Dear All
Does anybody know of any research or data resources relating to learning
outcomes following "Outreach" type science shows and demonstrations?
Specifically, I'm looking to quantify the effects of "one-off" or
"hit-and-run" style shows (i.e. outreach staff visit a school once to
deliver a science show, and don't return) vs. repeat visits or sustained
relationships with schools. Intuitively, we know the latter is more
effective in terms of learning, engagement and inspiration...but I'm looking
for any concrete evidence (feedback, evaluations, formal studies, research)
of this.
Can anyone point me in the right direction? Any and all help appreciated.
Cheers,
Glenn Murphy
-----Original Message-----
From: psci-com: on public engagement with science
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Keir, Scott
Sent: 29 June 2006 11:29
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PSCI-COM] Factors affecting science communication: a survey of
scientists and engineers
Dear all (with apologies for cross-posting)
The final report of "Factors affecting science communication: a survey
of scientists and engineers" is published today at
http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/survey
The "Factors affecting science communication" study was commissioned by
the Royal Society, with support from Research Councils UK and the
Wellcome Trust, to examine the views and experience of UK scientists and
engineers with regard to science communication and public engagement.
The study emerged in direct response to the BA/Royal Society Science
Communication Conference in 2004, which produced several strategic
recommendations to promote public engagement with science. The survey
will be discussed in depth at a session at the 2006 BA/Royal Society
Science Communication Conference.
Highlights:
(taken from the press release at
http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/news.asp?id=4861 )
According to the scientists surveyed for the report the pressure to
publish research, attract funding to their departments and build careers
on 'hard research' means public engagement work, such as debates,
dialogues or exhibitions, media appearances or outreach activities with
schools, is not a priority. The need to spend more time on research was
the top reason, cited by 64 per cent of respondents, stopping scientists
getting more engaged with science communication work.
Scientists highlighted that public engagement activities were seen by
colleagues as being bad for their careers. Some said that it was seen as
being done by those who were 'not good enough' for an academic career,
that it was 'light' or 'fluffy' and risked reinforcing negative
stereotypes for women involved in these activities.
However, in spite of this, 45 per cent of respondents said that they
would like to spend more time engaging with the non-specialist public
about science. 74 per cent of those surveyed reported that they have
taken part in at least one science communication or public engagement
activity in the past 12 months.
The study found that generally, younger researchers, those in
departments rated 5*' by the RAE, and those in research-only
appointments, undertook less public engagement activity compared with
senior researchers, those in departments rated 1-5 under the RAE and
those in research and teaching positions.
In general, respondents to the survey felt that their participation in
science communication activities would be increased more through rewards
to their departments rather than to themselves as individuals. 81 per
cent of scientists said bringing more money into their departments would
be a key incentive. And 56 per cent of respondents said that awards or
prizes for departments were important, in contrast to 39 per cent who
identified awards for individuals as being important. Additionally, 76
per cent said they would be encouraged to get more involved if it helped
their careers.
The aim of the study was to provide evidence for funding organisations,
universities and other research institutions on which they can base a
workable system to reward scientists for their efforts to become
involved with public engagement activities. It involved a web-survey of
1485 research scientists in higher education institutions and 41 more
detailed interviews with a cross section of respondents and other key
players within science policy and science communication such as social
scientists, senior managers, funders and science communicators.
The key findings from the survey and interviews and the conclusions and
recommendations of the Consultative Group are outlined in the report of
the study, launched today. You can download the final report, the
evidence and the raw data from the Royal Society website:
http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/survey
Best wishes
Scott
Scott Keir
Science in Society Officer
tel +44 (0)20 7451 2513
fax +44 (0)20 7930 2170
web http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk
The Royal Society
6-9 Carlton House Terrace
London SW1Y 5AG
Registered Charity No 207043
The Royal Society - excellence in science
Visit the Royal Society Summer Science Exhibition, 3-6 July 2006 -
http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/exhibition
Your chance to meet the scientists behind the cutting-edge science and
technology of the future.
*************************************************************************
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may also be
subject to legal privilege. It is intended only for the recipient(s) named
above. If you are not named above as a recipient, you must not read, copy,
disclose, forward or otherwise use the information contained in this e-mail.
*************************************************************************
**********************************************************************
1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
send an email to [log in to unmask] with the following message:
set psci-com nomail
2. To resume email from the list, send the following message:
set psci-com mail
3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the
message:
leave psci-com
4. Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including list
archive,
can be found at the list web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
5. The psci-com gateway to internet resources on science communication and
science
and society can be found at http://psci-com.org.uk
**********************************************************************
________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned on behalf of NMSI for all viruses by the
MessageLabs Email Security System.
This e-mail and attachments are intended for the named addressee only and are confidential. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the sender immediately, delete the message from your computer system and destroy any copies. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not reflect the views of the National Museum of Science & Industry. This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
**********************************************************************
1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
send an email to [log in to unmask] with the following message:
set psci-com nomail
2. To resume email from the list, send the following message:
set psci-com mail
3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the message:
leave psci-com
4. Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including list archive,
can be found at the list web site: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
5. The psci-com gateway to internet resources on science communication and science
and society can be found at http://psci-com.org.uk
**********************************************************************
|