Comments on: Revisiting the Civic Scientist http://2020science.org/2009/02/01/revisiting-the-civic-scientist/ Providing a clear perspective on developing science and technology responsibly Mon, 21 May 2012 14:01:46 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: 2020 Science in 2009 – and a chance to win a rather nifty 2020 Science Mug! http://2020science.org/2009/02/01/revisiting-the-civic-scientist/#comment-47613 2020 Science in 2009 – and a chance to win a rather nifty 2020 Science Mug! Sat, 06 Feb 2010 03:12:52 +0000 http://2020science.org/?p=826#comment-47613 [...] [...] [...] [...]

]]> By: Thank goodness for Sir Robert http://2020science.org/2009/02/01/revisiting-the-civic-scientist/#comment-1286 Thank goodness for Sir Robert Tue, 03 Mar 2009 18:11:22 +0000 http://2020science.org/?p=826#comment-1286 [...] (Dec 24 2008) Nanotechnology, science and public engagement—lessons from the UK (Jan 13 2009) Revisiting the Civic Scientist (Feb 1 [...] [...] (Dec 24 2008) Nanotechnology, science and public engagement—lessons from the UK (Jan 13 2009) Revisiting the Civic Scientist (Feb 1 [...]

]]> By: Andrew Maynard http://2020science.org/2009/02/01/revisiting-the-civic-scientist/#comment-354 Andrew Maynard Wed, 04 Feb 2009 11:49:47 +0000 http://2020science.org/?p=826#comment-354 Tom, I couldn't agree more. Thanks for highlighting this. One concern I didn't voice in the post is that over the past few years various people have watered the concept down - even subverted it - so that it is simply another label for one-way communication. Tom,

I couldn’t agree more. Thanks for highlighting this.

One concern I didn’t voice in the post is that over the past few years various people have watered the concept down – even subverted it – so that it is simply another label for one-way communication.

]]> By: Tom Zinnen http://2020science.org/2009/02/01/revisiting-the-civic-scientist/#comment-340 Tom Zinnen Tue, 03 Feb 2009 22:34:28 +0000 http://2020science.org/?p=826#comment-340 Yes, the key to better communication and engagement is to develop our talent to listen. Yet how many programs geared to engaging the public in science intentionally develop--let alone emphasize--the skill of listening? In conversation, the ears matter as much as the mouth. We need more programs for scientists that cultivate listening and conversation. Neal Lane's original vision for the civic scientist got it right; but watch out--you'll find people who use the phrase as just another term for a well-tuned speaker who is willing to talk to elected officials and policy-makers about controversial topics. Yes, the key to better communication and engagement is to develop our talent to listen. Yet how many programs geared to engaging the public in science intentionally develop–let alone emphasize–the skill of listening?

In conversation, the ears matter as much as the mouth. We need more programs for scientists that cultivate listening and conversation.

Neal Lane’s original vision for the civic scientist got it right; but watch out–you’ll find people who use the phrase as just another term for a well-tuned speaker who is willing to talk to elected officials and policy-makers about controversial topics.

]]>