Three accredited zoos and aquariums in the Pacific Northwest are collaborating on a project aimed at developing tools to assess program effectiveness in encouraging children's empathy towards animals. This short briefing paper outlines the team's initial work to 1) gain a shared understanding and definition of the construct (empathy towards animals) and how it develops during childhood, and 2) review existing research on the link between empathy and beneficial action towards wildlife, and 3) summarize research findings on best practices towards encouraging empathy.
To observe art and science in interaction offered a great opportunity for me as cultural anthropologist to learn about the production of climate knowledge. Like ethnographers, artists entered the world of science, observed climate scientists and participated in their daily routines. They dissected elements of the scientific process and focused on science as a social practice. For scientists and artists, a process of “self-identification via the other” [Kramer, 1993] was set into motion. The artwork reflects this process by “mimicking” scientific procedures and by linking human sentiment and
With the suite of environmental challenges faced by today’s society growing ever more imminent, the potential role of science and natural history museums as social institutions to promote environmental stewardship is being realized. A recent collaborative effort between the
EcoTarium in Worcester, MA and six other institutions across the country, the NSF funded City Science exhibit serves to introduce the public to new research on human-ecology interactions in urban settings. The project also supports the inclusion of Public Participation in Science Research (PPSR) elements in museum exhibits
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Marissa GallantShana HawrylchakJacqueline DeLisa
This document presents an overview of the quantitative survey data findings from the SL+ Equity Pathways in Informal Science Learning project. Further qualitative analysis on some of the open response data is yet to be completed. Findings are grouped into four areas: about the individuals taking part in the survey; their definitions and understanding of equity and related terms; their current equity practice; and their practices around equity work including reading, talking with colleagues and evaluation.
Does the public trust science? Scientists? Scientific organizations? What roles do trust and the lack of trust play in public debates about how science can be used to address such societal concerns as childhood vaccination, cancer screening, and a warming planet? What could happen if social trust in science or scientists faded? These types of questions led the Roundtable on Public Interfaces of the Life Sciences of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to convene a 2-day workshop on May 5-6, 2015 on public trust in science. This report explores empirical evidence on
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Helaine ResnickKeegan SawyerNancy Huddleston
As Kathleen Enright rightly stated in the opening article of this issue: “Until all participants in the evaluation chain embrace and support a learning focus, I think our ability to use evaluation results to increase impact will be limited.” As grantmakers, we arguably play the most important role in ensuring that all stakeholders receive the support they need to be full participants, contributors, learners and beneficiaries of an evaluation process. For evaluation to be worth the money and time we spend on it, everyone needs to be a full participant — funders, grantee organizations and even
Today, policy makers, funders, and government agencies alike are grappling with the need to use resources efficiently and effectively in order to make a measurable difference in addressing some of today’s pressing significant social, cultural, and educational challenges. When dealing with such complex and “wicked” problems as global warming, hunger, substance abuse, education and skills development (including competencies in STEM disciplines), it’s not enough for an organization to deliver results that contribute only to its bottom line. Increasingly, civic and philanthropic leaders are
Summative evaluation plays a critical role in documenting the impacts of informal science education (ISE), potentially contributing to the ISE knowledge base and informing ongoing improvements in practice and decision-making. In response to the growing demand for capacity-building in ISE evaluation, this paper presents a framework for summative evaluation based on an extensive review of literature and research-based refinements. The framework synthesizes key elements of high-quality summative evaluation into three dimensions: (a) Intervention Rationale, (b) Methodological Rigor and
This is a handout from the Science Learning Plus (SL+) Forum held on InformalScience.org from July 6-17, 2015. It lists and describes resources about research and practice collaborations.
This presentation was given as a preconference workshop at the 6th Annual International Science of Team Science Conference in 2015. It presents tools and resources for implementing effective practices in team science, and introduces tools and resources to help bolster collaboration.
The National Research Council's Roundtable on Public Interfaces of the Life Sciences held a 2-day workshop on January 15-16, 2015, in Washington, DC to explore the public interfaces between scientists and citizens in the context of genetically engineered (GE) organisms. The workshop presentations and discussions dealt with perspectives on scientific engagement in a world where science is interpreted through a variety of lenses, including cultural values and political dispositions, and with strategies based on evidence in social science to improve public conversation about controversial topics
The Royal Society of Chemistry commissioned TNS BMRB to conduct this research to provide well-grounded, robust data on the public’s relationship with chemistry in the UK. This programme of research aimed to understand where people are now, explore what drives people's views, identify windows of opportunity, and use evidence to produce guidance on opportunities and challenges in communicating chemistry to the public.