BIG enewsletter - Winter 2015 Edition – Issue 31
BIG Year Starts Little
It’s become a tradition now to start the BIG year with the Little Event and in early January, 27 sci-comm newbies descended on Thinktank in Birmingham to do just that.
The Little Event started as an offshoot to the BIG Event when member Toni Hamill thought it would be nice to create a training day she wished there was when she began her career: something to give a whistle-stop tour of the industry with some basic skills all in one low-cost day. The event has morphed a bit over the six years it’s been running but it’s always had the same aim – to bring skilled BIG members together with early-career communicators to exchange experiences. Five BIG members gave a day of their time to lead sessions on presenting, project planning, evaluation and job seeking so delegates could pick through a career-buffet, ask questions and find out options available to them. Thanks go to Bridget Holligan, Lorna Williams, Greg Foot, Rachel Mason and of course Toni herself.
And delegates sure did ask questions – just as we’d hoped. Feedback following the day suggests that most people got useful answers (we didn’t please everyone but we’re pleased with the number we pleased) and that the content was more-or-less what they needed to help them have a fair idea of where their interests could take them.
For BIG, the Little Event brings a bunch of new members from organisations and corners of the UK we’d not had contact with before. A good number of these have already been in touch since with suggestions, job postings on BIG Chat, stories of the uses they’ve put their attendance to already… and of course more questions. We expect to see at least a couple turf up at the BIG Event in Norwich
this July and if they bring what they plan to bring, they’ll be making a really valuable contribution for us all.
Duncan Dallas: 27 October 1940 – 11 April 2014
It may have escaped your notice that Duncan Dallas, the man behind the original Café Scientifique, died during the course of last year. He studied chemistry at Oxford, which led to the following obituary being published in their online newsletter:"The television presenter Duncan Munro Dallas died on 11 April 2014, aged 73. Born in Elgin, Morayshire, he was educated at various schools before entering Balliol College, Oxford, where he read Chemistry, graduating in 1964. He then joined the BBC’s graduate trainee scheme, working on the current affairs series Man Alive, before moving to Yorkshire Television in 1968. He was best known for producing scientific programmes, including Don’t Ask Me (1974-9), which made an unlikely star of Dr Magnus Pyke, and Where There’s Life (1981-6). Later he founded his own television production company, XYTV, and the Café Scientifique movement, initially in the wine bar opposite his house in Leeds. He was survived by four children, both his wives having predeceased him."
Call for applications for the Josh Award 2015
The Josh Award is an award established to recognise and support up-and-coming talent in science communication. It recognises a defining moment in the career of a science communicator; a person who is a practicing scientist or someone who has chosen science communication as their profession.
This defining moment could be a game changing project, piece of work, way of working or a key moment of change, creativity, innovation or passion. A defining moment in a career that has transformed science communication practice, inspired others or changed the landscape of science communication.
The award provides the opportunity to become the science communicator in residence at the Manchester Science Festival 2015, developing and delivering a new project or event while show-casing best practise in the field of science communication.The winner will receive support to nurture their development in the field and their involvement in the Manchester Science Festival from both the Festival team and BIG.
Download further information and an application form here - and return it by 17th April 2015.
Working in University Outreach – Skills for STEM Engagement
Over a number years there has been a steady increase in the number of BIG members whose role is managing public engagement of research. With lots of ideas and emerging issues in the field we're enthused to get these like-minded people together and have created a 2-day Skills day on 20-21 April in Edinburgh. It will be an opportunity for those whose role it is to manage, develop and deliver research engagement (e.g. based in a university or research centre) to network, share ideas and experiences with people who work in the same field and identify developments and issues we can work on together.
We anticipate this event will sell out quickly, so book your place for just £45 here
Mini 'Stories from Science' BlogDr Len Fisher, Visiting Research Fellow, University of Bristol
I have just started a new blog "Mini Stories from Science", intended as a free resource for science teachers and communicators.
My idea is to provide stories (a new one each weekday), not generally found in standard textbooks, about WHY and HOW scientists get their ideas, since I believe that this is central to science education (both in schools and to the general public), but that it is often difficult for science teachers and communicators to get access to relevant and interesting material.
I freely admit that it is an experiment, and would certainly appreciate feedback. If you like the idea, and the blog, do please let others know whom you think may find it useful. The first few stories are historical, but there is plenty of contemporary material to come.
Read the blog here.
Running Creative Computing Interactive Art: A Girls Only Club Jenny van der Puil, Science Oxford
This year at Science Oxford we have been developing, as part of the Ingenious grant from the Royal Academy of Engineering, a series of computing clubs for 11 – 16 year olds which introduces the basics of coding and micro-controllers.
These clubs provide fantastic opportunities for local engineers and young people to interact with one another and learn. While this project aims to introduce computing to both genders, we recently ran an experimental all girls club to see whether young females where more inclined to sign up to a computing club if no boys were there. The results seem to say yes! Our first club was marketed as an Arduino Hack Club and showed little female participation. This time, the club was remarketed as a girl’s only Interactive Art club. By doing this the emphasis was shifted from practical, traditionally boy focused, applications of micro-controllers to creative arty applications; from motorised vehicles to light and music displays. Now some may argue that nothing stops either gender from enjoying both styles of club. And while that’s true, that was not the point here. Here we were trying to engage those who might not usually be interested in technology by remarketing how programming skills could be applied.
To add to the distinct flavour of the club, we called on local artists involved in or interested in the new media and technology in art scene, to help out alongside our engineer volunteers. The results were a sold-out club with a relaxed, fun and creative atmosphere where engineers, artists and young females came together to innovate and invent! Participants were delighted to meet and work alongside other girls with similar technological interests, as if previously, they had thought no other girls like that existed! They felt more comfortable and attracted by the fact that it was girls only.The success and atmosphere of the club did not just confirm, what we already know, that girls enjoy technology just as much as boys; what it highlighted was the benefit in creating a suitably focused and encouraging environment!
Three go mad in Gothenburg... the Fall and Rise of International Science Communication!
David Price, science made simple
John Downey, Gerd Hombrecher and myself were really honored to be invited to Ecsite to speak about science busking.
In previous conferences we had run some very well attended sessions devoted to what busking was and how to do it. But this session was going to be different, we all wanted to push the envelope a bit. I mean all three of us believe the following to be true: science busking at its best is a none judgmental and wholly open invitation to play and investigate the world around us. Great but what does that actually mean, in practice what can busking do? So we decided to point the session in the direction of answering this question. So yes we were going to busk a bit, but mostly we wanted to discuss the implications of what busking had done for us and what it could do for delegates.
Gerd is an amazing close quarter conversational busker, using skills honed in his time in the diplomatic service. So Gerd was going to talk about low key busking and its impacts in community settings, getting people to buy into science almost without them realizing that this is what was happening. John is fascinated by the tie ups between science and magic, sort of looking at “the science of magic and the magic of science”. So John was going to talk about his use of magic based busking in Balthazar science centre and its communities. And I was going to fill in the gaps with anecdotes about busking training in schools and universities and about what busking can do for the busker in terms of dynamically selling themselves and their organization. All great in theory! But our session got placed in the Nocturne of the conference, with delegates wondering around an amazing science centre, whilst stuffing themselves full of food and drink. Maybe not the best place or time for a talking / discussion centered session! So we ran the session (which went pretty well), but was delivered to about 20 delegates, (the last busking session we ran at Ecsite had about 200 attendees!). Must admit I was pretty glum about this at the time, glass half empty etc. But as Gerd and John and Wendy (Sadler) pointed out (in a very nice way saying I told you so!) this really did not matter, as the busking we had done in conference breaks, lunches and dinners had engaged hundreds of delegates with really positive snapshots of what science busking could do. Maybe with science busking actions really do speak louder than words!
What is Innovative Exhibition Design?Axel Huttinger, Kurt Hüttinger GmbH & Co
What, in fact, is really good? As clichéd as the question may sound, it hits the nail squarely on the head of our dilemma as exhibition makers. Is an exhibition innovative and, therefore, good if it goes into the subject in depth? Is it good if it offers fun to the visitors? Does it touch the visitors if or because it is the place where they encounter the original?
None of these questions make any sense if one does not start doing something where one actually wants to achieve something, i.e. with our actual clients, the visitors. Unfortunately, the exhibition designer seldom (in most cases, never) has the opportunity to make use of this approach in his real life, because we as exhibition designers do not usually depend directly (financially) on the visitors. As a rule, exhibition designers are paid by the client. The latter, in turn, are financed by corporations which are usually subject to other contingencies than orientation towards the needs of visitors. Apart from that, it is in the nature of projects of this kind that the paying client usually gets the opportunity only once in his lifetime to implement a large exhibition project. This fact, in turn, has, of course, an effect on the conduct of the client in the course of the project. I will disregard this reality and take a normative point of view, i.e. I will describe the world as it ideally is supposed to be.
“Know your audience.” I heard this sentence with a certain insistent emphasis from an American exhibition designer for the first time. This statement has left a lasting impression with me. Of course, this statement is of no particular interest for a museum curator who has received a thorough scientific education, let alone whether it would fit in his view of the world. The latter has, of course, other worries, for instance, whether using the academic degree should be common practice when addressing people in the daily museum routine. At least, people are certainly discussing this issue at some length on public e-mail lists. Orientation towards the needs of visitors is a lesser issue on the list of topics in this context.
Nevertheless, the sentence about the visitors is worth to be taken seriously, even though it seems a little trite on first sight. A popular-science exhibition in a museum, science centre, children’s museum or in a scientific visitor centre is not a scientific publication. The “exhibition” is the worst possible medium for communicating the required depth of scientific content directly with the audience. An exhibition is just a little sequential medium. An exhibition should and can pursue only one single aim: It is designed to motivate people in WANTING to understand and learn. To this end, it must, however, give them a sense of security and a certain amount of self-confidence. It should give people the impression that they are taken seriously and that they have understood, or can understand something. The nuclear physicist and founder of the Exploratorium, Frank Oppenheimer, once said with reference to an exhibition organized by him that nobody must leave the room with the feeling that he is “more stupid than another person.”
As an exhibition designer or scenographer, if one favours this term, one is faced with the question of how far one should go regarding depth of content, without giving the visitors the impression that they are “stupid.” Pages of books, copied on text boards and charts in exhibitions are not exactly the optimum means of giving people a good or motivating feeling. Personally, I think that I am relatively well educated. Middle-class general knowledge has always played and still plays an important role in my life as a result of my upbringing. Yet I feel bored, if not to say a little annoyed, in an exhibition with charts containing texts which are longer than 3 or 4 sentences. If I want to read a book this is something one should rather do at home in peace and quiet. If, by contrast, you attend an exhibition, I expect the use of other or additional mediа for transferring knowledge. I, therefore, doubt that the intellectual target group -- educated classes leaves an exhibition with enthusiasm, in which pictures are pinned up on the walls. Incidentally, the educated classes in Germany are about to become extinct and do not offer themselves as the main target group for exhibitions anyway.
The phrase “Know your audience” is misinterpreted as “Know yourself” by the majority of curators, but also by so-called scenographers. At the last European Hands-on Conference in Vienna in November 2005, the forum for European children’s museums, the Dutch social researcher, Fritz Spangenberg, has politely pointed out to the designers of children’s museums that one should always keep in mind who one is actually working for. This reproach is certainly paradoxical, for it should be self-evident that, when planning a facility for visitors, it should be modelled exactly for them. It is, however, apparently necessary to clarify the orientation towards the needs of visitors in relation to the programme. And still, it usually is difficult to concentrate on one target group. Irrespective of whether the investor, the designer or the curator find it difficult or not, in the end, there is no other choice: No matter, whether one works for a children’s museum, a science centre or a traditional museum, the facility cannot and will not be a success if the question for whom the facility was designed has not been clarified in an honest, pragmatic way. “First of all, we clarify the scientific content and then we try to find a good scenographer who fuses everything into a popular exhibition architecture.” This, in my opinion, is the wrong approach, if not to say a naive one.
An exhibition is an emotive medium. A good exhibition can generate so-called aha experiences. Factual knowledge can be conveyed at exhibitions only to a limited extent. What part should and must the design proper of an exhibition play? Designers, who have specialized in scientific communication, can work successfully only if they have a sufficient degree of freedom. In my opinion, it is our task to plan a public venue that is authentic and generates real physical experiences which can be experienced with all senses: “Real things and real processes!” Ideally, an exhibition is a public laboratory, in which the visitors themselves become researchers and scientists. Laboratories that give people a good feeling: “It is, after all, not all that difficult and, what’s more, I have understood everything.” In Anglo-Saxon countries this hypothesis is paraphrased as “hands-on, minds-on or hearts-on.” And this hypothesis plainly applies not only to science centres and children’s museums.
Exhibition design, particularly in Germany, is strongly determined by interior architecture and design. Scenery design and stage design are other important components. Their use marked the preliminary culmination in the Expo design in Hanover in 2000. Unfortunately, as a rule, specific learning theory and psychology play a minor role in relation to formal exhibition designs. Negative examples exist in large numbers and celebrating failures is also fun, after all. However, the primary aim should be to learn from one’s mistakes committed in the past. With many projects, the design was not given adequate significance. Often it was worked out or interpreted in competition to the object or to the interactive exhibit, thus becoming an artistic end in itself, being rather a means of drawing attention to objects, for getting oneself in the right frame of mind for something emotionally, for sensitizing one’s senses or for motivating visitors in connection with exhibition design to deal with a topic interactively. Best of all, everything taken together.
A prerequisite for designing successful exhibitions is the knowledge of human psychological mechanisms that play a role when visiting an exhibition. First of all, we are talking about quite simple everyday problems that become a must for enjoying an exhibition “intellectually.” Just imagine a family with two children after a nerve-racking journey that lasted several hours. Car journey, looking for a parking space, standing in a long queue to buy tickets, “mummy I need the loo.” These are stress factors which are not very likely to let the visit proper to an exhibition start in a really funny way, let alone reading a book in eight-point type in dark-grey on light-grey. The old motto to “pick up people where they are at a particular moment in this context means to give people – and the children – a feeling of security, the avoidance of the said stress factors having, of course, been given adequate attention in the design of the external setting of the exhibition.
“I know what it is about“, and this I know straight away.“ No eccentric artistic installation should demand too much of the visitor intellectually, no matter which target group he belongs to. The best example of a pleasant discovery tour that I have ever seen was in the Natural History Museum in Lyon. At the entrance of the special exhibition there was hung a huge picture of an aesthetic photo of a desert with the caption “Sable” (Sand) extending over the whole wall. Simple – yes, that’s right, but exactly this degree of simplicity is brilliant as a start. Every visitor, no matter to which cultured class he belongs, now knows what the topic is: Namely, sand. The complexity of the theme can then still be explored to a sufficient degree. The lead-in to the topic must, however, be associated with the conveying of a feeling of security, otherwise it will be very difficult to achieve the desired learning effect.
To remain with the example of a successful dramaturgy, an example with which the human psychological mechanisms are taken so wonderfully seriously, I would like to briefly describe the further arrangement of the exhibition rooms of the said exhibition. In the next room, the walls were used for displaying small test tubes filled with a wide range of sand samples. In the centre of the room there were microscopes, with the aid of which the visitors were able to examine a range of different samples of sand. Microscopes are one of the most “unproblematic” means of interaction as far as wear and “disarranging things” are concerned. For the use in schools they are usually very robust, so that trouble-free operation is nearly always guaranteed. On first sight, the room can easily be surveyed like the first one and yet gently gives people an understanding of the complexity of the topic. The experience of the microscope stations is the preliminary highlight of the mis-en-scène, which is designed to generate this feeling of security. That is the reason one can now dare to go deeper into the content of the exhibition in the following rooms. In the special exhibition “Sable”, traditional ways of representing things, such as stuffed animals in showcases, are used, even graphics boards were installed. A critic would refer to the information depth of the special exhibition as homoeopathic.
By contrast, I see it as pragmatic in a visionary way. And exactly this assessment is true regarding the entire exhibition: Adequately detailed, but not overloaded content-related information with a tremendously exciting and varied focus on different fields of life and knowledge, in which the exhibit, sand, is shown. In the following rooms and installations of the special exhibition, the topic is sand in art and culture. In terms of design, the topic now manifests itself in scenographic installations such as, for instance, in a mini-cinema, where sequences from Hollywood films are shown: A cursing Will Smith, who in the film “Independence Day” drags a shot-down alien through the desert. At another place, the visitors are confronted with a “glass-sand-sculpture.” The conclusion of the exhibition is a collection of interactive exhibits concentrated in space, picking out the physical phenomenon sand as the central topic. The impressive thing about the exhibition was definitely not the specific design. The purely structural implementation in terms of quality and durability was also not world class. The way the visitors were being dealt with has made a lasting impression on me. In no place were the visitors overburdened with prefabricated concepts and metaphors. Everything hit the heart at the right time.
The question posed at the beginning (of my paper) “what, in fact, is good”, can now be answered at least by 50 percent, drawing attention to the clever and well thought-out human psychological mechanisms. In terms of “disciplines” it is, first and foremost, a challenge for the designers or the so-called scenographers, for the space configuration produces an immediate and direct effect on the visitors. And it is exactly this, what matters: The creation of speaking scenarios, in which the visitors move and interact with the exhibition. Our American colleagues express it like this: “Environments that truly connect with people”. The longer-term aim of an exhibition, however, is the knowledge transfer in a highly conventional sense. The visitors are supposed to leave the room knowing more than when they entered it. We are doing all this “not for fun”, i.e. we are not designers of leisure and theme parks, which first and foremost want to amuse people and must make money. Thus, our seemingly cumbersome educative approach, in my opinion, is the second part of the answer to the question posed:
An exhibition is only good if “learning” really takes place. In America, experts have been trying for decades to evaluate this, for most of their funding commitments are linked with a positive answer to the question whether people learn something. With his treatise “Learning in the Museum”, George E. Heim has written a standard work, in which he appeals to the designers of museums and exhibitions: Create a “Constructivist Museum.” His theoretical approach is modelled in a simplified form on the diverse theories of (Neo)constructivism in literature and social sciences and is really very helpful and quite fascinating. Visitors should not experience knowledge as something strange, but construct it in their heads themselves. For us as exhibition designers this means that the exhibition must become a laboratory, in which there virtually are no prefabricated results which the visitors are served. Results should rather be generated individually by the visitors themselves. At first glance, this requirement is a contradiction to the usual scenographic approach. A walk-on stage setting is static and “worn” after one visit. It may please, but it expresses nothing else than the knowledge which the scenographer puts into effect, and is, therefore, not any better than a push-button exhibit version of the year 1890.
What we, on the contrary, are passionately striving for is true interaction in an emotional exhibition with open platforms to experiment that do not provide results in advance. A few years ago, in 1971, Simon Nicholson published the book “Theory of loose parts.” In it, he said "In any environment, both the degree of inventiveness and creativity, and the possibility of discovery, are directly proportional to the number and kind of variables in it." In simple terms, this theory means that the amount of knowledge transferred is directly proportional to the number of loose parts in an installation. The more things are lying about, the more one can play with them, the more creative occasions for interaction arise. Ideally, the implementation of this idea or theory would not be a problem, were there not the objections of the exhibition operators - which can be understood from a sheer practical point of view - who are always anxious to keep the running costs as low as possible. That is why glass showcases and graphics boards are so tremendously comfortable … The only thing that wears away at this design are the ravages of time, but definitely none of the “creative” hands of visitors, who sometimes have unbelievable ideas for disarranging things.
Let me be provocative for a moment: The true opponent of effective learning in exhibitions is the operators’ unwillingness to take risks. Very few of them are willing to be faced with the “totally normal chaos” of true interaction, i.e. the danger of higher design and maintenance costs. Although again and again we see that loose parts or fragile stations for carrying out experiments cause people to feel: “Here I am taken seriously and people trust me”, this kind of exhibition design is not very popular. Owing to the fact that nowadays a minimum of “interaction” is needed so that one can say that one is up-to-date, the exhibits are planned individually, which is an “idiocy” in the true sense of the word [for the word “idiot” is derived from the Greek word “idiotes” – individual, private]. Everything must work as maintenance-free as possible, as if the exhibits were standing there “privately”, not wishing to have anything to do with anybody, so that, ultimately, everything is reduced to mere demonstration models, i.e. push-button exhibits. What a waste of money and what a missed opportunity to make something really good! For us exhibition designers this means that, in the long term, we do not have a chance of fulfilling George E. Hein’s hypothesis.
At a museum conference, once, an English client under the influence of alcohol said to me that “the Germans are getting on my nerves.” The latter are having discussions, you know, which the others (i.e. the Britons) had as long as 20 years ago. This statement has a virtually brutal political background. In the eighties the former Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, reduced the budget for museums drastically, thus forcing the museums to re-define and re-appraise their mission. The concentration on collecting, research, and publishing shifted markedly in the direction of “show collections” and the idea of the so-called “Public Understanding of Sciences.” In Germany, the latter is readily misinterpreted as “Disneyfication.” What an unbelievable ignorance and arrogance this is to bring orientation towards the needs of visitors into discredit in such a way!? Of course, in the wake of such a pioneering change, which has taken place in England and which should take place also here in Germany, one will sometimes overshoot the mark and make mistakes. Nevertheless, static stage sets or glass showcases with neat shelf details are no alternative! In order to create something really good – as always – everybody must move. However, in this case, the saying is true: “The fish starts to rot from the head.” But the head includes those who finance us bidders. Of course, we do almost everything for money, because we are subject to the usual financial burdens and constraints. However, we would enjoy our work a lot more, and our motivation to achieve something would increase tremendously, if we were given an opportunity of helping to change the world.
My Favorite Exhibit!
This beautiful exhibit was spotted by BIG's Administrator, Sarah Vining at the Pacific Science Center in Seattle recently. It shows how many Jupiters could fit into the Sun and how many Earths could fit into Jupiter.
Sarah said, "This visual representation made it really easy to understand the enormity of our Universe and how small and insignificant we humans can be! Presenting it to me in this context just blew me away!"
If you spot an exhibit that excites you, please share it with us by emailing a picture, a brief description and location of the exhibit to email@example.com
Name: Greg Foot
Job: Science Presenter on TV, on YouTube & on Stage.
A typical day at work consists of either: a long, fun day filming; a long, fun day doing a show at a school / science festival; or a long, booooooring day doing emails & admin!
What got you into this career? Someone at uni said I should totally be a Blue Peter presenter. I thought: no chance! But then I went for an audition and got down to the final bunch. That made me think more about presenting as a career. With my passion always being for science (& having studied it at uni – Natural Science, Cambridge) I decided to try for that. Then, during a Science Communication MSc, after sending SO many showreels out, version 12 I think it was, landed me a CBBC science gig. I also discovered I loved presenting live too so I started writing and delivering live science shows in schools. It’s been a snakes & ladders journey since then but that’s how I got into this crazy freelance world of science communication!
What is the best thing about your job? Spending my time speaking about something I’m genuinely interested in, getting to do amazingly fun things like wing-walking and crazy things like being Buried Alive, and working with some brilliant, creative people
... and the worst? ADMIN. I HATE ADMIN. And I spend far too much time doing it. Sooooo much time is spent doing emails and planning logistics. Someone save me from it! Please?
What is your favourite meal? Ok this interview has taken a sideways turn! Hmmmm I love a home-made spag bol made from scratch, but I’m also a big steak fan. Decisions!
What is your favourite smell? Sorry what? Random! I’m a huge fan of getting out of the city and into the countryside so my favourite smell is probably just fresh air. Or that damp forest kinda smell.
What talents do you possess? Back in the day I could juggle, and I used to be able to ride a unicycle, and play the piano pretty well too. Although I haven’t done any of those for far too long. I guess I’d say my main talent is taking a complex idea and boiling it down to a simple explanation that slowly unpacks and develops.
What talents would you like to possess? Flying. Totally. Or be able to just teleport places.
Which actor do you think should play you in the film of your life? Ha! I have NO idea! I asked someone this and they said Matt Damon. MATT DAMON?! Is that a good thing??
Which living person do you most admire and why? Oooo good one. I admire Steve Spangler in the states for the brand and business he’s built up around his science communication. To be honest I just really admire anyone who is following their passion and working bloody hard to make a career from it.
Most beautiful place on earth? Either in the middle of a tropical rainforest or on a beach looking out to a sea with good waves, before heading out and surfing them.
What is your Motto for life? As Steve Jobs said, “don’t settle” – don’t settle for a job or life that isn’t the one you want. Chase your dreams. But be realistic – chase them for as long as you can. Most importantly though, keep curious.
With best wishes from the BIG Executive 2014-15:
James Piercy, Chair
Bridget Holligan, Vice Chair
Lucy Moorcraft, Treasurer
Ben Craven, Secretary
Greg Foot, Ordinary Member
Ruth Perkins, Ordinary Member
Rachel Mason, Event Organiser
and Sarah Vining, Administrator
Spring e-news is due out on 1st April. Submissions to firstname.lastname@example.org by 25 March please.