This poster was presented at the 2021 NSF AISL Awardee Meeting.
Dinosaurs of Antarctica is a giant screen film and outreach project that documents the work of NSF-funded researchers on expeditions to Shackleton Glacier during the 2017-2018 field season. This immersive film and companion television special will bring the past to life and engage the public, and particularly students in middle grades (6-9), with polar science through appealing, entertaining media experiences and informal learning programs. The film serves as a companion for the synonymous Antarctic Dinosaurs museum exhibition
This poster was presented at the 2021 NSF AISL Awardee Meeting.
The archaeology after-school program, geared towards rural middle school students, explores the ability to teach STEM through archaeology. The multidisciplinary nature of archaeology makes it a useful vehicle for teaching a variety of STEM disciplines (e.g., biology, geology, ecology, zoology, physics, chemistry, mathematics, etc.). Its compatibility with hands-on activities, deep thinking skills, and scientific reasoning matches STEM learning goals.
Policymakers need data to make informed decisions. Local governments need data to justify policies like bans on single-use plastics. Federal agencies need information to set the conservation guidelines that protect endangered species. Data are also required to report on progress towards international policy targets, like the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
But worldwide, we don’t have enough data to understand the current state of our environment, or effectively evaluate the impact of interventions. In 2018, Washington, DC banned plastic drinking straws while citing evidence that 3
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Anne BowserAlex LongMetis MelocheElizabeth NewburyMeg King
This guide grows out of the research project “Evidence-based Science Communication with Policymakers” conducted by the four authors and sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences and the Rita Allen Foundation. In order to write these recommendations, we spent over a year studying science communication with policymakers from several vantage points. We reviewed hundreds of scholarly works on the topic published in over a dozen fields as well as numerous practical guides written by scientific societies. We interviewed both Democratic and Republican Congressional policymakers, including 22
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Elizabeth SuhayEmily CloydErin HeathErin Nash
This timeline was constructed by participants during the Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE ISE Summit) meeting in March 3-5, 2010 to document histories, capture events, and share memories about the field of informal science education. Postings were shepherded into four main strands: key events, policy, infrastructure, and learning. Along the bottom, participants marked when they entered the field.
In this participatory research project, a partnership between the Kitty Andersen Youth Science Center (KAYSC) and the Department of Evaluation and Research in Learning at the Science Museum of Minnesota, participants are working to rename and reclaim theory and research methods so as to foster relevance and equity. We have renamed the theory of science capital: "science capitxl" signals its roots in equity work and invites questioning. We are using what we have called "embedded research practices" for data generation and analysis. This poster was shared at the 2019 AISL PI meeting.
Citizen science, the active participation of the public in scientific research projects, is a rapidly expanding field in open science and open innovation. It provides an integrated model of public knowledge production and engagement with science. As a growing worldwide phenomenon, it is invigorated by evolving new technologies that connect people easily and effectively with the scientific community. Catalysed by citizens’ wishes to be actively involved in scientific processes, as a result of recent societal trends, it also offers contributions to the rise in tertiary education. In addition
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Susanne HeckerMuki HaklayAnne BowserZen MakuchJohannes VogelAletta Bonn
This article provides a starting position and scene-setter for an invited commentary series on science communication and public intellectualism. It begins by briefly considering what intellectualism and public intellectualism are, before discussing their relationship with science communication, especially in academia. It ends with a call to science communication academics and practitioners to either become more active in challenging the status quo, or to help support those who wish to by engendering a professional environment that encourages risk-taking and speaking-out in public about
This letter reflects on how the role of science in society evolved in 2016. While there were plenty of groundbreaking scientific discoveries, the shifting political landscape cultivated a tempestuous relationship between science and society. We discuss these developments and the potential role of the science communication community in political activism.
How should we convey science—both its findings and its value to society—to the many members of the public who lack either scientific training or intense interest in scientific progress? In October 2016 the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a workshop to explore ways of better presenting science—both specific findings and the processes of discovering and confirming—to the public. Participants discussed ways to develop data-enriched narratives that communicate to the public and policy makers in an engaging and rigorous way the work of basic research. They also
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
Differences in viewpoints between science and society, like in for example the HPV-vaccination debate, should be considered from a socio-technical system perspective, and not solely from a boundary perspective between the lay public, medical doctors and scientists. Recent developments in the HPV-vaccination case show how the debate concerning uncertainty amongst scientists and the lay audience is mostly focussed on the improvement of understanding of lay people about why vaccination is important. This boundary thinking leads to the idea that once the boundary is crossed, the problem is solved