A global perspective on the role of funding agencies in public engagement with science

You are here: / 2021 PCST Conference (virtual)

A global perspective on the role of funding agencies in public engagement with science

Author: Michael Ellis – NRF SAASTA, South Africa

Research funding agencies have an important role to play in creating an enabling environment for broader communication and engagement with scientific research. The Global Research Council is a virtual organisation, comprised of the heads of science and engineering funding agencies from around the world, dedicated to promote the sharing of data and best practices for high-quality collaboration among funding agencies worldwide. In 2019 the participants endorsed a State of Principles on Expectations of Societal and Economic Impact and the statement lists 18 key principles in addressing impact expectations and assessing and evaluating the impact of research from the perspective of funding organisations. Building on this statement of principles, the Global Research Council has undertaken to utilise its networks in its five global regions to assimilate best practice information and case studies of how research funding agencies are shaping and transforming the science and society interface. This assimilated information seeks to further guide and strengthen the research funding agencies role in widening participation in research to realise research for all. This paper will present a series of global case studies and a statement of principles on public engagement with science, as endorsed by the Global Research Council, of which the National Research Foundation (NRF) and the South African Agency for Science and Technology (SAASTA) are active participants.

The author has not yet submitted a copy of the full paper.

Presentation type: Individual paper
Theme: Transformation

Mauna Kea, Imiloa and a place for safe disagreement

Author: Steve Miller – University College London, United Kingdom

Co-authors:

  • Ka’iu Kimura – ‘Imiloa Astronomy Education Center, Hilo, Hawai’i, United States

The future of Mauna Kea – a mountain sacred to many native Hawai’ians – is now the site of a major demonstration / occupation in protest against the decision to allow the building of the Thirty Meter Telescope close to the summit. Although the courts have cleared the way for construction to begin, native Hawai’ian kia’i (protectors) and their supporters have blocked the access road to the mountain, claiming that the summit has been mismanaged for over 40 years since the first telescopes were erected and used there. They feel that yet another telescope adds to the “desecration” that has already been committed.

Supporters of the telescope – including many other native Hawai’ians and leaders of tradition-preserving organisations such as the Polynesian Voyaging Society – point out that astronomy is in the blood of the maka’ainana (people): spreading out from central Polynesia to the corners of the Polynesian triangle (Hawai’i, Aotearoa / New Zealand and Rapa Nui / Easter Island) would not have been possible without a deep understanding of the stars, their positions and how they moved in the night sky. They see the Mauna Kea observatory not as a sacrilege but as a natural extension of the voyaging traditions of the islands.

The ‘Imiloa Astronomy Education Center – with its focus on all aspects of Mauna Kea, astronomy and voyaging – sees the mountain as a boundary object that can bring people together in a place of “safe disagreement”, whatever their views. Founded in 2006, the Center runs programs and planetarium shows that emphasise what cultures have in common rather than what divides them. This talk will highlight the work done by the Center in an atmosphere of profound disagreement.

The author has not yet submitted a copy of the full paper.

Presentation type: Individual paper
Theme: Transformation

CERN Open Days: Going beyond head-counting

Author: Daria Dvorzhitskaia – CERN, ITMO University, Russia

Co-authors:

  • Lauren Elwin – University of Geneva, United Kingdom
  • Ana Godinho – CERN, Portugal
  • Leonore Saade-Augier – University of Geneva, France
  • Annabella Zamora – University of Geneva, France

CERN (European Laboratory for Particle Physics) Open Days traditionally take place every 5-6 years, attracting tens of thousands of visitors. The key component of this large-scale event is an opportunity for the public to visit CERN’s facilities and interact with the CERN scientists, engineers and other members of personnel who volunteer for the event. The communication outcomes of such interactions, however, were never measured systematically until this year, when, for the first time, the implementation of the Open Days was accompanied by a communication-focused research project.

Research questions

This study set out to evaluate communication outcomes of the Open Days through the diversity of aspects. What did volunteers intend to communicate and what did visitors take home as messages? How did visitors’ and volunteers’ perception of CERN and of each other change after the Open Days? Were the strategic goals defined for the Open Days achieved? How can ‘engagement’ be understood in the context of such an event? Which new questions about public-scientists interaction does the study raise?

Methods

These aspects were explored by using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods. Web-based surveys, mainly comprising semantic differentials and open questions, were applied before (summer 2019) and after the Open Days (September 2019). Overall, 6817 visitors (ca. 9%) and 1381 volunteers (ca. 49%) responded to them. In addition, survey data were complemented by structured observations of visitor-volunteer interaction at 97 activities during the event.

Results

The findings will inform CERN’s public communication activities, such as future editions of the Open Days, permanent exhibitions, guided tours and social media campaigns. More broadly, the insights provided by this study will benefit practitioners communicating about fundamental physics or for large scientific institutions, as well as researchers evaluating communication outcomes of similar events.

The author has not yet submitted a copy of the full paper.

Presentation type: Insight talk
Theme: Transformation

“The Public Understanding of Science” – a generation on

Author: Steve Miller – University College London, United Kingdom

Co-authors:

  • Martin Bauer – LSE, United Kingdom
  • Luisa Massarani – House of Oswaldo Cruz, Brazil
  • Bernard Schiele – UQAM, Canada
  • Melanie Smallman – UCL, United Kingdom

It is now 35 years since the Royal Society – the UK’s premier science organisation – published its report “The Public Understanding of Science”. 1985 in Britain was the middle of the “Thatcher years”, a time when science – particularly “blue skies” science – felt itself to be under attack. The Royal Society deemed that public ignorance of and indifference to science had to be addressed.

The report – also known as the Bodmer Report after its chair Sir Walter Bodmer – ushered in a flurry of initiatives: scientists were told they had a duty to communicate with their fellow citizens, media outlets were urged to carry more science in their pages or on the airwaves, prizes for good science communication were set up, university students and researchers were provided with courses, and Members of Parliament and Ministers were advised / lobbied on behalf of the scientific enterprise in general and individual projects in particular.

A lot of this activity was criticised as adopting a “deficit model” agenda of citizen ignorance as against more nuanced “contextual approach” involving the science people needed to live their daily lives. “Science and/in/with/etc Society” became the rallying cry.

But what has really been achieved and changed a generation on from Bodmer? Is it a case of “every attempt is a wholly new start, and a different kind of failure” (TS Eliot The Four Quartets, East Coker, 1941). And was Bodmer’s influence restricted to the UK and/or the English-speaking world? This round-table will discuss “The Public Understanding of Science – a generation on” with a UK and international panel.

This Roundtable Discussion will be linked to the new PCST book, “The Emerging of Modern Science Communication”.

The author has not yet submitted a copy of the full paper.

Presentation type: Roundtable discussion
Theme: Transformation

Science, Magic, and Mystery of Time

Author: Miquel Duran – University of Girona, Spain

Co-authors:

  • Fernando Blasco – Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Spain
  • Silvia Simon – University of Girona, Spain

Our group has been working for a few year in innovative ways to communicate science concepts in all STEM fields using magic as a useful, enticing tool. Moreover, discoveries of our own research groups are being communicated too, partially, with the help of Magic (and its mysteries), using cards, props, science curiosities, awesome experiments or mathematical games.

This communication will address our experience on explaining science concepts involving time to a general audience, according to its definition as a dimension in which events can be ordered from the past through the present into the future, and also the measure of durations of events and the intervals between them. Thus, chemical kinetics (as rate of change with respect to time), catalysis (acceleration), entropy (as equivalent to the arrow of time), and the Solar System, Moon phases and Easter Sunday (as periodic systems) will be analyzed and assessed. Furthermore, we will tackle calendar-related games and tricks, like determining the weekday corresponding to a given date, or relating weekday names to heavenly bodies. Finally, we will provide new ideas on calendar-related games which arose from creating our weekly “52 Games with the Periodic Table” 2019 website.

Audiences have found such games and activities fun, entertaining, and informative. Calendar-related activities attract curiosity by all kinds of participants, no only from those who are especially science oriented. Time involves history, and allows to try to predict the future – actually this is the subject of quite a lot of magic performances.

Of course such practices may be applied not only to public communication of science, but also to science education, However, there are meaningful differences that should be explained elsewhere. We will concentrate on public communication to a general audience. In any case, time is used here too as a blender of different scientific fields.

The author has not yet submitted a copy of the full paper.

Presentation type: Insight talk
Theme: Time

A new nexus model for science communication

Author: Jennifer Metcalfe – Econnect Communication, Australia

My PhD research compared the dominant science communication models (deficit, dialogue, participation) with case studies of practice. I found that the models proposed by scholars do not appear to take into account the extensive nature and mix of objectives for initiating or participating in science communication activities.

Most science engagement activities have objectives and characteristics that reflect a mix of those theorised for deficit, dialogue and sometimes participatory activities. My research indicates that this coexistence of models in practice appears to be not merely an unintentional lucky accident but a necessity for science communication activities to achieve their desired outcomes, especially when the science is controversial.

My research indicates that science communication is not an evolution from deficit to dialogue to participation (or from evil to good). In fact, it appears that long-term participatory science communication can lead to more effective deficit and dialogue-style communication.

Furthermore, I found that the nature of the relationships between the actors involved in a science engagement activity can determine the success of that activity in achieving its desired outcomes. Trusted relationships, in particular, are critical for participatory science communication activities.

My research of practice improves our understanding of how theorised science communication models might be further shaped to better reflect and even influence practice. I propose the new nexus model for science communication and describe how this can be implemented within the practical contexts of considering the objectives for engagement, who is involved in the engagement activity, and how positive relationships can be fostered among those participating.

The author has not yet submitted a copy of the full paper.

Presentation type: Visual presentation
Theme: Transformation

Science communication in nonscience events. New opportunities found in Magic Fairs, City Visits, and Flower Festivals

Author: Miquel Duran – University of Girona, Spain

Co-authors:

  • Fernando Blasco – Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Spain
  • Silvia Simon – University of Girona, Spain

Public communication of Science is usually achieved within science-related events like Science Fairs, Festivals, Lectures, etc. However, there are other events not specifically science-oriented that may be used to reach a larger population. Our team has been involved in three such cases (connecting Science with Magic): participation in a Costa Brava Magic Fair (communicating science to families), guiding City visits (communicating Science on the spot in Girona, Barcelona, and others), and building Flower exhibits (Rubik’s Cube, Periodic Table of the Elements).

All three cases have provided the opportunity to talk about science and techology advances and their social implications, because all three cases connect a large audience (social gathering) for a given amount of time (shorter in the case of a Flower Festival). Moreover, all three provide an urban context that allow to pinpoint history clues, keys to the future of communities, and transformation opportunities, while allowing discussion with the public.

Different fields of Science may be connected in this kind of nonscience events: actually, it is simpler than in Science-related events. This presentation will focus on urban magic&science walks: in a recent Barcelona Walk (Parc de la Ciutadella), we linked mathematics, biology, chemistry, geology and physics. In various Girona Old Town Walks on Magic and Science we led in the last four years, we addressed heritage, mathematics, physics, and chemistry using enticing magic tricks and curious experiments. Participants usually love that approach to local-based Science.

We think that science communication in general, nonscience events provides great opportunity to reach a much wider audience. Our experience from qualitative, impromptu post-event evaluation suggests that participants in science-related events reinforce their beliefs and satisfy their expectations. On the contrary, in general events like City Walks, surprise brings about curiosity for science to individuals and groups that might not consider science interesting enough.

The author has not yet submitted a copy of the full paper.

Presentation type: Visual presentation
Theme: Transformation

Participatory science communication’s power to create societal change

Author: Jennifer Metcalfe – Econnect Communication, Australia

Co-authors:

  • Anne Leitch – Adjunct researcher, Griffith University; casual senior editor, NatureResearch, Australia
  • Tibisay Sankatsing Nava – Royal Netherlands Institute: SE Asian & Caribbean, Netherlands
  • Christy Standerfer – U of Arkansas Clinton School of Public Service, United States
  • Tali Tal – Technion, Israel

The last two decades have seen calls by scholars for science communication to become participatory in nature, and to move away from linear (deficit and dialogue) engagement of publics. Theorised participatory science communication happens when scientists and publics directly interact in a process that scholars argue leads to a greater democratisation of science (Brossard & Lewenstein, 2010; Bubela et al., 2009; Joly & Kaufmann, 2008).

Scientists do not necessarily drive the participative process and publics may initiate and direct the engagement. This contrasts with the theorised deficit (one-way communication from scientists to public) and dialogue (two-way communication between scientists and publics) models of science communication, usually initiated by scientists (Rowe & Frewer, 2005; Bucchi, 2008).

Participatory science communication is theorised to possess an openness between participants and a deliberative democratic potential that linear models of science communication failed to deliver in practice. Achieving such a democratic potential relies on scientific governance to change its notions of power and control (Irwin, 2006; Stirling, 2008).

However, there is no joint understanding of what ‘participatory’ science communication means despite the push towards it by scholars, practitioners and research agencies.

This session will examine specific cases of participatory science communication that have created positive societal change. Presenters will use their case studies to discuss the comparative usefulness of participatory approaches, the constraints to participation, and the potential seriousness and reach of participation. The session will conclude with a discussion of how science communication scholars and practitioners can collaborate to promote a scientific culture where more effective participatory programs are valued and supported.

The author has not yet submitted a copy of the full paper.

Presentation type: Linked papers
Theme: Transformation

Mentors, Mentees, and Public Engagement

Author: Edward Duca – University of Malta, Malta

Co-authors:

  • Clayton Cutajar – Esplora Interactive Science Centre, Malta
  • Siddharth Kankaria – National Centre for Biological Sciences, Bangalore, India
  • Heather Rea – The University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom
  • Susan Wallace – Wellcome Genome Campus, United Kingdom

The Science Communication profession has expanded worldwide with different theories and approaches being developed across continents. Various institutional and country-wide efforts are being encouraged, through initiatives such as the EU’s embedding of institutionalised RRI (Responsible Research and Innovation) and the UK’s REF (Research Excellence Framework) programme, to increase research impact, societal involvement, and best practices in the field of public engagement with science.

Public engagement is a field with many entry points and career paths for individuals. Science communication scholars and practitioners come from a variety of backgrounds. As the importance and value of public engagement becomes more widely recognised and professionalised, it is important that the institutions who already have established programmes support those who are less experienced in the field of Science Communication. One mechanism for this support is institutional mentorship, either for public engagement as a whole or in one particular aspect of a public engagement programme. A mentoring relationship with someone more experienced in the field can advance an individual’s self-confidence, knowledge and career. This relationship can provide impartial encouragement for the mentee institution, and offers the mentor institution the opportunity to reflect on their own practice. Such mentorship needs to embrace and learn from cultural differences across fields, institutions and locations, in order to achieve the intended impact.

This session will discuss the importance of mentorship to increase the research impact, societal participation of public engagement with science.. The mentee-mentorship relationship will be discussed across cultural boundaries in Europe and India on a personal and institutional level, emphasising the challenges and benefits to all involved. The variety of informal and formal mentoring relationships will also be emphasised through the speaker’s case studies that reflect a variety of cultural norms and practices which session speakers will develop through personal experiences in EU projects and other collaborations.

The author has not yet submitted a copy of the full paper.

Presentation type: Roundtable discussion
Theme: Time

Participatory science communication changing publics

Author: Jennifer Metcalfe – Econnect Communication, Australia

Co-authors:

  • Heather Doran – Leverhulme Research Centre for Forensic Science, University of Dundee, United Kingdom
  • Maja Horst – University of Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Jennifer Manyweathers – Charles Sturt University, Australia
  • Michiel van Oudheusden – University of Cambridge, Belgium

Participatory science communication happens when scientists are one of the groups participating on a relatively equal basis with various publics, including policymakers, citizens, school children, farmers, technologists and industry. The aim of such participatory science communication is often to address an issue or societal problem.

In the early 2000s, a new participatory model of science communication gained traction in the scholarly literature. The participatory model appealed to scholars who theorised the democratisation of science as a solution to engaging publics in jointly tackling societal issues of concern. For controversial scientific issues, like climate change, public participation was argued to be beneficial for critically reviewing research, solving problems or supporting behaviour and policy changes. However, participatory science communication can be as much about the process of diverse publics engaging with each other as the outcomes.

This Roundtable session will begin with a short overview of specific but diverse cases of participatory science communication including forensic science; participation of scientists and policymakers in supporting science communicators; livestock production groups involving multiple stakeholders; and debate on nuclear power. There will then be a moderated discussion about our various perceptions and definitions of ‘participatory science communication’; what works or not with participatory science communication; how publics and scientists can be changed by the process of participation; and how scholars and practitioners can support more participatory science communication programs. The session will then be opened to questions and discussion with the audience.

The author has not yet submitted a copy of the full paper.

Presentation type: Roundtable discussion
Theme: Transformation

Between science engagement and co-construction: The pros and cons of a natural marriage.

Author: Matteo Merzagora – TRACES – ESPGG, France

Co-authors:

  • Aude Ghilbert – TRACES, France

Through a series of relevant examples collected within the action research H2020 project “SiSCode”(www.siscodeproject.eu) I will explore the points of contact and the points of divergence between science engagement activities, and emergent co-construction and participation practices.

In recent year we have observed an increasing interest of the science engagement community for the world of participation and co-construction, and vice-versa. More and more science centers are integrating fab-lab spaces and living lab approaches in their offer; citizen science activities are increasingly merging with science engagement activities; hybrid cultural spaces are multiplying, working in the grey zone between knowledge production and knowledge sharing; discussion games are often used to explore or even influence policy making around controversial socio-technical issues; design thinking is becoming an expertise valued to develop science communication actions.

This is a wonderful opportunity of renewal for science communication practices to move beyond the dialogue model. However, co-construction activities and science culture/engagement activities do not necessarily share the same objectives, neither the same business model. Also, this marriage could be influenced by fashion effects, masking differences and blurring the clarity of the political value of the activities.

The EU funded project SIS-CODE (co-ordinated by Politecnico of Milan) is exploring co-construction activities from many different angles, with a specific focus on social innovation and RRI, involving several key actors, and more specifically the EU networks of science centre and museum (ECSITE) and of living-lab (ENOLL), and the international networks of FabLabs. The experiences emerging from 10 co-design labs across Europe are currently being analyzed. In the PCST session, I will present and submit to open discussion specific results on how co-construction and science engagement activities can in fact nourish each other without loosing their specific identity and agenda, and explicit and identify the main critical factors that can promote or hinder this convergence.

The author has not yet submitted a copy of the full paper.

Presentation type: Insight talk
Theme: Transformation

Communicating science in the courtroom

Author: Heather Doran – Leverhulme Research Centre for Forensic Science, University of Dundee, United Kingdom

Co-authors:

  • Rachel Briscoe – Fast Familiar, United Kingdom
  • Niamh Nic Daeid – Leverhulme Research Centre for Forensic Science, University of Dundee, United Kingdom

Members of the public, in the role of jurors, are expected to listen, understand and make judgements in regards to the scientific (and non scientific) evidence presented during a court case and then come to conclusions, beyond reasonable doubt, in regards to the guilt or innocence of an accused person.

Are there ways we could ensure that juries correctly understand the information presented to them? As scientific techniques and their applications become more complex how can we support members of the public to make evidence based decisions? How can we ensure that they understand the limitations of scientific evidence?

The Leverhulme Research Centre for Forensic Science (LRCFS), in collaboration with ex-theatre company, Fast Familiar has explored a world leading public experiment using comics as a ‘scientific primer’ in a piece of particapatpry theatre. Members of the public ‘act’ as a jury in a mock-trial evaluating the potential to use alternative and creative means to communicate science to enable them in decision making.

In this session we will share what we have created and the interpretations of the research work we have carried out.

LRCFS is a £10 million, 10 year award-winning disruptive research centre with the aim of increasing the robustness of scientific evidence used within the justice system and ensuring that forensic science is communicated correctly and appropriately. The comics have been created with the University of Dundee Scottish Centre for Comics Studies based on interpretations of scientific evidence techniques from judges, researchers and forensic scientists.

The author has not yet submitted a copy of the full paper.

Presentation type: Insight talk
Theme: Transformation

A balancing act: Transforming science communication through research-practitioner partnerships.

Author: Jamie Menzies – University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom

Co-authors:

  • Zayba Ghazali-Mohammed – University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom
  • Sharon Macnab – Glasgow Science Centre, United Kingdom
  • Andrew Manches – University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom
  • Susan Meikleham – Glasgow Science Centre, United Kingdom

Have you ever noticed how you use your hands to explain science ideas? Science communicators naturally use gestures to accompany speech because when we think we draw upon body-based experiences. In other words, thinking is embodied.

Hands-on exhibits create an important foundation for understanding complex science concepts, enabling learning through different forms of interaction e.g. physical actions, speech, gesture. Yet, exploring how best to support preschool visitors (whose language skills are still developing) in these body-based experiences to promote science understanding is poorly understood.

University researchers and science centre practitioners worked together to co-develop an interactive exhibit for preschoolers, encouraging them to explore and communicate their scientific thinking using actions, speech and gesture. In doing so, we created guidelines for exhibit design and science communication at exhibits. Using a design-based research method, the team analysed preschoolers’ experiences with a balance exhibit to co-create a new body-based learning exhibit incorporating digital technology, communication, and hands-on apparatus.

Our approach required researchers and practitioners to alternate roles: building science centres’ independent research capacity and University researchers’ appreciation of the complexity of real-world settings. Exploring interactions between adults and children revealed that emphasising body-based communication improves children’s understanding of balance concepts beyond expected curricular levels, with certain movements and gestures proving particularly helpful. This demonstrates how science communicators can use a range of evidence-based communication approaches to support children’s learning with exhibits, increasing engagement and making science more accessible for underserved communities (low science capital) who may be less confident with using scientific language, but more confident using actions/gestures to support children’s interactions.

By linking embodied learning theory and practice we produced a set of practical guidelines highlighting how to improve science communication and evaluation, serving as a best-practice model for researcher-practitioner collaboration and impactful exhibit co-design to enable embodied learning experiences.

The author has not yet submitted a copy of the full paper.

Presentation type: Individual paper
Theme: Time

Transforming healthcare now – one doodle at a time.

Author: Stefanie Doebl – Epidemiology Group, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, United Kingdom

Research stories have the potential to enable real change in people, organisations and society. Many researchers aspire to create a powerful impact through their work. However, it can be a daunting task to tell an inspiring story. The speaker of this presentation shows her unique approach to this challenge.

Being based in an interdisciplinary health services research team, she focuses on patients affected by fibromyalgia, a long-term pain condition, and their experiences interacting with the healthcare system. She had to ask herself how she as a researcher could communicate patient healthcare journeys in a way that would allow her to include both quantitative and qualitative data as well as would leave a long-lasting impression on different audiences.

This visual presentation showcases the speaker’s winning entry for a research competition which challenged doctoral students to describe their research in a self-created, single image and maximum 100 words. For the single image, the speaker overlaid an original photograph with over 40 doodles (simple drawings) in a photo editing software. The doodles, which were hand drawn by the speaker, were purposefully arranged to communicate patients’ symptoms and their experiences with the healthcare system. They also demonstrated how these patient stories can be used to improve healthcare delivery for people with fibromyalgia. For the text, the speaker applied a creative writing style to describe her research succinctly.

Researchers have many opportunities to tell powerful stories. However, different approaches are needed to communicate patient experiences of health and healthcare, creating an impact which will lead to change.

The author has not yet submitted a copy of the full paper.

Presentation type: Visual presentation
Theme: Transformation

Presenting the Global Plant Council. Bringing plant science closer to society by helping plant scientists increase the impact of their research

Author: Isabel Mendoza-Poudereux – Universidad de Valencia, Spain

Co-authors:

  • Bill Davies – Lancaster University, United Kingdom
  • Ros Gleadow – Monash University, Australia
  • Barry Pogson – Australian National University, Australia

Plant sciences have a key role to play as society seeks to address a growing suite of environmental and social challenges, from food security to mental health and conservation. The Global Plant Council (GPC) is a vibrant community of plant scientists that provides a platform for networking and collaboration. Currently, it assembles 30 member organizations across the globe, representing over 50,000 plant specialists. The aim of the GPC is to promote plant science across borders, supporting those directly involved in research, but also in education and training, while increasing awareness of the key role of plant research in both science and society.

By acting as a central plant science hub, the GPC aims to enhance and develop coordination and communication mechanisms among GPC Member Organizations and their stakeholders. In order to do this, we have rolled out a new social media and communication strategy to engage with different audiences. Currently (December 2020) our online presence reaches over 24.000 followers through its website and social media accounts.

To nurture up and coming plant scientists, GPC recently established an Early Career Researcher (ECR) International Network, the ECRi, a collection of activities addressed to help the plant science ECRs with 4 essential components of their jobs: future job hunting, grant funding, dissemination of research results and networking. In its first year of existence, the ECRi Facebook group has gathered over 3.500 members. Besides Facebook, GPC is employing other social media strategies, such as a monthly Twitterstorm of job ads and a LinkedIn group.

In our visual presentation we will give insight into our online strategy, and how this has enabled us to grow from 9.500 to 24.000 followers in 26 months and how this new reach is helping us to implement our general and ECRi objectives and continue to grow into the future.

The author has not yet submitted a copy of the full paper.

Presentation type: Visual presentation
Theme: Transformation

Why don’t you (g)doodle it?: Making health services research more accessible and engaging.

Author: Stefanie Doebl – Epidemiology Group, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, United Kingdom

Health services research teams investigate how best to deliver healthcare and improve people’s wellbeing. This often complex, interdisciplinary research can be challenging to communicate to patients, healthcare workers and policy makers alike. Using a creative approach such as doodles (simple drawings) can be one successful communication strategy.

In this presentation, the speaker shares her experiences of using self-created doodles to communicate her research about a life-changing, chronic pain condition to different audiences. An overview is provided about the reasons for using the approach as well as its benefits and challenges. Examples from two recent public engagement activities (a PowerPoint presentation in a pub and an interactive talk while standing on a raised platform in an outdoor public space) are included. Feedback from several audience members accompany the examples. Further, the speaker suggests that doodles can be used to communicate scientific findings beyond the field of health services research.

Doodles offer a unique opportunity for opening a conversation about research and its connection to people’s lives. The approach is relatively easy to learn for researchers, while audiences are able to access science in a more engaging and understandable way. It also promises to be more fun for everyone.

The author has not yet submitted a copy of the full paper.

Presentation type: Insight talk
Theme: Transformation

Contact

The Network for the Public Communication of Science and Technology (PCST Network) is an organisation that promotes discussion on the theory and practice of communicating science, and of public discourses about science and technology and their role in society.

Email: admin@pcst.network
Web: www.pcst.network

Incorporated in the Australian Capital Territory, Australia. Registered number AO5352.

Terms and conditions  ·  Privacy policy
Disclaimer  ·  Copyright  ·  Sitemap

Copyright © PCST

Connect

Join

PCST is the an active and influential international academic and professional organisation in the field of science communication.

➔ Become a member

Discuss

Our email discussion list is free for everyone to join and has an international audience of over 2000 subscribers.

➔ Join the discussion list

Partners

PCST Network has co-operation agreements with the following international organisations:

EUSEA
European Science Engagement Association

IECA
International Environmental Communication Association

RedPOP
Latin American and Caribbean Network for the Popularisation of Science and Technology