Hi
all,
Interested to read Martin's findings and David's summary- looks like
a fairly substantial degree of outreach activity by the university, and I
expect other universities would show something similar. My experience via
science communication also indicates that there is a lot of science
outreach activity going on, but it's almost all provided informally eg
science centres providing weekend and evening programmes for adults,
media programmes with associated education resources, public science
lectures and so on. From my experience the bulk of public funding
favours programmes for the young, with adults less visibly or
consistently targeted. It would be very interesting to know what the split
is in David's study between adult audiences and school students- I suspect
adults might be less targeted here too.
Secondly and along these lines, have you heard about the Science and
Engineering Ambassadors programme?
This
is a national programme funded by the DTI which seeks to secure consistent
mentoring from scientists so that every child has direct contact with a
professional scientist at least once at every key stage of their education. This
is currently being coordinated via the SETPOINTS, some of whom are based at
universities.
As an
aside, I wonder when external communication will become a formal part of the
science brief at all universities rather than an ad hoc one. With the rise in
science communication as a field of study and as an industry, and increasing
pressure on science to be accountable in the public eye, the time is surely
right for a more coherent strategy at university level. Be glad to hear your
thoughts on this...
Best
wishes,
Bobby
Bobby Cerini
Programme Manager
Science Year
11 Tufton Street
London SW1P
3QB
Tel: 020 7808 1895
Fax: 020 7233 4052
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Counihan
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 05 September 2002
21:22
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject:
Sci-3L
I am very grateful to everyone who responded to my
query about public outreach work which Sci-3L members are involved in other
than providing credit-bearing courses. There have been some extremely
interesting responses. Let me attempt a crude summary:
(1)
Non-credit-bearing courses have been disappearing.
(2) Credit-bearing
science programmes for the public are flourishing in a few universities, but
it is notable that the best examples are in the environmental sciences
involving locally-based fieldwork rather than in other kinds of science.
(3) Other (non-course) lifelong learning activities seem to take place
only on a rather limited scale, although the examples that were mentioned
(e.g. by Bobby Cerini) are very interesting. On balance it seems to me to be
remarkable that other forms of public outreach were hardly mentioned - for
example, writing books or making radio programmes.
Incidentally, a
couple of days ago I received a link to a new report, "Dialogue with the
public: practical guidelines" which I have passed on to this list in a
separate mailing. It is all about dialogue/consultation activities.
Apart from Asher Minns, I wonder if anyone else in Sci-3L is into that sort of
thing?
Would it be fair to say that, although some colleagues are
running successful credit-bearing programmes (mainly in local environmental
science), we have still not collectively arrived at an effective new
post-liberal paradigm for our work?
I would be interested in any
response you may have, particularly if you disagree with my
summary!
Martin Counihan
University of
Southampton