About the role

The Executive Officer has historically been the central hub for all member enquiries and supporter of the National Executive Committee’s projects and initiatives. For the past several years, this is the only paid role at the Australian Science Communicators.

Until recently, the role has been filled by a long-standing employee who has chosen to stand down from the role. This leaves a significant gap in the organisation with many tasks being absorbed by volunteers. We are keen to reduce the number of volunteer hours as a priority.

In the immediate term, we are seeking the support of a temporary contractor who can invoice for their time. As part of our strategic review, it is expected this role will evolve into one or more operational and strategic positions. It is expected the successful contractor will support the design of this.

Key accountabilities

• Provide executive support to the National Executive Committee
• Be the key point of contact for all general office and member enquiries and respond to these in a timely manner
• Use our membership management platform to manage and modify membership information, extract data and reports, raise and edit invoices, and other membership-related tasks
• Manage online account access, subscriptions and services, and keep information up to date
• Manage other administration-related and ad-hoc tasks, keep documentation organised and up to date
• Assist with bookkeeping, invoicing and accounting-related tasks where needed
• Provide event-related support where needed
• Other activities as appropriate and requested by the National Executive Committee

We’re looking for someone who:

• Has excellent communication and customer service skills
• Can manage their own time and priorities
• Has flexibility in their schedule to monitor email inboxes at least once every 24-48 hours and allocate enough time to respond to enquiries when needed
• Can rapidly problem-solve around complex technologies and systems
• Is familiar with the principles of using a CRM and accounting software such as Xero

This role will be contracted at a weekly rate of $300-450 (ex. GST) pending experience and impact. Including additional load during the conference season, the estimated time requirement is between 6 – 10 hours per week (more initially as you become familiar with our systems). Should more consistent time be required, we will appropriately increase the weekly rate to cover.

Please do not hesitate to get in touch via office @ asc.asn.au if you are interested in discussing the role and your suitability. The role will be filled once a suitable candidate has been found.

About the Australian Science Communicators

The Australian Science Communicators is the peak body for science communication in Australia. Established in 1994, it represents a body of over 200 members with an interest in science communication.

2022 and 2023 has been a period of significant change, which will continue until the national conference, held in June 2024 in Perth. Further strategic review of the organisation, its operations and priorities are currently underway.

As a member-organisation of the World Federation of Science Journalists, the ASC qualifies members to access an international press card via the WFSJ. This card will help freelance and other journalists in gaining access to press conferences and official meetings, especially in countries that do not provide national press cards.

If you wish to apply, please fill in the application form on their website, and inform office@asc.asn.au who will then be able to supply you with an email certifying your membership with the ASC as required in Part III of the application. At present, the committee is not in a position to coordinate bulk applications; members will need to apply by themselves.

More information on how to apply, the form and what proof you need to provide can be found here. Please note that there is a cost associated with getting the card. 

New cards are being issued by WSFJ in September, so we recommend you get your application in before September.

Register on Eventbrite

Wednesday 30 August
5-6pm AEST | 4:30-5:30pm ACST | 3-4pm AWST
Zoom meeting (audio and video participants encouraged)

How do we demonstrate our value as science communicators?

Continuing on from the #ASC2023 Conference, Distinguished Prof. Arnan Mitchell, will be chatting and offering up Q&A with his experience at hiring a science communicator and why it’s ‘a damn good investment’.

This webinar aims to give research leaders and science communicators a case study that shows the value of long-term investment in science communication. 

Arnan will speak about how science communication helped him as a research leader – and Director of a research centre – to establish a track record, build reputation, and ultimately secure grants, like the $72M Centre of Excellence he now leads. 

More details can be found on Eventbrite. Don’t forget to register for the link.

This webinar is available to all members of the public.

Register on Eventbrite

This speech was delivered by Prof. the Hon Kim Carr FAHA FTSE to the Australian Science Communicators at the 2023 national conference at the Shine Dome, Canberra, 16 February 2023

---

Late last year, the Bureau of Meteorology tried to rebrand itself.  They issued statements insisting that we should now refer to them as ‘The Bureau’, rather than the BOM.  This somewhat bizarre campaign took place in the middle of a flood crisis across eastern Australia.  This odd idea, combined with poor timing, highlighted a particularly stark example of poor communication.  

The BOM – and I shall stubbornly continue to use what remains a widely popular name – is one of the most recognised and valued public science agencies in Australia. This fact only added to the unpopularity of the name campaign. Such a misreading of the popular mood, and a failure to prioritise what really matters, is a prime example of poor communications which can reflect a deeper problem within our public services.  

As Minister Tanya Plibersek pointed out, “with the severe weather we’re experiencing right now, what matters is timely weather information for communities. Lives are at risk. My focus and the focus of the BOM should be on weather, not branding.” In other words, the reputation of the Bureau of Meteorology has everything to do with the quality and value of its service, not the affectionate nickname which Australians have given it with characteristic brevity and a bit of cheek.

Good science communicators should take note of this unfortunate example.  

Our challenge is not to promote fancy branding and sanitised names – our challenge is to build genuine respect, trust and confidence in science: expressed through our scientific institutions, agencies, research and practitioners.

Many of the pressing problems that confront us, as Australians and as global citizens, will require us to make choices about what to do, when and by whom. To do that well, we need information, and we need it presented to us in a clear, concise and meaningful way.

How can we make intelligent and informed decisions if the information, arguments and options are held tightly by a bunch of experts?  How can we understand the depth and breadth of the challenges we face, if scientists are more worried about what their peers will think of them than in providing fearless and courageous advice?

Science communication is about getting the messages out – early, frequently, and in a language an interested but non-expert can access. 

Science communication is not about dumbing things down; rather it is about taking the community along for the journey at a pace they can keep up with.

Over the last decade, we have seen the merchants of doubt cynically argue against expertise. 

We have seen disturbing trends in the public discourse – trends which should be of concern not just to the science community, but to policy makers, innovators and leaders across all sectors of society.  These trends include:

• An undermining of public confidence in authority generally;
• Hostility to science: for example in regards to vaccines and climate change science to mention only two,;
• McCarthyist smears against some researchers and academics, particularly in regard to China; and
• an undercurrent of resentment directed at universities and other institutions with specialist expertise.

We need to ask ourselves what role science communication can play in restoring trust not just in science and research, but in public institutions more generally.   

We have to consider how science communication can assist in equipping our community for dealing with rapid change.

In the face of acute and seemingly intractable problems, it is all too easy for some people to succumb to pessimism.  

Today I wish to concentrate on science communication as a means of lifting public engagement, of enlightenment and strengthening a sense of wonder about scientific discoveries and ways of looking at the world. 

My simple assumption remains – that good science and research can move people, can influence attitudes and change behaviour.  Back when I launched ‘Inspiring Australia’ at your conference on the 8th February in 2010, I argued that good science can build confidence in democracy.  I stand by that even today.

Reversing the decline in trust in public authorities, in government, in business and in civil society should be a matter of priority for our entire democratic system of government.  

The current government recognises that trust remains the great fault line in modern politics, and that it is why it is so determined to implement its election promises. Politicians know that the ‘trust crisis’ runs deeper than that, with few quick fixes available.

Those of us engaged in scientific pursuits cannot be complacent about how much the work is recognised or valued by the broader community.  Trust in expert knowledge is far less stable than it once was. 

While scientists, researchers and academics still have high levels of authority and credibility, the value of science is not uncontested in the public mind. Think about the ease with which politicians openly acknowledge that scientific advice is no longer the primary determinant of public health responses to ongoing levels of Covid 19 infections. 

In the US, survey results in 2022 by the Pew Research Centre suggested a ten per cent drop in the level of public trust in science and medical scientists from the beginning of the pandemic. In Australia, last year’s 3M survey highlighted a six percent rise in public scepticism about scientific advice.

However, despite this trend, there is still a relatively high level of public support for science. And that gives me confidence that scientists can play an important role in defining what sort of society we aspire to, what sort of society we could be, and in rebuilding economic prosperity and social justice. 

We know that scientists have earned this support through well- grounded research expertise, evidence-based advice and leadership. We know that scientists have a vital role to play in the formulation and implementation of public policy. 

Scientific communicators need a sharper set of tools than ever before. They need to speak and write clearly, so that people from all walks of life can hear and understand the messages, without being patronised or taken for granted. 

This is not just a responsibility to the scientists and institutions we represent, but a civic responsibility to a more democratic, more informed society.

Given the impact of fake news, and the power of social media, it is not surprising that the trust deficit has grown.  This is the evidence of overwhelming survey results both here and abroad.  We have so many examples in recent times of how the power of misinformation and right-wing conspiracies can have frightening and even tragic consequences.  We need look no further than the protests during the height of the pandemic against masks and vaccination, and even more recently, the shocking shootings of police in Wiembilla, Queensland.   

Science communication needs to highlight that science can:

• provide real world solutions to problems that recognise real world effects and that can work for ordinary people, 
• enhance society’s ability to build anew, and 
• offer hope and confidence in the future

To be effective, science communicators need to have an understanding of how public opinion is formed.  And they need to be patient. 

Indeed, a former Chief Scientist, Professor Ian Chubb, once told me that he needed a three-word mantra to match the several of the then Prime Minister. He chose ‘passion, patience, persistence’ as a key to communication and to advice. 

Maybe it’s obvious but let me be clear: there is no point in doing it (or anything of substance) without 

• passion; 
• patience;
• hard work – this is no place for anybody who craves instant gratification;
• persistence – the work is NOT done by one good speech, press release, briefing or meeting with the Minister.  There is always a need for multiple follow-ups to keep the matter in front of busy people. 

Communicators need to understand the scientific method, to be agile, politically aware and credible.  

There needs to be a blending of scientific knowledge with a deep understanding that science works within the morés of the community:  the social licence to operate; and an acceptance that the social sciences and humanities have a role.  

These are not new problems. In 2010, the Labor Government was trying to address the very same problems when we announced the new national  science communications strategy, “Inspiring Australia”.  

Yes, the problems may now be more acute, but they are not new.  

It is the government’s role to create the climate in which science can prosper.

So, there is value in examining the original objectives of the Inspiring Australia program.  

It is important to note that in 2010 ‘Inspiring Australia’ was just one part of a much bigger science and research agenda for the 21st century, which we called ‘Powering Ahead, next steps for implementing a science and research vision for Australia’.

 The 2010 program was part of an integrated policy response.  It sought to address not just science communication, but research workforce development, research infrastructure, and international science and research collaborations.  

The position put within Government in 2010 was that 

• Science and research investment paid economic, social and environmental dividends.  
• attracting young people to science was critical
• science helped improve productivity and helped new jobs and industries
• science could help build public debate about intractable problems, and
• science could aid constructive and mutually beneficial international engagement.

By supporting the Prime Minister’s Science Prizes, the longevity of the program was enhanced. Other elements of the program also assisted. Questacon gave Australia a national Science Communications Hub that helped extend the CSIRO, the ABC and the Chief Scientist’s scientific activities.  Commonwealth leadership assisted the states’ networks and assisted the communications in the humanities and the social sciences through CHASS and FAST.  This program helped lock in Science Week and Science Meets Parliament.  The program was strengthened with the Cabinet giving support to bringing on the SKA bid in the 2011 funding cycle.

Science is a long game. 

To have a Minister in the portfolio for a few months at a time is not conducive to the long game. 

Notwithstanding:  the changes since my day: Gillard, Rudd, Abbott, Turnbull, Morrison, Albanese and multiple Ministers. in 2023, I find the longevity of our program remarkable.  Not only has it survived the changes in political directions of subsequent Prime Ministers, but also the different interests of the various Science Ministers. 

In the forthcoming period of budgetary ‘fiscal consolidation’ , the science community will have to work hard to emphasise the value of maintaining the investment in this as an ongoing program. 

Furthermore, it will be of assistance in that quest if the original breadth of the agenda was reasserted. 

I will remind you that the 2010 Inspiring Australia program was preceded by a major report in 2009 by the steering committee on the National Science Strategy Review chaired by Patricia Kelly. 

This 2009 report was the product of significant research. broad consultation, and detailed involvement of the CSIRO, ABC, the Chief Scientist , Questacon and community organisations. 

The Kelly Report highlighted the need to replace existing programs which were largely uncoordinated and fragmented. It called for national leadership and coherent action by the Commonwealth in mobilising public engagement across the country. 

It is time for another such substantive review. The program in recent years has lost its core focus and has moved away from Questacon and back into the Department. 

Since 2015 the program has been amended with a series of  ad hoc,  miscellaneous initiatives seeking to address short term political objectives, such as digital literacy, women’s participation, school science competitions and entrepreneurship. 

 It might well be argued that we have seen a return to the uncoordinated and fragmented approach of the pre 2010 period.

Science communication is more than just appealing to policy makers.  Science communicators must reach out to the community at large.

I remain concerned that one great group of science communicators, namely our teachers, have been left out of the science communication equation.

School based science education remains under-funded and insufficiently supported.  It is timely to re-examine this program to ensure that it is fit for purpose. 

While teachers are widely considered crucial to advancing an interest in science, classroom science teaching gets little additional support .

Science week is not enough to help under the pump classroom teachers.

It is timely to genuinely refocus science communication’s ambitions on the national interest by emphasising science’s role in building economic prosperity, social justice and democratic values.  

In this ambition we can help create a scientifically engaged Australia.

Science communicators can seek to build a society that is inspired by and values scientific endeavour, that engages with key scientific issues and that encourages young people to pursue scientific studies and careers.

---

Prof the Hon. Kim Carr FAHA FTSE, February 2023

Another public consultation opportunity has opened today, this a dialogue starter around diversity in STEM.

From the Department’s consultation website:

We want to hear your experiences with science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). Your stories and insights will help shape our vision to increase diversity, engagement and skills in STEM, and support pathways for diverse groups into STEM.

We welcome insights from all Australians. We especially welcome input from people in historically underrepresented groups in STEM.

We also welcome insights from organisations who support, employ, educate, learn from, represent or have policies and programs impacting people in STEM

Department of Industry, Science and Resources consultation hub

Go here for more information, and get in touch if you wish to contribute to the ASC’s response. We have until 11 April to provide our first submission.

The ASC, as part of our international engagement, have a seat on the Preparatory Committee for the World Organisation of Science Literacy (WOSL).

Currently WOSL are seeking ideas for projects to select as the international collaborative project for 2023. Their request is below:

We would like to know if any of our member organizations could contribute related projects and resources for sharing in the future. This could include projects related to science education, public outreach, science journalism, or any other relevant fields. We are particularly interested in projects that aim to engage diverse audiences and promote scientific dialogue across cultures.

Proposals need to put forward an application, including key detail such as target audience, who would fund it, and how people can get involved.

If you’ve a potential project or idea, get in touch at office at asc.asn.au and we can chat. We would need to send these ideas through before 16 March so get thinking!

The ASC is underway with a bid to host PCST2027 in Australia.

The current conference committee consists of the following ASC members:

• David Barbalet National Alliances Manager, Questacon – Department of Industry, Science & Resources
• Dr Heather Bray UWA
• Jirana Boontanjai Co-President, ASC
• Niall Byrne Creative Director at Science in Public Pty Ltd
• Dr Tom Carruthers Co-President, ASC; Client Partner, Ogilvy PR
• Melina Gillespie CSIRO; President of South East Queensland Branch, ASC
• Abigail Goff Victorian branch, ASC
• A/Prof Will Grant Australian National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science, ANU 
• Abigail Hils Australian National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science, ANU
• Alison Kershaw Program Manager, Inspiring South Australia
• Prof Joan Leach Director, Australian National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science, ANU
• Clare Mullen Bureau of Meteorology
• Prof Sujatha Raman UNESCO Chair in Science Communication for the Public Good, CPAS, ANU
• Dr Michelle Riedlinger Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Science Communication (JCOM); Senior Lecturer, QUT
• Ruby Stoios Co-Secretary, ASC

The committee is also forming a set of supporting subcommittees to provide advice and support.

The bid is underway, and we will share more on this as we proceed through the process.

Please get in touch if you are keen to be involved.