Let’s start at the start…
POSTnotes are four page briefing documents, or ‘notes’, on current science and technology issues relating to science policy. These documents are a non-biased representation of current facts and research, written for non-specialist audiences. The notes are sent to MPs with the aim of making sure that the decision makers are as informed as possible before making policy decisions or changes.
The Science in Policy group at Sheffield University ran a competition from December 2014-January 2015, in which competitors write their on version of a POSTnote; rebranded as ‘SiPnotes’. Participants were split up into small inter-disciplinary teams, given a hot topic to write a SiPnote on and then two months in which to complete it in. The competition reached its finale with a ‘Whistle-stop tour’ event consisting of five minute presentations on these hot-topic SiPnotes, a prize giving , and a speech from the Rt Hon David Blunkett MP. The event was open to all; the audience filled up and listened to eight SiPnote submissions on the following ‘hot topics’:
- Nature: Wellbeing and Health
- Social Mobility and Science Education
- The Effects of Wind Turbines on Wildlife
- Precision Agriculture
- Autonomous Robotics in the Home
- mHealth Apps
- Parkinson's Disease
- Climate Change and Food Security
During the competition I worked as part of a five person group on the SiPnote ‘The Effects of Wind Turbines and Wildlife’. I can comfortably say that SiPnotes are really hard work to write and even harder to make non-biased (I fear my group did not do the latter very well). I left the SiPnote prize giving event with the impression that all SiPnotes were extremely high quality and that all participants enjoyed the process, meeting policy interested individuals and took away valuable writing (and planning) skills. The organisers deserve credit and thanks for a well thought out and run competition.
The prize giving ceremony started off with two SiP group committee members, Helen and Beth, explaining both what the Science in Policy group do, want to do, how members have been involved with the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, and of course a crash course into POSTnotes. We went on to have our ‘whistle-stop tour’ into the eight POSTnote topics listed above. I will try a ‘whistle-stop summary’ for people who weren’t in attendance.
We heard about how green space can give value to our health, both physically and mentally; how social mobility is linked to education and how science education can contribute to good life choices, and therefore back round to social mobility. We heard about how wind turbines are a positive contribution as a renewable energy source, but may pose a threat to local wildlife without careful planning. We heard about both the high-tech precision agriculture methods, and the helpful resource saving techniques that are far simpler and easier to implement. We heard about autonomous robots, and how these may not be as ‘dystopian’ as science fiction films would have us believe; they can be as simple as a robotic hoover. We heard about the distribution and types of mobile health applications available to us (97,000 apparently!). We had an informative presentation on the biology of Parkinson's, drug treatments, and the impacts that specialist health care has on both patients and their carers. We also heard about how climate change may impact food security on every continent and that this brings knock-on effects for all.
Now, breathe….
Rt Hon David Blunkett MP then gave a humbling keynote speech on his take on science in policy. He implored young people to learn about policy and get involved to make sure a clear and accurate message regarding our science research and these ‘hot topics’ get through to both MPs and the public equally. He shared with us how he looked forward to a time where good researchers were seen more in the media for their positive research and technology developments. He also shared several remarkable anecdotes about his education that made a well rounded speech crediting the value of university level study, both in a science and the social sciences.
The winning SiPnote was on the topic of Social Mobility and Science Education and (very well deserved). Second place was awarded to the SiPnote on mHealth Apps (still getting over the fact there are 97,000!) and third place went to the SiPnote on Parksinson’s Disease. (See www.sheffieldscienceinpolicy.com/postnote-competition-resources.html for more information on the competition, prize winners and all the completed SiPnotes.)
Personally, I was very happy to see what my ‘competitors’ had produced over the 2 month competition, as well as learning more about ‘hot topics’ I may have otherwise been too lazy to ‘google’. Of course, I was a little disappointed that my SiP note and ‘whistle-stop slideshow’ (including a photo of a dead bat) didn’t waggle me a House of Commons goody bag like the third place prize… there’s always next time.
Both the prize-giving ceremony, writing the SiPnote, and the SiP team have inspired me to stop ignoring the role we as researchers should play in ensuring research and facts are represented properly in society, and how we can help get the information to the places they need to go for change (POSTnotes!). It also further emphasised to me that research impact is a ‘real thing’, and does exists outside of funding and publishing requirements; it is not to be ignored or scoffed at.
I’ll be sitting somewhere at the future SiP events and listening intently with my learning cap on!
Some helpful links
- Sheffield Science in Policy group: www.sheffieldscienceinpolicy.com
- Original blog post: www.sheffieldscienceinpolicy.com/blog/reflections-on-the-postnote-competition
- POST and POSTnotes: www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/offices/bicameral/post/publications
- Blog from winning SiPnote team member Katie Grayson thinkaheadsheffield.wordpress.com/2015/03/18/see-through-the-hype
