Communicating sciences: the other side of the coin

I found very interesting the initiatives of the center for communicating sciences at Stony Brook University. The project looks very interesting and I perceive its purpose as totally necessary. Many times I have been in situations, specially in engineering, where the technical jargon have made my mind confused. I believe for some of us (engineers) effective communication can be a challenge.

However, there is another side of the story. I worked as a field engineer for many years, when in Industry I realized that people was the most powerful resource in every organization I worked for. That motivated me to study people, their behaviors, and everything related to their interaction with organizations. Becoming a social science researcher in an engineering world have been complex. I feel sometimes that I am not being seen as a “serious” researcher and that all my work is based on touchy feelings and holding hands.

I believe sometimes we need to use some kind of technical jargon in order to “look” like a scientist. Some times I have feel the need to make my speech confusing and very technical in order to get the attention of an engineering audience.

For you people in the social sciences, do you feel the same way?

For you technical engineers, do you feel that we need to prove something?

 

This entry was posted in PFP14S. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Communicating sciences: the other side of the coin

  1. east2westjms says:

    Totally agree that we need to speak the language of the field while at the job and look and feel professional. As long as people are able to switch between technical and non-technical explanations at will then everything should be okay.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *