The MSc in Science Communication offered by the University of the West of England is taught in short three day blocks, designed specifically to cater for both full and part time students wishing to combine work and study effectively. Started in 2004, the programme emphasises the development of practical skills as well as developing a wider understanding of the key issues facing science communicators today. With this in mind, workshops explore theory and practice, considering the potential of a range of creative, targeted and innovative opportunities to enable greater community participation in scientific issues.

A recent article published in Science Communication addresses the training issue in issue in our discipline. Henk Mulder and his colleagues discuss the shared features that university curricula should or could have to favour the full admission of science communication into the academic circle. Having analysed analogies and differences in the curricula that a number of schools provide all over the world, the authors reached the conclusion that much remains to be done. Science communication seems far from having found shared fundamental references, lessons that cannot be missed in the practical-theoretical education of future professionals or researchers in this discipline. What should one study to become a good science communicator? And to make innovative research?

The concept of a project often corresponds to its history. In particular, you can identify this when you reconstruct, through the memories of its main players, the history of the oldest and longest-running Italian training school of science communication – the Master’s Degree in Science Communication – which has been held for sixteen years now at the Interdisciplinary Laboratory of the International School for Advanced Studies (SISSA-ISAS) of Trieste.

There is a compelling need to ensure that the points of view and preferences of stakeholders are fully considered and incorporated into natural resources management strategies. Stakeholders include a diverse group of individuals in several sectors that have an interest in how natural resources are managed. Typically, stakeholders with an interest in groundwater resources include groups who could be affected by the manner in which the resource is managed (e.g., farmers who need water for irrigation; municipalities and individuals who need drinking water, agencies and organizations that want to maintain in-stream flows to support ecosystems, etc.) Refugio County in South Texas provides an interesting case study since several groups of water users in the region are working with researchers at Texas A&M University-Kingsville (TAMUK) to develop decision-support models that incorporate stakeholder concerns. The focus of this paper is to provide a series of arguments and approaches about the ways in which stakeholder issues have recently been incorporated into environmental models, to briefly describe some of the TAMUK efforts to develop groundwater models that incorporate stakeholder inputs, and to present and discuss a method in which communication research can be used to obtain stakeholder preferences input into modeling efforts.

Mouse-related research in the life sciences has expanded remarkably over the last two decades, resulting in growing use of the term “mouse model”. Our interviews with 64 leading Japanese life sciences researchers showed heterogeneities in the definition of “mouse model” in the Japanese life sciences community. Here, we discuss the implications for the relationship between the life sciences community and society in Japan that may result from this ambiguity in the terminology. It is suggested that, in Japanese life sciences, efforts by individual researchers to make their scientific information unambiguous and explanative are necessary.

The creation of a scientific culture through the experiences that can be offered in a museum is the central theme in the training of guides at Universum. Emphasising the social importance of science democratisation, providing the public with the chance to enjoy science itself, conceiving it as a human creation of extreme beauty, giving it the chance to be appreciated and enjoyed, presenting it from the different fields where an approach to it is possible, is something difficult to achieve outside a science museum and impossible without the intervention of the anfitriones.

In 2008 two collections were published: the Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology, edited by Massimiano Bucchi and Brian Trench, and Communicating Science in Social Contexts: New models, new practices, edited by Donghong Cheng and five other scholars from China, Canada, Belgium and Australia. These books try to define and draw the boundaries of science communication’s field from both a theoretical and empirical point of view. But do we need to establish it as a distinct research field? For a number of decades, a growing community of scholars and communicators is trying to reply positively to this question, but the need to look outside the disciplinary boundaries, to other academic fields, is still vital.

The Exploratorium explainer program is not only important to the young people involved, but is an integral part of the museum culture. This initiative that started to help the youth of our community has blossomed into a program that has been very helpful to the science centre. In fact, the institution would not be complete without the fresh energy of the explainers. They help the Exploratorium to continue to give the real pear to its public.

The initiatives focusing the professional development of explainers are multiplying around the world, building an informal network of researchers, museums managers and directors, explainers, and regional/continental networks, as THE group, the Thematic Human Interface and Explainers group of Ecsite.The Workshop Sul-Americano de Mediação em Museus e Centros de Ciência e Escola de Mediação em Museus e Centros de Ciência, which took place in Rio de Janeiro in September 2008, was a further important step along this path. We believe it is worthwhile to offer to Jcom readers some of the workshop contributions concerning the training of explainers, to which we added an overview of the general problem presented by Lynn Uyen Tran (Lawrence Hall of Science at the University of California, Berkeley).

This article seeks to reflect on mediation in museums based on experiences that occurred in the “Learning in order to Teach” Project.  In this case, the mediation acquires specific characteristics because it deals with young deaf people learning art-related contents in order to teach other youth in their first language.  The most interesting aspect of this encounter between museum and deaf culture is a mutual, immediate and highly visible influence.  While museum-goers and professionals understand that the “gestures” used by the deaf are not random (rather, on the contrary, they make up a complex language), new signs are created by the students based on the contents that are worked with and discovered in the museum.  These new signs thus enrich the language itself and begin to circulate within the community.