---
tags: course support, explainer video
---

# SCRB111

## THE ELEMENTS

here we'll sketch out the elements of the workshop.
* the stage we'll build and the experience we want students to have while entering it
* the initial get-to-know-your-group and get-to-know-the-camera-setup activity
* the main explain-a-figure-from-a-paper activity

### THE STAGE AND THE ENTRANCE

They arrive at 1:30pm and we'll want to have elements set up in the space that frame the experience, deepening their sense of what it is and why it matters.
* let's have some former SciComm projects lying out (folders from MCB81 group projects, for instance, potentially some of the better single page visual explanations from years past and the sessions we've done so far)
* let's have the green screen cut through the table to see 2-4 of our all-time favorite examples of sciComm video assignments (see links below)
* on the table itself, we'll have a disassembled article from a journal (or two on the two tables?) We'll cut it into pieces, just as we do for the shot-by-shot breakdowns of film (and we'll mention this in passing).
* A couple of different ideas for the cutting would work:
1. if in a real hurry, do figure-cluster by figure-cluster and text segment by text segment
2. with more time, do figure-by-figure and paragraph-by-paragraph
3. with LOADS of time, cut each piece of text that leads up to a figure reference, then cut it just after the figure is referenced.
* And for the layout, there are, likewise a couple of things that would work
* have the article entirely re-assembled like a put-together jigsaw puzzle, then have them separate text from image into two streams (would take time, but would be extremely valuable)
* or do the pre-assembly yourself
* in cases 1 and 2 above, having separate text and image strips running parallel would be great (with the two roughly lining up--though this is usually impossible)
* in case 3, assembling so that the images are inserted at the precise moment they're referenced would be great.
* also on the table we'll want to have the usual art supplies, but be sure that they are set up in a way to really emphasize some of the visual moves and mechanics they might want to employ
* like we can have cutting devices set next to a little pile of cuttings from a previous workshop, or a student project illustrating a process, say, so that they don't just see "scissors"---they see scissors+an-example-of-an-arrow-you'd-cut-out-with-scissors-that's-explaining-a-scientific-process (also transparencies and translucent paper or plastic for overlays, bits of string for shifting the positions of line-plots and other data-vis examples, etc)

With this stage assembled there are many things they'll get implicitly
* scientific communication involves an integration of text and images
* the fun art supplies we're providing them aren't in ***opposition*** to "grown-up sciComm"--they're on a ***shared continuum*** . . . and, in fact, these art supplies are *better* than the "grown-up" tools for creating quick visual drafts.

but there are also some things we can say more explicitly
* starting, I guess, with the implicit points above:
* sciComm involves text and visuals
* in the LL we'll use fun kindergarten-ish art supplies not *just* because they're fun, or because they feel like a "break" from grown-up work. Because this ISN'T really a "break"---the fun here isn't in OPPOSITION to the grown-up work of scientific communication, it's really on a shared continuum of visual explanation. We're using these art supplies because they are BETTER than the grown-up visualization tools at quickly prototyping scientific explanation and narrative.
* as we look at these papers, it defamiliarizes scientific articles, and it helps us visualize the way text and images interact.
* at the Bok Center we encounter a bunch of research about how people learn, and there are a couple of interesting things researchers have found that pertain to our activities today
* students can absorb a single stream of words at a time--not two! So if you have words on a slide, and words on a handout, and you're speaking words at them, they can only handle one of these streams of words at a time (and will have to ignore the others). This often forces them to pop back and forth between these streams, having fragmented experiences of each and really not grasping ANY of them in their entirety (ref => Kosslyn book)
* that said, we CAN absorb streams of images and words at the same time, ESPECIALLY if the words are spoken (both Kosslyn and Mayer)--which is one of the things that provides a real justification for our explainer videos
* building on that last point, researchers have demonstrated that learners do best when related ideas and images are brought close together in space and in time. Richard Mayer calls these the "Spatial Contiguity Principle" and the "Temporal Contiguity Principle." You'll probably remember from your time reading today's academic papers that it was a little challenging popping back and forth from the text to the images it references. The extra "cognitive load" this involves isn't a big problem for experienced readers of scientific papers, but it IS a big problem for students or audiences who are trying to keep up with your explanation in realtime.

## THE INTRO ACTIVITY

The first activity has these goals
* get the students excited, invested and activated
* help the groups who will be doing the assignment get to know each other
* help them learn where to put their visuals under the overhead camera
* help them practice a single piece of visual grammar (like an arrow for a process, say, or a 2-axis plot they can interact with) to give them a taste of some of the moves and mechanics they'll deploy in today's activity (and in their final projects)

In their groups, students will develop a 2-axis graph on which they can plot the members of the group. Clearly this sounds abstract! So we'll prime them with a few already-made graphs and ideas for axes. Examples:
* the 4 binary oppositions that structure the Myers-Briggs test are an obvious way to go, and these "get to know your team" activities often involve personality-test-adjacent reflective activities
* MK and Sophie did "brute force" vs "thoughtful planning" and "serious" vs "playful" (with Sophie )

1. team name
2. 2 binaries on 4 cards
3. the introduce their binaries
4. they plot their members
5. JK or leader gets them on the spot to render things more complex and animated, asking about what would get something to move within the grid . . . adding a line of force or tension to concretize a relationship and getting them to reflect on it, etc.

## LINKS

taste receptors explainer
<iframe title="vimeo-player" src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/225859223?h=2a94036ce3" width="640" height="360" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

vox on salamanders
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cnrSa18-onc" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>