This practitioner reflection was provided to stimulate conversation at the June 20-21, 2013 CAISE Evaluation Convening. It discusses improving practice through reflection.
"Strengthening Networks, Sparking Change: Museums and Libraries as Community Catalysts" combines findings from a literature scan and input from the library, museum and community revitalization fields with case studies about the experiences and vision of museums and libraries working to spur change in their communities. It describes the complementary conceptual frameworks of social wellbeing and collective impact and explains how libraries and museums can use these concepts to partner with community-based organizations, government agencies and other cultural or educational organizations. It
The purpose of this national survey was to connect with librarians to determine: (1) What STEM programming is currently in place? How do libraries approach and implement these programs? (2) What obstacles prevent libraries from incorporating more STEM programming? (3) What kind of training and resources would be most helpful to librarians? Additionally, we sought the following information from STEM professionals, for the purpose of establishing and maintaining a Community of Practice: (4) What factors influence and enhance the success of Communities of Practice?
Public libraries are becoming an important place for informal science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education for K-12 students and their families, as well as for adult education activities that support STEM workforce development. This report provides public librarians, administrators and collaborating organizations a brief background on the role that libraries can play in fostering a healthy STEM education ecosystem, as well as promising practices for implementing effective STEM programs in public libraries.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Annette ShtivelbandLauren RiendeauAmanda Wallander-RobertsRobert Jakubowski
Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education and programming has become a priority in our nation. In the United States, the STEM pipeline is considered "leaky" as many students disengage from STEM at various points during their lives. In particular, women, Latinos, and African Americans are more likely to disengage from the STEM pipeline. American students are less likely to earn STEM postsecondary and graduate degrees compared to other nations. As careers in STEM fields are expected to increase at a faster rate than other occupations, there is growing concern about the
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Annette ShtivelbandAmanda Wallander RobertsRobert Jakubowski
resourceresearchProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
The National Academies’ Science and Technology for Sustainability Program (STS) in the division of Policy and Global Affairs was established to encourage the use of science and technology to achieve long-term sustainable development. The goal of the STS program is to contribute to sustainable improvements in human well-being by creating and strengthening the strategic connections between scientific research, technological development, and decision-making. The program concentrates on activities with the following attributes:
• Cross-cutting in nature, requiring expertise from multiple
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
The National Science Foundation (NSF) supports the most meritorious ideas submitted as proposals from researchers and educators in all fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Creating opportunities and developing innovative strategies to broaden participation among diverse individuals, institutions, and geographic areas are critical to the NSF mission of identifying and funding work at the leading edge of discovery. The creative engagement of diverse ideas and perspectives is essential to enabling the transformative research that invigorates our nation’s scientific
The purpose of this document is to build on best practices and offer new approaches toward creating "a bold new initiative" to augment the Foundation's ongoing efforts to increase participation in STEM from underrepresented groups.
Peter Weingart and Lars Guenther have written a short but nevertheless comprehensive stock-taking of science communication and the issue of trust. I fully agree with almost all of their theoretical and critical observations. My aim is to critically discuss the understanding of trust as expressed in the traditional discourse on science communication. From my point of view, this concept of trust in science reveals severe shortcomings. As a consequence, communication strategies following this concept could even jeopardize trust in science.
Peter Weingart and Lars Guenther suggest that the public's trust in science has become endangered due to a new ecology of science communication. An implicit theoretical base of their argument is that the integrity of science as an institution depends on the integrity of science as a profession. My comment aims to reconstruct and question this specific institutional understanding of science. I argue that rust in technologies of knowledge production might be a potential equivalent to trust in professions.
Trust in science is, to a considerable extent, the outcome of communication. News and online media in particular are important mediators of trust in science. So far, however, conceptual works on mediated trust in science are lacking. Taking a cue from Weingart & Guenther, this commentary proposes a concept of mediated trust in science and for its measurement, and shows where it could be used in the science of science communication.
Science communication, whether internally or to the general public depends on trust, both trust in the source and trust in the medium of communication. With the new 'ecology of communication' this trust is endangered. On the one hand the very term of science communication has been captured by many different actors (e.g., governments, PR experts, universities and research institutions, science journalists, and bloggers) apart from scientists themselves to whom science communication means different things and whose communication is tainted by special interests. Some of these actors are probably