Herausforderungen der aktuellen Evaluationspraxis in der Wissenschaftskommunikation in Deutschland

other

Author(s): Ricarda Ziegler , Imke Hedder , Liliann Fischer

Publication date (Online): March 07 2023

Publisher: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

Read this book at

Publisher

Buy book

Bookmark

There is no author summary for this book yet. Authors can add summaries to their books on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Zusammenfassung

Evaluationen bieten einen wichtigen Mehrwert für Wissenschaftskommunikation, denn anhand ihrer Ergebnisse lässt diese sich zukünftig zielorientiert und effektiv gestalten. Zur Zeit steht die Evaluation von Wissenschaftskommunikation in Deutschland allerdings noch vor Herausforderungen. So ergeben sich bereits vor Beginn der Evaluationen Probleme durch fehlende strategische Planung von Wissenschaftskommunikation. Darüber hinaus mangelt es bei Evaluationen oft an passenden Evaluationsdesigns und geeigneten Datenerhebungsmethoden. Zu guter Letzt erschwert das in der deutschen Wissenschaftskommunikationspraxis vorherrschende Bild von Evaluation einen kollektiven und konstruktiven Lernprozess für die Wissenschaftskommunikation. Diese Herausforderungen gilt es zu überwinden, damit Evaluation als kollektiver Reflexionsprozess zur konstruktiven Weiterentwicklung von Wissenschaftskommunikation beitragen kann.

Related collections

Most cited references 24

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Why should we promote public engagement with science?

Jack Stilgoe, Simon J. Lock, James Wilsdon (2014)

This introductory essay looks back on the two decades since the journal Public Understanding of Science was launched. Drawing on the invited commentaries in this special issue, we can see narratives of continuity and change around the practice and politics of public engagement with science. Public engagement would seem to be a necessary but insufficient part of opening up science and its governance. Those of us who have been involved in advocating, conducting and evaluating public engagement practice could be accused of over-promising. If we, as social scientists, are going to continue a normative commitment to the idea of public engagement, we should therefore develop new lines of argument and analysis. Our support for the idea of public engagement needs qualifying, as part of a broader, more ambitious interest in the idea of publicly engaged science.

0 comments Cited 100 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Scientists’ Prioritization of Communication Objectives for Public Engagement

Anthony Dudo, John Besley (2016)

Amid calls from scientific leaders for their colleagues to become more effective public communicators, this study examines the objectives that scientists’ report drive their public engagement behaviors. We explore how scientists evaluate five specific communication objectives, which include informing the public about science, exciting the public about science, strengthening the public’s trust in science, tailoring messages about science, and defending science from misinformation. We use insights from extant research, the theory of planned behavior, and procedural justice theory to identify likely predictors of scientists' views about these communication objectives. Results show that scientists most prioritize communication designed to defend science from misinformation and educate the public about science, and least prioritize communication that seeks to build trust and establish resonance with the public. Regression analyses reveal factors associated with scientists who prioritize each of the five specific communication objectives. Our findings highlight the need for communication trainers to help scientists select specific communication objectives for particular contexts and audiences.