Voices  Laura Wagner === [00:00:00] Laura Wagner: We're in a science museum and they're supposed to be getting a science experience. They're not just here to give us data. They're also here so that we can give them some kind of understanding of what science is and how it works. Jen Farmer: From the heart of the Ohio State University on the Oval, this is Voices of Excellence from the College of Arts and Sciences, with your host David Staley. Voices focuses on the innovative work of Arts and Sciences faculty and staff. With departments as wide ranging as art, astronomy, chemistry and biochemistry, physics, emergent materials and mathematics, and languages, among many others, the college always has something exciting happening. Join us to find out what's new, now. Joining me today over Zoom is Laura Wagner, Professor of Developmental Psychology at the Ohio State University College of the Arts and Sciences. She is the Director of the Language Sciences Research Lab at the Center of Science and Industry, COSI, [00:01:00] here in Columbus, where she collects data and helps to educate the public about language and linguistics. She has received many awards, including Ohio State's Outreach and Engagement Community Partnership Award, the Linguistics Language and the Public Award from the Linguistics Society of America, and in 2023 was named a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Dr. Wagner, welcome to Voices. Laura Wagner: Thank you. And I'd like to start first with the Language Sciences Research Lab. Tell us about this, I think, very unusual lab, or at least its location, is very unusual. Laura Wagner: It is actually one of a very few number of labs like this that exist around the world. So, if you've ever been to COSI, on the second floor of COSI, there is an exhibit and they call it the "Life" exhibit, and at the very beginning of the "Life" exhibit, there are three giant glass rooms. We call it a fishbowl style lab because we are inside these glass rooms where, part of the purpose at COSI is for people to watch us [00:02:00] doing research. We're like the monkeys at the zoo, and people can come and see what real research looks like. So, that's how we originally were conceived by COSI and Ohio State is as something they call research in real time or research in view, and the idea was we would use the visitors at COSI as our participants in our studies and collect data there. We do that, we do that a lot. We work with around 2,500 to 3000 COSI visitors every year as actual research participants. There are several faculty members across campus who collect data there, and it's been a really successful research lab for us. So, what does it mean to say that you work with 3000 members of the public, what does that mean they're working directly with you? Laura Wagner: So, we have, at any given time, anywhere from two to seven different research experiments going on there that are just part of people's research programs. So, in my spare time I study children's language [00:03:00] development, so, I might be doing a study about how children learn the meanings of the words before and after, for instance. We have researchers in Linguistics and Speech and Hearing Science, and occasionally the Music department or the English department or the Computer Science department, and everybody has their own research studies, and just as on campus, you might get Ohio State students to come in and do your study and press your buttons and go through your experiment. What we do is we go out on the floor at COSI and we say, do you wanna do a science experiment? And shockingly large numbers of people say yes, and they come on into our glass room and they do a research study just the way they would do if they were in a lab on campus, except they aren't necessarily Ohio State students, although some of them are. So, they are everyday normal, regular people who honestly don't always get a chance to participate in a research study. And then, the other thing that we do that's a little bit different from some research on campus, is we are very [00:04:00] good about giving educational debriefings, we call them. We want people to actually understand why we did what we did and, you know, what they're doing and why science matters and what's going on in this study, because, after all, we're in a science museum and they're supposed to be getting a science experience. They're not just here to give us data; they're also here so that we can give them some kind of understanding of what science is and how it works. Well, I know one of the research activities you engage with in the public is teaching people about the International Phonetic Alphabet, and I'd like you to tell us a little bit more about this research line. Laura Wagner: Okay, well, so let me be clear about what we're doing with the IPA. One thing I do wanna be clear about is that, in addition to doing research, we actually also do a whole series of things that are straight up education, public engagement, where we're not collecting data, and the IPA is actually falls into an interesting situation where it's both. So, IPA [00:05:00] is the International Phonetic Alphabet, and this is a tool that linguists use all the time as a way to write down what speech sounds like. So, you are probably familiar with the fact that, in English, spellings aren't always easy, and sometimes when you look at the way a word is spelled, you can't figure out how to pronounce it, and if you're a child and you're learning this, believe me, it's, it's a problem, but it's even sometimes a problem for adults as well. So, the English spelling system is not always a true representation of what sounds are like, but if you're a linguist, you care about what the actual sounds are. And this is important for a number of reasons: it's important because different languages use different sounds, and so you don't wanna have to always be sort of weirdly trying to translate something between what English is doing or not doing and what they're doing, some languages don't even have writing systems, and then even within English, different people pronounce things differently, and you might wanna represent that [00:06:00] depending on the kind of work you do. So, for instance, if you study regional dialects, it might matter to you that something that we would all spell "PIE" gets pronounced very differently by people in the North and people in the South. So, the International Phonetic Alphabet or the IPA is a tool that linguists use. Now, we often do a whole educational activity about the IPA at COSI, and often we just do it and it's just a way to educate people about a tool that linguists use and it's fun. And we give you a name tag and we'll write your name in the IPA and you get to see how the letters that you use may or may not correspond to the sounds that are in your name. And it's a way for us to help people think about the fact that spoken language is about the sounds, and letters are not the same thing as sounds. And we also use it as a way to think about how you do make sounds and how we can represent that. We've been using the IPA to make name tags for people for many years, we love this, our students love this. It's actually a, common activity, if you ask a linguist on the street, how [00:07:00] can I engage people, they may well come up with this as an example. But what we really wanted to do was find out whether we're any good at educating people about the IPA when we give them a name tag, right? So, we're at a science museum, we are researchers and we do public engagement, and one of the things we do research about is the public engagement effective? And so, we did a whole study about the IPA public engagement activity, and so, what we did is we did our activity more or less the way we normally would; it wasn't quite the same because we made sure that the student had a script, it wasn't a, you know, word by word script, but it was a, you know, here are the 10 points you're gonna go through and here's roughly the order you're gonna do it in. Obviously, people come and talk to her and sometimes the conversation gets derailed or goes in a different direction or goes in a different order, but she's got a pretty strong script. So, we know that every time she does the demo with people, they're getting pretty much the same experience. And then what we did is [00:08:00] we interviewed people before they did the activity and we interviewed them after they did the activity, and we asked them a lot of questions about what they had learned and what they were interested in. And we also asked them questions about things like, what do you think a linguist does, and do you think that we do science, and do you think we could do experiments, and how would you learn about language, and things like that. And what we were interested in is, what's the effect of learning how to write your name in the IPA on all of these sorts of things? The answer is glass half empty, glass half full, to be perfectly honest. So, the whole activity takes less than 10 minutes, depending on how interested you are. It could take four to five minutes or seven to eight minutes, but it, it never takes much longer than that; we're an activity on the floor at COSI, we're here to be, have fun with people. Everybody does have fun, for the record, at least they all say they have fun, whether or not it's true. We ask them what did they learn, and pretty much everybody learns [00:09:00] something important. So, they sometimes they learn about how you make sounds, sometimes they learn about the fact that this is a tool, sometimes they learn about writing systems. The real message that we think is critical for this activity is the idea that sounds and letters are different things and that, if you're a linguist, you need to represent the sounds the way people really make them, even if that's different than the way English would write them. So, you have to get the connection between sounds and letters, and honestly, only about a quarter to a third of the people actually get that message all the way. So, if you're a pessimist, you can think, wow, you aren't teaching everybody everything you really wanted, but I'm an optimist, so what I think is, wow, in seven minutes I can get a third of the people I talk to to get my entire message and I can get like 90% of the people to get at least a piece of that message. The part I'm super excited about and the part that was most exciting for us as sort of researchers in a science museum was the idea that we [00:10:00] actually do a pretty good job at convincing people that you can study language in a scientific way. So, showing people a tool that linguists use and talking about it like we're scientists actually seems to impress people, that there are professionals here, we're scientists, we use the scientific method and we can use experiments and do all the things that scientists do to figure out how language works. So, the place where we move the needle, frankly, the most is not necessarily on the content, it's on attitudes around language and the attitudes around linguistics. And that's one of the big missions we have at COSI, is to convince people that this is what science is, and these are what scientists look like, and this is something you can study scientifically, and that's something we're very successful at. So, you described your lab here as being sort of in a fishbowl, you are very much there in public. As a researcher, is that troubling? Do you find that uncomfortable being in a fishbowl like [00:11:00] that? Laura Wagner: You know, we thought we would all feel uncomfortable a little bit, and we thought that the visitors would be really uncomfortable participating in a research study, you know, with everybody watching them, but the fact of the matter is that you forget about it really fast; honestly, probably too fast. You know, sometimes we have to make sure that we remind our students that people can see you, right? There are things you should not do, people are watching you all the time. So, you know, like being on your phone inside of the lab is actually kind of wrong because people are watching you be on your phone. So yeah, we were surprised that it turned out to be a non-issue. So, yeah, it, you get used to anything. Turns out you can get used to people watching you. So, you don't think it impacts the science, that what you're doing there in a fishbowl is different, say from a lab on campus? Laura Wagner: Okay, so that's something we have definitely wondered about before, and believe me, our reviewers occasionally wonder about it when we publish papers. For some of the things that we do, like with the IPA thing, that's a feature not a bug, because the whole point is that [00:12:00] we're, you know, yes, this is what it's like when people are in a public space. We have actually done a couple of studies where researchers have done them in the lab and done them out at COSI and compared the results to see is there anything dramatically different in the results, and the answer is there's not. David Staley: Hmm. Laura Wagner: There really isn't. The biggest difference is probably that we have more people drop out of our studies than do in a normal lab situation, and partly that's because we have many more things that can draw people away. So sometimes people, you know, leave because their kids are like, I wanna go, and you're like, you know what, that's a distraction, you should go. So, we have, you know, a little bit more of sort of people being distracted by, like, their situation. We have learned with kids that if they have siblings, you know, sometimes the siblings likes to go on the outside of the glass and purposefully distract them; that turns out not to be our best choice if we can avoid it. But you know, that actually happens much less frequently than you might imagine. So, even with all that, we don't lose that many [00:13:00] participants. People, when they come in, also forget that they're being watched the whole time. David Staley: Well, and I know you've done some research on the impact of this kind of public scholarship on your undergraduate students: what has the impact been? Laura Wagner: It's fantastic, to be honest. So, we've done a couple of different studies. We teach a class on campus to OSU undergraduates and graduate students, if they wanna take it, where we train them to do our public engagement activities and to learn how to talk to the public. And we've done some studies on those students, and the number one thing that we teach them is public speaking skills. People become substantially less uptight about public speaking, they feel more confident in doing it, they feel like they have control over how to make that happen. The other big thing we do is we improve their sense of sort of clarity about their science. Are they interested in going into this? Do they feel confident in talking about it? In addition, over the summer, we run a summer program. It's funded by the National Science Foundation and we, we're actually [00:14:00] up for renewal now, these days you never know what's gonna happen with that. But we also did retrospective interview with a bunch of these students and we got a lot of great feedback about the public engagement. It's something that students, undergraduate students, really feel strongly should be a part of science. They're really excited to get to do it, and they feel like it connects them to the science in a very different way, and a way they feel is important. So, it's something that sort of helps them think about going into science for different reasons and makes them feel like you could be a more responsible scientist. So, the undergraduate students feel like this is a great way to go about things and they feel like they learn a lot about themselves, how they fit into science and how to actually do the talking, as well. David Staley: Has this changed the way you think about teaching and training future scientists? In other words, say, you know, grad students, PhDs, postdocs? Laura Wagner: Well, one of the ways I got into this, there are other people in the field who do this, and I'm gonna steal a line from one of them, a guy named Colin Phillips, and as he would say, [00:15:00] you know, I never expected to be doing this, but now here I am mixing the Kool-Aid for everybody else. I mean, none of us are really trained. I mean, at least, I was certainly of the age where none of us were trained to think about our science as something that needed to be communicated to the general public. I mean, maybe you did that, but it certainly wasn't sort of embedded in what you were doing, and now I'm a huge advocate for that as something that we should be training our students to do. It's good for them because it helps them think about what's really important in their science and why they're doing what they're doing and what makes it interesting in order to communicate with the general public. That's what people care about. They do not care about the details of your counterbalancing and your statistical analyses, they care about why you're doing this and why it's important, but I think that it's also important for scientists to be able to articulate that for grant funding, for their deans, for their politicians. People don't always understand what scientists do, why it's important, [00:16:00] why we're trustworthy, why someone can work on a tiny little problem for their entire lives, and that still matters. We need to do better at communicating what we do and why it's important, and so I think it is something that should simply be a part of what we teach everybody when they do science. David Staley: So, what got you into public scholarship? What led you down this path? Laura Wagner: Pure accident, to be perfectly honest. David Staley: Okay. Laura Wagner: So, the Ohio State University is an amazing institution and they had already built a relationship with COSI. There was actually a different set of labs that was up at COSI doing research and, due to a variety of political things above my pay grade, they decided to swap out the researchers that were there, and the person who happened to be in charge of swapping the new people in was someone who was tenured in the Speech and Hearing Science department, Dr. Jan Weisenberger. She was, at the time, working at the Office of Research and she thought we should have people doing research on humans, which I think is a great idea because [00:17:00] people who do research on humans can use the visitors as participants. And, you know, it's an important part of what we do at Ohio State, and because she worked on language, she thought, you know, language is a great topic that involves studying humans. And I got roped into it by her, and we started as basically just a research lab, and then we figured out that even though we work with an enormous number of research participants, compared to the number of people who go to COSI, we don't work with anybody, right? I mean, last year they saw over 700,000 visitors and, you know, our lab, every one of our researchers is being very successful, they're getting lots of participants, and we're still only working with like 2,500, 3000 people. So, we developed our program of public engagement in part so that we could try to reach a much larger percentage of the COSI population and be a better exhibit at COSI. So, I got into it as part of maintaining the relationship and I like it, I really like doing it and I like training students to do it, so, it was pure accent that I got involved, though. David Staley: [00:18:00] And this is pure supposition on my part, but 700,000 visitors to COSI; I suspect that's a multicultural, multilingual audience. Laura Wagner: Yeah, I mean, we are in central Ohio, so yes, it's many different ages, right, it's little kids, but they come with their parents, they come with their grandparents. We have adults who go on, there's a dating scene at COSI you may not be aware of. There's a lot of different ages that go there. Central Ohio has lots of different races and ethnicities and languages. One of the people affiliated with our lab, Dr. Leslie Moore, actually did a study about, what languages are people speaking, like if you go in, you know, people are multilingual, but in what languages? And the answer is in a lot of languages, so there's, you know, obviously we have a lot of Spanish English bilinguals, but of course we also have a lot of Somali English bilinguals, and we have about more than a dozen other languages that are spoken by our visitors. That said, I will say it is still the case that the majority of people we work with are in fact, monolingual English speakers. There's a [00:19:00] lot of reasons for that; probably because those are the people most comfortable doing research studies in a public space. We do get an opportunity to reach a wide range of people. We've actually done, like, sort of developed some activities specifically to try to reach other populations. We had a small grant with Anna Babel, who's in the Spanish and Portuguese department where we brought bilingual Spanish and English activities to the floor, and she helped us get bilingual students to run them. We still have them and we still get bilingual students and we still sometimes get to have activities in Spanish being done on the floor. David Staley: Hmm. Ear lier, you had mentioned you do work in children's language development. Could you say a little bit more about this research? Laura Wagner: Sure. So my, I, I'd like to call it my bread and butter research 'cause this is what I was trained to do and this is why I got hired originally to be here. So, I study how children think meaning: the meanings of words, but also the meanings of parts of words like "ING" and "ED". And I collaborate with a lot of different people within the lab. So I, I recently worked with Dr. [00:20:00] Rachel Holt and we looked at how children learn the meanings of the words before and after. I like them 'cause they're wonderfully abstract, and so they have really complicated semantics. One of the things the lab has done has, it has changed the way I do research, because we have access to populations that you just don't normally have access to, so one of the reasons that Rachel and I were interested in before and after is because it's something that kids as old as 10 years old have trouble with a little bit. David Staley: Really? Laura Wagner: Yeah. I mean, not if you, give them enough time and you do this and you give 'em enough context, they're great, but in lots of situations, they just sometimes get 'em backwards. And so, we are interested in, in this whole idea that we've been working on this a series of studies on what we call late language development, and by late language development, I mean things that children who are between the ages of like eight and twelve typically have some trouble with. This is not a group of children who's studied all that frequently, partly because they're in school and it's, harder to [00:21:00] get access to them. You have to go through the school system and you have to go, usually have to go to the schools to work with them. But, we have them coming to us, right? They're all over COSI and they come with their parents. And so, we have done ,you know, a couple of different studies that have been looking at what's going on with these older age range. It's cool work, and it turns out the big thing that's going on with this age range is that they actually do know the meanings of all these things. They're just not fast the way that adults are fast, so their ability to process language is much slower and so their ability to be flexible on the fly is much less than adults. David Staley: Well, I think you've answered my next question. So, were you trained as a linguist? Laura Wagner: Yes. David Staley: Or have you always had an interest in language? Laura Wagner: So my PhD is actually in linguistics, so. David Staley: Oh, okay. Laura Wagner: Yeah. So, I have a PhD linguistics and I have a Master's in psychology. I have been wanting to do psycholinguistics since college, and I ended up doing child language acquisition because when I went to graduate school, the coolest person was working on language acquisition, and I just turned out to be good at working with four year olds.[00:22:00] So it was a, it was a match made in heaven. So, I've been doing language acquisition since graduate school, and I've liked language forever. Languages. I mean if you talk to many people who are in linguistics, we just like language, and language is just fun to play with, to think about, to get to read about, to do research on, and I'm one of those people. So, I've always loved language and linguistics. But, I have actually always done it in an experimental fashion, which is why I'm in a psychology department, because I'm serious about doing the experiments and thinking about how this relates to cognition and how it relates to other parts of the mind. David Staley: Hmm. So you've recently written a book, _How to Talk Language Science with Everybody_, and I'd like to hear some of the findings. Laura Wagner: Sure. So the book was really written as a way to think about the class that I teach on campus. The class is about how to train people to be out at COSI and in doing this, I've learned a lot about how it works and how to teach students and how to make activities that you can do there. And so, the fundamental purpose of the book [00:23:00] is to bring that knowledge to more people. So, we talk about the things that we've done and we actually, it's actually set up sort of like a textbook a little bit to help you create your very own activity that you could do. I did it in collaboration with a colleague, Cecile McKee, who's at the University of Arizona, and she does very similar work. She tends to do it at festivals, but we got to know each other by doing festivals together, such as at the triple A s, the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences runs a family science fair day at their annual conference and we would come and bring a bunch of, of language scientists in and, and help them do this, and we wanted to sort of share the knowledge that we had. I mean, I don't know if you wanna use this part, but the other reason to write the book, another reason that that I was interested in writing the book is, to be perfectly honest, within the academy, working with the general public does not come with a lot of rewards. The tokens that we get as faculty members that determine our pay and our prestige are basically [00:24:00] research articles, so the research results we get in the lab matter a lot for my prestige. The public engagement doesn't matter very much at all for my prestige, but it is something I spend a lot of time doing, and one of the reasons to write the book was to create a product that gets the kind of respect that you want as an academic. David Staley: Hmm. Laura Wagner: It does that for me as well. David Staley: So, one of the chapters in your book focuses on avoiding jargon or making concepts accessible without oversimplifying. What are some of the practical strategies you recommend for scientists to spot, to remove jargon? Laura Wagner: So, jargon right, is like one of the big problems that you have. One of the things we get trained in is how to we get trained in all the technicalities and we have words for all the technicalities, and once you're in it, it is super hard to see what those technical terms are. My favorite example of this in linguistics is that if you study speech sounds, we talk about speech sounds spatially, so sounds can be high or low, they can be back or [00:25:00] front, and if you know how the mouth makes sounds, these are obvious terms, but if you don't know that even though the words are familiar to you, high sounds, low, sounds back. We have high, low back, front are very familiar words to you. You don't necessarily understand how language scientists are using them because we actually are using them in a technical way, so it's very easy for scientists to identify the hardcore jargon, anything that's got an acronym, right? Anything that's in Latin, anything that's in Greek, anything that is more than four syllables. That stuff's almost surely jargon. And you know, you can look at it and go, all right, how can I, you know, tone that down. I find the ones that are really difficult are the ones that match words that we have in other places. And you don't realize you're using it differently though. The thing about doing this is that one way to, one way to help you with jargon we have sort of two big techniques. One way is to think about how am I gonna explain this to a 10-year-old? That often helps people sort of get the right mindset that, you know, what am I gonna talk [00:26:00] about with a 10-year-old? And you can often think about ex people rarely assume that 10 year olds have the same background knowledge that they assume that an adult has. So one way to think about it is, how are you gonna say it for a 10-year-old? And then the magic trick is, that's probably not that different than how you should explain it to an adult who doesn't know anything about your field. They don't know that background either. Another thing that we recommend, and we do this a lot with our students, is there are a lot of online tools that can help you. So you can run your language through the Henning Way editor or the Up Goer five editor, and you don't have to take their advice, but it's very helpful to have these online places flag the things that you're saying and say, you know, this is not a common word, or this is a little bit odd, or this, even if you do the Hemingway editor, it'll even tell you. This sentence is very long and complicated. Did you maybe wanna make that a less long and complicated sentence? So having an [00:27:00] external person and or programs tell you something like that can be a really useful way to go. Oops, maybe I did use jargon, but probably the most important thing is to stop and think to yourself, maybe I'm using jargon and I should pay attention and try not to. David Staley: So I am absolutely with you on this. As someone who engages in public scholarship, I am absolutely in sympathy with this, but I've also gotta think that that's a hard sell, given what you said earlier, we are rewarded for speaking with other researchers, not with 10 year olds. Laura Wagner: True. Right, so this is one of the big barriers that, that that people are well aware of. So if you look at something like like the Pew Charitable Trust, they like to run these like, you know, surveys of everyday people. If you ask and the, and one of the more recent ones a couple years ago, they ask people, you know, do you think scientists are smart? And the answer is, yeah, basically they think scientists are smart and they ask, do you think scientists do a good job of communicating? And the answer is no. No. They don't think scientists do a good job of communicating. And. This is actually like, this is [00:28:00] just a field problem, right? Where we are used to talking to each other and it is cool to use jargon if you are talking to someone else in your profession at a technical conference. I mean, it's part of how we actually do get the work done. You, you've gotta actually have a place value on talking to people who aren't in the field. And that's, that's a structural problem that we need to actually believe that it is important that people understand us, even if they're not going to be experts in it. Like, we're not gonna, I mean, I'm, I'm not training people at CSCI to become PhDs in linguistics. That's not the goal. The goal is to help them understand that. Language science is something you can study scientifically, and here's a cool fact about language science you didn't know. You can explain a remarkable amount about how language works without getting particularly technical. If you're willing. Honestly, one of the things you do have to give up is some of the deep nuance, [00:29:00] right? So scientists are also very excited about the precision with which we can talk about what's going on. But precision only matters if you have the broad strokes in place. If you don't have the broad strokes in place, and all you give me is precision. I just have like, like scattered dots around at the edges, but I don't actually know what the big picture is supposed to look like. Our job at Cosi is to give people the big picture, and I think scientists in general would do, would, would do well to think with funders and with politicians. They want the big picture. They don't all want all the, the, the level of nuance and things like that. Not all the time, at least. David Staley: Hmm. Well to that end, you are working, you are finishing up a book called _The Conversational Scientists_, and I'm very interested to know what you're arguing in this book. Laura Wagner: So, the last book we wrote. Cecile McKey and I wrote was aimed particularly at people who are interested in language science and who were really like interested in getting down and dirty in doing this the way that, that we are doing it. But one of the things that [00:30:00] we feel is that not everybody wants to go into a science museum or a festival and, you know, make an activity and devote their lives to doing this. But pretty much every scientist has had the experience of being an on airplane or at a bus stop and someone says, Hey, what do you do? And you wanna tell them what you do, and you want to say that to someone who you don't necessarily know that well, maybe but who doesn't necessarily have your background? We are, although our framing conversation is. The Thanksgiving dinner table might be a place where someone asks you, what do you do? And you might wanna tell your Uncle Bob something about what you do. So the idea that. All kinds of scientists wanna have conversations with everyday people and they wanna be able to explain what they're doing. And we wanted to give people a series of fairly easy to use tips to help them talk to anybody. And we've aimed this pri, I mean, we're being published by the American Psychological Association, so we spun it a little bit towards psychology, but we [00:31:00] really do think the lessons apply to all sciences. I mean, they're things like. Avoid jargon. They're things like respect your audience. They're things like ask them questions to find out what they know and to tailor their, your what you're saying. Be interesting, have good examples. It's not. It's not rocket science as they say, right to, to do this, but you do have to have sort of a willingness to, to be think about what the other person knows and what they wanna know and to bridge to that. It's less about sort of you showing how smart you are and more about trying to get someone else to be interested in why you do what you do. David Staley: Laura Wagner, thank you. Laura Wagner: Thank you. This was fun. Jen Farmer: Voices of Excellence is produced and recorded at The Ohio State University College of Arts and Sciences Marketing and Communications Studio. More information about the podcast and our guests can be found at go.osu.edu/voices. Voices of Excellence is produced by Doug [00:32:00] Dangler. I'm Jen Farmer.