast-forward two years, and I have realized that the director was performing an invaluable intellectual service to the public.
I have come to recognize that there is a vast information gap between average citizens and "ivory tower" academics. The academic community as a whole has failed to communicate the social value of its work to the broader public and as a result the public often fails to recognize the importance of scientific research that seems far removed from daily life. This misunderstanding has had grave consequences for research funding. In the latest example, The Chronicle of Higher Education reports that Republicans in the House of Representatives have presented a plan that would cut spending by 16 percent from the department responsible for the National Science Foundation and NASA, 10 percent from the Energy Department and 4 percent from the department that includes the National Institute of Health.
Meanwhile, the field of biology has seen staggering advancements in recent years. Less than six decades after Watson and Crick published their findings on the structure of DNA, subsequent discoveries have allowed human beings to clone sheep and dogs, genetically modify produce and decode the human genome. The rapid accumulation of scientific knowledge has shown no signs of deceleration, but as concepts and fields become more specialized, they are becoming lost in a haze of esoteric jargon and techniques beyond the grasp of the general public. This problem is not limited to the field of biology, or even the sciences, for that matter. Each academic field has its own distinct flavor and its own canon of esoterica from biology to physics, sociology to economic.
To combat ignorance and explain the importance of their research to the public interest, many academics have taken it upon themselves to educate the public. For example, Dr. Francis Collins, the director of the NIH and the former director of the Human Genome Institute, has given interviews, testified before government committees and written the critically acclaimed book "The Language of Life: DNA and the Revolution in Personalized Medicine" in order to illuminate the importance of genomic research. He has proven himself an invaluable asset in bridging the gap between researchers and the general public. Of course, Collins is not alone. Academic leaders who strive to enlighten the general public also include Paul Krugman, Atul Gawande, Richard Dawkins and Jared Diamond, to name a few. These scholars all write in a style that is accessible to readers without academic backgrounds. Through their works, laymen have been able to dip their toes into the pools of economics, medical practice, evolutionary biology and anthropology.
These writers may not be able to present complete pictures of complex academic topics, but they allow the public to catch a glimpse of some of the remarkable work being done by contemporary researchers. Academics must take it upon themselves to explain the importance of their work to the general public in order to ensure future support for their fields. The institutions producing these scholars (I'm looking at you, Dartmouth) should ensure not only that their graduates have the ability to write coherently, but also that future academics have the ability to communicate their works to a general audience. By fostering public intellectuals, we will be fostering an intellectual public.
