Reporting from the trenches of scientific research
“Vitamin C Can Beat Cancer.” “Prostate Cancer Cured in One Week.” Or, from my (S.D.) own line of work: “Researchers Solve Puzzle of Origin of Life on Earth.” We’ve all seen these overly enthusiastic headlines that promise more than the science delivers. But the real headline should read: “Side-effects of sensationalizing science: Sense of deception in taxpayers and erosion of public trust in scientists.” After the COVID pandemic, we should hold this statement to be self-evident – but what should be done?
Scientists in the trenches of daily research have little time or energy to share their findings with the world outside their laboratories and most practicing scientists lack training in how to do so effectively. Over centuries, science has evolved its own specialized language to ensure precision within the research community, but this very language – the dreaded scientific jargon – creates a barrier to communication with broader audiences. What may feel like everyday language to scientists (“Wait, that’s jargon?”) can sound completely foreign to outsiders – as if they’re staring at an Egyptian tablet without the Rosetta Stone. To bridge science with society, sans the sentimentalization and misrepresentation, practicing scientists must be the ones to communicate their research, and scientific discoveries in general, to the public. Communicating science is not only a direct way to show taxpayers that their hard-earned money is being put to good use, but also a powerful tool for dispelling harmful misconceptions about the scientific method. Isn’t the public justified in feeling outraged when they hear that billions are spent on cancer research, yet read headlines claiming that cancer has already been cured? Imagine how different the conversation around COVID vaccines might have been if scientists had clearly explained, in plain language, how viral genes mutate to escape immunity, and how that’s simply evolution at work. The Rosetta Stone exists, and it is science communication. What we need now is to ensure that the next generation of scientists is equipped to use it.
Science communication is, in many ways, an artistic enterprise – an acquired skill that requires deliberate practice. Yet, most researchers are not actively engaged in science communication, either because they don’t fully recognize its importance or because there are few structured opportunities to develop SciComm skills. Scientists possess a deep understanding of the complexity and nuance of their work, which uniquely positions them to explain both the implications of their findings and the ethos of the scientific method. When scientists communicate directly with the public, they not only convey accurate information but also build trust, enhancing the credibility of science as a whole. In the digital age, where information flows freely and is no longer gatekept by traditional media, scientists have unprecedented opportunities to engage the public directly. It will be most beneficial if early career researchers, such as PhD students and postdocs – who have both the intellectual expertise and the energy, are trained to communicate their research in more approachable ways. Therefore, science communication needs to be included in formal STEM curricula. This inspired me to use the Research!America Public Engagement Microgrant to create multi-module course to train PhD and postdocs. This half-semester course, tentatively named – ‘A Science Communicator’s Toolkit’ will teach popular science writing, the use of visual art to represent scientific concepts, and how to leverage social media for public engagement of science. The modular design allows instructors to integrate the course flexibly into their own existing STEM curricula. While there is a growing body of literature on the philosophy of science communication, this course adopts a pragmatic, outcome-driven approach, reflecting how most practicing science communicators, including the authors, learned the craft. Each module has a distinct deliverable, and these deliverables are inter-connected to reflect the overall course objectives. Students will produce an original popular science article (800-1000 words), create an artwork (scientific illustration, comic-zine, infographic, etc.), ideally complementing the article, and a social media campaign to promote their articles and artwork.
Trialing the Writing module: A virtual workshop on popular science writing
Creating a course with three distinct modules requires strategic collaborations. For the writing module, I partnered with my co-editors at Club SciWri – a popular science publication that has been operating in the SciComm space for nine years and hosts an archive of over 200 articles. Club SciWri is led by Dr. Roopsha Sengupta, with Dr. Ananya Sen, Dr. Sumbul Khan (the co-author of this piece) and myself serving as editors. We organized a virtual science writing workshop to beta test parts of the writing module, with the goal of using a prompt-driven workflow to help participants transform complex scientific concepts into compelling narratives during the workshop itself. The event attracted 80 registrants from six countries across three continents, of whom 60% had never written a popular science article and 80% considered science communication as a viable career path. We have hosted two workshops so far, engaging 17 participants from diverse scientific and educational backgrounds. At least three more workshops are planned this year.
Each workshop consisted of two sessions. In the first session, I introduced the practical importance of science communication, emphasizing its role in professional development as well as public engagement. While building a robust scientific information ecosystem is a noble aspiration, we also acknowledged that career advancement is a key motivator for many researchers. Participants brought topics of personal interest – ranging from their own research and recent manuscripts to exciting scientific developments – and worked through a series of carefully designed prompts. These exercises taught them to identify the central message they wanted to convey through their article, identify and eliminate jargon from their writing, tailor their writing for different audiences, and use narrative storytelling to engage readers without falling into the trap of oversimplification. Participants were then asked to draft their articles using the tools provided. These drafts were reviewed by a panel of Club SciWri editors. The cohort was also divided into peer-review groups, allowing participants to provide feedback from the reader’s perspective. In the second session, we held both general and individualized discussions based on reviews from Club SciWri editors and peer feedback. The final deliverable was an 800-1,000-word popular science article. We received 14 completed submissions from 17 participants, an 82% conversion rate, which is an encouraging outcome for a trial run. Based on editorial review, we plan to publish at least half of these articles as a special series on Club SciWri starting next month. A post-workshop survey showed that participants particularly appreciated the interactive, hands-on nature of the workshop. Notably, self-reported confidence in writing for a general audience rose from 37.5% to 80% following the workshop.
Trialing the Art module: An in-person workshop on ‘Sci-Art’
For the Sci-Art module of the course, I teamed-up with longtime collaborator, Prof. Argha Manna, a science cartoonist and Artist-in-Residence at IIT Gandhinagar, India. With my own limited artistic chops, piloting this module was initially daunting. But as Albus Dumbledore once said, “Help will always be given to those who ask for it”, Argha and I secured a grant to work on our shared dream project: a graphic novel on the origin of life – my primary research focus. This grant enabled Argha to visit the University of Notre Dame, where we advanced our graphic novel project and engaged in a range of science communication and outreach activities. This unique opportunity allowed me to organize a two-day Sci-Art workshop on science comics, led by Prof. Manna. The workshop attracted 20 participants from six different academic programs, spanning undergraduate, master’s, and PhD students, and even postdoctoral researchers and faculty. The workshop’s impact was clearly reflected in pre- and post-workshop survey results: Participants who considered visual art important for science communication increased from 63% to 100%, their confidence in communicating science to non-experts rose from ~40% to 100%, and all participants expressed interest in attending similar events in the future. The workshop concluded with a science-art exhibition featuring the collaborative work between Prof. Manna and me. However, it was the student display board, showcasing the artwork they created during the workshop, that drew the largest crowds. While the metrics were affirming, the most powerful feedback came in the form of participant reflections. Many shared that graduate school had slowly dimmed the artist within them, and that their creative side was rarely acknowledged in academic spaces. That sentiment alone stands as the strongest justification for including this module in the course: to create a space where scientific and artistic identities can coexist, thrive, and mutually enrich science communication.
Science Comics Workshop for students,postdocs, and faculty at Notre Dame. June 5-6, 2025.
Artwork for the science comics workshop displayed at our exhibition at Notre Dame. June 6, 2025.
Where are we on the road to Oz?
There is still much to be done. We are actively developing course materials, including reading lists, lecture slides, workbooks, and discussion prompts. We are also working on trialing the social media module. I look forward to integrating this course into Notre Dame’s science communication curriculum and partnering with other institutions, both locally and internationally, to pilot the course across diverse academic settings. Looking ahead, Club SciWri plans to adapt the material into an asynchronous online format, expanding its reach and accessibility to a global audience. When scientists take an active role in communicating their work, they help build a more informed and scientifically literate society. This course aims to equip researchers not only to explain their science clearly, but also to inspire the next generation to pursue careers in STEM. My own academic journey was shaped by science communicators like Richard Dawkins and Paul Davies, whose ability to convey the wonder of science had a profound impact on me. In the end, it’s about sharing the love of science with anyone willing to listen. To quote another legendary SciCommer, Carl Sagan, “When you’re in love, you want to tell the world.”
Authors:
Saurja Dasgupta is an Assistant Professor of Chemistry and Biochemistry at the University of Notre Dame with a concurrent appointment in the Department of Biological Sciences. His lab uses synthetic, biochemical, and evolutionary approaches to unravel the mysteries of the origin of life.
Saurja obtained his Ph.D. in Chemistry at The University of Chicago, where he studied the structure-function of RNA enzymes or ribozymes. Saurja moved to Harvard to work with Dr. Jack Szostak for his postdoctoral research, where he used laboratory evolution to discover enzymes that may have played important roles in primordial life. Saurja’s scientific dream is to perform the ultimate alchemical experiment – creating life in a test-tube from nonliving matter. Beyond the lab, Saurja loves to engage the community through popular science articles and public lectures. Saurja is an amateur poet and a pretend songwriter.
Sumbul Jawed Khan is the Assistant Editor-in-Chief at Club SciWri. She received her Ph.D. from the Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur and did her post-doctoral research at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. She is committed to science outreach activities and believes it is essential to inspire young people to apply scientific methods to tackle the challenges faced by humanity. As an editor, she aims to simplify, translate, and excite people about current advances in science.
Cover Image generated with OpenAI’s Sora.
