Citizen science is a form of Public Participation in Scientific Research (PPSR) in which the participants are engaged in the scientific process to support research that results in scientifically valid data. Opportunities for participation in real and authentic scientific research have never been larger or broader than they are today. The growing popularity and refinement of PPSR efforts (such as birding and species counting studies orchestrated by the Cornell Lab of Ornithology) have created both an opportunity for science engagement and a need for more research to better implement such projects in order to maximize both benefits to and contributions from the public.
Towards this end, Shirk et al. have posted a design framework for PPSR projects that delineates distinct levels of citizen scientist participation; from the least to the highest level of participation, these categories are contract, contribute, collaborate, co-create, and colleagues. The distinctions among these levels are important to practitioners seeking to design effective citizen science programs as each increase in citizen science participation in the scientific process is hypothesized to have both benefits and obstacles. The literature on citizen science models of PPSR calls for more research on the role that this degree of participation plays in the quality of that participation and related learning outcomes (e.g., Shirk et al., 2012; Bonney et al., 2009). With an unprecedented interest in thoughtfully incorporating citizen science into health-based studies, citizen science practitioners and health researchers first need a better understanding of the role of culture in how different communities approach and perceive participation in health-related studies, the true impact of intended educational efforts from participation, and the role participation in general has on the scientific process and the science outcome.
Project goal to address critical barrier in the field: Establish best practices for use of citizen science in the content area of human health-based research, and better inform the design of future projects in PPSR, both in the Denver Museum of Nature & Science’s Genetics of Taste Lab (Lab), and importantly, in various research and educational settings across the field.
Aims
Understand who currently engages in citizen science projects in order to design strategies to overcome the barriers to participation that occur at each level of the PPSR framework, particularly among audiences underrepresented in STEM.
Significantly advance the current knowledge regarding how citizen scientists engage in, and learn from, and participate in the different levels of the PPSR framework.
Determine the impact that each stage of citizen science participation has on the scientific process.
DATE:
-
TEAM MEMBERS:
Nichole GarneauTiffany Nuessle
resourceevaluationMuseum and Science Center Programs
The Museum of Science, Boston’s Research and Evaluation Department conducted a summative evaluation of The Hall of Human Life (HHL) exhibition. This 9,700 square foot exhibition is geared towards older children and adults. It is focused on human biology and human health with the main message, “Human beings are changing in a changing environment.” Visitors are able to use their own bodies and behaviors to understand biological mechanisms. Unique to this exhibition, visitors are able to use scannable wristbands to record and compare personal data with other Museum visitors to learn about their
Bio Med Tech: Engineering for Your Health was a 2,750 square foot exhibition at the Great Lakes Science Center (GLSC) that dealt with issues related to biomedical technology. Partially funded by a grant from the National Institutes of Health Science Education Partnership Awards program (NIH/SEPA), the project was developed through a partnership between GLSC and Case Western Reserve University. The SEPA grant also funded a variety of programming activities, including informal Exploration Cart activities in the exhibition, presentations in the exhibition's theater space, and teacher training
This study was conducted as part of the formative evaluation of the NISE Network Forum Nanomedicine in Healthcare. The purpose of the forum was to bring members of the public together to discuss the conditions under which nanotechnology applications in medicine and personal care products should be made available to the public. During the forum, participants learned about nanotechnology and its societal and ethical impacts from expert speakers, had chance to ask questions of the experts, participated in a small group discussion in which they talked about the pros and cons of releasing
The NISE Network Forums were created to provide an in-depth learning experience that would (1) enhance participants' understanding of nano and its potential impacts; (2) increase participants' confidence in participating in public discourse about nanotechnologies; and (3) build informal science educators' knowledge and ability to conduct this type of programming at their institution (NISE Network Public Forums Manual, 2007). In an effort to reach out to a more diverse audience, the NISE Network Forums Team translated into Spanish the existing NISE Net forum "Nanomedicine in Healthcare" to
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Elizabeth KollmannJane MorganNanoscale Informal Science Education NetworkRoxana del Campo
IN 2005-2008, the Nanoscale Informal Science Education Network experimented with forum models designed to provide attendees with an opportunity to learn about and discuss the implications of nanotechnology on their lives, society and the environment. For this summative evaluation, the forum Nanotechnology in Health Care was implemented at three NISE Net museums and evaluated with a pre-post one-group design. The Nanotechnology in Health Care forum model is successful in positively influencing attendees' definition of nanotechnology; their awareness, assessment, and understanding of both the
It is relatively unknown what impact the Museum of Science has on its visitors once they leave our doors. This study aims to create a baseline understanding of how visitors follow up on what they have learned at the Museum. We examined follow up interviews from the Star Wars: Where Science Meets the Imagination exhibition evaluation and some of its accompanying programming, the Rethinking Urban Transportation forums, Bionics and Prosthetics forums, and The Force and Its Many Faces lectures. The follow up interviews were conducted via email and phone six to 10 weeks after visitors came to the
Grossology Live! was a creative and innovative program that involved unique format, content, and collaboration. The program used live video-conferencing techniques to create two-way interaction between onscreen actors in a colorful Grossology set in the studio in Noblesville, Indiana; uniquely imaginative comedic and musical presentations on the human body; and a live presenter, stage set, and audience at 5 small science or health centers primarily in the mid-west and southeast. The receiving sites were members of the National Association of Health Education Centers (NAHEC), which played a