The Museum of Science, Boston (MOS or the Museum), in partnership with EdTogether and in collaboration with researchers and engineers across a range of affective science and technology disciplines, implemented a two-year exploratory research and development initiative titled Empowering Learners through Effective Emotional Engagement (ELEEE), with funding from the Argosy Foundation. Through the ELEEE project we sought to develop a framework for leveraging emotion in design where visitors are empowered to have meaningful, self- or socially-directed, and intrinsically motivated learning
This report details the results of a five-year longitudinal study on the Explainer program at the Exploratorium. Explainers from the summer 1999, fall 1999 and spring 2000 cohorts were interviewed before and after their first semester of work as an Explainer, then followed up with additional interviews three more times at intervals of from one to three years. Additional supplemental data were gathered from a larger set of Explainers via surveys that were administered to these same cohorts before and after their first semester of work, and to a set of Explainer alumni who had been out of the
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
Scientists (and engineers) wishing to conduct public engagement do so in the context of established disciplinary norms and complex institutional systems that may support or limit their success. This report seeks to convey the known complexity, unique challenges, and opportunities for universities to better support for scientists in their public engagement work. The report is intended to drive discussion towards deeper exploration and development of actionable next steps.
This is the executive summary of report from Workshop III: Academic Institutions, part of the Support Systems for
The Association of Science-Technology Centers (ASTC) aims to help member institutions inform and educate the public about science through a global lens. The World Biotech Tour (WBT) was a three-year initiative designed to not only promote a greater understanding of biotechnology through public outreach and programming led by science centers and museums, but also as an opportunity for ASTC to collect useful data on the resources required and challenges encountered at different science museums around the world when implementing a long-term, multi-country program. The WBT involved students
This preliminary study examined the effect that five major sources of public science education—schools, science centers, broadcast media, print media, and the Internet—had on adults’ science interest values and cognitive predispositions. Over 3,000 adults were sampled in three U.S. metropolitan areas: Los Angeles, California, Phoenix, Arizona, and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. To minimize potential sampling bias, the results were weighted by current U.S. Census data to be comparable to demographics from each of the three jurisdictions. Participants were asked to self-report their current and
Scientists (and engineers) wishing to conduct public engagement do so in the context of established disciplinary norms and complex institutional systems that may support or limit their success. This report seeks to convey the known complexity, unique challenges, and opportunities for universities to better support for scientists in their public engagement work. The report is intended to drive discussion towards deeper exploration and development of actionable next steps.
This is a report from Workshop III: Academic Institutions, part of the Support Systems for Scientists' Communication and
This is a report from Workshop II: Overview of Organizational Support for Public Engagement among Scientific Societies, part of the Support Systems for Scientists' Communication and Engagement workshop series. Workshop II was held Feb. 28 - Mar. 1, 2018 at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Chevy Chase, MD. The report provides an overview of a project aiming to help reveal how societies view the concept of “public engagement” and to provide an empirical understanding of the availability and prevalence of tools that societies currently use to support engagement efforts.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Shupei YuanAnthony DudoJohn BesleyBrooke Smith
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.
This paper describes Synergies, an on-going longitudinal study and design effort, being conducted in a diverse, under-resourced community in Portland, Oregon, with the goal of measurably improving STEM learning, interest and participation by early adolescents, both in school and out of school. Authors examine how the work of this particular research-practice partnership is attempting to accommodate the six principles outlined in this issue: (1) more accurately reflect learning as a lifelong process occurring across settings, situations and time frames; (2) consider what STEM content is worth
The dramatic decline in youth interest in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) during adolescence, both in the USA and internationally, has been a phenomenon of societal concern for several decades. The Synergies project was launched to help deal with this issue. In this paper, we report findings from the first two years of our longitudinal survey research. We sought to understand the nature of the STEM-related interests of 10-/11-year-old youth living in a single urban community and the factors that seem to influence whether these various dimensions of interest increase
The nature of STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) learning is changing as individuals have unprecedented, 24/7 access to science-related information and experiences from cradle to grave. Today’s science-education opportunities include not only traditional schooling, but also libraries, museums, zoos, aquaria, science centers, and parks and preserves; diverse broadcast media such as television, podcasts, and film; organized youth programs such as 4-H, after-school or summer camps, and special-interest clubs and hobby groups; and an ever-increasing array of digital media