summary

Developing a tool for assessing scientists' views about, knowledge of, and skills in science communication (Abstract # ED51C-0768) Bruce V. Lewenstein, Cornell University, [email protected] Ayelet Baram-Tsabari , Technion – Israel Institute of Technology, [email protected] Summary Recent exhortations call upon scientists to engage in a respectful dialogue with the public, as public values make important contributions to science- related policy issues (Leshner, 2009). One challenge for scientists' public engagement is their lack of training in communicating science with the public (Poliakoff and Webb, 2007) . Many organizations and institutions have created training opportunities for science communication. However, the claims for the efficiency of such training programs are often based on anecdotes and basic self-report evaluations. This situation does not support evidence-based policy regarding media training for scientists (Baram- Tsabari and Lewenstein, 2010). Standardized assessments will allow comparisons across programs and identification of best practices. Here we describe the development and piloting of a tool for measuring scientists' views about, knowledge of, and skills in science communication. The instrument collects four types of data: (1) background information, (2) communication skills, (3) views about science communication, and (4) knowledge about the context of science communication. It may be used for baseline surveys, pre-post workshop evaluations, or formative assessment during science communication training. Science Communication Skills Learning goals are established in seven areas: content, knowledge organization, clarity and language, style, analogy, narrative, and dialogue. Views about Science Communication • Self confidence in speaking with the media • Attitudes towards science in the media • Responsibility of individual scientists • Benefits and challenges of speaking with the media • The deficit model and attitudes towards public engagement Number of interactions with the media in the last three years and preferred analogy for science popularization (n = 64, χ 2 = 39.36, p < 0.05) Scientist s may agree both with statement s represent ing a deficit model (upper panel) and a dialogic or engagemen t model 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Simplification or Translation Adaptation or Recontextualization

Upload: cirila

Post on 04-Jan-2016

34 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Report

Download

Embed Size (px):

DESCRIPTION

TRANSCRIPT

Developing a tool for assessing scientists' views about, knowledge of, and skills in science communication (Abstract # ED51C-0768)

Bruce V. Lewenstein, Cornell University, [email protected] Baram-Tsabari , Technion – Israel Institute of Technology, [email protected]

SummaryRecent exhortations call upon scientists to engage in a respectful

dialogue with the public, as public values make important contributions to science-related policy issues (Leshner, 2009). One challenge for scientists' public engagement is their lack of training in communicating science with the public (Poliakoff and Webb, 2007) . Many organizations and institutions have created training opportunities for science communication. However, the claims for the efficiency of such training programs are often based on anecdotes and basic self-report evaluations. This situation does not support evidence-based policy regarding media training for scientists (Baram-Tsabari and Lewenstein, 2010).

Standardized assessments will allow comparisons across programs and identification of best practices. Here we describe the development and piloting of a tool for measuring scientists' views about, knowledge of, and skills in science communication. The instrument collects four types of data: (1) background information, (2) communication skills, (3) views about science communication, and (4) knowledge about the context of science communication. It may be used for baseline surveys, pre-post workshop evaluations, or formative assessment during science communication training.

Science Communication SkillsLearning goals are established in seven areas: content, knowledge organization, clarity and language, style, analogy, narrative, and dialogue.

Views about Science Communication• Self confidence in speaking with the media• Attitudes towards science in the media • Responsibility of individual scientists• Benefits and challenges of speaking with the media• The deficit model and attitudes towards public engagement

Number of interactions with the media in the last three years and preferred analogy for science popularization (n = 64, χ2 = 39.36, p < 0.05)

Scientists may agree both with statements representing a deficit model (upper panel) and a dialogic or engagement model (lower panel) (n = 73)

None (n = 32)

One (n = 7) Two (n = 9) Three-Five (n = 10)

Six or more (n = 6)

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%