As science communication develops as a field of both practice and research, it needs to address issues of equity, diversity, and inclusion across a wide range, including race, power, class, gender. Doing so will require deeper understanding of conceptual work and practical activities that address those issues. This brief comment introduces a series of commentaries that provide one approach: feminist approaches to science communication.
In this final chapter, we reflect on four themes that cut across the preceding chapters on evaluating outcomes in informal STEM education (ISE): validity, context, technology, and evaluation capacity building. We also note several topics that we hope will be addressed more extensively in future conversations about evaluation in ISE. These include the ethical responsibilities of evaluators, theory‐based approaches to evaluation, formal training and professional development pathways for evaluators, and funding opportunities and the structural landscape of the field.
BioEYES is a K-12 science outreach program that develops self-sustaining teachers as a replication strategy to address high demand for the program while promoting long-term school partnerships. This paper explores the practices of “model teachers” from multiple grades, who are empowered over a three-year period to deliver BioEYES’ hands-on science content autonomously, as compared to the program’s standard co-teaching model (BioEYES educator + classroom teacher). The authors found that BioEYES’ professional development (PD) workshop, classroom co-teaching experience, and refresher trainings
Although cooperative, interorganizational networks have become a common mechanism for delivery of public services, evaluating their effectiveness is extremely complex and has generally been neglected. To help resolve this problem, we discuss the evaluation of networks of community-based, mostly publicly funded health, human service, and public welfare organizations. Consistent with pressures to perform effectively from a broad range of key stakeholders, we argue that networks must be evaluated at three levels of analysis: community, network, and organization/participant levels. While the three
Traditionally, programs designed for community audiences are designed by the STEM institution or organization seeking to “serve” a given community, using top-down design processes that are framed by the perspectives of the lead organizations, and typically reinforcing dominant cultural norms in STEM and therefore marginalizing certain audiences. Co-design offers an approach that can lead to more robust and sustainable results by developing programs that are culturally responsive, respectful, and inclusive.
About this resource:
This is a practice brief produced by CAISE's Broadening
Broadening participation efforts need to move beyond the programmatic to the institutional. Embedding inclusion throughout an organization’s operations will lead to more comprehensive, better supported, and more impactful and sustainable results.
About this resource:
This is a practice brief produced by CAISE's Broadening Participation in STEM Task Force to help informal STEM education (ISE) and science communication groups reflect on and strengthen their efforts to broaden participation in STEM. It is part of a larger professional development toolkit, developed for those who lead staff
Science educators and communicators must value and appreciate science that already takes place in the community, which may look different than traditional (school-like) representations of science, which have historically excluded many communities. "Community science programs" are designed by community members to advance community priorities and recognize that communities themselves—not just the nearby universities or research labs—are rich with people, resources, and practices that make up science in everyday life.
About this resource:
This is a practice brief produced by CAISE's
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Angela Calabrese BartonEdna TanDaniel BirminghamCarmen TurnerCenter for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE)
Organizations, institutions, or initiatives often do not engage these influential adults as effectively as they might, nor are they always sensitive to the perspectives, needs, and expertise that caregivers bring to the activities in which their children participate. STEM educators and science communicators can better support youth when they effectively engage parents in relevant aspects of the work by considering whether parents are part of the intended audience and if so, how they can participate.
About this resource:
This is a practice brief produced by CAISE's Broadening
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Dale McCreedyMicaela BalzerBhaskar UpadhyayCenter for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE)
Many communities are adopting a “STEM learning ecosystem” approach to identify and map those settings and time frames, to enrich and reinforce opportunities within them, and to broaden participation in STEM. Science communicators and STEM educators can increase the relevance and inclusiveness of their programs by making explicit connections between the programs they offer and additional or ongoing opportunities learners can pursue in the local STEM learning ecosystem.
About this resource:
This is a practice brief produced by CAISE's Broadening Participation in STEM Task Force to help
Science communication that connects STEM-based professionals with various publics are often designed and implemented with a range of multiple outcomes in mind which can influence the effectiveness of engagement efforts. Scientists, science communicators, and STEM professionals can be more effective at engaging diverse audiences if they align their engagement strategies with their communication goals and target audience.
About this resource:
This is a practice brief produced by CAISE's Broadening Participation in STEM Task Force to help informal STEM education (ISE) and science
The varied and diverse ways in which people engage with STEM are often not acknowledged due to the historical representation of STEM in school, industry, and society. These cultural models of “who does STEM” discourage many who don’t identify as male and/ or white, or who don’t see themselves as highly intelligent, from choosing or identifying with STEM. To broaden participation, the field needs to define STEM more comprehensively so that people can recognize the ways they already engage in, use, and contribute to STEM disciplines, even if they don’t conform to cultural stereotypes associated
When everybody engaging in STEM is expected to adhere to dominant cultural norms established by the populations that have historically participated in and institutionalized STEM—that is, male, white, western, and privileged, some may feel like outsiders, even though others will find them familiar and comfortable. This can shape perceptions about who has expertise and/or belongs in STEM fields. STEM programs and science representations must encourage and support participation by leveraging audiences' personal experiences and cultural practices.
About this resource:
This is a practice