Eric A. Jensen

10/06/2022
Comment

Developing open, reflexive and socially responsible science communication research and practice

Eric A. Jensen

There are many different pathways into science communication practice and research. But rarely do these pathways require critical reflection on what it means to be a ‘responsible’ science communicator or researcher. The need for this kind of critical reflection is increasingly salient in a world...

29/09/2015
Essay

Highlighting the value of impact evaluation: enhancing informal science learning and public engagement theory and practice

Eric A. Jensen

King et al. [2015] argue that ‘emphasis on impact is obfuscating the valuable role of evaluation’ in informal science learning and public engagement (p. 1). The article touches on a number of important...

29/09/2015
Comment

Evaluating impact and quality of experience in the 21st century: using technology to narrow the gap between science communication research and practice

Eric A. Jensen

Access to high quality evaluation results is essential for science communicators to identify negative patterns of audience response and improve outcomes. However, there are many good reasons why robust evaluation linked is not routinely conducted and linked to science...

13/03/2014
Comment

The problems with science communication evaluation

Eric A. Jensen

Even in the best-resourced science communication institutions, poor quality evaluation methods are routinely employed. This leads to questionable data, specious conclusions and stunted growth in the quality and effectiveness of science communication practice. Good impact evaluation requires...

Footer menu 1

Footer menu 2

Footer menu 3