The article proposes a reflection on science communication and on the communicative processes characteristic to the production of new-found knowledge. It aims to outline the role that sociology can play within this frame for greater understanding. The article first defines the main evolutionary trends in scientific research in recent decades, with particular reference to the emergence of new social actors. Following on from this, it will look at some of the epistemological conditions that may strengthen the sociologist's role in the cognition of scientific production. Using this as a premise
The objective of the present paper is an attempt to measure the public understanding of science in the area of health and hygiene and test the efficacy of "cultural distance model". A pre-tested open-ended questionnaire was used for administering cross-sectional surveys at a religio-cultural festival in India. 3484 individuals were interviewed and responses were coded and entered to construct computer database. The data was used for determining the cultural distance of five scientific concepts from the quotidian life of the target population. In developing countries, the formal system of
Can (and should) there be a "Mediterranean model" of science communication? For those of us who work in the field of science communication in a country which is on the Mediterranean Sea, this has always been a question that spontaneously leaps to mind. This is because we "feel" there is something intangible in our way of communicating science that is rather similar to the way of a French, Spanish (or even Brazilian) colleague of ours, whereas it is slightly different from that of an American or British one. And yet, the more in depth this question is studied in time, the more complex the
At the beginning of the new millennium, science is not only a neutral system or an objective methodology of knowledge, but also the implicit basis of the totality of our culture. Though science and its derivates are omnipresent in daily life, its basic ideologies and functional mechanisms are in most cases not fully visible to the subject. In using the most evolved systematical-critical model of psychoanalysis provided by the French thinker Jacques Lacan (1901-1981), an enlightening analysis of western science can be made, which contributes not only to a better understanding of its own
Peer review is the evaluation method that has characterized the scientific growth of the last four centuries, the first four of what is called modern science, indeed. It is matter of scientific communication inside scientific community, a subject too poorly studied in comparison with its critical importance for a scientific study of science (science of science). Peer review has been used for scientific paper evaluation before publication (editorial peer review) and for research proposal evaluation before financial support (grants peer review). Both cases present similar pros and cons, so I
In recent weeks, Britain’s Better Regulation Task Force report on scientific research regulation asked the Government to evaluate the risks associated with the development of Nanosciences and Nanotechnologies. The Government was also asked to prove its implementation of a specific policy to protect human, animal and environmental safety, were it to be threatened by the development of this emerging field of knowledge. These requests may sound rather alarming. However, objectively speaking, the precautionary attitude of the Better Regulation Task Force does not differ greatly from that of the U
Enrico Fermi's work gave birth to a real cultural revolution in the Italian scientific scenario. His scientific studies concerned almost every field in physics and had far-reaching effects of which virtually everybody, above all in Italy, is still taking advantage. Two important "by-products" of Fermi's ideas and initiatives will be here taken into consideration: the new way of carrying out research and communicating science invented by Fermi and his group and his publications for the general public, which often stood for high examples of scientific popularisation. Then the focus will shift on
AAAS describes public engagement with science as intentional, meaningful interactions that provide opportunities for mutual learning between scientists and members of the public. Through the Alan I. Leshner Leadership Institute for Public Engagement with Science, AAAS empowers scientists and engineers to practice high-impact public engagement by fostering leaders who advocate for critical dialogue between scientists and the public and lead change to enable their communities, institutions, and others to support public engagement. This report, with additional work on understanding mechanisms for
How do people make sense of conflicting beliefs? Although Gottlieb & Wineburg’s paper is about highly educated professionals reading history, informal science educators will recognize similar issues when working with people who hold beliefs incompatible with scientific ways of understanding the world. “Epistemic switching” was a way of considering criteria for truth, reliability, and validity according to one belief system or another. Rather than simply believing or excluding ideas as people who held to only one value system, the people with multiple, competing affiliations actually more
The National Writing Project (NWP) is collaborating with the Association of Science-Technology Centers (ASTC) on a four-year, full-scale development project that is designed to integrate science and literacy. Partnerships will be formed between NWP sites and ASTC member science centers and museums to develop, test, and refine innovative programs for educators and youth, resulting in the creation of a unique learning network. The project highlights the critical need for the integration of science and literacy and builds on recommendations in the Common Core State Standards and the National Research Council's publication, "A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas." The content focus includes current topics in science and technology such as environmental science, sustainability, synthetic biology, geoengineering, and other subjects which align with science center research and exhibits. The project design is supported by a framework that incorporates a constructivist/inquiry-based approach that capitalizes on the synergy between rigorous science learning and robust literacy practices. Project deliverables include a set of 10 local partnership sites, professional development for network members, a project website, and an evaluation report highlighting lessons learned. Partnership sites will be selected based on interest, proximity, history, and expertise. Two geographically and demographically diverse cohorts, consisting of five partnerships each will be identified in Years 2 and 3. Each set of partners will be charged with creating a comprehensive two-year plan for science literacy activities and products to be implemented at local sites. It is anticipated that the pilot programs may result in the creation of new programs that merge science and writing, integrate writing into existing museum science programs, or integrate science activities into existing NWP programs. Interest-driven youth projects such as citizen science and science journalism activities are examples of programmatic approaches that may be adopted. The partners will convene periodically for planning and professional development focused on the integration of science and literacy for public and professional audiences, provided in part by national practitioners and research experts. A network Design Team that includes leadership representatives from NWP, ASTC, and the project evaluator, Inverness Research, Inc., will oversee project efforts in conjunction with a national advisory board, while a Partnership Coordinator will provide support for the local sites. Inverness Research will conduct a multi-level evaluation to address the following questions: -What is the nature and quality of the local partner arrangements, and the larger network as a whole? -What is the nature and quality of the local science literacy programs that local partners initiate, and how do they engage local participants, and develop their sense of inquiry and communication skills? First, a Designed-Based Implementation Research approach will be used for the developmental evaluation to assess the implementation process. Next, the documentation and portrayal phase will assess the benefits to youth, educators, institutions, and the field using surveys, interviews, observations of educators, and reviews of science communication efforts created by youth. Finally, the summative evaluation includes a comprehensive portfolio of evidence to document the audience impacts and an independent assessment of the project model by an Evaluation Review Board. This project will result in the creation of a robust learning community while contributing knowledge and lessons learned to the field about networks and innovative partnerships. It is anticipated that formal and informal educators will gain increased knowledge about science and literacy programs and develop skills to provide effective programs, while youth will demonstrate increased understanding of key science concepts and the ability to communicate science. Programs created by the local partnerships will serve approximately 650 educators (450 informal educators and 200 K-12 teachers) and 500 youth ages 9-18. Plans for dissemination, expansion, and sustainability will be undertaken by the sub-networks of the collaborating national organizations drawing on the 350 ASTC member institutions and nearly 200 NWP sites at colleges and universities.
In this study of preschoolers’ understandings and enactments of racial and ethnic difference, Park asks, “How do different ideas about diversity play out in the day-to-day interactions and activities of young children?” Park takes a sociocultural perspective, seeking to understand the ways children talk about difference and behave toward others in their preschool.
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.