WEBVTT

00:00:00.921 --> 00:00:05.151
Do you ever find yourself
referencing a study in conversation

00:00:05.175 --> 00:00:08.412
that you didn't actually read?

NOTE Paragraph

00:00:08.865 --> 00:00:10.015
(Laughter)

NOTE Paragraph

00:00:10.633 --> 00:00:13.236
I was having coffee
with a friend of mine the other day

00:00:13.260 --> 00:00:15.985
and I said, "You know, I read a new study

00:00:16.009 --> 00:00:19.178
that says coffee reduces
the risk of depression in women."

00:00:20.175 --> 00:00:25.135
But really, what I read was a tweet.

NOTE Paragraph

00:00:25.476 --> 00:00:27.104
(Laughter)

NOTE Paragraph

00:00:27.128 --> 00:00:28.307
That said --

NOTE Paragraph

00:00:28.331 --> 00:00:29.498
(Laughter)

NOTE Paragraph

00:00:29.522 --> 00:00:33.672
"A new study says drinking coffee
may decrease depression risk in women."

00:00:35.212 --> 00:00:39.672
And that tweet had a link
to "The New York Times" blog,

00:00:39.696 --> 00:00:42.403
where a guest blogger translated
the study findings

00:00:42.427 --> 00:00:44.609
from a "Live Science" article,

00:00:44.633 --> 00:00:46.569
which got its original information

00:00:46.593 --> 00:00:50.037
from the Harvard School
of Public Health news site,

00:00:50.061 --> 00:00:53.355
which cited the actual study abstract,

00:00:53.379 --> 00:00:57.521
which summarized the actual study
published in an academic journal.

NOTE Paragraph

00:00:57.997 --> 00:00:59.147
(Laughter)

NOTE Paragraph

00:00:59.577 --> 00:01:02.172
It's like the six degrees of separation

00:01:02.196 --> 00:01:03.506
but with research.

NOTE Paragraph

00:01:03.530 --> 00:01:04.680
(Laughter)

NOTE Paragraph

00:01:04.703 --> 00:01:08.006
So, when I said I read a study,

00:01:08.030 --> 00:01:14.198
what I actually read was 59 characters
that summarized 10 years of research.

NOTE Paragraph

00:01:14.222 --> 00:01:15.372
(Laughter)

NOTE Paragraph

00:01:16.179 --> 00:01:18.942
So, when I said I read a study,

00:01:18.966 --> 00:01:22.054
I was reading fractions of the study

00:01:22.078 --> 00:01:24.799
that were put together
by four different writers

00:01:24.823 --> 00:01:26.720
that were not the author,

00:01:26.744 --> 00:01:28.077
before it got to me.

00:01:28.823 --> 00:01:30.387
That doesn't seem right.

00:01:30.886 --> 00:01:34.045
But accessing original
research is difficult

00:01:34.069 --> 00:01:37.965
because academics aren't regularly
engaging with popular media.

00:01:38.982 --> 00:01:40.728
And you might be asking yourself,

00:01:40.752 --> 00:01:43.561
why aren't academics engaging
with popular media?

00:01:43.585 --> 00:01:46.553
It seems like they'd be
a more legitimate source of information

00:01:46.577 --> 00:01:47.910
than the media pundits.

00:01:48.760 --> 00:01:49.910
Right?

NOTE Paragraph

00:01:49.934 --> 00:01:51.085
(Laughter)

NOTE Paragraph

00:01:51.109 --> 00:01:54.680
In a country with over
4100 colleges and universities,

00:01:54.704 --> 00:01:56.656
it feels like this should be the norm.

00:01:57.513 --> 00:01:58.663
But it's not.

00:01:59.087 --> 00:02:00.934
So, how did we get here?

00:02:02.505 --> 00:02:05.903
To understand why scholars
aren't engaging with popular media,

00:02:05.927 --> 00:02:08.720
you first have to understand
how universities work.

00:02:09.497 --> 00:02:10.814
Now, in the last six years,

00:02:10.838 --> 00:02:13.458
I've taught at seven
different colleges and universities

00:02:13.482 --> 00:02:14.743
in four different states.

00:02:15.473 --> 00:02:17.355
A bit of an agent extraordinaire.

NOTE Paragraph

00:02:17.379 --> 00:02:18.529
(Laughter)

NOTE Paragraph

00:02:18.553 --> 00:02:21.140
And at the same time, I'm pursuing my PhD.

00:02:21.458 --> 00:02:23.807
In all of these different institutions,

00:02:23.831 --> 00:02:26.866
the research and publication process
works the same way.

00:02:27.232 --> 00:02:30.533
First, scholars produce
research in their fields.

00:02:30.557 --> 00:02:34.708
To fund their research,
they apply for public and private grants

00:02:34.732 --> 00:02:36.410
and after the research is finished,

00:02:36.434 --> 00:02:38.569
they write a paper about their findings.

00:02:38.879 --> 00:02:41.855
Then they submit that paper
to relevant academic journals.

00:02:42.807 --> 00:02:45.180
Then it goes through a process
called peer review,

00:02:45.204 --> 00:02:47.204
which essentially means that other experts

00:02:47.228 --> 00:02:49.323
are checking it
for accuracy and credibility.

00:02:50.553 --> 00:02:52.886
And then, once it's published,

00:02:52.910 --> 00:02:56.006
for-profit companies
resell that information

00:02:56.030 --> 00:02:57.998
back to universities and public libraries

00:02:58.022 --> 00:03:00.223
through journal
and database subscriptions.

00:03:01.038 --> 00:03:03.172
So, that's the system.

00:03:04.188 --> 00:03:08.417
Research, write, peer-review,
publish, repeat.

00:03:09.315 --> 00:03:12.394
My friends and I call it
feeding the monster.

NOTE Paragraph

00:03:13.657 --> 00:03:16.243
And you can see how this
might create some problems.

00:03:17.728 --> 00:03:22.379
The first problem is that most
academic research is publicly funded

00:03:22.403 --> 00:03:24.136
but privately distributed.

00:03:25.268 --> 00:03:29.605
Every year, the federal government
spends 60 billion dollars on research.

00:03:30.498 --> 00:03:32.617
According to the National
Science Foundation,

00:03:32.641 --> 00:03:35.783
29 percent of that goes
to public research universities.

00:03:35.807 --> 00:03:41.045
So, if you're quick at math,
that's 17.4 billion dollars.

00:03:41.707 --> 00:03:42.873
Tax dollars.

00:03:43.667 --> 00:03:46.001
And just five corporations are responsible

00:03:46.025 --> 00:03:48.619
for distributing most
publicly funded research.

00:03:48.643 --> 00:03:52.156
In 2014 just one of those companies

00:03:52.180 --> 00:03:54.881
made 1.5 billion dollars in profit.

00:03:55.505 --> 00:03:56.838
It's a big business.

00:03:57.520 --> 00:04:00.346
And I bet you can see the irony here.

NOTE Paragraph

00:04:00.370 --> 00:04:03.403
If the public is funding
academics' research,

00:04:03.427 --> 00:04:07.847
but then we have to pay again
to access the results,

00:04:07.871 --> 00:04:09.648
it's like we're paying for it twice.

00:04:10.855 --> 00:04:12.164
And the other major problem

00:04:12.188 --> 00:04:14.911
is that most academics
don't have a whole lot of incentive

00:04:14.935 --> 00:04:18.207
to publish outside of these prestigious
subscription-based journals.

00:04:18.988 --> 00:04:21.569
Universities build their tenure
and promotion systems

00:04:21.593 --> 00:04:23.993
around the number of times
scholars publish.

00:04:24.338 --> 00:04:28.593
So, books and journal articles are kind of
like a form of currency for scholars.

00:04:28.617 --> 00:04:32.807
Publishing articles helps you get tenure
and more research grants down the road.

00:04:33.347 --> 00:04:37.677
But academics are not rewarded
for publishing with popular media.

00:04:38.780 --> 00:04:41.422
So, this is the status quo.

00:04:42.002 --> 00:04:44.069
The current academic ecosystem.

00:04:44.820 --> 00:04:47.033
But I don't think it has to be this way.

00:04:47.776 --> 00:04:50.839
We can make some simple changes
to flip the script.

NOTE Paragraph

00:04:52.403 --> 00:04:55.093
So, first, let's start
by discussing access.

00:04:56.069 --> 00:05:00.037
Universities can begin
to challenge the status quo

00:05:00.061 --> 00:05:02.102
by rewarding scholars for publishing

00:05:02.126 --> 00:05:04.895
not just in these
subscription-based journals,

00:05:04.919 --> 00:05:08.847
but in open-access journals
as well as on popular media.

00:05:09.673 --> 00:05:12.633
Now, the open-access movement
is starting to make some progress

00:05:12.657 --> 00:05:13.982
in mini disciplines,

00:05:14.006 --> 00:05:17.037
and fortunately, some other
big players have started to notice.

00:05:18.252 --> 00:05:21.934
Google Scholar has made
open-access research

00:05:21.958 --> 00:05:23.958
searchable and easier to find.

00:05:25.077 --> 00:05:28.291
Congress, last year, introduced a bill

00:05:28.315 --> 00:05:31.754
that suggests that academic
research projects

00:05:31.778 --> 00:05:34.831
with over 100 million or more in funding

00:05:34.855 --> 00:05:36.847
should develop an open-access policy.

00:05:37.488 --> 00:05:42.484
And this year, NASA opened up its entire
research library to the public.

00:05:43.353 --> 00:05:46.614
So, you can see this idea
is beginning to catch on.

00:05:47.585 --> 00:05:50.006
But access isn't just about being able

00:05:50.030 --> 00:05:52.647
to get your hands
on a document or a study.

00:05:53.165 --> 00:05:54.799
It's also about making sure

00:05:54.823 --> 00:05:57.374
that that document or study
is easily understood.

NOTE Paragraph

00:05:57.830 --> 00:06:00.520
So, let's talk about translation.

00:06:03.497 --> 00:06:08.847
I don't envision this translation to look
like the six degrees of separation

00:06:08.871 --> 00:06:10.394
that I illustrated earlier.

00:06:11.847 --> 00:06:15.935
Instead, what if scholars were able
to take the research that they're doing

00:06:15.959 --> 00:06:17.800
and translate it on popular media

00:06:17.824 --> 00:06:20.357
and be able to engage with the public?

00:06:21.672 --> 00:06:23.037
If scholars did this,

00:06:23.061 --> 00:06:26.315
the degrees of separation
between the public and research

00:06:26.339 --> 00:06:27.806
would shrink by a lot.

00:06:28.276 --> 00:06:32.212
So, you see, I'm not suggesting
a dumbing-down of the research.

00:06:32.236 --> 00:06:35.443
I'm just suggesting that we give
the public access to that research

00:06:35.467 --> 00:06:39.403
and that we shift the venue
and focus on using plain language

00:06:39.427 --> 00:06:42.117
so that the public
who's paying for the research

00:06:42.141 --> 00:06:43.942
can also consume it.

00:06:45.395 --> 00:06:48.026
And there are some
other benefits to this approach.

00:06:49.427 --> 00:06:52.290
By showing the public
how their tax dollars

00:06:52.314 --> 00:06:54.458
are being used to fund research,

00:06:54.482 --> 00:06:57.736
they can begin to redefine
universities' identities

00:06:57.760 --> 00:07:01.720
so that universities' identities
are not just based on a football team

00:07:01.744 --> 00:07:03.839
or the degrees they grant,

00:07:03.863 --> 00:07:06.358
but on the research
that's being produced there.

00:07:07.157 --> 00:07:12.141
And when there's a healthy relationship
between the public and scholars,

00:07:12.165 --> 00:07:15.365
it encourages public
participation in research.

00:07:16.673 --> 00:07:19.214
Can you imagine what that might look like?

NOTE Paragraph

00:07:20.188 --> 00:07:21.823
What if social scientists

00:07:21.847 --> 00:07:25.474
helped local police redesign
their sensitivity trainings

00:07:25.498 --> 00:07:29.660
and then collaboratively wrote
a manual to model future trainings?

00:07:30.924 --> 00:07:33.568
Or what if our education professors

00:07:33.592 --> 00:07:36.687
consulted with our local public schools

00:07:36.711 --> 00:07:39.894
to decide how we're going to intervene
with our [unclear] students

00:07:39.918 --> 00:07:42.247
and then wrote about it
in a local newspaper?

00:07:43.411 --> 00:07:46.649
Because a functioning democracy

00:07:46.673 --> 00:07:50.234
requires that the public be
well educated and well informed.

00:07:51.030 --> 00:07:55.339
Instead of research happening
behind paywalls and bureaucracy,

00:07:55.363 --> 00:07:58.624
wouldn't it be better
if it was unfolding right in front of us?

NOTE Paragraph

00:08:00.419 --> 00:08:03.109
Now, as a PhD student,

00:08:03.133 --> 00:08:06.156
I realize I'm critiquing
the club I want to join.

00:08:07.673 --> 00:08:09.276
Which is a dangerous thing to do,

00:08:09.300 --> 00:08:12.674
since I'm going to be on the academic
job market in a couple of years.

00:08:13.347 --> 00:08:16.809
But if the status quo in academic research

00:08:16.833 --> 00:08:19.657
is to publish in the echo chambers
of for-profit journals

00:08:19.681 --> 00:08:22.053
that never reach the public,

00:08:22.077 --> 00:08:25.014
you better believe
my answer is going to be, "nope."

00:08:26.085 --> 00:08:29.514
I believe in inclusive,
democratic research

00:08:29.538 --> 00:08:33.203
that works in the community
and talks with the public.

00:08:33.727 --> 00:08:36.085
I want to work in research
and in academic culture

00:08:36.109 --> 00:08:39.903
where the public is not only seen
as a valuable audience,

00:08:39.927 --> 00:08:42.385
but a constituent, a participant.

00:08:43.066 --> 00:08:46.462
And in some cases even the expert.

00:08:48.852 --> 00:08:52.506
And this isn't just about

00:08:52.530 --> 00:08:55.926
giving you guys access to information.

00:08:56.768 --> 00:09:01.807
It's about shifting academic culture
from publishing to practice

00:09:01.831 --> 00:09:04.521
and from talking to doing.

NOTE Paragraph

00:09:05.458 --> 00:09:09.188
And you should know
that this idea, this hope

00:09:09.212 --> 00:09:11.146
it doesn't just belong to me.

00:09:11.743 --> 00:09:15.672
I'm standing on the shoulders
of many scholars, teachers,

00:09:15.696 --> 00:09:18.672
librarians and community members

00:09:18.696 --> 00:09:22.117
who also advocate for including
more people in the conversation.

00:09:22.912 --> 00:09:25.516
I hope you join our conversation, too.

NOTE Paragraph

00:09:25.540 --> 00:09:26.706
Thank you.

NOTE Paragraph

00:09:26.730 --> 00:09:31.010
(Applause)