# Session 4 — Explaining Geophysics to Someone Who Doesn't Care (Yet)
Format D — Science Communication Workshop
Week 4
Relevance: Risk communication · Public engagement
*90-second concept pitches · Peer rubric feedback · Risk translation*
---
```{dropdown} Hook (0 – 5 min)
Play **90 seconds** of a scientist explaining something poorly to a general audience — jargon-heavy, no analogy, no "why it matters."
Then play **90 seconds** of the same concept explained well (IRIS educational videos or similar).
Ask: **"What was different? What changed?"**
Take 3–4 observations before moving on.
```
```{dropdown} Peer pitch activity (5 – 40 min)
Each student delivers a **90-second verbal explanation** of one geophysics concept (their choice, from Weeks 1–4) to a partner. Partner gives structured feedback on 4 criteria:
1. Was there an analogy?
2. Was the "why it matters" clear?
3. Was there unexplained jargon?
4. Would you want to learn more?
Pairs swap roles. Then 2–3 volunteers present to the full room.
**Class debrief:** What made the best explanations work — and why is this hard even when you understand the content?
```
```{dropdown} Relevance
**Communication:** Earthquake misinformation spreads faster than seismic waves on social media. The USGS 2024–33 EHP Decadal Strategy explicitly identifies "risk translation and communication" as a core program priority. Geoscientists who can communicate clearly are rare and in demand.
**Career:** Every job interview contains a version of this moment — explain your work to a non-expert. The 90-second verbal explanation is also directly transferable to cover letters, LinkedIn summaries, and conference poster conversations.
```
```{dropdown} Go Deeper
USGS "Did You Feel It?" citizen science program · Fallou et al. (2022) on fighting earthquake misinformation
**One name:** Dr. Sara McBride, USGS — earthquake risk communication. What frameworks does she use to explain probabilistic hazard?
```