These slides provide an overview of current NSF funding opportunities, including Dear Colleague Letters and foundation-wide mechanisms. The presentation occurred as a technical assistance session at the 2016 NSF AISL PI Meeting.
This poster was presented at the 2016 Advancing Informal STEM Learning (AISL) PI Meeting held in Bethesda, MD on February 29-March 2. DEVISE was conceived to address the need for improved evaluation quality and capacity across the field of citizen science.
This poster was presented at the 2016 Advancing Informal STEM Learning (AISL) PI Meeting held in Bethesda, MD on February 29-March 2. The purpose of this research is to advance theoretical and practical understanding of how participation in citizen science fosters and/or supports lifelong science learning. We are specifically examining the relationship between engagement, science learning, and science identity.
This poster was presented at the 2016 Advancing Informal STEM Learning (AISL) PI Meeting held in Bethesda, MD on February 29-March 2. The project investigates how Co-generative Dlogue (cogen), a respectful conversation among students and scientists for improving teaching and learning, may produce more engaging and productive interactions and learning environments.
This poster was presented at the 2016 Advancing Informal STEM Learning (AISL) PI Meeting held in Bethesda, MD on February 29-March 2. This project's interdisciplinary team will carry out research and training that will identify ways for professionals in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) to engage with public audiences that currently lack the community connections, resources, time, or know-how to gain access to science education and to scientists.
This poster was presented at the 2016 Advancing Informal STEM Learning (AISL) PI Meeting held in Bethesda, MD on February 29-March 2. Head Start on Engineering is a pathways project focused on developing the foundations of a long-term, community-based research program to (a) understand how preschool children (4 years old) and their families develop engineering-related interests in early childhood and (b) develop community partnerships and programs that support engineering interest pathways for these families.
Even in the best-resourced science communication institutions, poor quality evaluation methods are routinely employed. This leads to questionable data, specious conclusions and stunted growth in the quality and effectiveness of science communication practice. Good impact evaluation requires upstream planning, clear objectives from practitioners, relevant research skills and a commitment to improving practice based on evaluation evidence.
Access to high quality evaluation results is essential for science communicators to identify negative patterns of audience response and improve outcomes. However, there are many good reasons why robust evaluation linked is not routinely conducted and linked to science communication practice. This essay begins by identifying some of the common challenges that explain this gap between evaluation evidence and practice. Automating evaluation processes through new technologies is then explicated as one solution to these challenges, capable of yielding accurate real-time results that can directly
King et al. [2015] argue that ‘emphasis on impact is obfuscating the valuable role of evaluation’ in informal science learning and public engagement (p. 1). The article touches on a number of important issues pertaining to the role of evaluation, informal learning, science communication and public engagement practice. In this critical response essay, I highlight the article’s tendency to construct a straw man version of ‘impact evaluation’ that is impossible to achieve, while exaggerating the value of simple forms of feedback-based evaluation exemplified in the article. I also identify a
AAAS describes public engagement with science as intentional, meaningful interactions that provide opportunities for mutual learning between scientists and members of the public. Through the Alan I. Leshner Leadership Institute for Public Engagement with Science, AAAS empowers scientists and engineers to practice high-impact public engagement by fostering leaders who advocate for critical dialogue between scientists and the public and lead change to enable their communities, institutions, and others to support public engagement. This bibliography, with additional work on understanding
The purpose of this study was to investigate the ways in which environmental education (EE) programs are contributing to environmental quality (EQ) improvement. The research applied the Pressure-State-Response (PSR) environmental indicator framework to the reported outcomes of 103 EE programs in order to 1) determine the extent to which existing EE programs are reporting EQ improvement outcomes; and 2) examine the extent to which these programs are impacting indicators in the three areas of the PSR framework. The study consisted of three research phases: evaluation synthesis, semi-structured