Public communication from research institutions often functions as both science communication and public relations. And while these are distinct functions, public relations efforts often serve as science communication tools. This is because successful science communication and public relations efforts for research institutions both rely on finding shared language and disseminating findings in context.
We argue that the institutionalized push communication of academic institutions has become the dominant form of public science communication and has tended to force other forms and functions of science communication into the background. Given the new schemes of public funding, public communication of science now primarily serves the purpose of enabling academic institutions to promote themselves in a competition that has been forced upon them by the political domain. What academics working under these conditions say about themselves and their work (and what they do not) will depend crucially
In this commentary I explain why research institutions are neither doing science communication nor developing ‘public’ relations in the proper sense. Their activities are rather a mix of different things, serving various purposes and targets. However, dealing with PCST, their main responsibilities [should] include: promoting genuine communication and dialogue, being open and accessible to the public, providing high quality scientific information, ensuring good internal communication and educating their scientific staff.
There is growing competition among publicly funded scientific institutes and universities to attract staff, students, funding and research partners. As a result, there has been increased emphasis on science communication activities in research institutes over the past decade. But are institutes communicating science simply for the sake of improving the institute’s image? In this set of commentaries we explore the relationship between science communication and public relations (PR) activities, in an attempt to clarify what research institutes are actually doing. The overall opinion of the
Sharing scientific knowledge in conflict zones may not sound like a priority. Still science communicators can contribute to address social issues by inviting people to experience research practice, engaging them in scientific questioning and constructive dialog.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Leila PerieLivio Riboli-SascoClaire Ribrault
This is a handout from the session "Increasing Audience Diversity" at the 2014 ASTC Conference held in Raleigh, NC. The session was broken down into groups by audience age. The handout provides notes for engaging university students and middle and high school aged children.
This poster was presented at the 2014 AISL PI Meeting in Washington, DC. Using STEM America (USA) is a two-year Pathways project designed to examine the feasibility of using informal STEM learning opportunities to improve science literacy among English Language Learner (ELL) students in Imperial County, California.
This poster was presented at the 2014 AISL PI Meeting in Washington, DC. This project seeks to improve public engagement in climate communication by broadcast meteorologists, using scientific methods to identify probable causes for their skepticism and/or reticence, and to test the efficacy of proposed solutions.
This poster was presented at the 2014 AISL PI Meeting. In this NSF International Research Experiences for Students project MSU students will travel to the Altai Republic and work with faculty and students at Gorno-Altaisk University to conduct research related to native language use in learning ecological sciences in informal settings.
This poster was presented at the 2014 AISL PI Meeting in Washington, DC. It highlights the goals, audience, outcomes, and lessons learned for a pathways project to develop a model for producing scientific news reports in a variety of media formats on a range of topics of keen interest to rural and Native American communities in Montana. Cultural differences and geographic isolation influence opportunities to provide STEM content to these communities, yet these communities are facing perplexing decisions about exploitation of their environmental resources. The poster highlights the successes of
This report summarizes the content and shares ideas coming out of a convening organized in September, 2013 by the Alliance and The Henry Ford. Essays by educators, students, researchers and reformers explore how leaders from the worlds of education and museums can work together to integrate the nation’s assets into a Vibrant Learning Grid. Produced with the support of the Robert and Toni Bader Foundation.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Center for the Future of MuseumsElizabeth Merritt
With the success of open access publishing, Massive open online courses (MOOCs) and open education practices, the open approach to education has moved from the periphery to the mainstream. This marks a moment of victory for the open education movement, but at the same time the real battle for the direction of openness begins. As with the green movement, openness now has a market value and is subject to new tensions, such as venture capitalists funding MOOC companies. This is a crucial time for determining the future direction of open education. In this volume, Martin Weller examines four key