From ScienceWriters: The rise and fall of a new science-writing program
By Paul Raeburn
Two years ago, I felt lucky to announce that I had been lured to the Sunshine State by Florida Atlantic University, which offered me a free hand to develop a new master’s program in science writing.
As reported here at the time (SW, Summer 2010), I planned to set up a newsroom where students could get immediate experience writing for the web, so that they would be prepared to move directly into new-media jobs when they finished. I was excited by the prospect of developing a new program from the ground up. How often does an opportunity like that arise?
FAU appeared to be establishing itself as a center for research. It was launching a new medical school, and there were two new world-class science institutions on campus — the Max Planck Florida Institute and Scripps Florida. The head of the communications department thought a science-writing program would mesh nicely with that, and I did, too.
Sadly, all has come tumbling down. I spent the first semester writing a 70-page proposal for the program, which was then catapulted into a labyrinth of university committees while I taught a few undergraduate classes. Somewhere, midway through, the proposal stalled, after more than a semester of deliberation.
Part of the reason it disappeared in some committee or other (there were a lot of them) was probably the changes that were occurring at the top of FAU. At first, it seemed that the announced change in administration would be good for the program. The new president — Mary Jane Saunders — is a cell biologist, no less. She appointed a new provost — Brenda Claiborne, a neuroscientist. Clearly, FAU was interested in science, and so was conservative Florida governor Rick Scott who stated he wanted the state’s universities to focus on science and mathematics.
Alas, Gov. Scott was also promising sharp cuts in state funding for universities, and he followed through in the spring of 2012 with $300 million in cuts. As FAU administrators pored over the budget for things to cut, the science-writing program was evidently an easy target.
I have no quibble with that. The president and provost should be able to cut where and when they like. It was the manner in which they did it that I found distressing. Nobody told me the program was on the chopping block. I was not offered a chance to defend it. The dean and the department head who hired me were demoted. They were replaced by administrators with no knowledge of the science-writing program or any interest in it. One came from a background in peace studies, and the other was a pianist.
I found out about the program’s demise when, at a faculty meeting, a budget was distributed that showed elimination of the funding. “I guess that means you,” the new department head said to me later.
It was not a happy experience. I enjoyed teaching; I liked the undergrads I met, and I liked passing on what’s been given to me by so many reporters, editors, and writers over the years. But while I’m happy to talk to friends’ classes about science writing, I don’t think you’ll find me stepping into a classroom of my own again.
Paul Raeburn is a journalist, a media critic at the Knight Science Journalism Tracker, and the author of Do Fathers Matter? The New Science of Fatherhood, to be published next year.
RE: From ScienceWriters: The rise and fall of a new science-writ
Written by Mary Ann Spiro on Nov 21, 2012 Blog
Sorry to hear this and also about the way it was handled. I have seen something similar (but not with a science writing program) here where I work. If you enjoy teaching and are good at it, you should find some outlets for that. We need people to teach others how to write about science. Man, do we need that!
RE: From ScienceWriters: The rise and fall of a new science-writ
Written by Gary J Schwitzer on Nov 21, 2012
Paul,
That sucks. I'm sorry for you - and for the students.
But there's a lot that sucks about academia. If only parents - or whoever is signing the big checks - knew more before the ink was dry.
I don't talk publicly very much about my resignation from a tenured faculty position at the University of Minnesota School of Journalism & Mass Communication. But stories like yours draw it out of me. While there were several big reasons, one of them was lack of institutional support for the health journalism grad program I was hired to help launch.
But I've never looked back - and I hope you won't either. I have cherished the chance to devote fulltime attention to the http://www.HealthNewsReview.org project and related efforts. Even tenure didn't afford the time and flexibility that this project deserved. You will continue to do great work on the Knight Science Journalism Tracker and in other venues.
I hope our paths cross again soon. We can share war stories. Or not.
Gary Schwitzer Publisher http://www.HealthNewsReview.org
RE: From ScienceWriters: The rise and fall of a new science-writ
Written by Sarah Estes on Nov 21, 2012 Blog
So sorry to hear about this. A relative in 'management' told me to be cautious about newly created positions as they can always be uncreated if the winds shift; but academic politics and practices can seem more draconian and inefficient than usual (or necessary) at times to be sure! Even something basic like securing a classroom, office or parking spot within 5 miles of your job can be a serious challenge! Looks like you've got a great new book coming out and plenty of other options. If you do decide to go back to teaching, at least you'll have an idea of what you're getting into...
RE: From ScienceWriters: The rise and fall of a new science-writ
Written by Robert Irion on Nov 21, 2012 Blog
Paul, it's a pity your faculty and administrative colleagues at FAU did not recognize the value of the professional launching ground you intended to establish. Public university funding reductions in general have been disheartening, and a new program always will be more vulnerable in the university hierarchy. You simply didn't have the pull or the track record, in their eyes. FAU's loss. (And, I'll concur, it's totally lousy that you weren't in the loop.)
There is an interesting broader question about the flow of new journalists into our field from the various graduate training programs. I've spoken with several senior editors and staffers who have felt that we're already at critical mass -- that the job market, annually, couldn't sustain a higher rate of science-writing graduates. More of them would be forced into freelancing, a daunting way to start one's new career. I do feel there are niches within which good jobs are available, and your initiative proposed to train folks for one such arena. But competition is fierce. For my own program, alumni employment successes have been the best shelter against California's budgetary squalls.
Rob Irion / UC Santa Cruz
RE: From ScienceWriters: The rise and fall of a new science-writ
Written by Paul Raeburn on Nov 22, 2012 Blog
Thanks all for the nice notes. I was commuting from New York two or three days a week, which was proving to be harder on the family than we had anticipated, so the bright side of all this is that the Florida commute is over.
I've worked for some tough outfits, and I've dealt with inscrutable editors, but none of that prepared me for the capriciousness I saw at FAU. And I found the faculty meetings stunning in one respect: the word "student" was almost never spoken. All the discussions centered on money, faculty, money, the administration, money, and, as Sarah notes, parking.