Using Experiential Learning to Help Undergraduates Understand the Science of Science Communication
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56103/nactaj.v69i1.242Keywords:
science communication, experiential learning, writing quality, science beliefsAbstract
Experiential learning is a high-impact practice in education, but there are few examples of how to implement experiential learning in the undergraduate communication classroom to advance skills in science communication and expose students to scientific research. This project consisted of two implementations of an experiential learning module at two universities. These modules were embedded in existing courses and included activities such as conducting interviews with scientists and developing science communication messaging. Students completed written reflections, science writing samples, and science attitudes and beliefs questionnaires as a part of the project. Although results showed no changes in students’ writing ability, there were increases in their science literacy self-efficacy and deference to scientific authority. Additionally, reflections showed that students were learning about the scientific process. These findings suggest that this module is a viable learning activity that can be incorporated into existing courses to expose students to scientific research and build communication skills. For future implementations of similar projects, it is recommended that the project contained in this module be the major project of the course as opposed to one of several projects in the course.
Downloads
References
Baker, M. A., Robinson, J. S., Kolb, D. A. (2012). Aligning Kolb’s experiential learning theory with a comprehensive agricultural education model. Journal of Agricultural Education, 53(4), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2012.04001
Baram-Tsabari, A., & Lewenstien, B. V. (2017). Science communication training: What are we trying to teach? International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 7(3), 285-300. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2017.1303756
Bauerle, T. L., & Park, T. D. (2012). Experiential learning enhances student knowledge retention in the plant sciences. Teaching Methods, 22(5), 715-718. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTTECH.22.5.715
Besley, J. C. (2018). The National Science Foundation’s science and technology survey and support for science funding, 2006-2014. Public Understanding of Science, 27(1), 94-109. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662516649803
Braun, V., & Clark, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Brossard, D., & Nisbet, M. C. (2006). Deference to scientific authority among a low information public: Understanding U.S. opinion on agricultural biotechnology. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 19(1), 24–52. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edl003
Christensen, R., Knezek, G., & Tyler-Wood, T. (2014). Career Interest Questionnaire (CIQ) [Database record]. APA PsycTests. https://doi.org/10.1037/t33611-000
Deslauriers, L., McCarty, L. S., Miller, K., Callaghan, K., & Kestin, G. (2019). Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(39), 19251–19257. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1821936116
Downs, J. S. (2014). Prescriptive scientific narratives for communicating usable science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111, 13627–13633. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1317502111
Fischhoff, B., & Scheufele, D. A. (2013). The science of science communication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(Supplement 3), 14031–14032. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1312080110
Fischhoff, B., & Scheufele, D. A. (2014). The Science of Science Communication II. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(Supplement 4), 13583–13584. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1414635111
Fives, H., Huebner, W., Birnbaum, A. S., & Nicolich, M. (2014). Developing a measure of scientific literacy for middle school students: Developing a measure of scientific literacy. Science Education, 98(4), 549–580. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21115
Funk, C. (2017). Mixed messages about public trust in science. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2017/12/08/mixed-messages-about-public-trust-in-science/
Hoggett, P. (2006). Conflict, ambivalence, and the contested purpose of public organizations. Human Relations, 59(2), 175-194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726706062731
Jamieson, K. H., Kahan, D. M., & Scheufele, D. (Eds.). (2017). The Oxford handbook on the science of science communication. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 192-212.
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2012). Experiential learning theory. In N. M. Seel (Ed.) Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_227
Kuh, G. (2008). High-impact educational practices: what are they, who has access to them, and why they matter. Association of American Colleges and Universities. https://www.aacu.org/publication/high-impact-educational-practices-what-they-are-who-has-access-to-them-and-why-they-matter
Lefebvre, M. R., & Redien-Collot, R. (2013). “How to do things with words”: The discursive dimension of experiential learning in entrepreneurial mentoring dyads. Journal of Small Business Management, 51(3), 370-393. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12022
Masambuka-kanchewa, F. (2023). Perceptions of Scientists before and after Taking a Graduate Level Science Communication Course: Graduate Students’ Perceptions of a Scientist . North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture Journal, 66(1), 113-121. Retrieved from https://nactajournal.org/index.php/nactaj/article/view/30
Matheson, S. (2017). Going public in support of science. Cell, 169, 181–182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2017.03.029
McKeown, T. (2017). Validation stud of the Science Literary Assessment : A measure to assess middle school students’ attitudes toward science and ability to think scientifically [Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Commonwealth University]. VCU Scholars Compass. https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/5080/
Mellor, F. (2013). Twenty years of teaching science communication: A case study of Imperial College’s Master’s programme. Public Understanding of Science, 22(8), 916-926. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662513489386
Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2016). Communicating Science Effectively: A Research Agenda. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/23674
National Science Board. (2018). Science and Engineering Indicators 2018. NSB-2018-1. Alexandria, VA: National Science Foundation
Rakedzon, T., & Baram-Tsabari (2017). To make a long story short: A rubric for assessing graduate students’ academic and popular science writing skills. Assessing Writing, 32, 28-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2016.12.004
Ritchie, S., Tomas, L., & Tones, M. (2011). Writing stories to enhance scientific literacy. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 685–707. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500691003728039
Rockers, A., & Rumble, J. N. (2023). Agricultural communication students’ media writing self-perception in an writing self-perception in an introductory course. North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture Journal, 67(1), 211-217. https://doi.org/10.56103/nactaj.v67i1.62
Schroeder, J., Kardas, M., & Epley, N. (2017). The humanizing voice: Speech reveals, and text conceals, a more thoughtful mind in the midst of disagreement. Psychological Science, 28, 1745-1762.
Silenas, R., Akins, R., Parrish, A. R., & Edwards, J. C. (2008). Developing disaster preparedness competence: An experiential learning exercise for multiprofessional education. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 20(1), 62-68. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401330701798311
Smith, T. W., Davern, M., Freese, J., & Hout, M. (2017). General Social Surveys, 1972-2016: cumulative codebook. Chicago, IL: NORC. Retrieved from http://gss.norc.org/documents/codebook/GSS_Codebook.pdf
Trench, B. (2012). Vital and vulnerable: Science communication as a university subject. In B. Schiele, M. Claessens, & S. Shi (Eds.) Science Communication in the World. Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands.
Washburn, T., Essary, C., Irlbeck, E., Gibson, C., & Akers, C. (2022). Foreseen demands and up-and-coming science communicators and recommendations for science communication training programs. Journal of Applied Communications, 106(2). https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.2410
