These slides were presented at the NSF Advancing Informal STEM Learning (AISL) Principal Investigators' Meeting held in Bethesda, MD from February 29-March 2, 2016. The presentation describes NSF INCLUDES, a funding opportunity that leverages collective impact strategies to broaden participation in STEM.
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 is producing twenty videos of scientists and engineers presenting their research that are closely aligned with one hundred scientific inquiry and engineering design-based experiments and lesson plans.
This poster was presented at the 2016 Advancing Informal STEM Learning (AISL) PI Meeting held in Bethesda, MD on February 29-March 2. 'Be a Scientist!' is a full-scale development project that examines the impact of a scalable, STEM afterschool program which trains engineers to develop and teach inquiry-based Family Science Workshops (FSWs) in underserved communities.
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. 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
Wallace and Brooks examined the culture of an elementary science education methods course conducted in a summer science camp, along with the professional identity development of the preservice teachers during their participation in the course.