The Green Bank Observatory organized a community workshop on research experiences for high school students in disciplines supported by NSF’s Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences (MPS). The workshop was intended as a forum for sharing, gathering community input, and illuminating best practices in providing research experiences to high school students and organizing such research activities across universities, labs, and observatories. The input gathered from the workshop may be useful to others wanting to support K-12 research activities.
It is often stated that solving the global challenges presented by the 21st century requires a United States workforce with training in STEM fields, and that the STEM workforce may be insufficient to fill that need. Education research literature in STEM suggests that engaging students early and often in authentic research experiences enhances STEM identity, STEM self-efficacy, and STEM career interest: three personal attributes that are linked to entry into and persistence on a STEM career pathway. Much of this literature is focused on college students, however. This workshop convened people and organizations who have designed and implemented research experiences for high school students, and who will examine the role such experiences can play in the development of a student’s interest and STEM identity.
Community voice, alongside academic voice, is essential to the core community engagement principle of reciprocity—the seeking, recognizing, respecting, and incorporating the knowledge, perspectives, and resources that each partner brings to a collaboration. Increasing the extent to which academic conferences honor reciprocity with community members is important for many reasons. For example, community perspectives often enhance knowledge generation and potentially transform scholarship, practice, and outcomes for all stakeholders. However, community presence and participation at academic
Modern science communication has emerged as a field of study, a body of practice and a profession. In the last 60 years, we have seen the birth of interactive science centres, university courses, the first research into science communication, and a growth in employment by research institutions, universities, museums, science centres and industry. Now Ireland has told its story.
Many scientists want to connect with the public, but their efforts to do so are not always easy or effective. Visionary programs and institutions are leading the way identifying the support needed to enable scientists’ connections with the public. However, the current appetite by -- and demand for -- scientists to do this exceeds the capacity of those who facilitate quality communication and engagement efforts. More can be done to ensure that those who support scientists are networked, sharing best practices, and supported by a reliable infrastructure.
This workshop series, convened by the Kavli, Rita Allen, Packard and Moore Foundations, was intended to view the entire system of people who support scientists’ engagement and communication efforts in order to explore how this system can be most effective and sustainable. The discussions examined where this system is thriving, the limits people within the system face and what can be done to ensure their efforts are commensurate with the demand for quality communication and engagement support.
Conducted over four closely scheduled workshops in late 2017 and early 2018, the convenings brought together leaders in different parts of the field who bridge scientists and the public and led to the emergence of a number of key priority areas. While the initial intention was to also hold a plenary event to provide a more holistic view of scientists’ support system in order to collectively discern directions to advance the field, we feel a more efficient way forward right now is to focus our efforts and resources on building community and advancing these priority areas.
Our invitation-only workshops brought together scientists, academic leaders, engagement professionals, researchers, communication trainers, and foundation leaders. For each workshop, we also commissioned a “landscape overview”, to better understand the high-level state of each community. Workshops included:
Workshop I: Communication and engagement training programs - Dec. 4-5, 2017 at SUNY Global Center/Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science in New York
Workshop II: Associations, societies and other professional organizations - Feb. 28 - March 1, 2018 at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Chevy Chase, MD
Workshop III: Academic institutions - March 27-28, 2018 at UC San Diego
Workshop IV: Science engagement facilitators (museums, science festivals, connectors) - May 2-3, 2018 at Monterey Bay Aquarium
TBD - Workshop V: Plenary event
The goal of the workshops was to explore how to ensure scientists’ communication and engagement support is effective and sustained. In doing so, we hoped to 1) deepen our understanding of how scientists are currently supported in these areas, 2) map the broader support system to expose the opportunities and obstacles that play a role in achieving this goal, and 3) identify strategic and practical next steps that move us closer to this goal. This initiative also aimed to forge and strengthen networks across communities and institutions – and in so doing, take a view of the entire system to explore how everyone can better ensure their efforts are impactful, mutually supportive, and connected to a greater whole.
Included in the links below are summaries from each workshop.
Science communications proficiency is an important skill for STEM graduate students but is not a typical part of STEM graduate education nationally. At the institutions that do offer such science communications training, instructional approaches are highly variable, reflecting an absence of standards and evaluation metrics. The workshop will 1) inventory science communications training for STEM graduate students nationally, (2) identify high effective practices in science communications training with attention to curriculum, approaches, and evaluation, and (3) define a roadmap that gives concrete recommendations to university administrators and funding agencies for national implementation and scale-up of science communications training. The workshop will involve IGERT PIs, science communications trainers, science communications researchers, and individuals from national agencies and organizations with a high interest in STEM graduate student communications training. Products of the workshop will include a white paper to NSF that identifies best practices for science communications training and specifies a roadmap for national scale-up of effective practices; publications in the peer-reviewed literature and other media; and briefings of officials at organizations with capacity to foster changes in graduate education (e.g., NSF, Council of Graduate Schools, and AAAS).