Interview With Michele Bahr

Michele Bahr is the Education and Public Outreach Coordinator for the Marine Biological Laboratory Astrobiology Program. This past year Michele has been involved with the COSEE-NE program PSOS, advising teachers on ways to incorporate microbial activities in oceanography curriculum. A quick look at Michele’s resume raises the question: how did someone clearly on a hard science track become someone devoted to Education and Outreach (E/PO) Recently Michele consented to answer this question - and more.

You started out as a teacher. What happened?

I had been a teacher in California in the 1970s. I drifted away from it – there was a surplus of teachers, and being in a room with 25 people all day seemed like it would drive anyone nuts. I also got less involved in education and more involved in science.

And working on a PhD seemed like the answer?

Yes, I was accepted into the PhD program in marine microbiology in the Oceanography department at the University of Hawaii. But it was clear that I wasn’t competitive enough or devoted enough or comfortable writing enough to be a PI.

What did you do instead?

I enjoyed being in the lab, and felt that I could do exceptionally good work, so I finished my MS in Oceanography. That work included an incredible opportunity to do field work in Antarctica. I spent four years working in a lab in Hawaii and learned molecular methods.

What got you from Hawaii to Cape Cod?

I am married to an oceanographer, and we wanted to live on the mainland. He got offered a position at WHOI. I got a position at the MBL Ecosystem Center. They needed someone to do field work on the LTERS, and because of my work in Antarctica I could fit in with the Arctic research. I wanted to be doing molecular work, and was working in Mitch Sogin’s lab, examining the role of microbes in Arctic lakes and streams, the carbon flow and how bacteria affect the movement of nutrients. I’ve gone on 14 trips to the Arctic over the course of a dozen years.

What got you back into teaching?

From the late 1980s to 2000 I had been doing exclusively lab work. I began to feel like talking with people again would be a good thing to do and would give me a larger context for my work. When I did do presentations or worked with students I always found the connections strong and the work satisfying. I considered going back to teaching but didn’t want to leave the lab. Then I started volunteering to teach ESL classes, and discovered adult education – and that everyone is there because they want to be. So I became a GED instructor.

You seem to have a mission. How does teaching science fit in?

I am bothered by the isolation of science, how everyone works in an ethereal atmosphere. To my mind, science is the world, so you can’t hate it or ignore it. My mission is to try to interject enthusiasm and understanding about math and science to adult learners.

How did your present job come about?

In 2004 there was an opening for the Education and Outreach Coordinator in Astrobiology, and I decided it was my big chance. It would allow me to stay at MBL and do something different.

What are some of your specific outreach projects?

I have been working with Lorraine Olendzenski on Living in the Microbial World, a summer workshop for high school teachers at MBL. Scientists from the Woods Hole community present teachers with background information and information about current research developments topics related to the importance of microbes and microbial processes in the biosphere. We emphasize activities and experimental systems that can be used easily and inexpensively in the classroom to teach basic biological principles. This workshop has been an invaluable model for me. I hold workshops for teachers, advise students on science fairs, attend national meetings, and publicize astrobiology as a field, particularly microbial diversity.

What do you see as your primary functions?

I have an activist view – that a scientifically literate public is a good thing. My first job is to translate science to people who aren’t scientists. I came to the realization that it is appropriate for the general public to be aware and engaged in science investigations that are going to affect their lives. Genetics, molecular biology, ecology – all have ramifications. And from a practical standpoint, if people don’t understand science they won’t want to fund it!

How are you funded?

My job was written into the formation of the NASA Astrobiology Institute. MBL was one of eleven institutions involved from the beginning of NAI’s “virtual institute” in 1998.

How developed is E/P O as a profession?

Recently I went to a meeting of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, and the conference was titled ``Building Community: The Emerging EPO Profession.’’ We’re so new we don’t have our own conference yet! There are professional development avenues open. I have been wondering about the second step – different from one-on-one contact at workshops – how to reach the greatest number of people, which is most likely to come from the internet.

Is E/PO becoming more accepted by researchers?

Assistant level scientists do understand and make outreach part of their work. They recognize that it has to be part of their proposals. They’re looking for what will separate them from the crowd. And they are mostly outgoing, friendly people.

And older scientists?

It's rare to find a senior scientist interested in outreach. I’m not so sure that understanding exists with people who have been doing science for a long time. When they became established there was no funding, expectation or encouragement for outreach. Scientists who are serious about outreach are by and large all under 40 years old. [I wonder what kind of deep kimchee I’ll be in over this one!]

What about the role of the outreach coordinator within science?

It's necessary to demonstrate knowledge and understanding of science in this field, and most people are proving to be intelligent with a good understanding of science. I am in awe of the E/P O people I meet, the depth of their knowledge and ability to communicate. And because they are competent, they will be accepted.

Can you predict the future for E/PO?

I anticipate a growing collaboration. As people find themselves more and more impacted by science in their everyday lives they’ll be more interested in knowing what’s going on in research. Also the class division, economically and educationally, is disconcerting. People aren’t getting really basic ideas that you would expect to be common knowledge.

What does it take to know you are effective?

I've had to acknowledge that single events are not enough to actually change what a teacher does. We have to provide something more intense, a stronger influence, to get into lesson plan books. Right now we are concentrating on evaluation tools, trying to make our work more effective. We are trying to answer the question: What are our goals and are we meeting them?

What about funding?

The larger issue is funding in general. The number of proposals that aren’t funded is astronomically high. I blame that directly on the war in Iraq – money just isn’t available for science. At the moment I’m rather pessimistic about that changing. But because funding is tight scientists can’t live in an ivory tower.