Dissertation
In my research, I trace the relationship between expertise and literacy, re-envisioning expertise as embodied, relational, and shaped by differences in identity. My dissertation, “‘Anyone Can Be a Scientist’: The Construction of Expertise and Citizenship in Citizen Science Literate Activity,” argues that citizen science projects are exemplar spaces where people with different constructions of expertise collaborate to conduct and communicate science. To make my argument, I interviewed 40 citizen science participants and coordinators, focusing on two focal projects: the Illinois Butterfly Monitoring Network and the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail and Snow Network. I employ citizenship studies to explore the tension between efforts to expand access to science and barriers to recognition of citizen science expertise. Citizen scientists and coordinators enact rich literacies, constructing disparate expert and amateur identities to navigate the rhetorical boundaries of hegemonic science. I contribute to research on science communication by outlining the unique ways in which citizen science communication is shaped by embodied scientific practice, mediated by documentation technologies, and indexed by participants’ positionalities. My research can be used to center public audiences in STEM writing classrooms, to inform WAC programs developing expanded forms of communication with disciplinary faculty, and to give writing students a space to build disciplinary expertises.
Observation Bubbles and Rain Gauges: Seeing, Sensing, and Being in C* Science Communication
Abstract: Writing studies research helps reveal the multitude of audiences and genres in c* science communication, which trouble expert and non-expert binaries (Reid, 2017; Melenbacher, 2019). In my research, I interviewed c* science participants and observed c* science field workshops in the Illinois Butterfly Monitoring Network (IBMN) and Community Collaborative Rain, Hail and Snow Network (CoCoRaHS) to illustrate how participants negotiate their own identities and expertise within science. I argue that these negotiations are embodied, affective, and inherently tied into broader conversations around science communication.
Theory
Multimodality
Multimodality is a concept that emerged from the New London Group, a group of ten researchers and educators who argued we should approach meaning-making as multiple and intertwined with teaching and analysis. They resisted the notion of “mere literacy,” or literacy that isolates written language from other forms of meaning-making. I approach the highly visual, interactive, and place-based communication practices of c* science from a multimodal perspective.
Literate Identity
Building from multimodality, literate identity describes the way we make meaning of the world around us through visual, linguistic, spatial, gestural, and aural means. Literate identity calls us to consider the long chains of doing, being, and sensing that make up people’s lives as writers. As Paul Prior (1998) describes, literate identity is “not only a process whereby texts are produced, exchanged, and used, but also part of a continuous sociohistoric process in which persons, artifacts, practices, institutions, and communities are being formed and reformed” (p. 139). Through this framework, we can see c* science writing as situated in specific ecosystems, represented across modes, embodied in acts with scientific tools, and extended across long natural histories.
Methodology
Research Questions
What does expertise mean to citizen scientists? What expert and non-expert identities do citizen scientists draw on when participating in citizen science?
What perceptions of expertise affect literate activity in citizen science settings?
What literate strategies do citizen scientists use when participating in citizen science?
What notions of citizenship and civic literacy do scientists draw upon when they communicate in citizen science settings?
How is scientific becoming enacted in citizen science literate activity?
Methods
Survey of c* science participants
Interviews with c* science coordinators and participants
Text collection and genre analysis
Focus group with c* science coordinators from different projects
Observations of c* science trainings and activities
Findings
Genres in C* Science Communication
The genre map below calls attention to the rich and varied kinds of communication—the network of literate activity—created within and extending from citizen science projects. The genres in this map represent those I was able to collect and observe, so do not represent all of the literate activity emerging from these projects. Altogether, the map gives a sense of the range of audiences, contexts, and purposes that citizen scientists of every level take up when engaging with this set of practices.
Genre map representing texts created within (and extending beyond) the Illinois Butterfly Monitoring Nework (IBMN) and the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail & Snow Network (CoCoRaHS). IBMN texts are green, CoCoRaHS are in purple, and genres shared by both are in yelllow. The genres are linked to shared purposes, represented by blue circles in the center.
Writing, Affect and Embodiment
Through c* science practices, participants learn to re-see their environments and construct collaborative visions of protocol.
IBMN
Observers learned to walk slowly and keep their sightings within a 40-meter bubble, becoming experts in their route and influencing local land management practices. They also built community through communication practices both in in-person field workshops and meetings, and online through social media and email. Using tools like forms and field guides, they learn to read the markings of butterflies that frequently diverge from idealized specimens, and navigate uncertainty around documentation practices.
“I'm walking out there with field guides, clipboard, special binoculars, backpack. I am slow walking, I'm taking my time and really looking, and so I'm like a spectacle in a way…and not a bad way…people come up and they say, ‘Well, what are you doing?’ And I say, ‘Well, I am doing this study and we're doing it down here in southern Illinois because all the studies are done in northern Illinois, and we're going to show them what we have down here. Let me tell you about what we're looking at. Let me show you those beautiful butterflies. Let me tell you about invasive plants,’ and here we take off…it goes on and it goes on…people who come out and go strolling and hiking in the state forest, they're kind of interested…and I'm trying not to be heavy-handed about climate change, but I'm saying there are some changes. This is how you can also help.”
-Pat Dunbar, Volunteer co-coordinator for the Southern Illinois branch of IBMN
CoCoRaHS
Rain gauge monitors become backyard experts, gaining a better understanding of their local ecosystems by learning specific precipitation monitoring methods. They learn to measure at the meniscus, taking significant figures into account, and come to appreciate the importance of accuracy and 0 measurements. CoCoRaHS monitors communicate with family and friends, and some draw on precipitation measurements in their advocacy around issues
like climate change and flood management.
I enjoy going out every morning as part of my routine now, and looking at the rainfall measurement, and reporting it in the little app. It's just, for some reason, the most exciting thing in the whole world.
-Margaret Howard, CoCoRaHS Observer
Possible Interventions for C* Science Leaders
Embodiment & Affect
Consider how identity (including race, disability, gender, sexuality, and religion) can lead to exclusion of certain kinds of bodies from science spaces
Create safety and access guides outlining physical expectations and accommodations
Documentation
Consider how protocol are represented differently across modes (guidelines, videos, in-person training)
Talk about uncertainty around documentation practices
Represent c* scientists’ voices directly in dissemination and list them as co-authors where possible
Training
Integrate instruction about language precision and accuracy in training
Talk about the possible audiences and purposes of written material that c* scientists produce
Advocacy
Create space to discuss the political (local and global) implications of c* science work
Organize workshops around advocacy communication challenges, such as talking about climate change
References
Ball, Sheppard, J., & Arola, K. L. (2022). Writer/designer : a guide to making multimodal projects (Third edition). Bedford/St. Martins.
CoCoRaHS. (2023). Community Collaborative Rain, Hail and Snow Network. https://cocorahs.org/
IBMN. (2023). Illinois Butterfly Monitoring Network. https://ibmn.org/
Mehlenbacher, A. R. (2019). Science communication online: Engaging experts and publics on the Internet. The Ohio State University Press.
Prior, P. (1998). Writing/disciplinarity: A sociohistoric account of literate activity in the academy. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Reid, G. (2017). Shifting networks of science: Citizen science and scientific genre change. In Scientific Communication: Practices, Theories, and Pedagogies (pp. 19–38). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315160191
#POSTERS #Communication #writing #documentation #genre #embodiment #affect #training #Advocacy #identity