Science Writing for general public 書寫科普文章

Scientists like me have spent lots of time in our research. We wrote scientific papers to publish our work in scientific journals. However, these papers are usually too difficult for general public, including my friends and family, to understand. Although most of my friends and family "seem" to know that I have worked on something very interesting and very important. But do they really know what I am doing? Nope. The gap between scientists and the general public is even larger and this gas really needs to be filled up. But how? Today I attended a science writing workshop. We talked a lot about what scientists can do and how we can prepare ourselves to write our own work for general public.

像我這種整天泡在實驗室，偶而出野外採樣，耗了好多的時間跟精力去了解未知的海洋環境，雖然自己覺得自己從事的科學研究很重要、很酷，我的家人跟是我身邊的朋友"似乎"也覺得我做的工作很特別，但老實說，大家對我真的在做什麼，真的不太清楚，更不用說一般大眾對於科學研究的認知，那是一個很大的斷層。

尤其在台灣，即使是國高中的教科書，基本上裡面是沒有的收納台灣先端的研究成果，讓我出來讀海洋博士的一個重要轉捩點，是我看到高中教科書中一張台灣附近的海流圖，用的是1960年代日本科學家的研究成果，天啊，台灣的海洋研究並非停留在1960年代，但是為何教科書裡的資料卻不更新呢？所以我知道在台灣，科學研究跟一般大眾認知間的差距，更是大，所以我常常在想要怎樣才能拉近這個差距呢？

一個很重要的一步，應該是踏出我所熟習的科學術語跟科學文章，用簡單的話語，把真正的科學研究精確無誤的傳達給大眾們知道，可是，要怎麼做呢？對我而言，寫科學文章已經很難了，要盡量不用科學術語，卻得把科學的內容完整又"有趣"的介紹給你們，我覺得更難了。今天我們學院辦了一個關於書寫科普文章的研討會，我有所收穫，因此把一些重要的內容放到部落格與你們分享。

In this workshop, we had Dr. Judith Connor from Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI), science writer George Johnson for the New York Times and chief magazine editor Tim Appenzeller from the famous scientific journal "Nature" . 
這個研討會，我們邀請到了美國蒙特利灣水族研究機構的寫作專家，康納博士，幫美國紐約時報寫科學專欄的強生先生，以及著名的科學期刊"自然"的雜誌總編輯阿平宅樂先生。

Dr. Judith Connor is a trained scientists (Ph.D. from UC Berkley and postdoc at Stanford) and now working in a research-intensive "aquarium", her role  is to convert on-going scientific results into easy to understand aquarium exhibit and annual reports. She helps the scientists from MBARI to edit their news press. She has also authored in four scientific history books.
康納博士從有名的柏克萊大學拿到博士學位，曾在史丹佛當博士後研究員，之後就一直在美國的美國蒙特利灣海生館研究機構當寫作專家，她的工作內容包含幫展覽附上文字內容，幫特別的展覽寫教案，包含類似台灣常見的學習單之類的，然後一個重要的工作是幫科學家修改新聞稿。她開玩笑的說，剛開始科學家們對於她的修改都非常反彈 （我似乎看每次從老師那邊拿到他幫我改的文章時，火冒三丈的自己），因為大家都覺得自己嘔心瀝血之作已經是完美的，但長久以來，科學家們開始體會不改成更淺顯易懂的詞句，一般大眾真的轉頭就走了。

Dr. Judith Connor

Here is a link to read more about her:
這個連結可以看到更多關於康納博士的介紹
http://www.mbari.org/staff/conn/

From her talk, she introduced the annual reports published by Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute http://www.mbari.org/news/publications/pubs.html. Click on the link and it will bring you to the pdf version of the reports. There are lots of pictures in these reports and are quite easy to understand. Dr. Connor suggests us to use VISUAL AIDS to help general public to SEE our work. You can actually see how many photos she used in the annual reports. Teachers can get good teaching materials from here too.  
康納博士一個很重要的工作就是幫蒙特利灣海生館研究機構寫每年的年終報告，我自己快速瀏覽了其中一份報告後，真的非常佩服她的工作，想想我自己每次讀一篇科學文章要花多少時間，何況是要去了解那麼多新穎且跨越不同次領域的科學內容，然後用簡易的文字敘述出來。如果你有興趣點進去看的話，往文件的最後面，去看看她到底濃縮多少篇這個機構發表的科學文章而成的一份年終結報。康納博士一直跟我們強調的是，要多利用圖片來幫大眾"看到"我們的科學研究過程與結果，她在年終報告中，就放入了大量的圖片。


A question she posted to us was "why do the public still go to the aquarium to see exhibits while the ocean is right there?" Why? (you should answer this). Her question made me realize that the ocean can be intimidating to many people but the aquarium can always make the ocean/sea appealing. Science writing for general public is exactly what an aquarium does: to take out the fear and let the general public enjoy the science. So now, I have a good idea about my other responsibility. To bring my science to general public and to allow them enjoy the exhibit I display for them.
她提出一個有趣的論點是"當美麗的海洋就在你眼前，為什麼你還要去海生館呢？" 就像台灣的車城的海生館，就在美麗的海邊一樣，為什麼？她的這個問題，提醒了我並不是每個人對於海洋都像我一樣無畏懼的，所以海生館的設立，就可以讓每個人都可以放鬆心情的去學習關於海洋的一切。（燈泡在我腦袋中亮了!!），原來，科普的寫作，就像是海生館一樣，讓對科學有所恐懼的一般大眾們，可以輕鬆的一窺現在最前端的研究。


The next speaker is George Johnson (http://sciwrite.org/glj/). The idea of his recent book "Cancer Chronicles" comes from when his (formal) wife got a cancer in 2003. I really didn't get much of what he talked about because his voice was at the frequency I can't really hear well. Nevertheless, I looked up some of his articles and man... there are a lot. Check this out and read them when you have time http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/j/george_johnson/index.html   
另一個講者是科學專欄的作家，老實說，因為他說話的頻率實在太低了，我很難聽清楚他在說什麼，而且也沒有投影片，所以我趁機上網查了一下他的作品，實在太多了吧！！http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/j/george_johnson/index.html  他的文筆真的很不錯，大家想要多練習科學英文閱讀的，真的可以去看看。

George Johnson

The third speaker is Tim Appenzeller. I extracted some information from his slides and I think they are funny.
第三個講者很風趣，尤其是他投影片的一些內容，真的讓我很會心一笑。

The trouble with editors

·         You can’t escape them, unless you're publishing in blogs

·         They never seem to get your points

·         They are easily bored

·         They ask too many questions

·         They make clumsy changes

·         They have no respect for your time

愛找碴的編輯們

·        你逃不出他們的魔掌的，除非你寫的是部落格文章

·        他們似乎永遠看不到你的重點在哪裡

·        他們很容易感到厭煩

·        他們總是問一大多堆的問題

·        他們把你文章改的一塌糊塗

·        他們對於你的嘔心瀝血之作似乎不屑一顧

What editors hate

·         They hate a very clumsy first draft. Don’t just throw your ideas out and expect the editor will do the cleaning for you. (Tina's face turned red... because this is exactly what I've been doing to my academic adviser).

編輯們最討厭的

他們討厭雜亂無章的初稿，千萬不要想說你就是想要把你超棒的寫作靈感交出去，其他的就讓編輯們幫你修飾與潤稿。（TINA在冒汗中，因為這就是我最常對我指導老師作的事。）

What editors do

·         They look for places where you think are clear but actually they are confusing.

·         They are sharp.

·         They think for the readers.

·         They want you to walk your reader through the entire article.

·         They point out places where you assume your readers know but actually most of your readers don't. 

偉大的編輯們

·        找出你以為描述很清楚，但實際上卻是很令人混淆的地方。

·        他們都很犀利

·        他們總是站在讀者的那一邊

·        他們希望你可以牽著讀者的手，一步一步的走過整篇文章

·        他們會指出一些你認為你的讀者應該已經知道，而忽略未加以解釋的地方。

Self reflection:
My adviser is a very good editor and he is the most patient academic adviser I've ever had. Now seeing what other editor told me what they expect and what they hate. I realize how clumsy a writer I was and how much improvement my adviser has help me to achieve. No one wants their writing to be "criticized" but trust me, you need to feel lucky if some is willing to spend the time to read and criticize your work. It will only help you to make your writing better. Practice makes it better. Revise! Revise! Revise!!!

Okay... not more clumsy first draft to Jim.


There are other fun parts of this workshop. For example, we were asked to read four journal articles about the same scientific paper. I was amazed to see how journalists can "interpret" the same scientific paper so differently. For me as a scientist, I prefer to use objective terms such as "hints, probably" and I do not like dramatic words. However, for general readers like you, would dramatic words and sentences catch your eyes better?

I really enjoy today's workshop and hopefully, I will use this blog to practice my writing for the general public like you. Please feel free to send me your comments so that I can do better and to inspire you more.

卉婷的自我檢討
我有一個非常好的指導教授，他同時也是個很好的編輯，他總是不斷的告訴我Tim今天提的這些重點。這幾年來，在柯恩教授的指導下，我的寫作已經進步相當多了。真的，不然我也不敢建立這個部落格，我以前中文、英文寫作都超破爛的，自己寫的東西，都不想要再看第二次，每次寫作課，草草寫完，交出去，就再也不會回顧了。我想要讓大家知道的是，虛心接受別人的建議跟批評真的是讓自己寫作進步的重要過程，不要排斥別人意見，反而要感謝有人願意花時間讀你寫的文章，並且提出評論。多寫，多改，改了又改，一改再改，才有機會進步。

嗯....再也不能交雜亂無章的出給給柯恩教授收拾殘局了！！

這個研討會另一個有趣的地方是，Shimi （主辦人）讓我們讀四篇科普文章，這四篇文章探討的內容都源自同一篇科學研究報導，讓我很驚訝的是，同一個科學研究，居然可以讓四個記者寫出四篇迥然不同科普文章。這讓我想起台灣媒體的亂象，老是喜歡斷章取義，用聳動的標題，但總是文不對題。從中，我們也討論了，身為科學家的我們，喜歡的是怎樣的科普文風，但我們更想知道的是，"你們"喜歡的文風是怎樣呢？聳動的標題與內容？還是穩穩當當讀像真正的科學文章一樣，不給"是或非"的科學結論呢？ 我們也意識到說，身邊的朋友都期待我們的回答是很確定的，因為如果連當科學家的我們，都不知道問題的真正答案是什麼，你們要何所是從呢？

希望你們能夠藉由我的部落格，給我多一些的建議，這樣我才能夠精進。