RMC Research designed evaluation activities to provide formative and summative feedback to the Hubbard Brook Research Foundation (HBRF) on their NSF Pathways project, Forest Science Dialogues (FSD). FSD consists of a plan to engage with scientists at the Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study and with the surrounding community using the Hubbard Brook Roundtable dialogue process in order to facilitate mutual learning. The purpose of this engagement was to increase public knowledge, understanding, and awareness of ecosystem science in the Northern Forest in order to enrich local dialogue surrounding
‘What’s in a Name’ is a collaboration between Harvard Museums of Science & Culture, the Encyclopedia of Life and the Biodiversity Heritage Library. Its goal was to addresses three significant issues: improving public understanding of life on Earth through resources on how scientists describe biodiversity; furthering public understanding of the scientific process, as exemplified by the study of biological species; and creating ways to enable access to the vast amount of data available from museums and libraries. The primary audiences were museum visitors and online users; the materials were
This summative evaluation report details the Broad Implementation of the Living Laboratory model--an initiative to promote partnership between museums and cognitive science researchers in order to promote professional learning and involve the public in scientific research. The evaluation investigated the extent of the dissemination effort’s depth, spread, sustainability, and shift in ownership, based on Coburn’s criteria for scale-up (2003). Evaluators collected data from surveys, interviews, focus groups, document review, and observations. Findings about depth suggest that adopters fully
Frontier Scientists is comprised of a website and portfolio of videos created for distribution web-wide and through television broadcast. The goal of this program is to excite the general public about ongoing science in Alaska and the Arctic. This is the summary evaluation of a three-year National Science Foundation grant received by Frontier Scientists. Frontier Scientists contracted PEER Associates to conduct the evaluation. Over the course of the three years, the evaluation was focused on both formative (intended to inform and improve programming) and summative (what has the program