A Response to Professor Nancy Longnecker's Talk –Ryohei

 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 the spread of disinformation. Because I use tools daily, I’m aware of the necessity of fact-checking against primary sources. For example, when I read long paragraphs generated by AI (I regularly use Gemini Pro), it showed a conflict that measures different numbers for the same topic. After that, I thought fact-checking was important. However, from a practical viewpoint, I believe the future challenge is not simply avoiding these techniques by fear but learning how to use them correctly. Science communicators of the next generation will figure out how to deal with it rather than just playing an exhausting “whack-a-mole” game with fake news.




Comments

  1. Chompunud (New)March 31, 2026 at 3:35 PM

    Hello, Ryohei, I agree with you that it is very important to do fact-checking when we use AI to assists our study or get more information on topics that we want in order to ensure that we get the correct information from using it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. David WoodfieldMarch 31, 2026 at 3:35 PM

    Insightful response, Ryohei. I have tended to avoid AI in my preparation of class materials in recent times. I suppose though I should attempt to find ways in which I can use AI apps in this task, ways in which I can make the most of their potential while taking steps which mitigate against their drawbacks. David :-)

    ReplyDelete
  3. A Response to Professor Nancy Longnecker's Talk – KaterinMarch 31, 2026 at 3:39 PM

    Hi Ryohei. I really liked your example about teaching pH with purple cabbage—it clearly shows how connecting science to daily life makes it easier to understand. I agree that communication is not just about facts, but how we explain them, and you make a good point about AI. Fact-checking is essential, but learning how to use these tools responsibly is even more important for the future.

    ReplyDelete
  4. SosukeApril 1, 2026 at 6:21 PM

    I actually din't know that you have experience to have taught Chemistry in Japan. From that experience, I can imagine how hard the professor words hit you! As you mentioned in the sentence, we human needs towell understand AI hallucinations and the spread of disinformation.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Response to Professor Nancy Longnecker's Talk

Image
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.
Read more

A Response to Professor Nancy Longnecker's Talk -- Iza

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 ...
Read more

'A Response to Professor Nancy Longnecker's Talk -- Sosuke Fukushima

Image
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...
Read more