Research translation for flat earthers
Talking common sense with Vitomir Kovanović
“Would somebody think, 50 years ago, that in 2024 we would be talking about flat earth being a serious movement? You know what I mean, how ridiculous is that?”
People don’t think academics do much, at least nothing of any real value. This sentiment is reinforced, according to Associate Professor Vitomir Kovanović1, by media entities that can misinterpret and misrepresent academics’ work. Intentionally, or not. At the same time, many academics rely on media outlets to connect their work with these same audiences who fail to appreciate what it is that they do.
On top of this, academics are made to compete with all manner of public intellectuals, content creators and influencers for attention. Kovanović states, “Especially in the days of social media, everybody can have a voice. And if you are, as an academic, being quiet, essentially you’re allowing a media space to others.” Academics are conceding the public sphere.
In doing so, “it’s not allowing people to benefit from the research.” As institutions fail to connect their research with diverse audiences its impact is stifled. And negative sentiment perpetuates.
A media landscape saturated with charismatic characters. The sheer volume of online content. The depth of internet rabbit holes. Kovanović recognises the challenges academics must face when sharing their work, the efforts it takes to engage a broader audience. But, Kovanović believes, academics have to find space in this mess.
“Competition is driving us away from the audience where as this craziness, of social media and all of that, is bringing all kinds of people to have a voice.”
“It is a big problem, in many ways it divides the society.” Division between the intelligentsia and those outside. Yet,
“Academics have almost no incentive to intervene. They just quietly sit on the side doing their papers to get promoted. It’s weird. It’s bad.”
Academics should be leading discourse and shaping public opinion. But they won’t achieve this on scraps thrown by the mainstream media. As society comes to terms with something like generative artificial intelligence, academics should be at the head of the table2. But, right now, they’re not even turning up to dinner. “You really need to be there to discuss these issues”, suggests Kovanović.
Considering the need to connect his own research, in education, with teachers to see it applied in practice “teachers are very busy, extremely busy, and getting their time is very tricky.” And academic styles make matters worse, “the way the things are written, made in the most obscure way possible so the practitioners can’t apply that. And, of course, the academic publishing model which, you know, pay-walled and things like that. So, all of those things contribute.” There is an abundance of high quality, hugely valuable research but it offers little to society when it can’t be applied.
Kovanović addresses another competitor,
“For example, our education technology. We can publish as much research as we want, if it’s all paywalled and written in an obscure way, and then there will be a company coming ‘hey, yeah we developed this tool, buy it and look how shiny it is.’ They actually have way more impact on it”.
Outreach and engagement are critical for academics to have “impact on practice”. If nobody even knows what academics are doing, especially the practitioners in a researcher’s own field, research wastes away. Kovanović asks, if research isn’t being applied in practice “who cares? It doesn’t really matter that you published the papers if it’s not having any impact on the practice.” Journal articles are the documentation of knowledge, the repository of record. But it is only when knowledge is actually applied that it can lead to impact3.
Engaging broader audiences, beyond your peers, delivers clear and present benefits. According to Kovanović, Academics can “establishing yourself as a leader in a field. Establishing your centre as some, you know, leading institution known for something and things like that.” Adopting a more strategic perspective towards engagement, the point isn’t self-promotion. It is to achieve something.
“We want to have engagement because that will lead to something else. So whether it’s more funding, money, reputation, what ever that might be.”
But engagement is typically a long game, taking the time to foster relationships that might pay dividends in the future. This approach is in stark contrast of a common short-sightedness universities succumb to. They want results, they want them to be easy and fast. This clash of attitudes restricts and limits researchers, unable to achieve their full potential.
Kovanović raises a point, academics know how to engage audiences. And there are plenty of examples from which academics can draw inspiration. “The problem is finding the time and having an incentive”. For Kovanović, if institutions started to care more about public engagement academics would actually do it. And do it well.
“People know how to engage. They could engage. The biggest problem is setting them so they want to do that. Especially juniors, who are actually, would be way better, better positioned, more closely relatable to, you know, better know those technologies. They’re also very passionate about those things. The way we are setting up the structures is not really supporting that.”
Kovanović believes that “People still, I think, do a lot given how badly incentivised they are.” Career progression is, generally speaking, dependent on funding and publications. Tangible and easily quantified measures of success. Engagement and outreach, creating content to share research in creative and innovative ways takes time.
So, if you dedicate time to research translation for non-academic audiences, “your other bits will suffer”.
Regardless of engagement’s importance, and its potential impact,
“The problem is, at the moment, the competition is so fierce that it’s almost impossible to spend time doing activities like that... that’s all time that you didn’t spend writing the papers or grants.”
Academia can be ruthless. It is tough to strike a balance between the work that is meaningful, for impact oriented academics this might be engagement and outreach, and the work that gets you promoted4. This balance is especially difficult for early and mid career researchers, whose employment is often precarious.
One recurring challenge for academics is their relationship with marketing and communication teams. Kovanović’s own experiences have been positive, “they were fantastic, and did a great job”. But, at the same time, without acknowledgement and the resulting resources, the burden of labour is upon the shoulders of academics. They still have to put in the work, with limited reward5.
According to Kovanović, institutions set the rules. But if universities can address the systemic barriers that prevent academics’ undertaking of meaningful engagement, “that will be really, really powerful”. For many academics, all of this makes sense. Still, for leadership it doesn’t.
“I’m, almost, not sure if they fully understand the potential of that.” That being academics’ engagement on platforms like YouTube. He considers popular misconceptions, “that’s just kids watching YouTube. They want to tap into industry partners.” This perspective, admittedly an assumption though one stemming from experience, neglects the fact that industry partners are online audiences too. With the popularity of podcasts and online video, there’s a good chance prospective industry partners are engage on these platforms.
As Kovanović states, academics engage non-academic audiences with an objective. A goal that will, ultimately, benefit an institution just as much as the researcher.
Reputation. Prestigious collaboration. Maybe even cold hard cash.
An interesting postscript:
With the demise of twitter, according to Kovanović, “LinkedIn is becoming more and more prominent”.
“Linked is actually becoming a far more important platform… Twitter was definitely far more dominant, now days it’s actually LinkedIn being the place where academics are. And I think that’s good.”
For academics keen to engage with industry, and see their research applied in practice, LinkedIn can be a valuable platform because “many different professions use it.” It is possible to engage diverse audiences and even achieve academic goals.
Kovanović believes research is more easily discovered on social media platforms like LinkedIn than through academic channels such as Google Scholar.
Check this out if you’re interested in making better research videos.
Associate Director (Research Excellence and Communication) of the Centre for Change and Complexity in Learning (C3L), University of South Australia.
The same could be said for economic reform, foreign policy, education, healthcare, etc.
Perhaps with the exception of basic science.
I was recently told, by a professor, that universities pay you to do the things you doesn’t want to do. Not the things you do.
Academics, often, also question the value and benefit (to them) of marketing and communication. Feeling that their work can be corporatised, and resulting in content that does not reflect them or resonate with their audience.