In the EMBL Skills & Careers Webinar held in June 2026, Sally Hall, Science Education and Public Engagement Officer at the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), explored practical approaches to sharing science with non-specialist audiences and reflected on the broader role of public engagement in research careers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The session sparked a wide range of questions from participants, covering topics such as engaging audiences in dialogue, reaching and including diverse audiences, and navigating a career in public engagement. Below, you will find a brief career profile of the speaker, followed by a lightly edited transcript of the Q&A discussion from the live session.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The presentation slides are available here<\/a>, and a concise summary of the key takeaways from the talk can be found here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Sally has built a diverse career across journalism, public health, and life-science public engagement. After a decade as a journalist, she worked as a public health specialist in Leeds, UK. This involved sharing complex scientific information with a wide range of audiences. She also used participatory approaches to design and evaluate programmes promoting physical activity and healthy eating.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Since joining the Science Education and Public Engagement Office at EMBL in 2023, Sally has contributed to major initiatives including the TRaversing European Coastlines (TREC)<\/a> public engagement programme, which reached more than 10,000 people, and Unfold Your World<\/a>, a Europe-wide protein art project. Her current focus is on embedding a strong public engagement culture at EMBL. In 2025-26, this includes developing and delivering an organisation-wide training offer, rolling out a seed fund for public engagement projects, setting up knowledge exchange networks with colleagues, and organising drop-in events to promote and discuss public engagement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n How can you encourage genuine two-way dialogue with the public?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n That\u2019s a really good question. For me, the key starting point is to keep asking questions and encouraging engagement wherever possible. If asking questions verbally doesn\u2019t land well, there are also non-verbal ways to do this. For example, it can feel uncomfortable to put individual people on the spot, so a show of hands can be a useful alternative. For instance, you might ask: \u201cHas anyone heard of this before?\u201d or \u201cWho has studied this topic?\u201d This can help you gauge understanding without putting pressure on individuals. It\u2019s important to check back in regularly so you don\u2019t lose your audience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The key is to build in interaction from the very beginning. If you start with a traditional talk format, it can feel more intimidating for people to join in, because the speaker is positioned as the expert. If you want more interaction, formats really matter. Hands-on activities can help, because when people are doing something, they often feel more comfortable asking questions and engaging informally.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also depends on group size, but the main point is to design interaction into the activity from the start.<\/p>\n\n\n\n How do you choose the right audience for your engagement activity?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n This depends on what you are trying to achieve. The \u201cright audience\u201d might be different depending on the purpose. Sometimes it could be stakeholders or funders. Other times it could be young learners, where the aim is to share enthusiasm and possibly influence future career interests. So the \u201cright audience\u201d really depends on the purpose of the engagement and your motivation. There isn\u2019t a single right audience as such. So maybe it\u2019s more the other way around – about choosing the right engagement activity for your audience?<\/p>\n\n\n\n We often also talk about reaching people with lower \u201cscience capital<\/a>\u201d, meaning people who may have fewer opportunities to engage with scientific ideas in their everyday environment. Extra effort is needed to reach audiences who are not already engaging with science. And if you are thinking about a career in public engagement, inclusivity is important \u2013 making sure you are reaching people who may feel less comfortable engaging with science.<\/p>\n\n\n\n *How can we communicate complex topics clearly without creating unrealistic expectations about their real-world or clinical applications?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Recently, I spoke to one of our EMBL research fellows based in Grenoble about his public engagement experiences, and I was really inspired by what he said. His name is Jules Van der Walt, and his research is in structural biology. He tells people it\u2019s important to understand the structure of proteins because there are diseases linked to certain proteins, and knowing their structure at an atomic level is an important part of developing treatments for these diseases. It\u2019s about being a piece of a bigger puzzle, rather than making big claims like \u201cthis research could cure dementia\u201d, which might create unrealistic expectations. And when we talk about complex topics like this, we can use concepts and metaphors that many people can relate to, like the idea that if something has gone wrong \u2013 or even, for some audiences, you could say a \u201cmutation\u201d has occurred \u2013 then the protein won\u2019t fold in the way it should, and if it isn\u2019t in its proper structure, this can cause problems. But Jules also tells people that, at its core, science is driven by curiosity. We don\u2019t always know at the beginning what the application might be at the end, and that is actually really exciting and something to embrace. I think we need to own that too.<\/p>\n\n\n\n *Due to time constraints, we were not able to address this audience question during the live webinar session. We therefore included it in this blog post, with Sally kindly providing a written response afterwards.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n How do you address language barriers in public engagement?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n This is a very real issue, especially in international settings like EMBL where people speak many different languages.<\/p>\n\n\n\n First, it\u2019s important to say that having multiple languages is an asset, not a barrier. When you\u2019re offering an engagement activity, it is not always essential for everyone to be fluent in the host country language. In practice, many of the people who come along to an event may speak different languages, often including English. But even when there isn’t a common language, those with an interest in public engagement can still contribute meaningfully. <\/p>\n\n\n\n A lot of engagement is non-verbal: being friendly, smiling, and showing enthusiasm already goes a long way. You can also use pointing, gestures, and visual communication, which are often very effective. For more complex topics, or spaces where in-depth conversation is part of the activity, a shared language is of course important, but lack of fluency does not exclude participation in engagement activities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n There are also other ways to contribute, for example through translation. At EMBL, our educational resources are usually adapted into several different languages, so people can support engagement by assisting with translation, for example. <\/p>\n\n\n\n How do you think about and address diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) in your engagement activities?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n This is a really good question, and it\u2019s an ongoing area of work. It is very much a work in progress, not something we can say is fully \u201cdone\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When planning activities, one approach is to think actively about language accessibility, and offering activities in multiple languages, especially for communities that may have been less engaged with science historically.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Another approach is thinking about different sensory needs. For example, designing activities that work for people with visual impairments, such as sound-based or tactile experiences. Accessibility in physical spaces is also important, for example, ensuring wheelchair access and mobility access in venues and exhibitions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Overall, it\u2019s about continuously improving accessibility in language, sensory experience, and physical access, but also recognising that there is always more that can be done.<\/p>\n\n\n\n How do you know whether a public engagement activity has been successful?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n There are lots of different ways of thinking about it. At a basic level, it\u2019s important to record information about the activity. For example, how many people took part, and maybe the age range of participants. You can also do on-the-spot evaluations. It\u2019s useful to have something simple like a comment board, and encourage people to leave feedback about the activity. This can then be photographed as a record. This kind of simple approach can be one way of capturing people\u2019s responses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also depends on your audience. For example, at EMBL we had a large public engagement initiative that engaged more than 10,000 people as part of a project called TREC (Traversing European Coastlines). It took place across Europe and was very much a pop-up style engagement. In that case, evaluation was more challenging because you don\u2019t necessarily see those people again.We did use evaluation forms and QR codes, and encouraged people to respond, which is great, but it can be difficult without an ongoing relationship.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is why community engagement can offer richer evaluation opportunities, because you can go back to people, check in afterwards, and ask more qualitative questions about their experience and impact. You can also adjust what you do next time based on that feedback.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For example, in our teacher training, we follow up six months later to ask how the training has impacted teaching and classroom practice. At that point, we use both qualitative and quantitative evaluation. That kind of longitudinal approach helps us understand longer-term impact.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I’m interested in moving from bench science into public engagement. Where should I start?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If someone wants to move into public engagement professionally, it\u2019s often about building up a portfolio of experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A good starting point is to find job opportunities through mailing lists, such as science communication or public engagement networks, which often include internships as well. Larger networks and organisations can also be useful for finding opportunities, as well as conferences where you can network and sometimes take part in speed networking events. LinkedIn is also important if used strategically, for example, by following people working in the field and organisations that advertise opportunities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Internships can be a very good entry point. Many people start that way, including me – I came to EMBL as a trainee – and it can be a strong way into the field. Evaluation is also important here. If you can clearly demonstrate the impact of your engagement work, that becomes very valuable in applications and interviews, because it shows you understand the full process, from engagement to impact.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For more information on EMBL\u2019s science education and public engagement activities<\/strong>, including a wide range of accessible and freely available resources for use in settings from the classroom to science fairs, visit their dedicated website<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nCareer profile<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nWebinar Q&A<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n