Science is fascinating. Learning why things happen can sometimes become addictive. From a very young age, many of us have felt that urge to understand why a ball rolling across a table falls once it reaches the edge, or why a toy works the way it does (often taking it apart—sometimes without successfully putting it back together).
When I was little, I had three options to answer those “whys”: asking my mom, asking my teachers, and reading. As I grew older, studied, and learned (and eventually gravitated toward studying engineering), my options narrowed to asking teachers and reading. In other words, teachers became fundamental to my development. At university, I was always surrounded by professors whose main goal was to transfer their scientific, technical, or engineering knowledge to students predisposed to learn about those subjects.
Predisposition in audiences is key
Predisposition to learn refers to a person’s favorable attitude or inclination toward learning. This interest or willingness makes it easier to receive and process new knowledge. We see it clearly when students decide to enroll in a science or engineering program. However, even with that predisposition, understanding certain topics is difficult.
I have often heard that although a professor may have extensive knowledge on a subject, that does not guarantee they can effectively transmit it to students in the classroom. This is true—I can affirm it both as a student and as a professor—and it represents a very real challenge.
As a university student, I often had the experience of listening to a professor, the owner of an undeniable palace of knowledge, present a subject without fluency or logical order.
Likewise, when I became a professor, I realized that having clear and well-structured concepts is not enough. Success in the classroom depends on presenting those concepts in a way that allows students to easily assimilate them. To achieve this, professors must recall their own experiences as students, when their conceptual foundations were not yet strong. What now seems logical and straightforward to us might not feel that way to our students.
No matter the course, we must always connect our content with the fundamentals—the knowledge that forms the foundation for future professionals. By doing this, we help students build strong bases to construct their own palaces of knowledge. At the same time, if we want our students to be captivated by the subjects we present, it is equally important to become excellent storytellers. That is how we strengthen their predisposition to learn.
Students and the general public: two audiences, two ways of telling science
The challenge of clearly transmitting scientific knowledge from professor to student is only part of the issue. The greater challenge lies in transmitting science clearly to the general public, not just to that fraction of the population who are students predisposed to learn these subjects.
The general public does not necessarily share the same predisposition as classroom students. We can only spark their interest to the extent that we relate science and technology to their daily lives. Our role is to cultivate that disposition in the general public, not just to reinforce it in the classroom.
Let’s use the professor–student dynamic as a model of analysis. Knowledge transmission can be seen as a system consisting of several elements: the professor, the message, the medium, and the student. The professor produces a message and gives it structure, precision, and depth. The message is transmitted through a medium—in this case, the classroom, designed for that very purpose. The student hears the message, but many factors come into play.
The student evaluates other aspects as well: compatibility between the professor’s personality and their own, the tone and nuances of the professor’s voice, and the fluency of delivery. These factors, independent of content, affect how the message is understood. If we step outside the classroom into a more general setting, the medium itself may alter the message with external noise or time constraints, limiting its length and structure. And remember—in a general setting, we no longer have the student’s predisposition on our side.
Now, let’s look at the other side of the issue. Social media and emerging platforms for sharing information (Instagram, TikTok, YouTube) have boosted the presence of charismatic communicators—people who can captivate audiences, even if they lack the proper credentials to discuss certain subjects. This affects the precision and depth of the message. Their structure might be excellent, their charisma appealing, their voice pleasant—but the quality of the message suffers.
This should make all professors reflect. We face a great challenge: to communicate our knowledge effectively not only to students but also to the broader public. But more than a challenge, it is a responsibility. Refusing to acknowledge it is dangerous, as it may encourage the spread of superficial or inaccurate information.
In a world that favors instant gratification, short messages, and charisma over effort, precision, and depth, how can we adapt to protect and perpetuate what we are so passionate about? How can we effectively communicate science to the society in which we are a part? The better we answer these questions, the more seeds of curiosity we will plant—seeds that can grow into monumental trees of knowledge. Just as a forest is stronger with more and bigger trees, our society will thrive the more trees of knowledge we nurture.
Víctor Hugo Pérez González is a professor in the Department of Mechatronics and a member of the Nanotechnology and Semiconductors research group at the School of Engineering and Sciences, Tecnológico de Monterrey. He is a level 2 member of Mexico’s National System of Researchers.
