Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

5 Toward a Sustainable Infrastructure:Friction and Momentum
Pages 31-38

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 31...
... Extrinsic Rewards and Disincentives One reason why scientists feel they have insufficient time for public engagement is the prevailing culture of science institutions, which, as Colón-Ramos stated, tends to characterize public communication as little more than a hobby. In particular, workshop participants repeatedly cited promotion and tenure criteria as barriers to greater public engagement by scientists in academic institutions.
From page 32...
... Berenbaum, Nadkarni, and other participants emphasized the benefits to scientists of citizen science efforts, such as those catalogued by the Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education.11 In particular, said Berenbaum, citizen scientists participating in Bee Spotter12 have successfully reconfirmed the presence in Illinois of species thought to be locally extirpated. Ornithology and astronomy depend heavily on information from citizen scientists, added Brossard.
From page 33...
... Lack o Training of Many scien ntists lack training in communication with the public, with j ournalists, e and v social media The life scien via a. nces community does not have an understand y e ding of good comm munication prac ctices, said Borc chelt.
From page 34...
... Brossard said that scientists should receive training in the appropriate use of social media and the potential ways in which it can backfire. On the other hand, she argued, excessive concern by scientists over public communication may allow others to take the floor and circulate inaccurate, biased information.
From page 35...
... COMMUNICATION GOALS AND AUDIENCES Daniel Sarewitz of Arizona State University challenged workshop participants to take a step back and reflect more carefully on some fundamental questions. First, he challenged everyone to think about what is meant by "the public" and why it is good to communicate with the public about science.
From page 36...
... At an institutional level, Borchelt explained, one can distinguish between two potential goals of public communication: institutional advancement versus informing the public and fulfilling our civic responsibility. Over the past 20–30 years, he said, he has observed a shift from a public information officer model -- in which one person at an agency is responsible for informing the public and responding to media requests in a neutral, evenhanded way -- to a marketing and institutional advancement model.
From page 37...
... He lamented a lack of guidelines defining civic responsibility in terms of public communication. Martin Storksdieck of the National Academy of Sciences and Smith both noted that workshop participants had become hung up on the lack of a clearly articulated goal for science communication.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.