With support from the National Science Foundation’s Science Learning+ initiative, Twin Cities Public Television (TPT), in St. Paul, MN, in collaboration with a team of researchers in the US and the UK organized a workshop with the title Affinity Spaces for Informal Science Learning: Developing a Research Agenda. Our goal was to develop and refine a set of concepts and issues that will guide future investigations into how participation in online affinity spaces can promote and enable informal science learning. The workshop took place on July 6th and 7th, 2015, ahead of the Games+Learning
After the first paradigm shift from the deficit model to two-way communication, the field of science communication is in need of a second paradigm shift. This second shift sees communication as an inherently distributed element in the socio-technical system of science and technology development. Science communication is understood both from a systems perspective and its consecutive parts, in order to get a grip on the complex and dynamic reality of science, technology development and innovation in which scientists, industrial and governmental partners and the lay public collaborate. This essay
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Maarten C.A. van der SandenSteven Flipse
Science communication is an increasingly important field of activity, research and policy. It should not be assumed however, that science communication practices provide equitable and empowering opportunities for everyone. Social exclusion, inclusion and equity are key challenges for practitioners, researchers, policy makers and funders involved with science communication. In this commentary I reflect on the limitations of the ‘barriers approach to understanding social inclusion and exclusion from science communication and argue instead that a more complex perspective is needed. I conclude
Social inclusion is an emerging preoccupation in the science communication field. The political value of science communication (e.g. in terms of empowerment) and the necessity to address all audiences has always been considered, but in recent times the participation agenda has enriched the rationale and methodologies of the communication of science: social inclusion is not only an issue of access to knowledge, but also of governance and co-production.
Throughout the five year SciGirls CONNECT grant the independent evaluation firm Knight Williams assisted Twin Cities PBS (TPT) in a wide range of program evaluation activities. Given the project’s emphasis on a Train-the-Trainer model, the evaluation prioritized two goals: (i) assessing the various levels of CONNECT trainings from different vantage and time points, and (ii) capturing information on the implementation of SciGirls programs led by those who completed a training. This evaluation approach allowed the team to collect ongoing data over the course of the grant and share this
SciGirls Reflect: Leveraging Multiple Communities and Networks to Expand Understanding of Professional Development for Informal STEM Educators in Gender Equitable Teaching Strategies was a one-day event that brought together 25 SciGirls Trainers, Educators, and Partner Organization representatives to reflect on their experiences with SciGirls. Data was collected throughout the day via panel presentations, small group discussions, and partner interviews. Nineteen of these participants also conducted follow-up Broadening the Discussion interviews with SciGirls Trainers and Educators to gather
The independent evaluation firm Multimedia Research conducted an evaluation of the television component of SciGirls Season Two, including an experimental study of the impact of the TV series on girls' abilities to take part in science and engineering projects.2 During the same period, the independent evaluation team from Knight Williams Inc. conducted an evaluation of the implementation of the outreach activities among the member institutions of the National Girls Collaborative Project (NGCP) network.
Three possibilities are suggested by the author that aims to improve the quality of Science Communication. These are quicker responses to the contemporary issues, adding more short articles so as to enrich and enlarge information, and focuses on some special issues aiming to discuss one topic from different perspectives. The author also gives two examples of special issues of science communication.
JCOM can enhance its contribution to the science communication community by greater rigour in selection and editing and by opening up to reader comment.
In terms of efficiency, managing the effects of overpublising (the sheer volume of new papers published each week) has become seriously challenging for science communication researchers. This comment analyzes causes and consequences of this situation and proposes to research journals to take into considerations the following elements: a) special attention to headline and abstract, b) more visible and updated keywords and c) a clear structure of content and a shortening of the average number of pages per paper.
JCOM is eleven years old, and this is certainly a reason to celebrate. The journal has been a tribune where we could observe how geographical and institutional frontiers of science communication (SC) have been expanded. As open access publication, JCOM has played a key important role to diffuse and make visible the research results for all. This is relevant for many institutions and researchers in Latin America due to the difficulties for paying to access to the papers published by the international scientific journals. The journal has made a relevant contribution to consolidation of the