My misunderstanding about smart materials and solar energy
Keith S. Taber
It all started with an invitation from the 4th Annual World Congress of Smart Materials:
"Dear Dr. Keith S. Taber,
Hope this letter doesn't bother you.
The construction work of the The 4th Annual World Congress of Smart Materials (WCSM-2018)'s program is drawing to a close due to lots of preparing work and Festival Holiday before the conference. And almost every session is only one or two available slot. However, the congress committee considers that we still lack one fantastic speech on Upper Secondary Students' Understanding of the Basic Physical Interactions in Analogous Atomic and Solar Systems like your research. Therefore, we cordially invite you to make an oral presentation as the Speaker under Session 705: Materials for Solar Energy and Solar Microgrids.
What's more, please kindly pay attention [!], the deadline for submitting the speech abstract is December 20th. If you're interested in it, please contact me as soon as possible. Please don't miss the last chance to enjoy an academic feast.
Until now, WCSM has confirmed 300+ speakers from 22 countries. Keynote Speakers are list as below:
Dr. Shuji Nakamura, Professor, University of California Santa Barbara, USA (2014 Nobel Prize for Physics)
Dr. Mark Bradley, Professor, University of Edinburgh, UK
Dr. Florin Udrea, Professor, Cambridge University, UK; Fellow of Royal Academy of Engineering, UK
Dr. Masahiro Yoshimura, President, the World Academy of Ceramics (WAC); Chair Professor, the National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan
Dr. Mo Elbestawi, Fellow of the Canadian Academy of Engineering; Professor and Director, W. Booth School for Engineering Practice and Technology, McMaster University, Canada
More speakers and topics have been update online for your reference. Please don't hesitate to contact the coordinator to get details. …"
It was not immediately obvious to me how school students' understandings of the interactions in atomic and solar systems fitted with smart materials, so I did not hesitate (well, at least, not for too long) to contact the coordinator for clarification:
Invited speaker at World Congress of Smart Materials – query
"Thank you for the invitation to be a speaker at the 4th Annual World Congress of Smart Materials alongside such leaders in the field as Profs. Nakamura, Bradley, Udrea, Yoshimura, and Elbestawi. This would seem to be a very worthwhile conference which is likely to attract many delegates wishing to hear the expert presentations. I am pleased you have nearly completed the job of populating the programme with relevant talks.
I would not say your letter 'bothered' me, but I must confess I was a little surprised to be invited to speak at the session on Materials for Solar Energy and Solar Microgrid, given my own area of research and scholarship. I am sorry to read that you still still 'lack one fantastic speech' on the theme of 'Upper Secondary Students' Understanding of the Basic Physical Interactions in Analogous Atomic and Solar Systems'.
Whilst I can see why you would invite me as someone who would be ideally placed to speak on that subject, I am still struggling to see how it would be of interest to experts in materials science. Do they really want to hear about how school students may transfer ideas incorrectly between their understanding of the forces acting in the solar system, and their developing thinking about basic models of atomic structure? I feel it may be difficult to do the topic justice in the the usual time for an oral presentation, as I imagine that many in the audience would not have strong background knowledge in terms of learning theories, pedagogy, curriculum representations, teaching models, student conceptions, and the like, which would mean I would have to set out a lot of background that I might normally take for granted if talking to delegates more familiar with the field in which the work was undertaken.
Perhaps, however, I am missing the connection you are making in extending this kind invitation, and I look forward to hearing back from you about what you might imagine that I would include in such a talk that would be of interest to colleagues in this field, and to persuade me why I should prioritise my own time to select to present to this particular audience.
Best wishes
Keith"
Sadly the clarification was not as in-depth as I might have hoped:
"We hope you could make a keynote Speech under Session 705: Materials for Solar Energy and Solar Microgrids.
More details on this session, you could click on http://www.bitcongress.com/wcsm2018/ScientificProgramme7.aspPlease let me know whether you're interested in it."
So further clarification was sought:
Congruence of topic for keynote talk Re: Invited speaker at World Congress of Smart Materials – query
"Dear …
Thank you for getting back to me.
It is kind of you to reiterate the invitation to be an invited speaker and give a keynote at the conference.
I remain a little perturbed however, that specialists in smart materials who I appreciate might want to hear the latest developments and ideas in the topic of Materials for Solar Energy and Solar Microgrids are surely unlikely to find a talk considering conceptual difficulties that impact secondary level pedagogy of particular interest. I was hoping you could clarify the line of logic that led to you deciding that this work fitted alongside that of materials scientists and engineers of the quality of Profs. Nakamura, Bradley, Udrea, Yoshimura, and Elbestawi. In my own area of scholarship I understand why I would be called upon to consider giving a plenary talk, but a keynote speaker needs to be able to interest and enthuse (to inform and to some extent entertain) the specialist audience at a conference. Clearly my own work largely relates to aspects of conceptual understanding, integration, and progression in basic physical science topics commonly included in the secondary science curriculum.
Although I am clearly honoured to be considered alongside experts in this important field of research (which I recognise is of real significance in economic and environmental, as well as technical, terms), I am missing the rationale for why a serious academic conference aimed at academic and industrial scientists would choose to offer a valued and rare keynote opportunity to a scholar who works in a not entirely cognate field. I do not think this is false modesty, and I would genuinely appreciate you sharing your thinking on this. I am pleased you value my work so highly, but feel there must be a question here of its central relevance to your conference theme that I need to give due weight in considering an invitation.
Best wishes
Keith"
Still the clarification was disappointing:
"Thank you for your kind reply.
I think you maybe have some misunderstanding.
We hope you could make the Keynote Speech under Session 705: Materials for Solar Energy and Solar Microgrids not plenary.
What's more, due to the limited sponsorship and high cost for the conference preparation, I'm afraid that we couldn't cover the expense for our invited speakers.
It this convenient for you?
Look forward to your reply!…"
I was not really getting any clarification on the key issue:
"Dear …
I think you may be right that I have some misunderstanding, but I was hoping you could clarify for me, as I do not want to commit to talking to an audience that would not appreciate the presentation. It seems a little mean to invite speakers to give keynotes, but then not pay their expenses. What are the options for presenting remotely: as this would save you the cost of travel, accommodation etc.
I must reiterate, however, that I first need clarification of how my work fits with the interests of those attending. Do you have many delegates with science education backgrounds who are registered for the 'Materials for Solar Energy and Solar Microgrid' session? Are there going to be scholars and researchers from fields such as chemistry education and physics education in the audience? I would also need clarification of the timing of the Keynote, as there is a considerable time difference between here and Osaka.
Best wishes
Keith"
Back came a response, but still not addressing the logic of the invitation
"Thank you for your kind reply.
You could get more details on Solar Energy session by the following link…
Due to the limited sponsorship and high cost for the conference preparation, the committee is not able to cover the expense for our invited speakers, so you need to cover your expense by yourself. Hope you could understand.
Is this convenient for you? …"
So I am left to decide if it is convenient for me to travel around the world at my own expense to talk on a topic that clearly does not fit in the session topic or even the wider conference theme, to delegates unlikely to want to her about my work, at an event organised by people with no concern for 'constructing' a coherent programme.
I will give it some thought.
Addendum:
"Dear Dr. Taber,
Hope you receive this letter in a wonderful mood.
Have you make the decision on your attendance? Please let me know your decision. More details on the congress, you could click on the following link. …
Look forward to your reply! …"
"Dear …
Thank you for your message.
You have made no attempt to answer my substantive question in any of your replies, so I am left bemused about the rationale for the invitation. I suggest you look for someone with appropriate expertise to be able to talk on a topic likely to be of interest to the delegates, i.e., someone with expertise relevant to the theme of the strand. If people are paying you to attend a meeting about current developments in solar energy technology then I would imagine they are likely to wish to hear about that topic. I have not been able to work out why you think otherwise as you have not been prepared to explain this and have just ignored the question.
I hope the conference goes well.
Best wishes
Keith"
Read about 'Conferences and poor academic practice'
First published 12th December 2017 at http://people.ds.cam.ac.uk/kst24/
