Search

Sep 22, 2014 Article

Slovenian social scientists’ understanding of public knowledge and participation in sustainable development: from deficit to mutual learning

Public participation in decision-making has in the last decades become a common refrain in political and scientific discourse, yet it does not often truly come to fruition. The present study focuses on the underlying issue, that of the construction of the difference between scientific and public knowledge and its consequences. Through discourse analysis of scientific texts on sustainable development three distinct groups of Slovenian social scientists were discerned that differed in their views on the relationship between scientific and public knowledge and consequently the role and nature of public participation in decision-making processes. With a rise in participatory practices the preponderance of the deficit model found in this study remains problematic.

Volume 13Issue 032014

Sep 22, 2014 Conference Review

Observations of PCST2014

by Nancy Longnecker

Attendance at any large conference is highly personal and every registrant has a unique experience. The value to the individual depends on which sessions they attend, whom they connect with and what outcomes eventuate from what they learn and the networking they do. The networking and feedback can be life changing as it was for me when I attended PCST in 1996 in Melbourne. PCST2014 was a successful conference that provided many options for delegates. This was my fifth PCST and I was glad to have made the long trip to Brazil. One of the most successful aspects of PCST2014 was the opportunity to hear voices that I had not heard at previous PCSTs. The opportunity to hear about interesting work and different perspectives is one of the main advantages of this large, diverse, international network. Some reflective presentations eloquently articulated the familiar but evolving framework of the science communication discipline. Some provocative presentations pushed me to consider new and different perspectives or methodologies. Some case study presentations illustrated that good science communication is happening around the world. All types are particularly useful to those of us at a crossroad in our career, considering where to invest our energy, expertise and time.

Volume 13Issue 032014

Sep 22, 2014 Article

Delivering the message: a theoretical study on designing science content for nature-based experiences

by Sanha Kim

The urgent state of our global environment calls for collective action, which depends in large part on effective science communication for better understanding and awareness. Activities and institutions that provide opportunities to learn about nature all ultimately rely on scientific findings about nature. Although science produces the knowledge and information about nature, for the content to be accessible and meaningful to the general public, it needs to be processed by what I call science content design. This process is similar to the concepts of interpretation in tourism, or aesthetic understanding in alternative science education. This study is a theoretical exploration on the definition and nature of science content design, what constitutes its process, and how the content can be designed. Focusing on the fields of macro-biology, I also discuss the types of biological content generally used in nature-based experiences, and examine model cases of biological content design.

Volume 13Issue 032014

Sep 22, 2014 Conference Review

Conference Review

by

PCST 2014

by Helen Featherstone

Observations of PCST2014

by Nancy Longnecker

Communicating Science for social inclusion and political engagement: reflections on the PCST Conference, Brazil 2014

by Astrid Treffry-Goatley

Volume 13Issue 032014

Sep 22, 2014 Conference Review

PCST 2014

by Helen Featherstone

The PCST conference attracts a substantial number of science communication academics and practitioners from all over the world. The conference is stimulating and refreshing but the size of it means that quality control is challenging for the organisers. This review highlights areas of both strengths and weaknesses whilst also making recommendations to the PCST committee for PCST 2016. The committee are encouraged to further strengthen the academic/practitioner combination and the international nature of the event. However, they are also recommended to ensure that work presented is of high quality with clear purposes and strong evaluative evidence presented.

Volume 13Issue 032014

Sep 22, 2014 Book Review

Book Review

by

Who’s Asking? Native Science, Western Science, and Science Education

by Emily Dawson

Volume 13Issue 032014

May 06, 2014 Editorial

Shared spaces: a future for JCOM

by Emma Weitkamp

As academic communities across the globe are increasingly encouraged to share their knowledge outside the ivory towers of academia, it becomes ever more important to create a bridge that crosses continents and disciplinary boundaries. Sitting, as it does, at the nexus between science communication practice and research, JCOM has a vital role to play as just such a knowledge sharing platform.

Volume 13Issue 022014

May 06, 2014 Commentary

Socially inclusive science communication

by Luisa Massarani , Matteo Merzagora

Social inclusion is an emerging preoccupation in the science communication field. The political value of science communication (e.g. in terms of empowerment) and the necessity to address all audiences has always been considered, but in recent times the participation agenda has enriched the rationale and methodologies of the communication of science: social inclusion is not only an issue of access to knowledge, but also of governance and co-production.

Reframing social exclusion from science communication: moving away from ‘barriers’ towards a more complex perspective

by Emily Dawson

Knowledge◦rooms — science communication in local, welcoming spaces to foster social inclusion

by Barbara Streicher, Kathrin Unterleitner and Heidrun Schulze

Science Centers. Which role can they play to participate in a city social reconstruction?

by Claudia Aguirre Rios

Straight into conflict zones, scientific research empowers the minds

by Leïla Perié, Livio Riboli-Sasco and Claire Ribrault

Volume 13Issue 022014

May 06, 2014 Commentary

Reframing social exclusion from science communication: moving away from ‘barriers’ towards a more complex perspective

by Emily Dawson

Science communication is an increasingly important field of activity, research and policy. It should not be assumed however, that science communication practices provide equitable and empowering opportunities for everyone. Social exclusion, inclusion and equity are key challenges for practitioners, researchers, policy makers and funders involved with science communication. In this commentary I reflect on the limitations of the ‘barriers approach to understanding social inclusion and exclusion from science communication and argue instead that a more complex perspective is needed. I conclude that placing equity at the heart of science communication is crucial for developing more inclusive science communication practices.

Volume 13Issue 022014

May 06, 2014 Commentary

Knowledge◦rooms — science communication in local, welcoming spaces to foster social inclusion

by Barbara Streicher , Kathrin Unterleitner , Heidrun Schulze

Socially inclusive science communication has to take place where people spend most of their time — within their communities. The concept of knowledge◦rooms uses empty shops in socially disadvantaged urban areas for offering low-threshold, interactive science center activities. The commentary carves out essential features that contributed to the success of the pilot project. Most importantly, the knowledge◦rooms had to be welcoming and comfortable for visitors of various backgrounds. The spaces were easy to access, the initiators were seen as trustworthy actors by temporarily becoming part of the community and the offer was respectful of the time and knowledge of its users.

Volume 13Issue 022014

Search results