There are strong arguments for and against having either a dedicated funding scheme for science communication in the next European Framework Programme, or mainstreaming upstream engagement across all disciplines. How could both approaches be combined? The success of either will depend on its operationalisation.
We argue that the commitment to science-society integration and Responsible Research and Innovation in past European framework programmes has already made considerable progress in better aligning research and innovation with European societies. The framework programmes have important socialisation effects and recent research point to positive trends across key areas of Responsible Research and Innovation within academic organisations. What appears to be a step away from the concerted efforts to facilitate European citizens’ meaningful contribution to research and innovation in the upcoming
Public trust in agricultural biotechnology organizations that produce so-called ‘genetically-modified organisms’ (GMOs) is affected by misinformed attacks on GM technology and worry that producers' concern for profits overrides concern for the public good. In an experiment, we found that reporting that the industry engages in open and transparent research practices increased the perceived trustworthiness of university and corporate organizations involved with GMOs. Universities were considered more trustworthy than corporations overall, supporting prior findings in other technology domains
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Asheley LandrumJoseph HilgardRobert LullHeather AkinKathleen Hall Jamieson
resourceprojectProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
This project supports the Broader Impacts and Outreach Network for Institutional Collaboration (BIONIC), a national Research Coordination Network of Broader Impacts to support professionals who assist researchers to design, implement, and evaluate the Broader Impacts activities for NSF proposals and awards. All NSF proposals are evaluated not only on the Intellectual Merit of the proposed research, but also on the Broader Impacts of the proposed work, such as societal relevance, educational outreach, and community engagement. Many institutions have begun employing Broader Impacts support professionals, but in most cases, these individuals have not worked as a group to identify and share best practices. As a consequence, there has been much duplication of effort. Through coordination, BIONIC is expected to improve efficiency, reduce redundancy, and have significant impact in several areas: 1) Researchers will benefit from an increased understanding of the Broader Impacts merit review criterion and increased access to collaborators who can help them design, implement, and evaluate their Broader Impacts activities; 2) Institutions and research centers will increase their capacity to support Broader Impacts via mentoring for Broader Impacts professionals and consulting on how to build Broader Impacts support infrastructure, with attention to inclusion of non-research-intensive universities, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and Hispanic- and Minority-Serving Institutions that may not have the resources to support an institutional Broader Impacts office; and 3) NSF, itself, will benefit from a systematic and consistent approach to Broader Impacts that will lead to better fulfillment of the Broader Impacts criterion by researchers, better evaluation of Broader Impacts activities by reviewers and program officers, and a system for evaluating the effectiveness of Broader Impacts activities in the aggregate, as mandated by Congress and the National Science Board. Through its many planned activities, BIONIC will ultimately help advance the societal aims that the Broader Impacts merit review criterion was meant to achieve.
The main goals of the project will be accomplished through the four specific objectives: 1) Identify and curate promising models, practices, and evaluation methods for the Broader Impacts community; 2) Expand engagement in, and support the development of, high-quality Broader Impacts activities by educating current and future faculty and researchers on effective practices; 3) Develop the human resources necessary for sustained growth and increased diversity of the Broader Impacts community; and 4) Promote cross-institutional collaboration and dissemination for Broader Impacts programs, practices, models, materials, and resources. BIONIC will facilitate collaborative Broader Impacts work across institutions, help leverage previously developed resources, support professional development, and train new colleagues to enter into the Broader Impacts field. This project will improve the quality and sustainability of Broader Impacts investments, as researchers continue to create unique and effective activities that are curated and broadly disseminated. BIONIC will create a network designed to assist NSF-funded researchers at their institutions in achieving the goals of the Broader Impacts Review Criterion. In so doing, BIONIC will promote Broader Impacts activities locally, nationally, and internationally and help to advance the Broader Impacts field.
This award is co-funded by the Divisions of Molecular and Cellular Biosciences and Emerging Frontiers in the Directorate for Biological Sciences and by the Division of Chemistry in the Directorate for Mathematics and Physical Sciences.
Today’s conservation challenges are complex. Solving these challenges often requires scientific collaborations that extend beyond the scope, expertise, and capacity of any single agency, organization, or institution. Conservation efforts can benefit from interdisciplinary collaboration, scientific and technological innovations, and the leveraging of capacity and resources among partners. Here we explore a series of case studies demonstrating how collaborative scientific partnerships are furthering the mission of the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), including: (1) contaminants of emerging
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Shauna MarquardtMandy AnnisRyan DrumStephanie HummelDavid MosbyTamara Smith
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
Why do scientists volunteer to be involved in public engagement in science? What are the barriers that can prevent them participating in dialogue with society? What can be done to facilitate their participation? We report the outcomes of a series of focus groups conducted with the young scientists who volunteered in SISSA for schools (S4S), the Children's University program of the International School for Advanced Studies (SISSA) in Trieste, Italy.
S4S is based on the contribution of PhD students as volunteers, has a participatory character, and is attentive to social and gender inclusion
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Simona CerratoValentina DaelliHelena PertotOlga Puccioni
In the United States, broad study in an array of different disciplines —arts, humanities, science, mathematics, engineering— as well as an in-depth study within a special area of interest, have been defining characteristics of a higher education. But over time, in-depth study in a major discipline has come to dominate the curricula at many institutions. This evolution of the curriculum has been driven, in part, by increasing specialization in the academic disciplines. There is little doubt that disciplinary specialization has helped produce many of the achievement of the past century
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
David SkortonAshley BearNational Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
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
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 project, an NSF INCLUDES Design and Development Launch Pilot, managed by the University of Nevada, Reno, addresses the grand challenge of increasing underrepresentation regionally in the advanced manufacturing sector. Using the state's Learn and Earn Program Advanced Career Pathway (LEAP) as the foundation, science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) activities will support and prepare Hispanic students for the region's workforce in advanced manufacturing which includes partnerships with Truckee Meadows Community College (TMCC), the state's Governor's Office of Economic Development, Charles River Laboratories, Nevada Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (Nevada EPSCoR) and the K-12 community.
The expected outcomes from the project will inform the feasibility, expandability and transferability of the LEAP framework in diversifying the state's workforce locally and the STEM workforce nationally. Formative and summative evaluation will be conducted with a well-matched comparison group. Dissemination of project results will be disseminated through the Association for Public Land-Grant Universities (APLU), STEM conferences and scholarly journals.
DATE:
-
TEAM MEMBERS:
David ShintaniJulie EllsworthKarsten HeiseRobert StachlewitzRegina Tempel
Arizona State University's Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering with the Maricopa County Community Colleges District and K-12 school districts along with industry partners, Honeywell, Intel, and Texas Instruments, and the Helios Education Foundation will implement an NSF Design and Development Launch Pilot to address the broadening participation objectives of enhancing entry and persistence of underrepresented groups in engineering. This alliance will identify and develop effective mechanisms to impact entry and persistence in engineering at scale and to expand the effort for the region, serving as a model for Arizona and other universities nationally. Diversity is often seen as a valuable commodity for fostering innovation and creativity in engineering, and extant theoretical and empirical literature provides evidence of the importance a diversified engineering workforce can have to spark scientific and technological innovation to solve complex problems. Nationally, there is a consistent shortage of available diverse engineers and scientists, which is believed to compromise the country's ability to sustain its leadership position as a global force. This project will create engineering pathways for underrepresented groups and identify and develop effective mechanisms that impact these students' entry and persistence in engineering.
A total of 500 high school students, 100 2-year college students, and 200 four-year college students will participate in the project. The research measures will focus on students' academic/career awareness and interest in engineering and the degree to which students develop a strong identity and affinity for engineering. It is expected that the alliance affiliates will develop into adaptive systems that respond to needs of first-generation students at various pathway junctures. This project has the potential to transform educational experiences and support systems for first-generation students.
DATE:
-
TEAM MEMBERS:
Kyle SquiresRoberta Anslow-HammondMaria ReyesJames CollofelloTirupalavanam Ganesh