Formative Evaluation: Citizen Science Program

Randi Korn & Associates, Inc. (RK&A) was contracted to conduct a formative evaluation of The Conservation Trust of Puerto Rico’s (the Trust) National Science Foundation-funded Citizen Science Program, which recruits and trains local Puerto Ricans to conduct scientific research about the Rio Manati watershed alongside Trust scientists, staff, and interpreters. How did we approach this study? The purpose of this evaluation was to explore participants’ motivations, experiences with program logistics, level of engagement, and understanding of project and activity goals, as well as staff and participants’ roles during the program activities and barriers to their successful completion. To gather an objective account of the program experience, RK&A and bilingual data collectors conducted naturalistic observations of the five research projects that make up the Citizen Science Program: Rio, Arqueología, Aves, Murciélago, and Costa. Following each observation, bilingual data collectors interviewed up to three participants from each activity. RK&A also conducted eleven in-depth telephone interviews with stakeholders, including Trust staff, volunteer leaders, staff interpreters, and researchers (scientists), to explore the successes and challenges of the Citizen Science program from their perspectives. What did we learn? Study findings reveal many strengths of the Citizen Science Program. Participants were highly motivated and engaged by the program activities, and facilitators actively supported this engagement. For instance, participants were observed asking questions of scientists, performing a variety of data collection tasks, and conversing with their like-minded peers, while facilitators demonstrated data collection tasks, encouraged participants to take ownership of individual tasks, and used inquiry throughout the activities. Both participants and facilitators said they valued the opportunity to gain knowledge about project topics and actively participate in real scientific research. Participants also described clear and reliable communications from Trust staff and felt that the overall program logistics were handled very well. Facilitators, however, named some challenges, include needing to adjust each activity to accommodate different levels of participant knowledge as well as recruiting and sustaining participants. Additionally, though the majority of participants understood generally that their participation in the activities was linked to a larger goal of encouraging citizens’ participation in research, some had only vague notions of how the activities linked specifically to the larger research goals of the Citizen Science Program. What are the implications of the findings? Overall, many aspects of the Citizen Science Program are successful; participants are highly engaged by the hands-on, collaborative nature of the program activities and appreciate the opportunity to participate in real scientific research. That said, to improve the quality of the program activities the Trust might consider scheduling regular times for facilitators to conduct focused reflections on program successes and challenges. For example, facilitators might choose one aspect of program implementation to address at each reflection session (e.g., recruitment), determine aspects that are within the Trust’s control to address, discuss ways to address them, and document this reflection so that facilitators can build on what they discuss. Furthermore, the Trust might consider ways to deepen participants’ understanding of the Program’s larger research and participation goals. For instance, a scientist or volunteer leader might list these goals explicitly during a formal introduction and conclusion to each activity.

If you would like to edit a resource, please email us to submit your request.