As part of its overall strategy to enhance learning in informal environments, the Advancing Informal STEM Learning (AISL) program seeks to advance new approaches to, and evidence-based understanding of, the design and development of STEM learning in informal environments. This includes providing multiple pathways for broadening access to and engagement in STEM learning experiences, advancing innovative research on and assessment of STEM learning in informal environments, and developing understandings of deeper learning by participants. This project will build and test a new model for co-created public engagement with science activities in partnership with civic, community, and scientist partners. The innovation to be tested is deliberative dialogues in science museums that help reduce the polarization about socio-scientific issues, giving people a greater voice in science, and addressing barriers that disconnect scientists from the public. The project will engage four target audiences (informal science education/ISE professionals, civic, community and scientist partners). Science museum partners include Museum of Science (MOS) Boston, Oregon Museum of Science, the Michigan Science Center, and the North Carolina Museum of Life and Science. The project is designed to have a strategic impact on how ISE institutions choose topics of STEM engagement and build public Forum programs.
There will be two evaluation teams for the project. MOS Research and Evaluation will act as formative evaluation mentors for the four partner sites as they co-create their forums. They will provide evaluation capacity building for the sites using team-based inquiry as they create and understand the potential impacts and outcomes of the model. Data collection will include panel surveys and focus groups. The evaluation will explore how the forums can decrease 1) public polarization around STEM topics and (2) the disconnect between scientists, civic organization, and the public. The external summative evaluation will be conducted by Rockman et al (REA). They will conduct a study of the project's process to help the team identify challenges and strategies for overcoming them as they work through the phases of public engagement. The summative study will focus on the project goals taking a qualitative approach. Early interviews with partner participants will explore their strengths and weaknesses in taking on this type of public engagement model including the extent of their previous work with civic partners. Later interviews will investigate what factors have enabled or hindered this project. Summative evaluation questions will also address changes in attitudes toward public engagement with science. REA will collect feedback from summit attendees through intercept interviews and post-surveys administered within a week at the event's conclusion to explore the any changes in knowledge or confidence in undertaking this type of model. REA will present findings from the external evaluation during the annual meeting of the Association of Science-Technology Centers and publish reports to Informalscience.org. Once the model has been developed and tested it will be disseminated to an initial group of 25-30 science museums and eventually to the entire ISE museum field.
This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.
Scientists (and engineers) wishing to conduct public engagement do so in the context of established disciplinary norms and complex institutional systems that may support or limit their success. This report seeks to convey the known complexity, unique challenges, and opportunities for universities to better support for scientists in their public engagement work. The report is intended to drive discussion towards deeper exploration and development of actionable next steps.
This is the executive summary of report from Workshop III: Academic Institutions, part of the Support Systems for
Summary brief describing summative evaluation associated with the MarcellusByDesign component of Marcellus Matters: EASE. Marcellus Matters: Engaging Adults in Science and Energy (EASE) was a program of Penn State University’s Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research (MCOR), in collaboration with other experts across the university. The first year of program activities took place in 2012, and the project continued through September 2016. EASE was a multidisciplinary initiative that provided adults in rural Pennsylvania with opportunities to increase their knowledge of science and energy
This is a report from Workshop IV, part of the Support Systems for Scientists' Communication and Engagement workshop series. Workshop IV was held May 2-3, 2018 at the Monterey Bay Aquarium in Monterey, CA. In this study, researchers sought to explore and understand the mechanisms, motivations, and outcome metrics utilized by individuals and organizations that facilitate scientists’ communication with the public. To capture the full range of engagement methods, facilitators from a wide variety of organizations were contacted and interviewed. After contacting 30 leaders the realm of science
Scientists (and engineers) wishing to conduct public engagement do so in the context of established disciplinary norms and complex institutional systems that may support or limit their success. This report seeks to convey the known complexity, unique challenges, and opportunities for universities to better support for scientists in their public engagement work. The report is intended to drive discussion towards deeper exploration and development of actionable next steps.
This is a report from Workshop III: Academic Institutions, part of the Support Systems for Scientists' Communication and
These are slides from Shupei Yuan, John Besley and Anthony Dudo's presentation at the Support Systems for Scientists' Communication and Engagement: Workshop II held February 28-March 1, 2018 at HHMI. The workshop was intended to explore how scientific societies can advance a sustainable system that supports scientists’ communication and engagement efforts. Yuan, Besley, and Dudo provide an overview of their project aiming to help reveal how societies view the concept of “public engagement” and to provide an empirical understanding of the availability and prevalence of tools that societies
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Shupei YuanAnthony DudoJohn BesleyBrooke Smith
resourceresearchProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
From February 28-March 1, 2018, the Kavli, Moore, Packard, and Rita Allen Foundations hosted a workshop at HHMI for leaders from scientific societies, associations
and professional organizations, researchers who study communication and learning, funders and other experts to explore how scientific societies can advance a sustainable system that supports scientists’ communication and engagement efforts. This outline summary aims to capture the ideas, notes and content discussed at the meeting.
This is a list of participants who attended the Support Systems for Scientists' Communication and Engagement Workshop II: Associations, Societies & Other Professional Organizations. This workshop was held February 28 - March 1, 2018 at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.
This is a report from Workshop II: Overview of Organizational Support for Public Engagement among Scientific Societies, part of the Support Systems for Scientists' Communication and Engagement workshop series. Workshop II was held Feb. 28 - Mar. 1, 2018 at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Chevy Chase, MD. The report provides an overview of a project aiming to help reveal how societies view the concept of “public engagement” and to provide an empirical understanding of the availability and prevalence of tools that societies currently use to support engagement efforts.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Shupei YuanAnthony DudoJohn BesleyBrooke Smith
resourceresearchProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
From December 4 – 6, 2017, the Kavli, Moore, Packard, and Rita Allen Foundations hosted a workshop at SUNY’s Global Campus, to explore how communication trainers support scientists’ engagement and communication, as part of the Support Systems for Scientists' Communication and Engagement project. The workshop was intended to explore the systems where communication trainers are thriving, where they are running into obstacles, and places they can advance the field as a community. This outline summary aims to capture the ideas, notes and content discussed at the meeting.
These are slides from John Besley and Anthony Dudo's presentation on "Communication Training Landscape View." Besley and Dudo discuss how the communication training community is incredibly passionate, bu also like the wild west.
This talk was given at the Support Systems for Scientists' Communication and Engagement Workshop I held December 4 – 6, 2017 at SUNY’s Global Campus, to explore how communication trainers support scientists’ engagement and communication. The workshop was intended to explore the systems where communication trainers are thriving, where they are running into obstacles
Diversity among scientists can foster better science, yet engaging and retaining a diversity of students and researchers in science has been difficult. Actions that promote diversity are well defined, organizations are increasingly focused on diversity, and many institutions are developing initiatives to recruit and enroll students from underrepresented minority (URM) groups (racial, ethnic, gender, sexual identity, or persons with disabilities). Yet representation of URM groups in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields lag behind demographics in society at large, and many
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Chandler PurittyLynette R. StricklandEanas AliaBenjamin BlonderEmily KleinMichael T. KohlEaryn McGeeMaclovia QuintanaRobyn E. RidleyBeth TellmanLeah R. Gerber