#MakingourCASE 2025
by Jocelyn D. Rodriguez, Jade Fachin, & Isaias Roberson
Isaias Roberson (left), Jocelyn Rodriguez (center), and Jade Fachin (right) were the UCLA PhD students sent as delegates to the AAAS CASE Workshop in Washington, DC by the Graduate Programs in Biosciences and Brain Research Institute.
AAAS: Advancing Science, Serving Society
The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) is one of the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific societies and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its Science family of journals. The mission of AAAS is to advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all.
As part of this mission, AAAS hosts an annual “Catalyzing Advocacy in Science and Engineering” (CASE) Workshop in D.C., geared towards understanding science policy, advocacy, and the interface of science and government. Another focus of the workshop is learning how to communicate science to non-scientists, including government officials and the general public. Increasing good science communication is vital to increasing awareness of the importance of our work and retaining funding for scientific programs, particularly in the current political climate.
The CASE Workshop
The 2025 AAAS CASE workshop was split across three days:
Day 1 provided a broad overview of the history of science policy. The first day was an introduction to science policy led by Tobin Smith, the Senior Vice President for Government Relations and Public Policy at the Association of American Universities.
Day 2 was learning about how federal budgets are drafted and set in motion. The focus on Day 2 was about the federal government structure and budget. We participated in an activity led by Alessandra Zimmermann, the Senior Manager of AAAS’s R&D Budget and Policy Program, where we split into groups of different political views and attempted to create a federal budget and agree on allocating funds. If time ran out, we had to resort to a “continuing resolution.” Without agreement, last year’s actual federal budget is continued without any changes only until the end of the fiscal year (September 2025)! At any point during this continued resolution period a new and final budget can be proposed if agreed upon.
Day 3 was about how the three branches of government interact and why it’s essential to ensure that Congress is on board with the importance of scientific funding, as they hold the most power. Day 3 also revolved around the theme of science communication and specifically communicating science in “challenging times” and how to be a good advocate for science. This day included some tips on how science communication will vary and should be tailored to your audience, especially on Capitol Hill.
Day 4 “Hill Day” focused on implementing everything we learned from the workshop into our 7 staff meetings on Capitol Hill. There we met with the offices of our 2 California senators (Adam Schiff & Alex Padilla) and 5 House Representatives from across Southern California, both Republican and Democrat, including Westwood’s representative Ted Lieu. We joined forces with other graduate students from UCSD, UCSF, and UCSB for our meetings with the senators’ offices. We were not too sure what to expect with these meetings, but we slowly got the hang of it! Our talking points included the importance of federal funding in biomedical research, informing the offices of immigration issues happening nationwide (with a focus on its impact on universities in their districts!), and the importance of funding for reproductive health research.
2025 CASE Participants outside the United States Capitol Building.
Key Takeaways:
Isaias:
“..being able to see members of the government and interact with them. They are normal people, just like us. In the same way that people might form preconceptions about a scientist and then meet one and realize they are a normal person, the same applies to politicians, even if we might see them on TV.”
Jade:
Getting a more in depth understanding of the federal government was illuminating! There is someone who teaches the federal government about the federal government!
There are clear differences between science for policy and policy for science. Policy for science includes making decisions that impact the pursuit of research and science as a whole. Science for policy is a way to scientifically inform a decision or policy.
Science policy is an essential branch to science communication. This was an amazing opportunity to see how to bridge the gap between science and politicians/policymakers while also knowing there are important roles science plays in policymaking.
Jocelyn:
“Turn anger and frustration into action”- there were conversations at length about the current climate of scientific distrust and injustices happening currently across the board nationwide in our scientific community. I think what I took most from this was being able to explain to non-scientists and government representatives how and why the changes at the government level are affecting you personally. They care about stories and personal impact.
The “dialogue model” is the most effective way to engage and convey scientific communication.
Communicating with policy makers requires context, a description of the bigger picture and coordination-message will be better received if it is concise and easily digestible
When advocating, be sure to have your “ask” ready: most representatives want to do what the majority of their constituents are asking for, so it’s important for your voice to be heard (via email, letter, phone call etc.). Avoid using a template letter if possible because your unique story will be more valued.
View of the Jefferson Memorial across the Tidal Basin.
Washington DC was beautiful and a bit chilly at this time of year! After the workshop we were able to explore this flourishing city. Some of the activities we chose to do was indulge in some local cuisine, peruse the many free Smithsonian museums, or simply walk around and enjoy the monuments lit up at night. It was a great experience being able to meet so many students that are passionate about advocating for science during this time.
We want to thank the Brain Research Institute (BRI) and the Graduate Programs in Bioscience (GBP) for giving us the opportunity to not only learn about science policy and advocacy, but proudly represent UCLA graduate students and advocate for science, positive change, and scientific funding.
