networking | PECOP Blog

As an Assistant Professor, you are under a lot of pressure to teach new classes, perform service and of course publish. Often times you do not have a mentor to guide you and you are off on your own pathway to tenure. While I had many good ideas about some teaching research I wanted to perform with my students I needed help in executing a study and publishing my work. While the goal was clear, the plan and the execution were not. Where to start was the biggest and most difficult hurdle.

I assumed incorrectly that the best way to be successful in publishing was to do it on my own. After all, I would only be accountable to myself and need not worry about collaborators who might be hard to reach and would take a long time to complete their portion of a manuscript. I tried this path initially and it was incredibly difficult as I could only work on one project at a time. The turning point came when I attended an Experimental Biology (EB) meeting Teaching Section symposium several years ago; I vividly recalled an excellent presentation where the speaker showed us an elegant study of how he used active learning and student grades improved. This talk inspired me and I got excited to try this with my class by performing a similar study. The excitement abruptly ended when he stated the two sections of students he used for his study had 250 and 300 students respectively. My own classes are between 12-20 students, quite small in comparison and I was completely disheartened thinking it would take years of study before I surveyed that many students. After the talk, I went up to him to ask a question, there was someone in front of me that asked the question that I had planned to ask. She said “I have small classes and for me to do a study of significance would take years”. I chimed in “I am in the same situation”. He answered us both with one word “Collaborate”. I walked away disheartened as I did not know anyone that I could collaborate with on a study.

After some time to reflect that this course of action was what I needed I developed an active plan to execute at the next EB meeting. At the Claude Bernard Lecture, I introduced myself to Barb Goodman. This was an excellent choice, as Barb knows everyone and she was kind enough to introduce me to everyone who approached her. From there my confidence grew. The next smart decision I made was to sit in the front during the lecture and all future Teaching Section Symposia. Do not hide in the back as people sometimes come in late and this can be distracting. In the front of the room are the friendly people who are very happy to talk with you and share ideas.

The next step was to follow the program and attend the Teaching Section luncheon. At this event, a small group of people dedicated to teaching and student success sit and talk about the different classes they teach and share ideas about teaching challenges. The tables are small and round so you can meet everyone at your table. Another key event to attend at EB is the Teaching Section Business meeting and dinner. At the dinner, you get a chance to meet more people in a relaxed setting. Some of the attendees have attended the other events and this is a great way to practice your recall and talk with them on a first name basis.

The final step in meeting people with whom to collaborate is to participate in an Institute on Teaching and Learning (ITL). There have been three of these meetings so far (2014, 2016 & 2018) and the meeting actively encourages you to meet new people at each meal and form new collaborations. Through this meeting, I met many of my collaborators and successfully published abstracts and papers (listed below), received one grant, was a symposium speaker, and chaired a symposium. The meeting is energizing as the program is packed with new ideas and teaching strategies to try in your classroom. It is easy to ask questions and be an active participant in the discussions. Thus, taking advantage of a number of opportunities for physiology educators through the American Physiological Society can be just the push you need to get going on a successful promotion and tenure process. Join the APS and its Teaching Section to keep up-to-date on what is going on in physiology education.

References

Aprigia Monteferrante G, Mariana Cruz M, Mogadouro G, de Oliveira Fantini V, Oliveira Castro P, Halpin PA, and Lellis-Santos C (2018). Cardiac rhythm dance protocol: a smartphone-assisted hands-on activity to introduce concepts of cardiovascular physiology and scientific methodology. Advances in Physiology Education, 42: 516-520, doi:10.1152/advan.00028.2017.
Blatch, SA, Cliff W., Beason-Abmayr, B. and Halpin PA. (2017).The Artificial Animal Project: A Tool for Helping Students Integrate Body Systems. Advances in Physiology Education. 41: 239-243 DOI: 10.1152/advan.00159.2016
Gopalan C., Halpin PA and Johnson KMS (2018). Benefits and Logistics of Non-Presenting Undergraduate Students Attending a Professional Scientific Meeting. Advances in Physiology Education. 42: 68-74. DOI.org/10.1152/advan.00091.2017
Halpin PA, Golden L, Zane Hagins K, Waller S, and Chaya Gopalan C. (2018). SYMPOSIUM REPORT ON “Examining the Changing Landscape of Course Delivery and Student Learning;” Experimental Biology 2017. Advances in Physiology Education, 42: 610–614. doi:10.1152/advan.00096.2018.
Lellis-Santos, C and Halpin PA (2018).”Workshop Report: “Using Social Media and Smartphone Applications in Practical Lessons to Enhance Student Learning” in Búzios, Brazil (Aug. 6-8, 2017). Advances in Physiology Education, 42: 340–342. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00011.2018.

Patricia A. Halpin is an Associate Professor in the Life Sciences Department at the University of New Hampshire at Manchester (UNHM). Patricia received her MS and Ph.D. in Physiology at the University of Connecticut. She completed a postdoctoral fellowship at Dartmouth Medical School. After completion of her postdoc she started a family and taught as an adjunct at several NH colleges. She then became a Lecturer at UNHM before becoming an Assistant Professor. She teaches Principles of Biology, Endocrinology, Cell Biology, Animal Physiology, Global Science Explorations and Senior Seminar to undergraduates. She has been a member of APS since 1994 and is currently on the APS Education committee and is active in the Teaching Section. She has participated in Physiology Understanding (PhUn) week at the elementary school level in the US and Australia. She has presented her work on PhUn week, Using Twitter for Science Discussions, and Embedding Professional Skills into Science curriculum at the Experimental Biology meeting and the APS Institute on Teaching and Learning.

As one of the founding leaders of PECOP, I’m always exhorting people to “Engage! Get involved! Comment! Rate! Review! Contribute!” But today I willingly confess: I am an online lurker. It’s not as shocking as it sounds. I’m part of the >90% of people who go to online communities to get information but rarely share or contribute. For example, I spent the last half hour at Overstock.com shopping for a cushion for my outdoor chair. I found the product I wanted easily and spent the next 15 minutes reading reviews at both Overstock and Amazon to see whether previous purchasers (e.g., the customer “community”) thought the cushion was worth the money. One lady offered up the history of her patio décor…pretty useless. But most reviews were short, to the point, and valuable. My “lurking” led me to feel confident about the purchase so I bought the cushion. In the last year, I have used online communities to “research” all kinds of purchases from shoes to cars to plumbing services. More importantly, I “lurk” at online communities to learn about services, apps, journals, organizations, and publications.

What’s wrong with being a lurker? Absolutely nothing! It’s one of the five phases of community membership as described by Kim (2006) and Noff:

Lurkers: those who visit infrequently, read, but never participate (i.e., comment or submit new content)
Novices: those who are new and are seeking to learn the rules of the community and how to participate
Insiders: those who participate regularly in the community
Leaders: those who not only participate, but encourage interaction and engagement by others
Elders: those who are leaving the community due to changes in personal interests, changes in the community, etc.

Lurkers also are the dominant group in community membership. In 2006, the Nielsen Norman Group found that 90% of online community members are lurkers, 9% of members comment occasionally and only 1% of members actively contribute significant content. More recent data suggests that engagement is increasing and, by 2011, engagement looked more like 70-20-10 for lurkers-commenters-content creators. But the vast majority of members are still primarily lurkers.

Why do so many of us lurk rather than engage in online communities? Blogger Joel Lee suggests that many feel they have nothing worthy to contribute while others fear negative reactions to their comments or questions. Alternatively, as a commenter to Lee’s blog noted, users may simply have better things to do with their time than to engage.

However, for professional networking, online community use is growing. A recent survey by the Society of New Communication Research (SNCR) found that people spend much more of their online time in professional networks than with friends or family. And when asked what online channels they use to share information with colleagues, social networking (25%), microblogging (e.g., Twitter, 28%), and direct email (31%) comprised the top three methods and were surprisingly comparable in frequency.

Why engage, comment, or contribute? The SNCR survey found that the top two reasons people moved from lurker to participant were:

To help others by sharing information, ideas, and experiences; and
To participate in a professional community of colleagues and peers.

How do YOU choose? Where do you lurk? Where do you contribute? And where do you lead?

Personally, I lurk at sites where I’m considering buying something, taking a course, going to visit…essentially where I’m a consumer and have limited expertise to offer. I contribute to sites that I use regularly for travel or business. Friends know I’m a frequent TripAdvisor reviewer and share science news on my Facebook page. My APS colleagues know I use Vivino to select and submit reviews of wines for APS committee dinners. I lead at those sites where I fill a specific role (e.g., my church’s Facebook page). Of course, here at the LifeSciTRC, I get to do a lot of leading and contributing!

What do we gain by contributing? Kollock (1999) says active users receive more useful help than do lurkers. He also states that visible and useful contributions lead to a positive reputation in the community and that actively contributing helps users feel that they have a real impact on their communities. For me, it’s all about give and take. I receive a steady stream of helpful information from online communities…I try to return the favor. And I learn how to use social media by contributing. It really demystifies the whole process.

Have you had good or bad experiences through lurking, commenting, or contributing to a community? Please share on the bulletin board below…let’s keep the conversation going. After all, this OUR PECOP community!

In the meantime, I’ll wait for my chair cushion to arrive. I will receive several emails from Overstock.com asking me to review it. If I like the cushion, I will be inclined to ignore the emails, but I really should write a review. Of course, if the cushion is rubbish, I will most certainly, in the words of Captain Picard, ”Engage!”

Resources

Kollock, P. The economies of online cooperation: Gifts and public goods in cyberspace. In M. Smith and P. Kollock (Eds.), Communities in Cyberspace. London: Routledge.

Marsha Matyas is a biologist, educator, and science education researcher. For nearly 30 years, she has worked at scientific professional associations (AAAS and now APS) to promote excellence in science education at all levels and to increase diversity within the scientific community. Marsha’s research focuses on factors that promote science career interest and success, especially among women and underrepresented minorities. At the APS, Marsha directs the Education Office and programs, which span from pre-Kindergarten to professional development and continuing education for Ph.D. and M.D. scientists. Marsha will be speaking more about community engagement, especially for physiology educators, at the APS Institute on Teaching and Learning.