Advanced DW Term 1 2026 Blog B

 Professor Nancy Longnecker's Talk had mainly two topics, which are about science communication and AI.  Her talk reminded me of the experience that I joined a class on science communication, where I taught elementary school students chemistry. There, we had some experiments to see what pH common liquids and solvents indicate using purple cabbage, and talked about why it happened. As the professor said, telling the fact wasn’t enough to teach the students, so I connected a daily experience with that experiment. Generally, sour things indicate low pH and stimulate our skin; on the other hand, things that indicate high pH are bitter and make our skin slimy, depending on the strength of the base. Using these daily experiences, I taught what pH was. Giving an example is easier to understand. That’s why I agree with her opinion.   Furthermore, as an active and frequent user of various AI tools, I strongly agree with the speaker’s warning regarding AI hallucinations and th...

I attended Professor Nancy Longnecker’s lecture Challenges of Communicating in Complex Times, and I found it very interesting and thought-provoking. One of her main points was that effective communication is not only about sharing information, but also about understanding the audience and having clear objectives. She explained that communication can aim to raise awareness, increase understanding, change behaviours, or even influence policy. Another important idea was that we are living in a time where misinformation and disinformation are very common. Because of this, people do not always trust scientific information, which makes communication more challenging. She also mentioned that we need to evaluate and reflect on how effective our communication is, instead of assuming that people will automatically understand or accept the message. I agree with the general message of the lecture. I think that communication today is more complex than before, especially because of social media and ...

I enjoyed Nancy Longnecker's lecture because I could relate to her and the subject on many levels. The way she was conveying the content seemed casual, and I appreciated her humor. I feel like one of the main points she tried to bring across was that science communication is its own field and cannot be equated with just being a scientist who knows how to communicate. According to her, this way of thinking might have led to the programme being let go for a period of time before it was reinstated. Science communication can aid in conveying scientific findings to the general public and can really benefit the everyday lives of people. The points that resonated the most with me were closely related to marketing and psychology. For instance, being aware of your own objective for communicating (to raise awareness, educate, change behaviour, or change policy), while also being mindful of who your audience is. A common flaw in science communication relates to a common psychological fallacy ...

I think the lecture was good and casual.   I  really appreciate that the lecturer thought of the audiences and gave more explanation of some words that I personally didn’t understand the meaning.   For example, she explained the difference between misinformation and disinformation.   Misinformation refers to unintentionally giving wrong information while disinformation is intentionally giving incorrect information which she gave example of Tobacco company. The company advertised and encouraged pregnant women to smoke because their babies will be small resulting in easier for them to give birth which was so scary to hear.   In terms of her main point, I think she mentioned that an effective communication is to consider lots of factors such as considering the differences of their target audiences.  For example, the audiences could be someone who are uninterested, skeptical, polarized or interested audiences.  Moreover, she also talked about the communic...

Regarding Nancy Longnecker’s talk, I found it is really imperative that whether others have concern or not is revealed after listening to their thoughts or values and respecting their point of view, because basically we all have different backgrounds and perspectives. For example, I've met a lot of people who have different ways of walking through this studying abroad, but if I judged books by their covers, I definitely couldn't belong in any communities and wouldn't make friends in NZ.  In terms of communication in the future, I think it's likely to be bleak because of the indistinguishable footage or images generated by AI.  I think the fine line between real and fake is getting thinner and thinner these days and it will be completely impossible to tell them from apart in a decade. Then, what we need is the capacity to research by ourselves to find facts and accurate information. My favourite words in the lecture were "People get attracted to contents...

What did you think of Nancy Longnecker's lecture Challenges of Communicating in Complex Times ? Summarise what you thought her main points were and state whether you agree with the gist of what she had to say or not. Then identify one of the points that she made that particularly resonated with you. Say what the point was and explain why it resonated with you. Finally say how optimistic you are about the state of communication in the future. Do you think it will become easier or more difficult to communicate successfully and why? Title your post 'A Response to Professor Nancy Longnecker's Talk -- Your Name' and accompany your post with a relevant image.

Hi, everyone! Welcome aboard to our class blog. I am looking forward to reading what you write and learning about what you believe and how you feel, here. So, let the journey begin.