LIT HoMES learns from informal science experts: A visit with Dr. Erika Shugart
By Nicholas Garafola and Amit Singh
In order to start thinking about which kind of arrangements would best suit our planned February summit, the Project LIT HoMES team was fortunate enough to consult with an expert on the topic, Erika Shugart. Erika has worked in the field of informal science education for the past 16 years, most recently as the Director of Communications and Strategic Marketing for the largest single life science membership organization in the world. Additionally, she consults with organizations in helping them engage more deeply with their audiences on topics related to science.
In our conversation with Erika, we learned that intentional changes in discussion arrangements can improve group outcomes. One book that Erika recommended, The Surprising Power of Liberating Structures by Keith McCandless and Henri Lipmanowicz, introduces alternative group structures and provides instruction on how to use each structure to maximize interest, engagement and contribution from each member of any group setting.
The standard approach to group decisions is to reach a conclusion as a small group, then communicate the decision among the larger group. The general tips below hint at the some of the best practices suggested by Dr. Shugart and the McCandless and Lipmanowicz book that the LIT HoMES team will consider as we approach our February symposium.
Major Lesson Categories for Group Engagement
Arrange a flexible and comfortable venue. The rooms that house the group should permit facing discussions and brainstorming. Furniture should allow people to face each other and develop small discussions. Technology and materials should allow participants to reflect individually and within small and large groups.
Move away from the podium. Regardless of the conversation topic, the speaker’s position relative to the audience is critical. If the speaker is physically elevated or separate from the group, the message might not be well received. The speaker should be located among the group at the same elevation.
Relinquish control of discussions. Some level of facilitation is beneficial, but a discussion should not be “led” by an expert. Structured discussions define purposes and therefore restrict the outcomes of a group. Alternatively, a facilitator can bring a group together and establish context, then allow the group to set goals and formulate strategies for meeting them. The facilitator should help the discussion group track progress.
Avoid dominant presentations, speeches or lectures. The distribution of participation affects group interest, buy-in and outcomes. Liberating structures include elements such as equal time for all discussions and time for individual reflection, followed by discussion in pairs and in increasingly larger groups.
A common theme in many of these best practices is to be mindful of power dynamics. At our February symposium, we aim to have a wide variety of stakeholders, with a wide variety of backgrounds and experiences. In planning, we need to be sure that we are implementing strategies that elicit buy-in and equal participation amongst all stakeholders.