StemistryPLUS
My Journey with Stemistry:
Reflections from a social anthropologist
My journey with Stemistry began in 2008 when, as a researcher at PEALS, I set out to learn more about 'public engagement with science' processes and practices. My starting point was PEALS innovative 'co-inquiry' work, a participatory approach to working with communities, where 'expertise from lived experience' is valued alongside academic expertise.
In early discussions with the writers, I learned about Stemistry's 'sci-art' approach, using science as an inspiration for their writing, and in turn I witnessed them using their poetry and creativity as an integral, insightful contribution to broadening understandings of both science and paths to participation. Two examples of this were the 'Stem Cell Weekend', 2009 and the 'PEALS Annual Symposium', 2010.
At the Stem Cell residential, all participants, both young people and adults, were involved in a kaleidoscope of activities that nurtured a safe, respectful environment for mutual learning and sharing, as they consolidated their prior explorations of stem cell research. Their resulting questions, put to a leading scientist, were both practical and profound. At the symposium, the Stemistry writers' performance of their work created an energy that infused the subsequent workshops and ongoing debates between researchers, funders and practitioners, who were examining their own practice and understandings of how to encourage meaningful participation.
Up to this point, I had worked closely with Stemistry leader, Lisa Matthews, and other facilitators, contributing to the long-term, detailed planning that preceded the events and I had interviewed the writers about their views on public engagement. This was valuable to me in my research, but I sensed that I was missing some vital clue or insight in what was happening during the 'sci-art' encounter.
In 2011, I was given access to the 'backstage' area of the creative writing process of StemistryPLUS. Drawing on my background of ethnographic research, I became a non-participant observer of the workshops in which the writers widened their scope of the life sciences as a catalyst for their writing. Sitting at the back of the room, I began noting by the techniques of the writing workshop and the resulting creative output. I also became aware of less tangible dynamics, which I later discussed at a final feedback session with the writers.
I saw and heard how the workshop stimulated personal memory and imagination, analysis and reflection that began with the science and soon incorporated social, ethical and spiritual dimensions. I was moved by the shared silences that had a meditative quality and which were later likened to the creative silences found in scientific laboratories. I was energised and inspired by the poetry that emerged.
So how does this relate to the spectrum of public engagement activities and co-inquiry practices? The Stemistry project highlighted core factors that contribute to effective public engagement. These include the value of longer term relationships between participants, which provide support and encourage trust, through listening to, valuing and incorporating diverse experiences. It confirmed the necessity for in-depth, adequately-resourced pre-planning, with participants shaping the direction and focus of learning and inquiry.
The "sci-art" approach, and the Stemistry project itself, acts as a bridge between participants and disciplines. It provides the opportunity for challenging and exciting pathways to creating new knowledge and shared experiences. Most of all the Stemistry process is seen as liberating. As one writer said, "You get led into something and let loose!"
Stemistry: opening up debate
Explorations: I had a whole in my heart
Explorations: My mum's kiss