Engaging Scientists in Policy Discourse

Abstract

Today’s science is largely funded by taxpayer dollars, and because of this, scientists have a responsibility to ensure that their research is being effectively communicated back to taxpayers and to the policy makers who determine the distribution of those funds. The importance and impact of effective science communication is compounded when research is used to inform legislative action. Science impacts policy, and policy can impact science. However, the formal education of scientists does not usually include specific training on interacting with science policy. This article describes strategies for engaging with science policy—starting with simple and easy policy actions, and delving into more complex event planning and group organizing tasks. Whether advocating for evidence-based policies or policies that impact the scientific enterprise or STEM education, practicing skills pertinent to science policy can help you gain comfort in translating your experiences and experiments into lasting change.

INTRODUCTION

Deepening partisanship in the public’s distrust of science (Funk, Hefferon, Kennedy, & Johnson, 2019; NASEM, 2017; Tsipursky, 2018), increased competition for science funding (NIH RePORT, 2019) and a continual widening of the “research-policy gap” (Cairney & Oliver, 2017) have created an environment that necessitates scientists’ involvement in policy discussions. For established investigators, early-career scientists, and trainees (undergraduate students, graduate students, and postdoctoral fellows) alike, the main barriers to policy involvement tend to be a lack of comfort with communicating science to policy makers coupled with a perception that these discussions require large time commitments. To overcome these activation-energy requirements, we have found that exposure to hands-on experiences was especially effective; these experiences included specific education on the meaningful roles that scientists can, and should, play in public policy. These roles have been described by Yvette Seger, director of science policy at the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB), who breaks science policy into two main categories: science for policy and policy for science (Seger, 2015). She describes science for policy as the use of scientific data to develop evidence-based legislation. Policy for science refers to the public policies that impact the practice and sustainability of science, science education, and the scientific enterprise.

Carl Hart, chair of the department of psychology at Columbia University and an expert on neuropsychopharmacology and drug policy, has stated that “science should be driving our drug policies, even if it makes us uncomfortable” (Hart, 2019). Perhaps science should be driving all of our policies, regardless of how that makes us feel. We are in a time when science and scientific advancement are being fought against by certain policy makers and a vocal and growing section of the public who do not seem to understand why they should support science (Ledford, Reardon, Mega, Tollefson, & Witze, 2019; Ortiz, 2019; Wolchover, 2017). Climate change is leading the world toward a human-caused mass extinction, and politicians are still debating the cause of climate change, even though there is clear scientific consensus (NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 2019; Penn, Deutsch, Payne, & Sperling, 2018). Scientists must take it upon themselves to engage in policy discussions, to clearly communicate rigorous science to policy makers, and to continue to reiterate the progress that science has enabled over time.

Out of the need for a scientific voice in policy discussions and a desire to improve the world, graduate and undergraduate students across the country are beginning to create opportunities to prepare future generations of scientists to engage in policy discourse. This article describes the techniques that graduate students from the Health Sciences Student Advocacy Association (HSSAA) at the Health Sciences campus of Washington State University (WSUHS) have used to introduce their fellow trainees to science advocacy. We detail tips and tools that can be used or adapted on university campuses to ensure that these efforts accommodate the students’ busy schedules and create a culture of science training that includes science policy and communication in all fields of science, technology, engineering, and medicine (STEM) to create the change needed to propel society into the future.

SCIENTISTS: MEET POLICY

Among academic scientists, there is often a stigma surrounding perceived political involvement. Being a champion of evidence-based legislation and policies that support science is not inherently political or partisan, however. Although support of certain evidence-based legislation might align scientists with certain political or partisan ideals in the eyes of the public (Vraga, Myers, Kotcher, Beall, & Maibach, 2018), this should not be considered a barrier to involvement. Supporting science’s benefits to society should be the ethical responsibility of the scientific community. Recent surveys by the Pew Research Center show an uptick in overall public confidence in scientists, an increased demand for scientists’ involvement in policy discussions, and a substantial divide along U.S. political party lines for confidence in science (Funk et al., 2019). This social environment, coupled with stagnating science funding (Erickson, 2019; Mervis, 2017), must propel scientists to engage in political discourse. It is no longer sustainable to expect the public or policy makers to fully understand the importance of science to society without the help of scientists. This section covers introductory events and activities to encourage science trainees, faculty, and staff to engage with science policy.

Priming Scientists for Policy Engagement

STEM students across the United States have been forming advocacy groups to introduce science policy and policy engagement to their campus communities. These groups provide opportunities to exercise skills that are not explicitly taught in traditional science curricula, such as science communication, networking, and coalition-building. On the WSUHS campus, we formed the HSSAA student advocacy organization to address these needs. HSSAA teaches by example, pursuing advocacy—at the campus, state, and federal level—on educational issues, evidence-based policies, and policies that affect the scientific enterprise (funding, controlled substances, etc.) to complement our STEM education programs. The policies addressed were selected with care to include the higher education and scientific issues important to the WSUHS campus community, which provided a gateway to understanding and which generated both interest and support for evidence-based policies within the state and federal government.

Science policy can be a daunting topic to engage with. When planning introductory events related to science policy, aim to think outside the box, to find ways to make them fun and engaging. Ultimately, the goal of these events should be to develop a level of comfort in exploring and communicating the impact of science on policy and policy on science with policy makers. Policy makers include any person with the ability to make policy changes: from state and federal legislators, to city officials, to campus leaders such as chancellors, presidents, deans, department chairs, and student leaders. A student body first needs to be willing to engage with and understand the policies before they can begin to engage with the policy makers.

Planning a captivating science policy event sometimes requires opportunistic thinking. Every university campus has times of the year when the student body may be in better spirits. An effective approach may be to capture the energy and spirit of the winter holidays with a signature yearly event. In December 2018, HSSAA hosted an event called “Letters to Santa” designed to educate students on efficiently drafting long-form communication. Participants were asked to write letters that expressed the policy and programming needs that would best support graduate and professional students on campus. They were encouraged to be honest and to address their concerns to “Santa,” thus making the exercise less formal and more fun, which lowered the barrier to entry. Today’s policy makers continue to place high importance on long-form and direct communication, such as letter writing (Bergan & Cole, 2015), and these letters were no exception. The event also gave HSSAA insight into the student body’s policy priorities, helping to guide our legislative agenda and create future opportunities to engage the campus in discussions with policy makers. A comprehensive list of proposed policy changes was developed (Fig. 1A) from the individual letters (Fig. 1B), and packets of the “Letters to Santa” were delivered to campus, state, and federal policy makers who represent our campus population.

Figure 1.

Results from the HSSAA Letters to Santa event. (A, B) A list of all the needs of the WSUHS student body. (A) was compiled from the individual letters and (B) submitted during the event.

Open-ended on-campus events like “Letters to Santa” are useful for engaging students in advocacy because there is no large time commitment. Although the prospect of speaking with legislators may be daunting to some scientists, many are already accustomed to engaging administrators in conversations about campus-related change. Moreover, much can be achieved at the campus level through advocacy. Change on a state or federal level may take years to occur, but campus administrators have the ability to quickly respond to student requests and/or demands for change. On the WSUHS campus, these included the creation of a student lounge decked out in university colors for use as a study space, and the start of conversations with administrators about access to better support for the mental and financial health of the student body. Do not ever assume you are aiming “too low” when working to enact change.

On the other end of the spectrum from letter writing, social media has become an excellent method for mass communication. Many legislators are easily accessible through social media (Straus, 2018). To take advantage of this low barrier to engagement (because, let’s face it, we are all on social media all of the time), HSSAA organized a Valentine’s Day event called “#LoveTweets to Legislators” that taught Twitter-style messaging to the campus community in order to introduce short-form science policy communication techniques. The ability to break down and effectively communicate science to a general audience is becoming more and more important and increasingly useful. This event introduced several current state-level science policy bills, which were summarized and displayed on a poster board in the main student center, allowing participants to learn about pertinent and current state-level legislation with aims that ranged from decreasing the cost of higher education to evidence-based legislation aimed at discontinuing daylight savings time (Washington State Legislature, 2019b) and increasing the tobacco-product purchase age to 21 (Washington State Legislature, 2019a). The bills were introduced to event participants with bill name, number, description, and a corresponding hashtag (currently used or created specifically for the event), as well as a sample Twitter message. Participants were asked to tweet from their accounts in response to legislation that resonated with them. If participants did not have a Twitter account or were uncomfortable posting this content on their personal Twitter accounts, they were encouraged to write their tweets on sticky notes and add them to the board. This way, HSSAA was able to crowdsource tweets for the HSSAA Twitter account, while event participants were introduced to legislation that could impact their education and community.

Tools and Tips for Campus Engagement: Cookies!

The WSUHS campus is made up of >60% graduate and professional students. Students on campus constantly expressed that they did not have enough time to engage in science policy actions or attend policy events due to the demanding curricula of these health sciences programs. That fact became apparent when the first HSSAA event, a Q&A with local legislators, drew an attendance of only 10 people. Although the need for and usefulness of events of this nature are discussed in detail below, HSSAA also sought to develop events that would engage a wider student audience. In actualizing this goal, we developed some useful guidelines to incentivize participation and improve outcomes of introductory science policy events.

• Incentivize:

To draw in participants, it is useful to provide incentives for event attendance. This can come in the form of swag, food, or participation credits (when working through student programs). For this reason, finding a funding source to support such incentives can drastically improve event engagement and outcomes.

• Prioritize convenience:

Rather than hosting only lecture-hall style events, plan drop-in events hosted during the lunch hour, and adjacent to the most popular lunch location on campus. This way, the event will have maximum exposure and participation will be convenient (and perhaps inevitable).

• Engage:

Develop events that encourage participant interaction and open-ended conversation. Engagement comes in many forms, but it is best practice to obtain something (a letter or a tweet) from each participant as a record of engagement. These can be used later when advocating directly to policy makers.

• Keep it short:

Keep action items at your events short. Participants should not need to stop by for more than 5 min, unless they are interested in engaging with the issues more deeply. The timetable of engagement should be flexible.

Following these simple tips may alleviate much of the perceived time commitment generally associated with policy actions. For each HSSAA-sponsored drop-in event, HSSAA offered food, drinks, and a photo booth—complete with a Polaroid camera—to get people interested. These incentives kept participants in the vicinity long enough for us to fill them in on policy, impart helpful messaging tips, and request that they practice these messaging tips by participating in the event. Providing cookies was found to have a large impact on levels of participation (Fig. 2).

Figure 2.

Graphic representation of the impact on participation from altering event types and tactics. The dotted line indicates the addition of cookies and Polaroid camera photo booth incentives, as well as the change from lecture-hall-style events to drop-in-style events.

In summary, be creative with your methods of engagement! Think outside the box, and do not be afraid to plan events with open-ended goals. This can help crowdsource material or legislative agenda items to fuel your science policy actions. When in doubt, refer to Figure 3 to help draft plans for your science policy events.

Figure 3.

Science policy (SciPol) event planning time line and checklist. Left: a checklist that can be used to ensure that no steps are missed during event planning. Right: a sample completed list with specific details from HSSAA’s #LoveTweets to Legislators drop-in campus event.

SCIENTISTS: MEET POLICY MAKERS

Academia is often separated from politics and policy under the guise of protecting scientific integrity (Young, 2017). These perceptions could be a contributing factor to why scientists and science trainees may not see themselves as public servants, even though service to society is the core mission of science. This mission has historically encouraged governments across the globe to invest in STEM education, research, and careers, as a means to improve quality of life and our understanding of the universe.

Scientific advances have traditionally been communicated in formal, field-specific publications, lacking engagement from nonscientific audiences. The communication gap between scientists and the public has likely contributed to the increasing acceptance of anti-science rhetoric by the electorate and some elected representatives (NASEM, 2017). This lapse requires action on the part of scientists to remind the public and policy makers that we provide a vital public service. As Gina McCarthy, former administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, wrote, “Simply put, today it is not enough to do science, you have to stand up and speak out for the science” (McCarthy, 2018).

The advent of Web 2.0 platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and wikis have opened doors to new methodologies for engaging in science communication. These resources have fostered an era in which Science Twitter comes to the fore (Bastian, 2017), by way of a participatory culture that directly engages scientists, policy makers, and the public in the same conversation (Welbourne & Grant, 2016). These tools have also made it easier to distribute misinformation, pseudoscience, and anti-science rhetoric, likely contributing to the politically polarized differences in the public’s support of scientific expertise (Funk et al., 2019). These factors make it all the more important that scientists remain engaged and active in being stewards of good science in their daily lives—online and offline. These tools are now inseparable from science policy, and they directly dictate the difference that we can make in the public conversation about science. These platforms brought scientists’ and policy makers’ attention to the paucity of U.S. government–funded research programs in 2017, when National Science Foundation (NIH) and National Science foundation funding had ceased to keep pace with inflation (Mervis, 2017). Scientists stood up and spoke about the need to increase funding levels, and recently, the NIH saw the highest increase it had received in decades (Kaiser, 2018). These platforms also brought graduate students across the country together to protest a clause in the 2017 tax overhaul passed through the U.S. House of Representatives, which would have taxed graduate tuition waivers as income (Hosking, 2017; Sokol, 2017). As a result, this provision did not appear in the final version of the bill. Although some federal actions can occur quickly, however, most require years of reform and are only occasionally sped up by collective actions.

Policy change on the state and local level happen faster and can have a greater impact on a scientist’s local community than federal legislation. State and local legislators also are often more accessible than federal legislators. Keep in mind that advocacy does not have to engage every citizen to be effective. It can be as simple as one person talking to another person. And, as luck would have it, both scientists and policy makers are people! The best way to prove this fact to both scientists and policy makers is through exposure therapy: simply put scientists and policy makers in a room together. Have them talk to each other. You may even be the first scientist that a policy maker has ever had a one-on-one conversation with, and that could make all the difference.

There is no one right way to engage in advocacy. Each action and advocacy experience can be as formal or informal as each individual desires. Scientists and science trainees are capable of hosting interactions with a wide range of policy makers—from federal legislators to campus administrators. This section covers methods and best practices in setting up these types of meetings.

Forum-Style Events

Scientists’ and science trainees’ power as advocates lies in our ability to tell personal stories about how policies have influenced our experiences in science and with science education. Legislators respond to human experiences, and a personal story can go a long way. A personal story from a constituent can go even further. The science of face-to-face interaction is clear, and legislators, too, are subject to the same effects of nonverbal cues from body language, tone, and behavioral synchronization (Jiang et al., 2012). A face-to-face meeting with a legislator, in which you relay the impact a policy has on your ability to address a critical public health question, may be the anecdote that sways a vote, or that is re-told to sway another legislator’s vote.

However, getting face time with policy makers can be challenging; therefore, it may be beneficial to start pursuing opportunities and building relationships early in a policy maker’s career. If possible, find common ground for interaction during the hiring process of new campus administrators, or during campaign events for new or incumbent legislative candidates. These opportunities are the perfect time to get to know prospective policy makers, as all of them will be seeking out opportunities to meet their prospective constituents, to earn their trust and their votes. Unable to attend a candidate forum? Consider hosting one. This will allow opportunities for you to ask questions and make an impression on the candidates as an advocate for science.

HSSAA members joined with other science policy groups across the state of Washington to form the Washington Science Policy Network (WASPN). Together, WASPN group members hosted a nonpartisan Candidate Forum on Public Health ahead of the 2018 election season. Two candidates running for federal office—incumbent congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers and Dr. Lisa Brown—and one candidate running for state office—Jessa Lewis—participated. Each candidate provided their vision for science and health in the district to potential voters. Our experience hosting a candidate forum showed us that success lies in the following key elements.

• Credibility:

During election season, candidates’ schedules will be packed. You need to prove your credibility to convince them to make your event a priority. Are you a new organization? Try to combine planning efforts with those of other science policy groups and local nonprofits known in the area. Decide on questions early in the planning process, and send the questions to the campaigns ahead of the event.

• Format:

Pick a format and theme for your event. The format will usually fall within one of the following categories: panel-style interview, debate-style event, or one-on-one onstage dialogue (Nonprofit VOTE, 2018). Keep in mind that the content needs to be interesting and understandable to the general public as well as being engaging for scientists.

• Funding:

Well before planning an event of this magnitude, consider the cost and acquire adequate funding. This can be done through on-campus funding mechanisms, fundraising, sponsorship, or grant funds. As with research funding, apply early and often!

• Advertising:

The success of these types of community-based events is largely based on the quality and quantity of advertising efforts. Leverage all possible avenues: social media, press releases, local radio spots, on-campus advertising, community partners, and word of mouth.

• Day-of logistics:

Find a venue that is an accessible space and welcoming to the public. Look at schools, community centers, libraries, campus event halls. Build a list of volunteers and staff you will need to recruit, including a scientist or trainee to facilitate the event. Plan a space for a meet-and-greet before or after the event. Plan how (and if) you will livestream, live-tweet, photograph, or record your event.

• Contingency plans:

Be flexible, and be prepared with contingency plans, in case campaigns back out. You can invite local legislators or administrators to join the stage in lieu of your original candidates. If you are unable to obtain an in-person commitment from your local candidates, ask representatives from the candidates’ offices come to the event to read candidates’ answers.

• Follow-up:

After the event, send pictures and thank you cards to participants, including emcees, candidates, and organizers. Keep in touch with each candidate for any future events you may wish to host. Even if they do not win the election, they may end up in notable positions of influence.

The complexity of forum-style events can vary greatly, and the format should be dependent on the background of the intended audience. Planning for community-oriented events will differ from planning for events intended to serve your campus community. Figure 4 provides a guide for both types of event planning. HSSAA also hosted a campus-oriented series of events entitled “Know Your District,” in which state legislators were invited to campus and interviewed by science trainee hosts. The conversations were focused on policies and programs supporting local science endeavors as well as on STEM and clinical education. These exchanges were conversational and provided opportunities for the legislators to share updates and information about their districts. The benefit of hosting forum-style events is the ample opportunity for interaction between the policy makers and trainees, which allows participants the chance to impress the importance their scientific priorities upon legislators. Campus-oriented events tend to cost less in terms of time, money, and organization than community-oriented events. Heavy advertising and incentivizing (cookies!) are still encouraged to increase turnout and the breadth of scientific discussion (Fig. 2).

Figure 4.

Venn diagram and checklists for the planning involved in community-oriented and campus-oriented events.

Campus Visits

Inviting elected officials to campus to see where the science happens can be a deeply impactful way to impress the importance of research upon policy makers. You can invite policy makers to the lab by getting in touch with their office via e-mail or phone, or by offering a lab tour in person during other visits and events. Each university should have a government relations office, which may be able to assist in visit requests, or your scientific organization of choice may have additional resources or relationships you can leverage to schedule such visits (California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, 2019). It is best to follow up any initial communication with a confirmatory e-mail. If you work in a lab, ask the primary investigator and/or lab manager if it is acceptable for you to schedule a lab walk-through with policy makers while you and other lab members are on site. Ask your fellow lab members to be prepared to explain their work to the policy makers in short (2- to 3-min) "elevator-style" pitches. For helpful hints to maximize the impact of these visits, see Figure 5. It is worthwhile to be in touch with the university office of government relations throughout the scheduling process, as they may be able to offer talking points, photographers, and/or practice opportunities, which could decrease your preparatory work for the visit.

Figure 5.

Tips for a successful campus visit with policy makers. An outline of tips and pointers for planning campus and lab tours for policy makers that will make the most out of the time when you have their attention.

Legislators are not the only policy makers who are interested in science. Branch out and invite local or campus policy makers in for a walk-through. This can be a simple way to introduce the university president, chancellor, deans, or department chairs to the policies that you are advocating for while you show them the scientific spaces in which you operate. Be sure to keep the campus communications office in the loop about scheduled campus events. Event coverage by the campus communications team or local media can cement your standing as an advocate on campus and within the community.

In-District and Capitol Office Visits

When your local policy makers are in town, you can schedule in-district office visits. Familiarizing yourself with the schedules for federal and state legislative recesses will provide a framework for when you can expect legislators to be working from their home district offices (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2019; US Senate, 2018). Requests for in-district office visits can be made over the phone or through e-mail. In-district visits range in formality depending on the staff and atmosphere within the local office. It may be best to err on the side of formality for a first meeting. Often, you may be meeting with a legislative staffer, even while your local legislator is in town. Should your legislator be available to meet with you, the meeting may still start or end with a staff member. Treat meetings with staff the same as meetings with the legislator themselves. A meeting with legislative staff, especially in federal offices, may have a greater impact that a meeting with the legislator, as the staffer may be the policy expert on the topic of interest.

During legislative recesses, policy makers tend to host in-district town halls, which allow constituents to converse with them directly. These are prime opportunities to make science policy priorities known to both the policymaker and the audience in attendance at the event. Always ask a question, or at least have one prepared. Did not get called on to ask a question? Try approaching the legislator after the event is over. Town hall events tend to be less formal than office meetings and allow more flexible timeframes for engagement. To keep apprised of upcoming town halls, follow your local legislators’ social media pages and keep up with local political and policy groups that have hosted such events in the past.

Meetings at the state or federal Capitol will be formal and will allow the introduction of science topics and science policy priorities to legislators. Because of the formality and possible impact of these meetings, they require greater planning and care than in-district meetings. Reach out to your student government, institutional office of government relations, or scientific organization of choice about the possibility of joining in on their annual “Hill Day” or “Capitol Visit Day.” These annual events often provide training and guidelines to familiarize you with the protocol and decorum of Capitol office meetings. Meetings should be well-organized, be rehearsed, and have a clear agenda. Follow the tips in Figure 6 to ensure that your office visits are a success. Developing a rapport with a policy maker’s staff can often be a critical leveraging factor in scoring longer and more fruitful future meetings.

Figure 6.

Tips for successful in-district and Capitol office meetings with legislators. An outline of tips and pointers for planning office visit agendas that will help you make the most out of the time when you have their attention.

Supporting Specific Legislation: Case Study of WA HB1196–2019

Although meetings between legislators and interested scientists/trainees can be useful as means to engage policy makers in conversations about science and science policy generally, these conversations might be too abstract to fully engage your scientific/campus community. It may be helpful to focus science policy actions or events on a current evidence-based bill sponsored or co-sponsored local legislators. Supporting or opposing a specific bill could reinforce your relationship with local legislators or open the door to meetings and events for which your local legislators might not have been previously available.

HSSAA was able to focus campus attention on our support for WA HB1196–2019: Allowing for the year round observation of daylight saving time, otherwise fondly known by its hashtag, #DitchTheSwitch (#DitchTheSwitch, 2019; Washington State Legislature, 2019b). The bill proposed that Washington state makes a permanent change to stay on Daylight Savings Time (DST) and stop switching time biannually. The bill was introduced to the state legislature with strong supporting evidence of the health consequences of changing time twice a year, which include disruptions to overall circadian rhythms and increased incidence of heart disease, cancer, and obesity (Janszky & Ljung, 2008; Roenneberg, Winnebeck, & Klerman, 2019). HSSAA provided additional research to one of the bill sponsors on the effects of the biannual time change, which include impaired travel safety and operational safety and decreased performance of workers and students (Gaski & Sagarin, 2011; Medina, Ebben, Milrad, Atkinson, & Krieger, 2015; Roenneberg, Wirz-Justice, Skene, Ancoli-Israel, et al., 2019). Ending DST has been endorsed by the Society for Research on Biological Rhythms and the European Commission vote to end DST, which was supported by several scientific societies, each of which referenced research of their members as support for the benefits of this legislative action. Based on the overwhelming evidence in favor of “ditching the switch,” HSSAA endorsed this legislation.

The bill was introduced to campus during the “#LoveTweets to Legislators” event, which allowed HSSAA to highlight the merits and pitfalls of the bill and its scientific basis, further engaging campus members in the conversation surrounding #DitchTheSwitch. The #LoveTweets event garnered campus support on social media, and additional research on the topic was provided by campus sleep and circadian research scientists. Both elements were important in constructing strong arguments in support of the bill, which could then be used to open conversations with the bill sponsors and link them to on-campus research. The bill generated a community conversation that HSSAA participated in, taking it as a chance to offer scientific perspective and expertise to support the bill’s passing and future enactment. #DitchTheSwitch passed both Washington state congressional chambers with bipartisan support, and has been signed into law by Governor Jay Inslee (Washington State Legislature, 2019b). The bill is awaiting federal approval to make the change permanent. Local legislation may influence the legislative agenda in other states and jurisdictions; thus, be sure to pass along any testimony/comments you collect from the student body to legislators, as its reach could be wider than anticipated (Wei-Haas, 2019).

Pay attention to evidence-based legislation in your local and state governments, especially legislation that is relevant to your scientific communities—on and off campus. Even in years where there is no legislation that fits these criteria, you have the power to suggest legislative changes (with a plethora of supporting evidence!) to legislators. You never know what difference you could make.

Bonus: Finding Legislators in the Wild

Legislators and their staffers have a vested interest in participating in community events, so it is possible that you will encounter a legislator outside of a formal meeting or event. As you build relationships with local legislative offices, it is likely that you will recognize them around your community, or even be recognized yourself! As public figures, they expect to be approached when they are out in public. Feel free to introduce yourself briefly, give context to the last meeting you had with them, and apprise them of upcoming local science events or developments. Do not forget to take a selfie, which you can post to social media or share with your campus’s communications office, and always thank them for their time. Keep the interaction short, as they may be conducting personal business, even though they expect to be approached. It is a good practice to carry business cards with you for use in these situations. Unexpected or bonus run-ins underline the importance of having a developed and practiced “elevator speech” about the science policy topics and bills you are monitoring. Although you may not agree with all policies your representative is supporting, always be respectful. Building a relationship could be the determining factor for a vote in favor of policies that support science.

SCIENTISTS: MEET POLICY PARTNERS

Broaching topics in science policy engagement and making change in this arena can require a lot of work. It is important to remember that this need not be done alone. The formation of strategic partnerships and coalitions may ease the workload and improve the effectiveness of topic messaging. Scientists often form strategic research collaborations to gain access to resources, expertise, and training. These partnerships not only are required for robust and sustainable science, but also may be necessary to gain access to research funding. Strategic partnerships in advocacy are similar to scientific research collaborations—they can expand your access to expertise and resources. This section contains guidance on networking for advocacy on a local, national, and international level.

You Are Not in This Alone

Partnerships with policy and advocacy groups offer benefits that range from exchanging ideas, to providing advocacy materials for events, to formal advocacy training programs. Ideally, the ties between policy and science should be introduced early in science education to establish this relationship as a necessary skillset for successful and impactful future science careers. If you are a trainee advocate, do some research to see if your campus or program offers science policy resources, or suggest that they follow in the path of universities that do.

There are several local, state, and national organizations that engage in advocacy and lobbying for science policies—lobbying being advocacy to influence a specific piece of legislation. Many of these organizations are open to forming partnerships around specific policy issues and events. However, tax-exempt 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations are limited in the extent to which they are able to participate in partisan lobbying efforts or events. In general, when working with nonprofits, it is best practice to initiate a discussion around whether they prefer to participate in general advocacy activities or specific and focused lobbying efforts. Through partnerships with other organizations, HSSAA was able to host a variety of events without shouldering the entirety of the burden of event planning and execution and was also able to gain assistance with lobbying efforts.

Forming a Science Policy Organization

If your campus does not already have a science policy student/trainee group, forming a new organization might be a good way to find other science policy advocates and to gain access to the resources offered by the campus. Recently, many student groups have taken up the charge of leading science policy actions on their campuses. Resources to aid in the creation of a science policy group are plentiful (Ruppersburg & York, 2016).

The formation of such an organization can provide a means to distribute the workload (Figs. 3 and 4) of event planning. Playing to the strengths and interests of the members of your organization is a key element to planning successful events. When recruiting, it can be useful to find members whose interests coincide with the following areas.

• Graphic design:

Members interested in expanding or flexing their skills in this area could be an asset in helping generate event advertising, leave-behind materials, and infographics for educational or policy action events.

• Research:

If members are particularly interested in specific science policy topics, they can contribute to the science policy organization by keeping up with their topic of interest. These members can research and keep up with pertinent bills in local, state, and/or federal legislation and with policy changes that may impact STEM education and jobs.

• Organization:

Detail-oriented planners are critical in developing agendas for your organization. These members can keep track of legislators’ schedules, set up meetings, and oversee to-do lists for organizing science policy events. These members could also help to build coalitions and partnerships and secure funding through the university and through external funding mechanisms.

• Public speaking:

It is helpful to have confident members who are able to act as the face of policy events and take the lead at meetings with policy makers. Hopefully, these members will also be willing to help other members learn how to develop their elevator pitches and deliver their messages with confidence.

If you are planning to form a science policy group, start planning well before the beginning of the school year: develop an annual schedule of events, figure out your budget as well as the per-event funding requirements, and work on securing funds early. Each university and nonprofit organization has organizational guidelines that govern their advocacy and lobbying efforts. If you are working with any university or nonprofit-affiliated science policy group (including local scientific society chapters), it is important to assess the impact these guidelines might have on your activities. Planning to accommodate any necessary organizational oversight is critical to success and coalition-building within your community.

Scientific Societies

Out of a growing desire for well-trained science advocates, scientific societies such as the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (ASBMB) and the Society for Neuroscience (SfN) have developed formal advocacy training programs. Practical utilization of the training materials from these programs within local scientific communities is vital to their efficacy. Faculty in your program and lab should be able to suggest scientific societies that match your interests and research area. Do your research and join societies that offer funding or support for science advocacy efforts by student chapters or members. HSSAA members were accepted into the ASBMB Advocacy Training Program and the SfN Early Career Policy Ambassadors program, which offered HSSAA the benefit of formal advocacy training from multiple perspectives. ASBMB offered the advocacy program trainees materials to present to congressional members during in-district meetings, which were added to the HSSAA legislative agenda. SfN organized an annual Capitol Hill Day as a part of the advocacy program, and our organization was able to be represented there as well. Join an advocacy training program and bring the resources and trainings back to your campus community to disseminate during various events.

Local and National Advocacy Organizations

Advocacy coalitions exist as a collective lobbying effort on a specific topic. Organizations like Research!America and the National Science Policy Network (NSPN) offer grants for student organizations. NSPN and the National Association for Graduate and Professional Students (NAGPS) offer individual and group memberships that give members access to their policy statements and one-pagers for a variety of policy areas. These memberships tend to be available at low cost and can drastically decrease the amount of research and document preparation required for a lobbying or on-campus information dissemination. HSSAA was offered the opportunity to work closely with a Washington state–based student lobbying organization, the Washington Student Association (WSA), by attending the WSA organizational General Assembly meeting to propose items for the WSA legislative agenda.

Grassroots science advocacy organizations created by scientists can also play a role in local and national science policy. Connect with local March for Science organizations, find or create local pods for 500 Women Scientists and/or 500 Queer Scientists, explore your local area and discover other science-related community organizations. There are likely to be science policy groups at other universities in your area, or groups on your campus that cater to specific interests. Align yourself and/or your organization with those whose goals best match or complement your interests. Forming collaborative resource-sharing coalitions will expand the reach of your campus organization or group and may have the added benefit of becoming further established as the go-to organization for science advocacy in your local area.

CONCLUSION

Students have powerful voices on university campuses and can be powerful change agents on the local, national, and/or global stage. It is critical that science trainees become more invested in shaping the policies that dictate their work and continue to shape those policies throughout their careers. Scientist engagement in science policy is imperative to ensure that funding continues to adequately propel scientific advances, that publicly funded science delivers results to taxpayers, and that scientists are equipped with the skills to communicate scientific findings to the general public and to policy makers. Improved communication between scientists, the public, and policy makers could increase society’s science literacy and decrease the partisan divide in support for science. It is our responsibility to try to stabilize communications between reputable scientists and the general public, so that trust in science is not shaken by accidental miscommunication.

If you are reading this, you probably agree that scientists should be more vocal in science policy. It is important to convince your colleagues and fellow science trainees that they do have a place in science policy, whether in policy for science or science for policy. Your voices can change the systems that support science–education, jobs, training, and funding mechanisms. Without your voice, these systems, and STEM culture overall, may never improve. Start simple; show your fellow scientists and/or science trainees that advocacy does not have to be time consuming, and that even simple actions can be impactful. If you are nervous about meetings with policy makers, reach out to your campus communications and/or government relations office and request time to practice and hone your messaging. And if you are ready to ramp up your actions in science policy, start reaching out beyond your campus to connect with the local and national resources that already exist in your scientific community. Remember to count your successes, however small. Scientists tend to get stuck on methods to quantify the impact of their work, as science is largely driven by measurable outcomes. The impact of advocacy, however, is difficult to quantify: we would have to stop advocating to truly quantify our impact, and the stakes are too high for that to be an option. Advocacy does not have to be measurable or quantitative to have an impact; this is not science, this is science advocacy.