science communication essays

Science communication is more important than ever. Here are 3 lessons from around the world on what makes it work

Visiting fellow, Centre for the Public Awareness of Science, Australian National University

Professor, Australian National University

Disclosure statement

Joan Leach receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Toss Gascoigne does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Australian National University provides funding as a member of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

It’s a challenging time to be a science communicator. The current pandemic, climate crisis, and concerns over new technologies from artificial intelligence to genetic modification by CRISPR demand public accountability, clear discussion and the ability to disagree in public.

However, science communication is not new to challenge. The 20th century can be read as a long argument for science communication in the interest of the public good.

Since the Second World War, there have been many efforts to negotiate a social contract between science and civil society. In the West, part of that negotiation has emphasised the distribution of scientific knowledge. But how is the relationship between science and society formulated around the globe?

We collected stories from 39 countries together into a book, Communicating Science: A Global Perspective , to understand how science communication has unfolded internationally. Globally it has played a key role in public health, environmental protection and agriculture.

Three key ideas emerge: community knowledge is a powerful context; successful science communication is integrated with other beliefs; and there is an expectation that researchers will contribute to the development of society.

Read more: Three key drivers of good messaging in a time of crisis: expertise, empathy and timing

What is science communication?

The term “science communication” is not universal. For 50 years, what is called “science communication” in Australia has had different names in other countries: “science popularisation”, “public understanding”, “vulgarisation”, “public understanding of science”, and the cultivation of a “scientific temper”.

Colombia uses the term “the social appropriation of science and technology”. This definition underscores that scientific knowledge is transformed through social interaction.

Each definition delivers insights into how science and society are positioned. Is science imagined as part of society? Is science held in high esteem? Does association with social issues lessen or strengthen the perception of science?

Read more: Engaging the disengaged with science

Governments play a variety of roles in the stories we collected. The 1970s German government stood back , perhaps recalling the unsavoury relationship between Nazi propaganda and science. Private foundations filled the gap by funding ambitious programs to train science journalists. In the United States, the absence of a strong central agency encouraged diversity in a field described variously as “vibrant”, “jostling” or “cacophonous”.

The United Kingdom is the opposite, providing one of the best-documented stories in this field. This is exemplified by the Royal Society’s Bodmer Report in 1985, which argued that scientists should consider it their duty to communicate their work to their fellow citizens.

Russia saw a state-driven focus on science through the communist years, to modernise and industrialise. In 1990 the Knowledge Society’s weekly science newspaper Argumenty i Fakty had the highest weekly circulation of any newspaper in the world: 33.5 million copies. But the collapse of the Soviet Union showed how fragile these scientific views were, as people turned to mysticism.

Many national accounts refer to the relationship between indigenous knowledge and Western science. Aotearoa New Zealand is managing this well (there’s a clue in the name), with its focus on mātauranga (Māori knowledge). The integration has not always been smooth sailing, but Māori views are now incorporated into nationwide science funding, research practice and public engagement.

Ecologist John Perrott points out that Māori “belonging” (I belong, therefore I am) is at odds with Western scientific training (I think, therefore I am). In Māori whakapapa (genealogy and cosmology), relationships with the land, flora and fauna are fundamental and all life is valued, as are collaboration and nurturing.

Science communication in the Global South

Eighteen countries contributing to the book have a recent colonial history, and many are from the Global South. They saw the end of colonial rule as an opportunity to embrace science. As Ghana’s Kwame Nkrumah said in 1963 to a meeting of the Organisation of African Unity:

We shall drain marshes and swamps, clear infested areas, feed the under-nourished, and rid our people of parasites and disease. It is within the possibility of science and technology to make even the Sahara bloom into a vast field with verdant vegetation for agricultural and industrial developments.

Plans were formulated and optimism was strong. A lot depended on science communication: how would science be introduced to national narratives, gain political impetus and influence an education system for science?

Science in these countries focused mainly on health, the environment and agriculture. Nigeria’s polio vaccine campaign was almost derailed in 2003 when two influential groups, the Supreme Council for Shari’ah in Nigeria and the Kaduna State Council of Imams and Ulamas, declared the vaccine contained anti-fertility substances and was part of a Western conspiracy to sterilise children. Only after five Muslim leaders witnessed a successful vaccine program in Egypt was it recognised as being compatible with the Qur’an.

Three key ideas

Three principles emerge from these stories. The first is that community knowledge is a powerful force. In rural Kenya, the number of babies delivered by unskilled people led to high mortality. Local science communication practices provided a solution . A baraza (community discussion) integrated the health problem with social solutions, and trained local motorcycle riders to transport mothers to hospitals. The baraza used role-plays to depict the arrival of a mother to a health facility, reactions from the health providers, eventual safe delivery of the baby, and mother and baby riding back home.

A second principle is how science communication can enhance the integration of science with other beliefs. Science and religion, for example, are not always at odds. The Malaysian chapter describes how Muslim concepts of halal (permitted) and haram (forbidden) determine the acceptability of biotechnology according to the principles of Islamic law. Does science pose any threat to the five purposes of maslahah (public interest): religion, life and health, progeny, intellect and property? It is not hard to see the resemblance to Western ethical considerations of controversial science.

Read more: What science communicators can learn from listening to people

The third is an approach to pursuing and debating science for the public good. Science communication has made science more accessible, and public opinions and responses more likely to be sought. The “third mission”, an established principle across Europe, is an expectation or obligation that researchers will contribute to the growth, welfare and development of society. Universities are expected to exchange knowledge and skills with others in society, disseminating scientific results and methods, and encouraging public debate.

These lessons about science communication will be needed in a post-COVID world. They are finding an audience: we have made the book freely available online , and it has so far been downloaded more than 14,000 times.

• Science communication
• History of science
• Public understanding of science
• Science of science communication

Events and Communications Coordinator

Assistant Editor - 1 year cadetship

Executive Dean, Faculty of Health

Lecturer/Senior Lecturer, Earth System Science (School of Science)

Sydney Horizon Educators (Identified)

Scicomm 101: A Beginner’s Guide to Science Communication

• by Sydney Wyatt
• November 02, 2020

As scientists, we constantly engage in science communication, but have you taken a moment to think about what that means and how you could improve your communication? Science Says hosted a SciComm 101 presentation in lieu of our annual kick-off barbecue (thanks, COVID-19) to explore some science communication background, basics, and careers.

When we talk about science communication (scicomm), we are referring to the practice of communicating science-related topics to non-experts, usually in the fields of  science, technology, engineering and math (STEM). The primary goal of scicomm is to engage and educate the public through outreach activities. Non-scientists and everyday citizens need to be informed and educated about the scientific issues at hand in order to be fully informed about the world they live in—climate change, vaccines, and COVID-19 are some current issues with a big impact on our lives. The average person only experiences scientific engagement in school and is often met with challenges that prevent them from continued engagement; they may have the understanding that there is only one way into STEM fields successfully, even though this is an inaccurate assumption . This gate-keeping negatively impacts the scientific literacy of the public who vote on policies affected by science like healthcare and environmental protections. Thus, science communication is imperative to improving the accessibility of science to the public.

What does science communication look like?

Who doesn’t like lists? This definitely isn’t an exhaustive one, but we just wanted to give you some examples of ways that you can communicate science. These are just some ideas so that you can think about a method that works best for you! 

• Digital media (videos, podcasts)

Other graduate students hone their skills in video creation and editing, such as on the Science Says Youtube channel . Here, you can talk about specific topics that you are interested in, or make videos debunking some myths about the field you study. You can even record yourself doing an experiment, either one for kids or a more advanced one for high school students interested in understanding research. 

• Writing (books, blogs, journalists, press releases…)

Traditionally, some scientists have written books about their work or their experiences as a scientist. These are usually aimed at the general public, with the intent to tell a story about their experiences. One example of this is Sy Montgomery’s The Soul of an Octopus: A Surprising Exploration into the Wonder of Consciousness , in which she talks about her appreciation for octopuses (not octopi!). In our book club we talk about how she really paints a picture of how octopuses act and make connections with people, even though their experiences are vastly different than that of humans. Scientists don’t have to write long-form pieces either—many scientists write short-form pieces such as blog posts , news articles, and press releases featuring recent research highlights. 

• Outreach (festivals, pubs)

When we think of outreach, many of us think of schools—like a classroom setting. But a lot of the outreach that we do can vary a lot! Science Says (at least, before COVID-19,) frequently goes to Farmer’s Markets to table and talk one-on-one with the public about things like GMOs, agriculture, and other hot-button scientific topics. Science cafés are becoming more popular, especially at bars, where you can discuss science with adults in a casual setting. Check out this list of science cafés near Davis.

• Education (formal/informal) (aka traditional science education in schools vs. museums, camps, other non-school educational settings)

While this can also fall under outreach, some science communication can be dedicated to education itself such as designing classroom lesson plans about exploring the world around them in a scientific manner. Some classrooms will allow graduate students to demonstrate experiments or talk to students about science; there are even opportunities for field trips. It depends on what kind of setting you work best in! 

• Science policy (pitching to and advising policy-makers)

Not surprisingly, many politicians don’t keep up with research. There is a new wave of graduate students interested in science policy, which may involve them running for office or becoming an adviser to politicians at the local, state, or national level.The goal of science communication in this realm is to help politicians make decisions based on evidence from scientific studies. 

• Social media 

Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, and even TikTok are quickly becoming platforms for scientists to talk about their research to a very wide audience. Some creative scientists post their artwork or microscopy images on Instagram. Others use TikTok to make short, entertaining videos about their research or even what it’s like to be a scientist. These platforms are a unique challenge for a scientist that is interested in science communication—how can you condense the information you want to convey into less than 280 characters? How do you visualize your research? How do you phrase your work in a way that everyone, ESPECIALLY non-experts, can understand?

Most importantly, you use your science communication skills anytime you talk about science, even with other scientists! Honing your scicomm skills is essential for any researcher. Good communication is critical to giving engaging talks, writing scientific articles, and networking with other scientists.

Who does science communication?

As a scientist, you do! Whenever you are talking about science, even to fellow scientists, you are engaging in science communication. 

Where do science communicators work?

There are a myriad of scicomm careers so here’s just  a sample of them. As a note, many scicomm careers involve lots of written communication so this is a valuable skill you can build with our workshops and blogs . Many of these careers integrate several of the different types of science communication discussed above (writing, social media, digital media, public speaking). Here are just a few examples of scicomm careers:

Academia: professors who incorporate scicomm into their work, news and media departments, colleges and institutes within a university with communications staff Journalism: freelance and full-time writers Informal education (museums, nature centers, etc): educators, docents, exhibit curators, communications and outreach directors Formal education: Science teachers and college professors or lecturers Other science writing: script writers for TV, radio, movies, podcasts; book authors Science policy: state and national level as staff member for a legislator, think tanks focused on science-informed policy and research Industry: science writers, digital communications, technical writers Publishing: academic journals Government organizations based on science (NASA, USGS, NIH, National Labs, etc)

How do you launch a science communication career?

Networking is a huge part of developing a scicomm career. This can be done through professional networks like CapSciComm or by attending conferences like Science Talk and the National Association of Science Writers’ ( NASW ) annual conference. Networking allows you to develop relationships and contacts, and puts you on the radar for opportunities. You may also connect with professionals you want to conduct an informational interview with to learn more about a particular career and necessary skills. 

Finally, build a portfolio to demonstrate your work. You can create your own free website through Wix or similar sources to curate your science writing or art; if you’re more interested in a digital career, make a YouTube channel or a podcast. Be sure to broadcast your portfolio and work on professional social media, whether that’s LinkedIn or your professional Twitter account. 

Science communication basics

There are many ways to prepare for a science communication event, so we shared some of our favorite tools and tips for monitoring our use of technical jargon and developing relatable and understandable talks or presentations. Identify which areas of scicomm you want to work on this year by watching Mary’s recorded portion below and keep an eye out for future Science Says workshops and events that will help you hone and polish that skill!

You can find all these resources and more on our resources page . 

How Science Says can help with science communication

We at Science Says offer a variety of opportunities to build and practice your scicomm skills. From workshops to invited speakers, we host events to build skills like storytelling , writing and digital science communication. We also extend opportunities to practice scicomm through our various blogs , our public science book club and different outreach events . If you’re interested in starting your scicomm career, reach out to us at [email protected] to get involved in planning an event, writing a blog, or brainstorming creative ways to engage the public especially in the current Zoom climate. Happy communicating!

Science Says is a community of UC Davis graduate students, postdocs and early career scientists dedicated to making scientific research interesting, relevant and accessible to everyone. For more content, follow us on Twitter @SciSays .

Primary Category

A Nature Research Service

• On-demand Courses
• Share & disseminate

Effective Science Communication

For researchers in the natural sciences who would like to communicate their research to a broader audience

8 experts in science communication, science writing and editing, science outreach, engagement and presentations, and the Springer Nature press office

6.5 hours of learning

10–30-minute lessons

1-module course with certificate

About this course

Knowing how to effectively communicate research with non-experts requires a certain skillset that can be learned and developed with practice. This course on ‘Effective Science Communication’ will provide researchers with the core tools and techniques to help them communicate any piece of research, published or unpublished, to a variety of different audiences. It covers the essential steps, including identifying communication goals, understanding different audiences, and crafting a key message. The course also explores the different communication methods and channels available. 

If you would like to preview lessons from the course, you can try a free sample.

What you’ll learn

• Compare different audience requirements to help you tailor your communications
• Select a relevant communication channel for your specific needs in a particular instance
• Understand how storytelling techniques can build a compelling scientific story to communicate your research
• Apply strategies to help you communicate your research in an accessible and persuasive way to a non-scientific audience 
• Tips and techniques for communicating your research via writing, public talks and presentations, social media and media interviews

Free Sample Effective Science Communication - section

13 lessons 6h 30m

Free Sample Effective Science Communication: Free Sample - section

No subscription yet? Try this free sample to preview lessons from the course

3 lessons 45m

Start this module

Select the dropdown to explore an overview of the course content

• Set your communication goals
• Understand your audience
• Reach your audience
• Identify your key message
• Build on your key message to create a story
• Apply strategies to communicate science to non-specialists
• Write about your research
• Present your research
• Communicate your research on social media
• Discuss your research in a media interview

Developed with renowned science communication professionals

This course contains insights from experts with a wide range of experience, including award-winning science writers, editors and communicators.

Meet the expert panel that have helped shape and refine the content of the course:

Laura Helmuth

Editor-in-Chief, Scientific American

Science and technology editor, The Economist

Director of Researcher and Community Engagement, Digital Science

Advice from experienced science communicators

The course has additional insights through video interviews from:

Lisa Boucher

Press Manager, Springer Nature

Patience Kiyuka

Research Scientist, Kenya Medical Research Institute

Isobel Lisowski

Press Officer, Springer Nature

Agostina Mileo

Science communicator and activist, EcoFeminita

Subhra Priyadarshini

Chief Editor, Nature India

Why should you take this course?

Discover related courses, narrative tools for researchers.

Examine the best ways you can share your research story persuasively with your peers

Advancing Your Scientific Presentations

Communicate your results in an engaging and memorable way

Access options

For researchers.

• Register and complete our free course offering , or try a free sample of any of our paid-for courses
• Recommend our courses to your institution, so that we can contact them to discuss becoming a subscriber

For institutions, departments and labs

Find out which of our subscription plans best suits your needs See our subscription plans

Does my institution provide full course access?

When registering, you’ll be asked to select your institution first. If your institution is listed, it has subscribed and provides full access to our on-demand courses catalogue.

My institution isn’t listed!

Select „other“ and register with an individual account. This allows you to access all our free sample course modules, and our entirely free course on peer review. You might also want to recommend our courses to your institution.

I am in charge of purchasing training materials for our lab / department / institution. Buy a subscription

Start this course

Full course access via institutional subscription only. More info

Institutions, departments and labs: Give your research full access to our entire course catalogue

Image Credits

When you choose to publish with PLOS, your research makes an impact. Make your work accessible to all, without restrictions, and accelerate scientific discovery with options like preprints and published peer review that make your work more Open.

• PLOS Biology
• PLOS Climate
• PLOS Complex Systems
• PLOS Computational Biology
• PLOS Digital Health
• PLOS Genetics
• PLOS Global Public Health
• PLOS Medicine
• PLOS Mental Health
• PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
• PLOS Pathogens
• PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
• PLOS Collections

Science communication, or “SciComm” for short, is in a state of punctuated equilibrium. And, if you don’t know what that means, then perhaps we’re not doing our jobs as scientists and science communicators.

• About This Blog
• Official PLOS Blog
• EveryONE Blog
• Speaking of Medicine
• PLOS Biologue
• Absolutely Maybe
• DNA Science
• PLOS ECR Community
• All Models Are Wrong
• About PLOS Blogs

By Ashley Moses, edited by Andrew S. Cale Each year, millions of scientific research papers are published. Virtually none of them can…

Children’s author (and PLOS SciComm contributor) Patricia Newman is celebrating a landmark anniversary of her renowned book on improving our environment. In…

This acclaimed courtroom drama offers valuable lessons for science communicators Bill Sullivan We often find ourselves at an impasse with others and…

Barbara L. F. Kaplan and William Slikker, Jr. Animals and animal models have been used for centuries to provide us with an understanding…

By Ana Santos-Carvalho and Carolina Lebre, edited by Andrew S. Cale Excessive use of technical jargon can be a significant barrier to…

By Ryan McRae and Briana Pobiner, edited by Andrew S. Cale In 2023, the field of human evolution benefited from a plethora…

In a world where the wonders of science are no further away than a Google search or a science museum field trip, it is…

By Elizabeth Fusco, edited by Michael Liesen Infection and pandemics have never been more relevant globally, and zombies have long been used…

In literature, Joseph Campbell pointed out in his book The Hero with A Thousand Faces that crossing the threshold is an essential step along the hero’s…

This year—2022—has been another exciting year for research in human evolution. With many projects around the world proceeding despite the COVID pandemic…

The communication gap between the medical field and the general population can lead to devastating consequences. Pediatric emergency medicine in particular faces…

By Patricia Newman Expressions of gratitude for nature rarely make headlines. Yet a growing body of research tells us that we feel…

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Urban Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Acquisition
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Religion
• Music and Media
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Strategy
• Business Ethics
• Business History
• Business and Government
• Business and Technology
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic Systems
• Economic History
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Administration
• Public Policy
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous
• Next chapter >

Introduction: Why Science Communication?

Dan M. Kahan is the Elizabeth K. Dollard Professor of Law and Professor of Psychology at Yale Law School. He is a member of the Cultural Cognition Project, an interdisciplinary team of scholars who use empirical methods to examine the impact of group values on perceptions of risk and science communication.

Dietram A. Scheufele is the John E. Ross Professor in Science Communication and Vilas Distinguished Achievement Professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and in the Morgridge Institute for Research. His research deals with the interface of media, policy and public opinion.

Kathleen Hall Jamieson is the Elizabeth Ware Packard Professor of Communication at the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg School for Communication, the Walter and Leonore Director of the university’s Annenberg Public Policy Center, and the program director of the Annenberg Retreat at Sunnylands. She is the author or coauthor of fifteen books, five of which have received a total of eight political science or communication book awards.

• Published: 06 June 2017
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

The introductory chapter defines a science of science communication, examines efforts to advance scholarship in this area, provides an overview of the contents within the six parts of the handbook, and indicates ways in which communication about the Zika virus relates to each of those parts and to chapters within them.

Ironically, those communicating about science often rely on intuition rather than scientific inquiry not only to ascertain what effective messaging looks like but also to determine how to engage different audiences about emerging technologies and get science’s voice heard. For decades, one plausible explanation for this state of affairs was the relative absence of empirical work in science communication. This is no longer a problem. As the essays in this volume confirm, researchers in fields as diverse as political science, decision science, communication, and sociology have examined how science can best be communicated in different social settings and in the process have evaluated different approaches to cultivating societal engagement about emerging technologies. A central task of the work in this handbook is distilling what they know about the science of science communication and unpacking how they know it.

By the science of science communication, we mean an empirical approach to defining and understanding audiences, designing messages, mapping communication landscapes, and—most important—evaluating the effectiveness of communication efforts. The science of science communication, as a result, relies on evidence that is transparent and replicable, theory driven, and generalizable. In short, evidence is derived by the scientific method, drawing on theories and methods from disciplines including economics, sociology, psychology, education, and communications science. What makes science communication distinctive is the fact that science’s way of knowing places constraints on communication that are not present in the same way in other forms of communication—for instance, communication about politics. The distinctive nature of science communication is discussed in Chapter 1 .

The audience we envision for this book includes scholars and students interested in understanding the pitfalls and promise of a scientific approach to science communication as well as, but not primarily, those on the front lines tasked with communicating complex and sometimes controversial science to policymakers and the public on consequential topics ranging from nanotechnology and nuclear power to the need for vaccination.

The Science of Science Communication

In 2012, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine took a leadership role in connecting a community of social scientists who were conducting empirical research on different aspects of science communication. Two Sackler Colloquia and two special issues of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences devoted to the “Science of Science Communication” were the result (Fischhoff and Scheufele 2013 , 2014 ). Their intent was both to heighten awareness among bench scientists about empirically based approaches to better communicating science and to promote the exchange of ideas among social scientists working on problems related to science communication in various (sub)disciplines.

Built on the foundations laid by those Sackler Colloquia, this volume is predicated on three major assumption. First, science is not monolithic. Second, the aspects of science or its applications that are being communicated or debated are a function of the nature of the science itself, the types of applications made possible by science or their societal implications, and the social dynamics surrounding emerging science. Finally, communication is an inevitable part of the process of characterizing scientific findings, engagement among scientists about them, and the process of sharing them with policymakers and diverse publics.

This Handbook

The handbook parses its exploration of the science of science communication into 47 essays organized into a six-part structure:

An overview of the science of science communication

Identifying and overcoming challenges to science featured in attacks on science

Failures and successes in communicating science

The roles of elite intermediaries in communicating science

The role, power, and peril of media for the communication of science

Overcoming challenges in communicating science in a polarized environment

In the model implied by this framework, scientists and elite intermediaries such as scholarly associations and governmental agencies communicate scientific norms, methods, and findings directly on websites and in scholarly publications and indirectly through communication outlets while also having their messages prioritized and framed by news and entertainment media as well as by political leaders and partisans. Various publics process both these exchanges and elite and mediated messages through the wide range of human biases that either can aid them in making sense of what matters to them or distort messages and meanings. Throughout this process, the public can be actively engaged or bypassed with sometimes unforeseen results.

As we were preparing to turn these chapters over to our extraordinary Oxford editor, Joan Bossert, and her talented team, the summer 2016 escalation of the Zika threat in the United States and ongoing concerns about the risks it posed to Olympians at the Summer Games in Rio provided an opportunity for us to test the serviceability of our handbook’s six-part structure. At the same time, this situation invited us to ask whether material in the book can provide principles of use to respond to a health challenge (and a result of a science communication problem) not anticipated when the volume was commissioned. In short, can the science of science communication guide a response that increases the likelihood of policy guided by science, better behavioral outcomes, and an informed debate about the risks and benefits of different solutions without triggering a polarized denial of what science knows?

To address these questions, we inflected this forecast of the contents of this book with tales of a virus so stealthy that most of those infected have no idea that they are. Nonetheless, being infected with this mosquito-borne and also sexually transmitted virus is associated with an increased likelihood of Guillain-Barré—temporary paralysis—and with a heightened chance that a pregnant woman will deliver an infant with microcephaly—a smaller than usual head and defective brain. Frustratingly for health officials, there is not yet a vaccine for Zika on the market, although one is being tested, nor is there a treatment. Raising the stakes for communicators is the fact that more than 60% of the US population — about 200 million individuals — reside in areas susceptible to the spread of Zika from biting female Aedes mosquitoes. As we write this introduction, “The disease has ‘explosive’ pandemic potential, with outbreaks in Africa, Southeast Asia, the Pacific Islands, and the Americas” ( Lucey and Gostin 2016 , E1). So what help, if any, do the handbook’s six clusters of chapters offer the scholar trying to understand the communication dynamics at play in this complex messaging environment?

Overview of the Science of Science Communication

The “science communication environment” is the interaction of processes and cues that citizens, organizations, governments, and a host of other stakeholders use to identify valid science and align it with their value systems, understanding of the world, and ultimately decisions. A central theme implicit in all the chapters in the first section is the idea that the amount of science that one must accept as valid exceeds the amount that any individual could ever be expected to comprehend much less verify for him- or herself. To attain the benefit of the collective knowledge at their disposal, members of a modern democratic society must become experts not in any particular form (much less all forms) of decision-relevant science but rather at reliably discerning who knows what about what ( Kahan 2015 ; Keil 2010 ).

The first section of the book spells out the essential features of science communication as an emerging area of scientific inquiry. Central to this section is a synthesis by Heather Akin and Dietram A. Scheufele (Chapter 2 ) on what we know about the science of science communication. Various chapters help to fill in what empirical study has taught us. To focus attention on the sorts of cues science communicators are actually transmitting, William Hallman, for example, discusses how little the public actually knows about science and why that does not generally matter for its effective use of scientific knowledge (Chapter 5 ). In the case of Zika, one cannot assume that the public knows the difference between a viral and a bacterial infection or is aware that it is the female mosquito that bites. But one can assume that the public is likely to trust recommendations offered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

This fact is particularly important when the communication climate is filled with issues in the process of being sorted out. “We don’t really know where these mosquitos are in the US,” CDC Director Tom Frieden stated in his early March 2016 appeal for Congress to appropriate the emergency funds requested by the Obama administration for Zika research. “The maps that are on our website are very clearly tagged with the comment that they are both incomplete and out of date” ( Branswell 2016a ). “We don’t have anything we can use today to screen the blood supply for Zika,” reported Brian Custer, associate director of Blood Systems Research Institute ( Seipel 2016 ). “As the weeks and months go by, we learn more and more about how much we don’t know, and the more we learn the worse things seem to get,” head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious diseases Dr. Anthony Fauci told reporters on March 10, 2016 ( Sun 2016 ). Yet within weeks both concerns had been addressed. By late March the CDC had placed update maps on its site. And by March 30, 2016, the Food and Drug Administration announced that it had okayed an experimental test to screen blood donations for the virus and the CDC had posted prevention guidelines and an action plan for vulnerable cities.

Mike S. Schäfer adds depth to this perspective by discussing how media structures affect science news coverage (Chapter 4 ). Some of these constructions of the voice of science come with necessary debates and sometimes even controversy about ethical or political questions raised by emerging science. Persistent states of public controversy over established, decision-relevant science, however, can damage the science communication environment. Protecting it from such damage is one of the aims of the science of science communication.

This is the central message of the chapter by Dan Kahan and Asheley Landrum (Chapter 17 ) on vaccines, where systematic neglect of the science communication environment led to the controversy over the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine in the United States and is today exposing universal childhood immunizations to similar controversy. Bruce Lewenstein reinforces this message by putting scientific controversies in an historical context (Chapter 6 ).

How to protect the science communication environment is the focus of the opening chapter (“The Need for a Science of Science Communication: Communicating Science’s Values and Norms”). In it, Kathleen Hall Jamieson argues that “the communicating scientist needs to focus on definitions and linguistic choices because failing to do so mucks up the science … [and] confuses policy debates” (Chapter 1 ). One of the central contentions of this essay is one threaded throughout the handbook— naming and framing matter—a point that the Zika science communication readily illustrates. Was Zika an “epidemic” or an “emerging health threat”? It was an “epidemic” according to the Rapid Response Assessment of the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control in December 2015 (“Rapid Risk Assessment” 2016) but “an emerging health threat” according to the blog of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) director Dr. Francis Collins (2016) .

These characterizations will predictably have an impact on public comprehension of Zika. The effect, of course, is unlikely to reflect how ordinary members reacted to these particular communications; little of what ordinary citizens know about science is a consequence of what they have heard a scientist or an institutionally based science communicator say. But the information that ultimately does reach citizens starts with statements that these actors make. How scientists and those speaking in their name express themselves can affect the career of information as it makes its way through the complex of intermediaries and institutions and processes that the science communication environment comprises. Given how valuable what scientists have to tell citizens is, failing to use the science of science communication to increase the chances that they express it in the terms most conductive to its uneventful passage through these pathways is problematic.

Each step of this process could draw insight from the understanding advanced by Akin and Scheufele’s synthesis (Chapter 2 ) of what we know about the science of science communication, Hallman’s assessment of what the public knows about science and why it matters (Chapter 5 ), Dan Kahan’s report on ordinary science knowledge and why communicating science in a polarized environment poses special challenges (Chapter 3 ), Schäfer’s precis of how media structures affect science news coverage (Chapter 4 ), and Lewenstein’s reprise of the lessons to be learned from scientific controversies in an historical context (Chapter 6 ).

Identifying and Overcoming Challenges Featured in Attacks on Science

The overall credibility of science and scientists is higher than that of many communities ( Scheufele 2013 ), with only military leaders eliciting greater public confidence than the scientific community in 2014 ( General Social Survey 2012). Nevertheless, popular understanding of how scientists generate knowledge is freighted with misleading simplifications. The gap between how people think science works and how it actually does can itself generate confusion that undermines public confidence.

Climate science communication furnishes a case in point. The popular conception of the “scientific method” envisions scientists “proving” or “disproving” asserted “facts” through conclusive experiments. The contribution that climate science makes to policymaking, however, consists less of experimentally corroborating basic climate mechanisms, most of which are well-known, than it does of establishing how they interact with one another. To generate such understanding, climate scientists use dynamic models, which are iteratively refined and adjusted to take account of new data. Discrepancies between model forecasts and subsequently observed data are expected—indeed, they are the source of progressive improvements in understanding. By design, dynamic modeling enlarges knowledge through its failed predictions as much as through its successful ones ( Silver 2012 ).

Not only did science communicators fail to make this element of climate science clear to the public, but over the past decade, many of them adopted communication “strategies” that elided it. To promote the urgency of action, they depicted the projections of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports—particularly those of the Fourth Assessment—as extrapolations from settled and incontrovertible scientific findings. But because this framing was selected to accommodate the popular understanding that science warrants confidence based on experimentally “proven” facts, it made climate science more vulnerable to attack by those intent on undermining public confidence in it when, as was anticipated by scientists themselves, actual data diverged from the climate-science model forecasts.

The 2001–2014 slowing in the acceleration of global temperature increase—a development not forecast by the IPCC Fourth Assessment model—had this effect. Predictably, climate scientists themselves were untroubled by this finding, viewing it as a development to be used to improve their models (Tollefson 2014). Partisans opposed to specific forms of climate change mitigation or prevention, however, highlighted this “failed prediction” as evidence of the invalidity of basic climate science.

The public’s comprehension of the threat posed by Zika could be undermined by this same misunderstanding. Like climate scientists, epidemiologists use iterative, dynamic modeling when forecasting the likely transmission of infectious diseases. The first generation of such models has now been developed for Zika ( Monaghan et al. 2016 ). Actual transmission patterns will—inevitably and instructively— vary from the predictions of these models too.

Will this discrepancy, highlighted by conflict entrepreneurs with a stake in casting doubt on the Zika science, undermine public confidence? It is the job of science communicators to try to forestall this result and avoid engaging in behavior that makes it more likely. The material in the second section of the book is designed to promote these objectives, in the case of the Zika science communication challenge and future ones as well. If the recommendations found in these essays are adopted, the public will be more likely to greet new findings — for example, about the Zika-microcephaly and Guillain-Barré links — aware that science is iterative and self-correcting and not perceive it through a prism that has exaggerated the originality and significance of individual studies (Peter Weingart, Chapter 11 ), prevalence and significance of failures to replicate key findings (Joseph Hilgard and Jamieson, Chapter 8 ), bias in the publication process (Andrew Brown, Tapan Mehta, and David Allison, Chapter 9 ), salient retractions of seemingly consequential work (Adam Marcus and Ivan Oransky, Chapter 12 ), and exposés of statistical chicanery (John Ioannidis, Chapter 10 ).

Failures and Successes

The science communication difficulties posed by Zika are not singular. Instead, they are instances of a class of such challenges, all of which feature conditions with the potential to disrupt one or another element of the science communication environment—the sum total of institutions, process, and cues that normally enable members of the public to align their decisions with what is known by science.

The failure of valid, compelling, and widely accessible scientific evidence to minimize public controversy over risks and evidence is a consequence of such disruption. Yet only a subset of the class of risk issues that could experience this problem ever does. Indeed, as Kahan and Landrum argue (Chapter 17 ), the number of societal risks that could plausibly experience what they call the “science communication problem” but do not is orders of magnitude larger than the number that do. There is no meaningful degree of public controversy over the impact of routine medical x-rays, exposure to the magnetic fields of high-voltage power lines, or the consumption of fluoridated water. But if there were, that would not seem any weirder than controversy over the dangers of geologic isolation of nuclear wastes, the carcinogenic effects of various pesticides or food additives, or the medicinal benefits of marijuana. As Kahan and Landrum indicate, the US public is (or at least was) highly polarized on the risks and benefits of immunizing adolescents against HPV, a sexually transmitted pathogen that causes cervical cancer, but it was not—at the very same time that a debate was raging over proposals for making the HPV vaccine mandatory as a condition of middle school enrollment—on universally immunizing adolescents against hepatitis B, another sexually transmitted disease that causes cancer (the shot is now administered to infants). The general public in Europe is culturally polarized over genetically modified (GM) foods; it is less so in the United States (see Hallman, Chapter 5 ).

As they craft the communication strategies that will determine how and to what ends science communicators will address various publics about Zika, those messengers have available cross-national lessons of the recent and distant past. In the section of the book telescoping failures and successes, our authors capsulize what we can learn from consequential successes and mistakes in communicating about food safety before and during the “mad cow” crisis (Matteo Ferrari, Chapter 14 ), HPV and hepatitis B vaccination (Kahan and Landrum, Chapter 17 ), the risks of nanotechnologies (Nick Pidgeon, Barbara Herr Harthorn, Terre Satterfield, and Christina Demski, Chapter 15 ), biotechnologies and genetically modified organisms (GMOs; Heinz Bonfadelli, Chapter 16 ).

Elite Intermediaries as Communicators of Science

As we noted earlier, the public is likely to learn less about Zika from the words spoken by scientists than it will from information transmitted to it via a host of intermediaries. Some of these will be institutions—such as government agencies and professional science communicators—specifically charged with communicating scientific information. What should those tasked with speaking for scientists do to protect the Zika science communication environment from consequential misinformation? What should they be doing to avoid past mistakes?

Of course, most members of the public will not learn what science knows about Zika from directly hearing what any of these institutions say either. They will garner it instead from other ordinary members of the public or from their family physician (Kahan, Chapter 3 ). Those interactions, the science of science communication tells us, are consequential elements in the science communication environment. In the case of Zika, for example, scientists might conclude that the most effective protective measures include the release of transgenic mosquitos or the administration of a Zika vaccine to some parts of the general population or all of it. How might the public react to these proposals? There is ample experimental evidence suggesting that the impact of what scientists or science communicators say to the public at that point will not matter as much as interactions among members of the public who share their basic outlooks and commitments, which may have already disposed them to reject what those authorities are saying ( Nyhan et al. 2014 ; Gollust 2010; Kahan et al. 2010 ). Similarly, the likelihood of agreeing to be vaccinated against Zika, once a vaccine exists, will probably be determined by the behavior and messaging of a family physician ( Smith et al. 2006 ). Accordingly, if they want to be guided by the best evidence on science communication, institutions charged with communicating science should not limit themselves simply to speaking to the public. They should play an active role in structuring how members of the public communicate among themselves.

However, interpersonal channels of communication within like-minded communities can fuel the spread of viral misinformation and conspiracy theories. In the absence of conclusive evidence that Zika was responsible for the rise in cases of microcephaly in Brazil and elsewhere, such theories predictably festered. Those suspicious of GMOs harnessed that fear to early uncertainty about cause of the outbreak of microcephaly in Brazil to seed a viral rumor blaming the outbreak there on the transgenic mosquito bred to minimize the transmission of malaria, dengue, and now Zika by ensuring that its offspring did not reproduce. Although that cause was discredited by the fact that the outbreak and site of the experimental release were in different locales, and no Zika associated with other genetically engineered mosquito test sites, when a national random sample of the US population was asked in July 2016 whether GM mosquitoes caused the spread of the Zika virus, 20% reported that they did. And, due to shards of Internet misinformation, in May 2016 the same Annenberg Science Knowledge Survey (ASK) found that 32% accepted the notion that the real cause of the Zika outbreak was prior inoculations.

Those making decisions about how to talk to the public about Zika are among the players treated in the handbook’s fourth section on the role of elite intermediaries in communicating and implementing science. In this part of the book we include chapters on scholarly presses (Barbara Kline Pope and Elizabeth Marincola, Chapter 20 ), governmental agencies (Jeffery Morris, Chapter 21 ), museums (Victoria Cain and Karen Rader, Chapter 22 ), foundations (Elizabeth Good Christopherson, Chapter 23 ), and scholarly associations (Tiffany Lohwater and Martin Storksdieck, Chapter 19 ). Essays in this section also construct an understanding of science and the assessment of responses to evidence it offers.

Citizen engagement will play a key role in determining whether possible experimental release of transgenic mosquitoes occurs in Florida and whether the eventual development and approval of a Zika vaccine will be met with widespread adoption or with controversy and rejection. Can insights generated by the science of science communication guide those involved in the process of increasing public understanding of the science involved in each and also ensure that that science plays a role in public and policymakers’ deliberations about such issues regarding whether the transgenic mosquito should be released, and if so where and how, and whether vaccination should be required of school-aged children? The closing essays in this section offer clues from past efforts to communicate science through public deliberation (see John Gastil’s Chapter 25 “Designing Public Deliberation at the Intersection of Science and Public Policy”) and social networks (see Brian Southwell’s Chapter 24 “Promoting Popular Understanding of Science and Health through Social Networks”) while also capturing what we know about the translation of science into policy (Jason Gallo, Chapter 26 ).

The Media Landscape

The media are another critical intermediary institution. Their role, moreover, is likely to be decisive not only in conveying accurate information but in countering inaccurate claims injected into the pathways of the science communication environment by those intent on misleading the public on Zika.

Adding complexity to these questions, the media landscape for science is undergoing a dramatic transformation as a result of new information technologies. A person seeking Zika information is less likely to look for it in the newspaper than on the Internet. One result is wider access to direct forms of communication from scientists unmediated by traditional media gatekeepers. On the Web today one can, for example, find an American Public Health Association webinar titled “ The Zika Crisis: Latest Findings” (2016) featuring NIH director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease Anthony Fauci, as well as the NIH director’s blog with a detailed posting on “Zika Virus: An Emerging Health Threat” ( Collins 2016 ) and the CDC Zika data on Github as well as the World Health Organization app that “gathers all of WHO’s guidance for agencies and individuals involved in the response to Zika Virus.” (“WHO Launches the Zika APP” 2016).

The Web also provides venues for scholar-to-scholar communication in forms including Web-based specialty publications such as Medical News Today (MNT) that detail the questions for which scientists are seeking answers, including “Why are the symptoms in adults so mild? How is the virus entering the nervous system of the developing fetus? How is the virus crossing the blood-brain barrier once it enters the blood? [And] Could Zika infect the small population of neural stem cells that, in adults, reside above the brain stem in the hippocampus?” ( Brazier 2016 ). Those interested in eavesdropping on science in action can do so by reading MNT, where one will find conclusions such as “While not proving a direct link between Zika and microcephaly, the present study does pinpoint where the virus may be causing the most damage” ( Brazier 2016 ). Unanswered questions are featured as well. The NIH director’s blog notes that scientists are trying to discover how readily Asian tiger mosquitoes, “which can tolerate relatively cold temperatures, spread Zika virus” ( Collins 2016 ). For the lay person who wants an efficient way to track ongoing news coverage, STAT, a Web news outlet directed by former New York Times political editor Rick Berke, posts regular updates under the banner “Zika in 30 Seconds” (2016) that include state-of-the-art videos answering commonly asked questions about Zika and efforts to combat it.

Although we address the topic throughout the handbook, the ways in which science information is conveyed through the media is the special focus of Section 5. The research unpacked here includes a cross-national analysis on: “The (Changing) Nature of Scientist–Media Interactions” (Sara Yeo and Dominique Brossard, Chapter 28 ), “New Models of Knowledge-Based Journalism” (Matthew Nisbet and Declan Fahy, Chapter 29 ), “Citizens Making Sense of Science Issues: Supply and Demand Factors for Science News and Information in the Digital Age” (Michael Xenos, Chapter 30 ), “The Changing Popular Images of Science” (David Kirby, Chapter 31 ), “What Do We Know About the Entertainment Industry’s Portrayal of Science” (James Shanahan, Chapter 32 ), “How Narrative Functions in Entertainment to Communicate Science” (Martin Kaplan and Michael Dahlstrom, Chapter 33 ), and “Assumptions about Science in Satirical News and Late Night Comedy” (Lauren Feldman, Chapter 34 ).

Challenges in Communicating Science in a Polarized Environment: Overcoming Biased Processing in an Era of Polarized Politics

People are imperfect information processors. Decision science has documented cognitive biases that interfere with individuals’ appropriate evaluation of evidence on risk ( Slovic 2000 ). Understanding the nature of these biases and how they can be counteracted are major objectives of the science of science communication.

Such biases pose an obvious impediment to the effective communication of information on a public health risk such as Zika. So, for example, the affect heuristic and cultural cognition can combine to reproduce about Zika the same reason-threatening states of political polarization that deformed public understanding of science on nuclear power and that impede effective engagement with climate change science. Hence, a number of chapters ask: How can democratic societies use the science of science communication to forestall this possibility?

Complicating matters further, political battles over reallocation of funding to communicate about Zika, prepare for a potential outbreak, and search for treatment and vaccines forced scientists and leaders of agencies to make predictions about areas of greatest need in a still fluid scientific environment. This process happened in a presidential campaign year with key members of the House and Senate facing reelection as they battled over approval of a White House funding request in February to authorize $1.9 billion for the Zika fight. When this debate polarized over funding of Planned Parenthood and a proposed Republican regulatory roll-back of Environmental Protection Agency pesticide regulation, as of August 2016, no additional congressional funds had been authorized.

Because concerns about Zika can foreseeably be harnessed to those about immigration, vaccination, GMOs, abortion, evolution, and climate change ( Kahan et al. 2017 )—contentious issues in which ideological partisans have hardened into evidence-resistant positions—the risk that polarized politics would corrupt policy decision-making and thwart the efforts of the CDC, NIH, and the World Health Organization was real. Actions by some worked to sidetrack that impulse. Although in 1968 the papal encyclical Humanae Vitae had prohibited use of contraception, in 2016 Pope Francis invoked an exception made in the 1960s in the case of nuns in danger of rape and declared that pregnant women in Zika-infected areas could in good conscience use contraception to prevent contracting the virus.

On the horizon were three other polarizing issues. The arrival of evidence that the Aedes mosquito was developing resistance to permethrin—the pesticide the CDC website urges people to apply to their clothing to repel mosquitoes—put evolution at play ( Branswell 2016b ). Since the transgenic mosquito provided a possible way to diminish the Aedes population, the GMO debate was at the fore as well. Global warming entered the conversation as news accounts noted that, over time, warmer temperatures could accelerate the spread of the Zika-carrying mosquito north.

Dan Kahan’s essay (Chapter 44 ) on communicating science in a “polluted science communication environment” addresses issues such as these. The antagonistic social meanings that transform positions on risks and facts into badges of membership in and loyalty to cultural groups are a form of science communication pollution because they disable the faculties that enable diverse groups to converge on the best available evidence.

Cultural cognition (in this pathological form at least) is only one of the recurring forms of defective information processing that threatens to distort assessments of risks on Zika ( Kahan et al. 2017 ). Others—and what can be done to combat them—figure in the handbook’s final section. Kate Kenski’s (Chapter 39 ) “Overcoming Confirmation and Blind Spot Bias When Communicating Science” and Natalie Jomini Stroud’s (Chapter 40 ) “Overcoming Selective Exposure and Judgment When Communicating Science” summarize what scholars know about addressing natural human inclinations to distort information to conform to predispositions. Nan Li, Stroud, and Jamieson (Chapter 45 ) outline communication strategies available in such settings in “Overcoming False Causal Attribution: Debunking the MMR–Autism Association.” Man–pui Sally Chan, Christopher Jones, and Dolores Albarracin (Chapter 36 ) address “Countering False Beliefs: An Analysis of the Evidence and Recommendations of Best Practices for the Retraction and Correction of Scientific Misinformation.” Michael Siegrist and Christina Hartmann (Chapter 46 ) speak to ways to communicate about them in “Overcoming the Challenges of Communicating Uncertainty across National Contexts.” Jon Baron (Chapter 38 ) identifies how more general philosophical orientations can complicate effective science communication, and how that distinctive challenge might be met.

These chapters provide principles useful in dispatching the conspiracy theories generated by an increasing anxiety about Zika. So, for example, the escalating number of births of Zika-infected Brazilian infants with neurological problems fueled a viral rumor blaming the outbreak there on the transgenic mosquito bred to minimize the transmission of malaria, dengue, and now Zika by ensuring that its offspring did not reproduce. As discussed, the Annenberg Public Policy Center’s ASK national tracking poll results showed that these rumors were embraced by at least some portions of the public. The acceptance of them persisted even after scientists confirmed that Zika caused microcephaly and refuted any suggestion that the new strain originated in GM mosquitos. The essays in this section provide answers to questions such as: How should the media respond to these forms of misinformation? How can they resist being made the conduit of science communication environment pollution? What role can they play in insulating that environment from contamination emanating elsewhere?

At the same time, this sixth section of the book identifies ways to effectively frame scientific content (James Druckman and Arthur Lupia, Chapter 37 ), ways to overcome public innumeracy (Ellen Peters, Chapter 41 ), fear of the supposedly “unnatural” (Robert Lull and Dietram A. Scheufele, Chapter 43 ), end point bias (Bruce Hardy and Jamieson, Chapter 42 ), and undesirable forms of normalization (Kahan, Chapter 44 ).

Why “Just” the Science of Science Communication?

As this overview suggests, science communication is an interest shared by scientists, policymakers, journalists, audiences, and many communities of practitioners in media, museums, virtual spaces, and elsewhere. So why limit our focus here to the scientific foundations of how to best communicate about science? A first part of the answer is that thought-provoking and useful books already have been written by science communication practitioners ( Baron 2010 ), science journalists ( Blum et al. 2006 ), and bench scientists ( Olson 2010 ) on best practices, pitfalls, and the day-to-day practice of effectively communicating. Some of this work draws on empirical social science research and other on the experiences from the field. Some of these efforts complement those in this volume; others are modified or challenged by work based in the science of science communication.

A second part of the answer, however, is built on the premise that this book is the first in a series of volumes to be superintended by the Annenberg Public Policy Center’s program on the Science of Science Communication. A subsequent volume will synthesize and draw on applied work now in progress to derive primary, research-based lessons for the practice of science communication.

By contrast, here we address questions such as: Are some communication principles applicable across issues? And how can we harness existing research capacity in the science of science communication to guide efforts to better communicate emerging technologies? Toward these ends, each of the sections of this handbook is followed by a synthesis chapter that highlights the themes cutting across the chapters in the section and offers lessons for science communication more broadly. These section-ending essays also identify missing pieces of research and important unanswered questions. We hope that these ideas and agendas will help guide the next stages of the science of science communication in four domains shaping the language of science, communicating science, communicating about science, and communicating science in a polarized environment on contentious issues.

Shaping the Language of Science

The language in which scientists discuss their work is freighted with assumptions and associations. So, for instance, mental associations are triggered by terms such as “herd immunity” or “embryonic stem cell research” (see Jamieson, Chapter 1 ). Research on how different descriptions of technologies shape initial public reactions ( Anderson et al., 2013 ) shows that how we talk about emerging science and the tools matters. Aware of that fact, grant proposers describe their research as “transformative” rather than “incremental.” Findings are described as “novel” or “groundbreaking” in journal submissions. Subtle cultural nuances in how new technologies are framed can not only affect how different public and policy audiences approach them downstream but may also block or facilitate technology transfer, build unjustified hype about them, or unnecessarily narrow or expand public debate. One key question facing those studying the science of science communication is: What can we know empirically about the impact of the full range of scientists’ linguistic choices and potential alternatives on public debate?

The Communication of Science

A second domain in which science communication is central comes into play when information is transferred from the scientific community to nonexpert audiences. One form this takes is the communication of “settled” science or scientific consensus on issues, such as climate change or the safety of GMOs for human consumption. But it extends as well to communication designed to align citizen behaviors with the best available science, as is the case with messaging designed to increase or in some cases sustain high rates of vaccination against communicable diseases such as whooping cough and measles. Much of the research on how to best communicate science to particular audiences is based on experimental designs. This maximizes our ability to make causal claims. The heavy reliance on experimental work, however, also limits our ability to make clear predictions about how scalable some of the mechanisms are to larger societal settings characterized by competing information environments, influences of social groups, and other influences that are held constant in the lab. Science communication researchers will also have to collect more systematic data about how some of the processes established in the lab hold or decay over time with or without repeated exposure to the same messages.

Communication about Science

A third domain of science communication involves deliberation about the boundaries within which science should work. This discussion pivots on ethical, political, or regulatory issues that fall into the domain of philosophy, not science. The notion that the public has a role in addressing the ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of evolving technologies emerged as part of the Human Genome Initiative in 1990 ( Watson 1990 ) and is now cast by the Obama administration as responsible development:

To the extent feasible … relevant information should be developed with ample opportunities for stakeholder involvement and public participation. Public participation is important for promoting accountability, for improving decisions, for increasing trust, and for ensuring that officials have access to widely dispersed information. ( Holdren et al. 2011 , 2)

A growing body of empirical work asks how to best structure efforts to involve public stakeholders in some of these broader debates about ELSI issues. Many of these efforts rely on consensus conferences or other forms of public meetings ( Scheufele 2011 ) and often struggle with an inability to capture opinions from an exhaustive and representative set of relevant stakeholders ( Binder et al. 2012 ; Merkle 1996 ). The challenge for the field of science of science communication will be providing data-driven guidance on how to translate some of the mandates on responsible innovation into effective day-to-day science communication practice.

Communicating Science in Polarized Policy Debates

A fourth domain in which communication is implicated occurs when scientific findings are at issue in partisan regulatory and policy debates (Jasanoff 2007; Pielke 2007 ) One issue here is when, if at all, and, if so, how, is it appropriate for the climate scientist, for example, to engage in policy discussions. Some argue that scientists should serve as honest brokers of information and translate those data into policy. Others contend that the scientist’s role should be limited to ensuring that what science knows is clearly and accurately presented and then step back while leaving policy concerns to others.

These different domains of science communication are neither exhaustive nor mutually exclusive. In fact, they are closely interrelated. The case that we threaded through this introduction—the recent cross-continent spread of the Zika virus with its related health risks of microcephaly and Guillain-Barré—illustrates some of these interconnected dynamics.

In a 2006 editorial, Ralph Cicerone, then president of the National Academy of Sciences, identified many of the problems facing the science–public interface. Disappearing news holes for science and the thinning ranks of science journalists led him to attribute some responsibility for bridging science–public divides to scientists themselves who — he argued — “must do a better job of communicating directly to the public.” As we noted at the beginning of this introduction, we as social scientists have exacerbated the problem by not being as proactive as we might have been in conducting research that offers policy-relevant insights and have also failed to seek audiences outside our disciplines. To address these lapses, this handbook digests the social science of science communication in areas relevant to closing science–public divides, assesses its strengths and limitations, and identifies areas in which additional research is needed.

Anderson, Ashley A. , Jiyoun Kim , Dietram A. Scheufele , Dominique Brossard , and Michael A. Xenos . ( 2013 ). What’s in a name? How we define nanotech shapes public reactions.   Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 15(2), 1–5. doi:10.1007/s11051-013-1421-z 10.1007/s11051-013-1421-z

Google Scholar

Baron, Nancy. ( 2010 ). Escape from the Ivory Tower: a guide to making your science matter . Washington, DC: Island Press.

Google Preview

Binder, A. R. , D. A. Scheufele , and Dominique Brossard . ( 2012 ). Misguided science policy? The pitfalls of using public meetings as surrogate gauges of public opinion.   The Scientist, April 10, 2012.

Blum, Deborah , Mary Knudson , and Robin Marantz Henig . ( 2006 ). A field guide for science writers . New York: Oxford University Press.

Branswell, Helen. (2016a). Congress is blocking key efforts to fight Zika, top health officials say. STAT, March 10. http://www.statnews.com/2016/03/10/zika-emergency-funding-anxiety/

Branswell, Helen. (2016b). Zika-carrying mosquitoes developing resistance to top insecticide. STAT, March 10. http://www.statnews.com/2016/03/10/puerto-rico-mosquitoes-insecticide/

Brazier, Yvette. (2016). Could Zika’s link to microcephaly be in the neural stem cells? Medical News Today , March 4. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/307279.php

Collins, Francis. (2016). Zika virus: An emerging health threat. National Institutes of Health: NIH Director’s Blog, January 26. http://directorsblog.nih.gov/2016/01/26/zika-virus-an-emerging-health-threat/

Fischhoff, Baruch , and Dietram A. Scheufele . ( 2013 ). The science of science communication.   Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(Suppl. 3), 14031–14032. doi:10.1073/pnas.1312080110 10.1073/pnas.1312080110

Fischhoff, Baruch , and Dietram A. Scheufele . ( 2014 ). The science of science communication II.   Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(Suppl. 4), 13583–13584. doi:10.1073/pnas.1414635111 10.1073/pnas.1414635111

General Social Survey 2012 final report: Trends in public attitudes about confidence in institutions . ( 2012 ). Chicago: National Opinion Research Center, University of Chicago.

Gollust, S. E. , A. F. Dempsey , P. M. Lantz , P. A. Ubel , and E. F. Fowler . ( 2010 ). Controversy undermines support for state mandates on the human papillomavirus vaccine.   Health Affairs, 29(11), 2041–2046.

Holdren, John P. , Cass R. Sunstein , and Islam A. Siddiqui . ( 2011 ). Memorandum: Principles for regulation and oversight of emerging technologies. Washington, DC: Office of Science and Technology Policy.

Jasanoff, Sheila. ( 1990 ). The fifth branch: science advisers as policymakers . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kahan, Dan , Donald Braman , Geoffrey Cohen , John Gastil , and Paul Slovic . ( 2010 ). Who fears the HPV vaccine, who doesn’t, and why? An experimental study of the mechanisms of cultural cognition.   Law and Human Behavior, 34(6), 501–516.

Kahan, D. M. ( 2015 ). What is the “science of science communication”?   Journal of Science Communication , 14(3), 1–12.

Kahan, D. M. , K. H. Jamieson , A. Landrum & K. Winneg . ( 2017 ). Culturally antagonistic memes and the Zika virus: an experimental test.   Journal of Risk Research , 20, 1–40.

Keil, Frank. ( 2010 ). The feasibility of folk science.   Cognitive Science, 34(5), 826–862.

Lucey, D. R. , & L. O. Gostin . ( 2016 ). The emerging Zika pandemic: Enhancing preparedness.   JAMA, 315(9), 865–866.

Merkle, D. M. ( 1996 ). The polls—Review—The National Issues Convention Deliberative Poll.   Public Opinion Quarterly, 60(4), 588–619.

Monaghan, Andrew , Cory W. Morin , Daniel F. Steinhoff , Olga Wilhelmi , Mary Hayden , Dale A. Quattrochi , et al. ( 2016 ). On the seasonal occurrence and abundance of the Zika virus vector mosquito Aedes aegypti in the contiguous United States.   PLOS Currents Outbreaks, Edition 1, March 16. doi:10.1371/currents.outbreaks.50dfc7f46798675fc63e7d7da563da76 10.1371/currents.outbreaks.50dfc7f46798675fc63e7d7da563da76

Nyhan, Brendan , Jason Reifler , Sean Richey , and Gary L Freed . ( 2014 ). Effective messages in vaccine promotion: A randomized trial.   Pediatrics, 133(4), e835–e42.

Olson, Randy. ( 2010 ). Don’t be such a scientist: Talking substance in an age of style . Washington, DC: Island Press.

Pielke, Roger A. Jr. ( 2007 ). The honest broker: Making sense of science in policy and politics . New York: Cambridge University Press.

Rapid risk assessment: Zika virus epidemic in the Americas: potential association with microcephaly and Guillain-Barré syndrome. ( 2015 ). European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, December.

Scheufele, D. A. (2011). Modern citizenship or policy dead end? Evaluating the need for public participation in science policy making, and why public meetings may not be the answer. Paper #R-34, Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy Research Paper Series, Cambridge, MA.

Scheufele, Dietram. A. , (2013). Communicating science in social settings.   Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(Suppl. 3), 14040–14047.

Seipel, Tracy. (2016). Early FDA approval sought for Zika virus blood tests. San Jose Mercury News , March 7. http://www.mercurynews.com/health/ci_29603313/early-fda-approval-sought-zika-virus-blood-tests

Silver, Nate. ( 2012 ). The signal and the noise: Why so many predictions fail—but some don’t . New York: Penguin Press.

Slovic, Paul. ( 2000 ). The perception of risk . Risk, Society, and Policy Series. London; Sterling, VA: Earthscan.

Smith, Philip J. , Allison M. Kennedy , Karen Wooten , Deborah A. Gust , and Larry K. Pickering . ( 2006 ). Association between health care providers’ influence on parents who have concerns about vaccine safety and vaccination coverage.   Pediatrics, 118(5), e1287–e1292.

Sun, Lena H. (2016). Zika outbreak: “The more we learn, the worse things seem to get.” The Washington Post , March 10. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2016/03/10/zika-outbreak-the-more-we-learn-the-worse-things-seem-to-get/

The Zika crisis: latest findings. (2016). American Public Health Association, March 4. https://www.apha.org/events-and-meetings/apha-calendar/webinar-events/2016/the-zika-crisis

Tollefson, Jeff.   Climate change: the case of the missing heat.   Nature, 505(7483), 276.

Watson, J. D. ( 1990 ). The human genome project: Past, present, and future.   Science, 248(4951), 44–49. doi:10.1126/science.2181665. 10.1126/science.2181665

WHO launches the Zika APP for health care providers. (n.d.). World Health Organization. http://eepurl.com/bTkihL

Zika in 30 seconds: what you need to know today. (2016). STAT, December 9. http://www.statnews.com/series/zika-update/

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Biological Sciences: Science Communication

• Literature & News Sources
• Data & Code Support
• Bioinformatics Resources
• Open Science at CMU
• Open Access at CMU
• Science Communication
• Career Development Resources

Writing Help

Here is a list of resources for learning about how to write well. Writing about biology research requires special considerations in terms of style, clarity, and content, so some of these resources specifically cover science writing. This list will be updated as resources are created and discovered.

The Elements of Style

T he Elements of Style is the definitive text and classic manual on the principles of English language read by millions of readers. The 18 main topics are organized under the headings, “Elementary Rules of Usage,” “Elementary Principles of Composition,” “A Few Matters of Form,” “Words and Expressions Commonly Misused,” and “Words Often Misspelled.” Written in an engaging and witty style, the book emphasizes  simplicity, orderliness, and sincerity in writing.

Science Communication Workshops

Mellon College of Science has excellent resources for learning about science communication.  Download slides, schedule a meeting, and view upcoming events at the Science Communication Workshop Website . 

Short Guide to Writing About Biology

This best-selling writing guide by a prominent biologist teaches students to think as biologists and to express ideas clearly and concisely through their writing.

Providing students with the tools they'll need to be successful writers in college and their profession,  A Short Guide to Writing about Biology  emphasizes writing as a means to  examine, evaluate, share, and refine ideas. The text teaches students how to read critically, study, evaluate and report data, and how to communicate information clearly and logically.

Students are also given detailed advice on locating useful sources, interpreting the results of statistical tests, maintaining effective laboratory and field notebooks, writing effective research proposals and poster presentations, writing effective applications, and communicating information to both professional and general audiences.

Writing in the Sciences

This free online course developed at Stanford,  Writing in the Sciences , teaches scientists to become more effective writers, using practical examples and exercises. Topics include: principles of good writing, tricks for writing faster and with less anxiety, the format of a scientific manuscript, and issues in publication and peer review. Students from non-science disciplines can benefit from the training provided in the first four weeks (on general principles of effective writing).

Student Academic Success Center

The  Student Academic Success Center   at CMU provides resources for supporting students' efforts to improve written, oral, and visual communication skills.  The GCC supports any student, at any level, in any discipline, at any stage of the composing process.  The GCC offers free one-on-one tutoring for academic communication projects on the first floor of the Hunt Library.

Biological Sciences, Biomedical Engineering, and Neuroscience Librarian

• << Previous: Open Access at CMU
• Next: Career Development Resources >>
• Last Updated: Apr 19, 2024 1:09 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.cmu.edu/biologicalsciences

• Open access
• Published: 23 July 2021

Establishing a baseline of science communication skills in an undergraduate environmental science course

• Rashmi Shivni 1 ,
• Christina Cline 1 ,
• Morgan Newport 2 ,
• Shupei Yuan 3 &
• Heather E. Bergan-Roller   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4580-7775 1  

International Journal of STEM Education volume  8 , Article number:  47 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

13k Accesses

13 Citations

17 Altmetric

Metrics details

Seminal reports, based on recommendations by educators, scientists, and in collaboration with students, have called for undergraduate curricula to engage students in some of the same practices as scientists—one of which is communicating science with a general, non-scientific audience (SciComm). Unfortunately, very little research has focused on helping students develop these skills. An important early step in creating effective and efficient curricula is understanding what baseline skills students have prior to instruction. Here, we used the Essential Elements for Effective Science Communication (EEES) framework to survey the SciComm skills of students in an environmental science course in which they had little SciComm training.

Our analyses revealed that, despite not being given the framework, students included several of the 13 elements, especially those which were explicitly asked for in the assignment instructions. Students commonly targeted broad audiences composed of interested adults, aimed to increase the knowledge and awareness of their audience, and planned and executed remote projects using print on social media. Additionally, students demonstrated flexibility in their skills by slightly differing their choices depending on the context of the assignment, such as creating more engaging content than they had planned for.

Conclusions

The students exhibited several key baseline skills, even though they had minimal training on the best practices of SciComm; however, more support is required to help students become better communicators, and more work in different contexts may be beneficial to acquire additional perspectives on SciComm skills among a variety of science students. The few elements that were not well highlighted in the students’ projects may not have been as intuitive to novice communicators. Thus, we provide recommendations for how educators can help their undergraduate science students develop valuable, prescribed SciComm skills. Some of these recommendations include helping students determine the right audience for their communication project, providing opportunities for students to try multiple media types, determining the type of language that is appropriate for the audience, and encouraging students to aim for a mix of communication objectives. With this guidance, educators can better prepare their students to become a more open and communicative generation of scientists and citizens.

Introduction

Scientists engage in a number of practices in their pursuit of understanding. Having students participate in these same practices—and as early as possible—is vital in fostering future generations of scientists and developing a scientifically literate society (ACARA, 2012 ; American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2011 ; American Chemical Society, 2015 ; Joint Task Force on Undergraduate Physics Programs, 2016 ; NGSS Lead States, 2013 ). One such practice is effective science communication.

Science communication can take many forms and is typically grouped into one of two types depending on the target audience—either a scientific audience or a non-scientific, general audience. While both types of audience-oriented communication are important for scientists and students, the focus of this study is on communicating science with non-experts (abbreviated as SciComm). In the current study, we describe SciComm as the use of appropriate media, messages, or activities to exchange information or viewpoints of science opinion or scientific information with non-experts. Depending on the goal of SciComm, it can be used for “fostering greater understanding of science and scientific methods or gaining greater insight into diverse public views and concerns about the science related to a contentious issue” (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, 2017a , p. 14).

SciComm is an important scientific practice that benefits both scientists and the public. With effective SciComm, the public learns about foundational and modern scientific understanding that can guide personal and societal decisions. Additionally, the public can appreciate the credibility of scientists and the scientific process to trust scientific consensus even if the scientific content is not easily understood. Communication also allows scientists to recruit more people to engage with science as well as to collaborate and learn about issues in need of more research.

As such, scientists are being encouraged to engage in SciComm by their scientific communities and the public (Cicerone, 2006 ; Department of Science and Technology, 2014 ; European Commission, 2002 ; Jia & Liu, 2014 ; Leshner, 2007 ; National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Risk Perception and Communication, 1989 ; Royal Society (Great Britain) & Bodmer, 1985 ), as well as combat the spread of misinformation (Scheufele & Krause, 2019 ). Additionally, surveyed scientists report viewing themselves as important components in societal decision-making (Besley & Nisbet, 2013 ) and commonly communicate with the public (Hamlyn et al., 2015 ; Rainie et al., 2015 ). Moreover, support and focus for more effective SciComm across STEM fields has grown. For example, researchers have investigated how to communicate engineering issues and technological perspectives of science, such as genetic engineering (Blancke et al., 2017 ; Kolodinsky, 2018 ), nanotechnology (Castellini et al., 2007 ), and artificial intelligence (Nah et al., 2020 ).

A pertinent example of scientists practicing effective SciComm was seen throughout the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, where technical experts in virology, epidemiology, data science, etc. took to social media and news media to produce and disseminate evidence-based, accurate health protocols and information about the novel coronavirus (American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (ASBMB), 2020 ). During major events, such as the pandemic, scientists are responsible for an important role in communicating emerging science with the public to ease fears, inform decisions, encourage engagement, and give hope to the future.

Because SciComm is an important practice for scientists, it is also essential that undergraduate science students engage with SciComm (Brownell et al., 2013b ). All college students are expected to become proficient in interpersonal skills, including communication (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, 2017b ), and this is expressly true for students in STEM fields including biology (American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2011 ), chemistry (American Chemical Society, 2015 ), physics (Joint Task Force on Undergraduate Physics Programs, 2016 ), engineering (Eichhorn et al., 2010 ; Riemer, 2007 ), technology (Bielefeldt, 2014 ), and math (Saxe & Braddy, 2015 ).

Environmental science is an important context in which to study SciComm skills because it is transdisciplinary—at the intersection of biology, chemistry, physics, and social sciences. Seminal documents in biology (American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2011 ; Clemmons et al., 2020 ), chemistry (American Chemical Society, 2015 ), and physics (Joint Task Force on Undergraduate Physics Programs, 2016 ) have explicitly stated the need for helping students develop science communication skills. These seminal documents are being used across the sciences to inform curricula and are relevant in guiding curricula and research in environmental science education. Additionally, environmental science encompasses some vital topics relevant to all of society (e.g., climate change) and thus students learning about these important topics should also be learning about how to share that information with the public. Helping a wide range of students develop science communication skills may help students understand scientific concepts, the process of science, and the skills to engage with science after they are out of school regardless of whether they pursue science-related careers. These outcomes are essential in promoting the science literacy of our students and citizens.

Conceptual framework

When aiming to help students develop skills, it is an important first step to operationalize those skills. In the context of undergraduate life sciences, the 2011 Vision and Change report broadly defined the skills, labeled as core competencies, students should develop in their undergraduate programs (AAAS, 2011 ). Clemmons et al. ( 2020 ) unpacked these core competencies into program- and course-level outcomes. Regarding communication, they define that students should be able to “share ideas, data, and findings with others clearly and accurately”; “Use appropriate language and style to communicate science effectively to targeted audiences (e.g., the general public, biology experts, collaborators in other disciplines)”; and “Use a variety of modes to communicate science (e.g., oral, written, visual).” We expanded those definitions, using evidence-based practices and principles of science communication, to define the key elements of SciComm that are appropriate for undergraduate science students. The resulting Essential Elements for Effective Science Communication (EEES) framework (Wack et al., 2021 ) adapts skills and concepts from the literature (Besley et al., 2018 ; Mercer-Mapstone & Kuchel, 2017 ) and organizes them into four strategic categories of storytelling: “who,” “why,” “what,” and “how” (Fig. 1 ). The full framework is available in Wack et al. ( 2021 ).

Overview of the Essential Elements for Effective Science Communication (EEES) framework (adapted from Wack et al., 2021 ). Elements are organized into interrelated strategic categories of who, why, what, and how. The element of purpose is broken down into important SciComm objectives as defined by Besley et al. ( 2018 )

The framework is further broken down into 13 elements that are organized under these four categories, which we used to assess the students’ baseline SciComm skills. As shown in Fig. 1 , the four categories overlap to represent the interrelated nature of the 13 elements. In order to create effective and cohesive SciComm, each element must be considered in relation to the others. Briefly, we describe the categories and the elements they encompass below.

The elements for who science students should communicate science with include identifying and understanding a suitable target audience and considering the levels of prior knowledge in the target audience. The elements for why science students should communicate science include identifying the purpose and intended outcome of the communication; this element is expanded upon by the important SciComm objectives defined by Besley et al. ( 2018 )—including to increase knowledge and awareness, boost interest and excitement, listen and demonstrate openness, prove competence, reframe issues, impart shared values, and convey warmth and respect. Further, science students should understand the theories of science communication and why science communication is important. The elements of what science students should communicate include focusing on narrow, factual content and situating that content in a relevant context that is sensitive to social, political, and cultural factors. Finally, the elements for how science students should communicate science includes encouraging a two-way dialogue with the audience, promoting audience engagement with the science, using appropriate language, choosing a mode and platform to reach the target audience, and adding stylistic elements (e.g., humor, anecdotes, analogies, metaphors, rhetoric, imagery, narratives, and trying to appeal to multiple senses). See Wack et al. ( 2021 ) for the full framework.

The EEES framework was originally used to guide the development of a lesson for undergraduate biology students in an introductory lab (Wack et al., 2021 ). This framework is relevant here because, while biology is only a portion of the course context in this study (i.e., environmental science), this framework was developed to be broadly applicable to any science students in undergraduate programs. Also, the framework describes the best practices for communicating science; through the lens of the backward design process (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005 ), these best practices can be thought of as learning objectives. Therefore, it is appropriate to then assess student work with the same framework.

• Baseline skills

After operationalizing competencies to provide a clear picture of what instructors should help their students attain, it is also important to understand what baseline skills students have at the start of a lesson; that way, a curriculum can be tailored to skim through honed skills and emphasize weaker skills. Identifying baseline skills, therefore, makes helping students learn these skills as efficiently and effectively as possible (Novak, 2010 ; Quitadamo & Kurtz, 2007 ). A similar argument is well-established in the context of helping students achieve conceptual understanding with the literature on prior knowledge (e.g., Ausubel, 2012 ; Bergan-Roller et al., 2018 ; Binder et al., 2019 ; Lazarowitz & Lieb, 2006 ; National Research Council (U.S.) & Committee on Programs for Advanced Study of Mathematics and Science in American High Schools., 2002 ; Tanner & Allen, 2005 ; Upadhyay & DeFranco, 2008 ); however, assessing skills before a lesson is less commonly discussed in the literature, which we designate as baseline skills .

Assessment is required to identify students’ skills, including their baseline skills. However, to our knowledge, there is very little literature that provides insight into the assessment of undergraduate science students on science communication skills. Kulgemeyer and Schecker ( 2013 ) examined how students communicate science in the limited context of older secondary students communicating physics phenomena to younger students. In another study, Kulgemeyer ( 2018 ) went further by testing older secondary students on audience-oriented SciComm best practices and found that those with more SciComm experience, or more developed baseline skills, were better at discerning an audience’s needs for particular SciComm content than students who had less experience with SciComm but were quite knowledgeable about the content. Other studies related to students and SciComm have measured application of SciComm knowledge with closed-response quiz questions (Wack et al., 2021 ), perceptions and confidence in communicating science (Brownell et al., 2013a ), the value of SciComm (Edmondston et al., 2010a ), and perceptions of SciComm skills (Yeoman et al., 2011 ); but they have not assessed how students demonstrate SciComm skills. More work needs to be done to assess how students communicate science in a variety of contexts (e.g., disciplines, audiences, level of the student) in order to establish a generalized baseline of skills from which to build an effective curriculum.

In this descriptive study, we surveyed baseline SciComm skills of students in an undergraduate environmental science course in order to inform instructors and curriculum designers on how to help similar science students develop SciComm skills. We took an exploratory, qualitative approach to investigate the following research questions:

RQ1- How did these students demonstrate their SciComm skills according to the EEES framework?

RQ2- How did the way these students planned their SciComm compare to how they executed their SciComm projects?

RQ3- Did instructions influence the SciComm skills that these students demonstrated?

We conducted an exploratory case study according to VanWynsberghe and Khan ( 2007 ); our unit of analysis was students’ SciComm skills and our case was one undergraduate environmental science course in which the students demonstrated their baseline skills with a project that included planning and executing a SciComm product.

Study context

The study was conducted at a large 4-year, doctoral-granting, regional comprehensive university in the Midwestern United States with students enrolled in an environmental science course. This course focused on the functioning of ecosystems, the patterns of biological diversity, the processes that influence those patterns over space and time, and how human activities can disrupt those processes. The course included a SciComm project, which we used for this research; however, SciComm was not a focus of the course. Students did not receive formal training on the underlying theories or practices of SciComm relevant to the EEES framework or otherwise; and we did not gather background information on whether students had knowledge from elsewhere to apply to their SciComm projects. We saw this as a unique opportunity to obtain a baseline of SciComm skills.

Study participants were recruited by one author attending a class period early in the semester, describing the study, and asking for their explicit consent. The entire class was given the opportunity to participate in the study, of which 32 (65%) consented. Students were assigned to plan and execute SciComm products, which we analyzed for this research. From the consenting students, 27 plans and 21 products were available for this research. All names listed herein are pseudonyms. Demographics for each of these populations are shown in Table 1 and the result show that they are equivalent. Generally, the samples consisted of more females than males. Most of the students were White/non-Hispanic, juniors, and 18–25 years old. About one-third of the students were first-generation college students and two-thirds were transfer students. Cumulative GPAs averaged 3.1 to 3.3 (with standard deviations of 0.9). The demographics of these students are typical for the university and major, as well as for undergraduate biology students throughout the USA—as compared to data from the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (Data USA, 2018 ).

As a regular part of the course, students were assigned a project to communicate science with a general, non-scientific audience. Their projects included having students submit a plan to the instructor, who gave individual feedback, and then execute their plan in what we call their product. Assignment instructions and rubric, which were provided to the students when the project was assigned, are available in supplemental materials S 1 and S 2 , respectively. Students were given creative freedom to communicate scientific content—using any means such as presentations, social media, and blogging—to a specific audience of their choosing. The instructions required the students to interact with an audience from the public. Though the assignment was developed solely by the instructor (the researchers and the framework were not a part of the assignment design), there was some overlap with the EEES framework that was explicitly mentioned in the assignment.

Data sources

Several course artifacts and student demographics were collected for this research (Table 1 ). Students’ plans and products were collected to identify which elements of the framework they included as evidence of their baseline skills. The students’ final products are available through the figshare data repository (Bergan-Roller & Yuan, 2021 ). Additionally, we collected the assignment instructions and rubric (supplemental materials S 1 and S 2 ) to identify which elements of the framework were included in order to provide insight into the possible influence that instruction can have on the students’ demonstration of skills. However, we did not analyze the individualized feedback given by the instructor after students submitted their plans as we focused on students’ skills in aggregate.

The plans, products, assignment instructions, and rubric were imported into qualitative software (NVIVO) and analyzed using content analysis which describes the themes in artifacts such as coursework (Neuendorf, 2017 ). First, we conducted a priori thematic analysis by coding for the presence or absence of each of the elements of the EEES framework (codebook provided in Supplemental Materials S 3 ). Three elements were not observable in the products (purpose, prior knowledge, and theory). After the presence of elements was identified, student plans and products underwent further thematic analysis to identify themes in how students addressed the elements of the framework (Braun & Clarke, 2006 ). An excerpt of an example product is presented in Fig. 2 with a description of how it was coded in the figure caption. To ensure the reliability of the codes, two of the authors co-coded all the data. The initial agreement was 83%. All dissimilar codes were discussed to a consensus, and the codebook was revised to clarify the codes. The final codebook is available in supplemental materials S 3 .

Example product from student Zoe. This product was coded to include the following elements with the types and levels indicated in parentheses: audience (general, primarily young adult to adult), content (apex predators and ecological topic; human and biological components), dialogue (social media Q&A and conversations with audience members; high), language (no jargon, mixed formality), mode (remote location; print media), platform (social media, specifically Twitter), and engagement (asks specific questions; low). The product was absent of style, appeal, and context. The elements of prior knowledge, purpose, and theory were not observable for any products

Most students completed the assignment individually; however, when a pair worked together on the assignment, the project artifacts (plans and products) were treated as single artifacts. This work was conducted with prior approval from the institutional review board (#HS17-0259).

Below we describe if and how the elements of the EEES framework appeared in students’ projects (i.e., plans and products). Later, in the discussion, we interpret these descriptions to characterize these students’ baseline SciComm skills. Additionally, we examined the project instructions for alignment with the EEES framework as an indication of how instruction may be able to influence the development of SciComm skills in undergraduate science students.

Presence of SciComm elements

The elements of SciComm that students described in their plans were similar to those demonstrated in their products, but there were a few key differences (Table 2 ). Students described a similar number of elements in their plans (8.0 ± 1.0) as they demonstrated in their products (8.1 ± 0.9), despite all 13 elements being observable in plans but only 10 being observable in products. Most to all the students described the elements of content, platform, mode, audience, dialogue, and engagement in their plans and demonstrated these elements in their products. Additionally, plans and products were similar in how few students included the elements of context and style. Dissimilarities existed in the number of students who described intending to use language in the plans and who demonstrated language in the products. Appeal was also present in more products than plans. Most students described a purpose in their plans while less than a third described considering the prior knowledge of their audience or the theoretical rationale for their decisions.

The instructor’s assignment instructions and rubric included some of the EEES framework elements even though the instructor did not have the framework and the researchers did not direct the instructor on assignment design prior to the semester. Nevertheless, we compared what elements appeared in the assignment instructions and rubric with the elements students demonstrated in their projects to provide insight into the effect that instruction can have on the students’ demonstration of skills (as further explained in the discussion). Elements that were explicitly mentioned in the assignment instructions were described in plans and demonstrated in products by most students (Table 2 ); fewer students described elements in their plans that were only present in the rubric, while many more students demonstrated these rubric-only elements in their products. Elements that were not explicitly asked for in either the instructions or rubric were present in the fewest student plans and products.

Themes for how students presented SciComm elements

Beyond if the elements were present in the students’ projects, we analyzed how the students presented these elements. We organized the results below into the four strategic categories to which the elements belong in the framework.

Who did students communicate with?

The students defined their audiences through categories of specificity, age, and interest (Table 3 ). More than half the students targeted both a specific audience in conjunction with a general audience in their plans and products. For example, Wells wrote,

My target audience would be people that work outdoors first and foremost, as this issue would affect them the most from a health perspective. Otherwise, I think the environmental aspect of the issue affects everyone and anyone, so I would want to spread that information to as many people as possible.

When specifying their audience, the students described age and interest. More students targeted adults over young adults or children. In the plans, about half of the students aimed for an audience with identified interest or non-interest in the scientific content that they intended to communicate. Of the 15 plans that addressed the interest of the audience, most targeted an audience with an interest in the subject. A few of the students explicitly sought out an audience who were not already interested in the scientific content (Table 3 ). For example, Bellamy wrote,

I hope to reach people that are not extremely in tune with the environment.

Two out of the 27 plans (Bellamy and Echo) described wanting to address an audience that included both interested and uninterested members. The interest of the audience was not observable in the final products as this work focused on the students and their work, not the students’ audiences.

Prior knowledge

The students approached the element of prior knowledge by collecting and sometimes using information about their audiences’ understanding to influence their projects. Eight students (30%) planned to collect information on the prior knowledge of their audience. For example, Raven wrote,

I plan to ask the children about their own thoughts on the subject, of what they already know about sharks and how they perceive them, why they think sharks are important and helpful to the ecosystem, and what they can do to help preserve the shark's habitat.

Raven planned to move forward with her presentation irrespective of the children’s input. Four students (15%) described planning to use the prior knowledge information they gathered by adapting their products accordingly. For example, Niylah wrote that she would (emphasis is ours):

create a survey with a mixture of multiple-choice and open-ended/extended-response questions to gauge the public’s knowledge on recycling (what is recyclable, where do these materials go after they are recycled, etc.) and what questions they have about recycling…Create easy-to-understand and visually appealing infographics on recycling based on survey results …in an attempt to address and clarify common misconceptions.

Why did the students communicate this science?

Purpose: communication objectives.

We examined how students described the purpose of their projects in their plans through the lens of Besley’s work that defines important science communication objectives (Besley et al., 2018 ) (Table 4 ). Several students intuitively developed their project’s purpose and described between zero and four objectives with two objectives being the most common (9 students, 33%). The objective to increase knowledge or awareness was the most common followed by the explicit goal to cause their audience to act, which is not a part of the Besley framework of objectives. For instance, Wells planned to create a public service announcement to show the effects of climate change on human health. His call to action was to help people slow the buildup of greenhouse gases from everyday changes, such as providing examples of cleaner forms of transportation and energy use.

The next most common objectives were to boost interest and excitement, as well as listen and demonstrate openness. For example, Echo demonstrated openness by starting a discussion on Facebook—within her circle of family and friends—to understand different points of view on climate change. She stated that she would “respond politely with facts, but in a way where [my peers] don’t feel attacked.” Few students included any one of the other four objectives.

For the students that included some element of theory (7 plans, 26%), their rationalization for why they made certain decisions did not align with science communication theory or evidence-based practices. For example, Clarke said she wanted to make the project entertaining so that the audience would be more likely to remember the information, and Anya chose college students as a target audience because she believed that people who go to college are more passionate and generally interested in changing the world. These explanations seemed to be based on their interpretations of how learning works and how education increases interest, respectively, but not necessarily based on the literature.

Another student, Madi, chose a target audience of high school students because “They are mature enough to instill the information being taught, but just as immature enough to refuse to accept it.” Her rationale stems from, as she explained, her upbringing in a household with parents who were teachers. Though not established in the literature on teaching nor SciComm, this student made a decision about her audience based on descriptions from her parents—her authority figures.

What did the students communicate?

We analyzed the scientific content of the students’ projects regarding what components they included and what topics they focused on (Table 5 ). Most to all students incorporated a human component to their projects and several included a biological (non-human) component. The human component was labeled if the plans and products presented anything related to human involvement. For instance, climate change would fall into this category only if a student explicitly talked about human roles in either causing climate change or how their actions could mitigate the effects of climate change. There had to be some language explicitly relating to people and not just assumed human involvement. For the biological component, the projects had to explicitly reference non-human biological species. For example, a student working on a climate change SciComm project would need to mention the effects on other species than humans. Components relating to earth sciences (e.g., weather and oil spills) were present but infrequent (four or fewer students). The students focused on topics that were covered at other times during the course at relatively equal proportions with an ecological topic being slightly more popular than sustainability or climate change.

Some of the students considered the social, political, and/or cultural context of the scientific information (4 out of 27 plans, 5 out of 21 products). Although there were too few of these students to decipher themes within context, examples included describing the culture of coastal fishermen in relation to overfishing issues (Harper), and that the ability to choose foods from sustainable farming practices may be impacted by socioeconomic status (Lincoln).

How did the students communicate science?

Dialogue pertains to any conversation between the student presenter and the audience. Conversation could be on any subject including on scientific content being communicated or other topics. Student plans and products were analyzed for the element of dialogue in two ways: the direction and level of dialogue. For the direction of dialogue, all students talked to their audience and most students also received input from their audience (Table 6 ).

The level of dialogue indicated how much dialogue was planned or occurred. Low dialogue was when only one direction of communication was planned or occurred (e.g., student communicating to the audience only). Fewer students executed low dialogue than described low dialogue in their plans (Table 6 ). Medium dialogue was when both directions of dialogue were planned or occurred, but one direction was much more prevalent than the other (e.g., a presentation with a brief question-and-answer (Q&A) session). Over half of the students described medium dialogue in their plans while only about a third executed dialogue at this level (Table 6 ). High dialogue was when both directions of dialogue were planned or occurred frequently and throughout the communication. The fewest number of students planned high dialogue, although the largest number of students executed high dialogue (Table 6 ).

Engagement pertains to how the audience engages with the science. Student plans and products were analyzed for the element of engagement in two ways: the type and level of engagement. Most of the students passively engaged their audience by having the audience listen and/or observe the presentation (Table 6 ). Engagement commonly took the form of asking the audience specific questions about the science or allowing for questions or comments from the audience. Only 1 out of 27 students planned to actively engage their audience with the science by having them play a board game on migration and go bird watching (Indra). Only 1 out of 21 students executed active engagement by having students identify rocks with a game (Lexa). A few of the students mentioned engaging their audience with the science but did not further describe how they planned to do so (coded as ambiguous) (Table 6 ).

The level of engagement indicated how much the student planned or facilitated the audience to engage with the science. Low engagement was when the student presented to the audience who only viewed or listened nearly the entire time. A third of students planned to engage their audience at a low level but a slightly lower percentage executed low-level engagement (Table 6 ). Medium engagement was when the student presented and the audience viewed and/or listened most of the time but there were some other types of engagement, commonly as questions between the audience and student. Most students planned and executed medium-level engagement (Table 6 ). High engagement was when the student facilitated active and/or frequent engagement between the audience and the science, such as the audience answering frequent specific questions and modeling or observing a scientific phenomenon (e.g., bird watching or the rock game). The fewest students planned high-level engagement; however, more of the students executed high engagement (Table 6 ).

We coded language for whether students used jargon and the formality of their language (Table 6 ). Only 1 out of the 27 students (Abby) described in her plans what language she would use by “avoiding jargon.” More students omitted jargon from their products than included jargon. More students used informal language when communicating science than formal language, or they used a mix of formal and informal rhetoric.

Mode and platform

The students approached the elements of mode and platform in terms of location, use of media types, and use of social media (Table 6 ). More of the students had projects that were remote from their audience than in-person. A few of the students planned projects that involved both remote and in-person portions. In-person projects were commonly set in a classroom. As for media types, most students used print media (e.g., the Twitter Q&A and conversations in Fig. 2 ) in their final products and several students used multiple types of media (Table 6 ). While many of the 27 students planned to do audio-based projects such as podcasts, only 2 out of 21 executed that plan. Regarding where to put their SciComm, most students included social media, which included sites like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube (Table 6 ).

Appeal and style

The students appealed to their audiences’ senses primarily with visuals including PowerPoint slides, photos, artwork, and charts. Some of the students used stylistic elements to present scientific information. For example, Bellamy included humor and satire by dressing up in a penguin suit and advertising to “kill the penguins.” Gaia employed narration and described her adventures at the local farmer’s market.

To tailor a curriculum to be meaningful and authentic, educators and education researchers need to first define learning outcomes that align with professional, scientific practice, and then use those definitions to assess students’ baseline skills, including for SciComm. Then, the curriculum can be built upon this solid foundation. Here, we provided a rich description of the baseline SciComm skills of students in an undergraduate environmental science course. Overall, our results showed that these undergraduate students are on their way to being effective science communicators and have room to develop these skills further with proper curricular support. We next interpret that description to guide instructors on how to help students develop important SciComm skills.

Students demonstrated their skills consistently, between their plans and products, in many ways including identifying their audience and focusing on factual content. However, there were a few notable exceptions. Students planned primarily one-way dialogue (e.g., talking at a class) but executed frequent two-way dialogue (e.g., played a game with the audience) throughout their SciComm; this switch to more interaction from planning to execution was similar to how students engaged their audiences with the science. But not all skills listed in the framework were observed in the students’ work, which provides instructors the room to give students a wide variety of opportunities and circumstances to demonstrate, practice, and develop their SciComm skills.

Furthermore, the results showed that it is important to recognize the value of the instruction given by the instructor, which affected the types of skills students demonstrated. The students demonstrated most of the elements in their plans and products that aligned with what was asked of them in the instructions. This suggests that students would benefit from explicit SciComm instruction and training on effective SciComm to develop their SciComm skills in the context of their science coursework.

Pedagogical and curricular recommendations for integrating SciComm into science courses

Below, we take a fine-grain view of the SciComm skills these students demonstrated and make recommendations on how instructors and curriculum can build off this baseline to effectively help science students develop their SciComm skills.

With whom to communicate science

Help students identify a narrow audience. Our findings showed that the students commonly described a specific population but then also described trying to reach a broader audience. Students may need help recognizing that fostering quality communication with a small and specific audience is more effective than just exposing their SciComm to large quantities of people (Mercer-Mapstone & Kuchel, 2017 ).

Help students understand their audience. Here, about a third of the students considered the prior knowledge of their audience and fewer used it to influence their products. Similarly, about half of the students did not describe whether they thought their audience was explicitly interested or not interested in the subject. A presenter must acknowledge and understand what their audience already knows (i.e., prior knowledge) and what the audience is interested in to increase knowledge (Ausubel, 2012 ; Novak, 2010 ; Vosniadou, 2013 ), which was the most commonly stated purpose objective. This is true whether the setting is a classroom between an instructor and students or on a public stage such as with these environmental science students and their target audiences.

Why communicate science

Introduce students to the theories that make for effective SciComm. Despite not being asked to, some of the students described their rationale behind why their project would effectively communicate science with the public (theory element). However, these explanations seemed to be based on intuition, and were lacking operational description, which are often ineffective and can be harmful to the public’s perceptions of science (Scheufele, 2013 ). Therefore, instructors may consider introducing SciComm via its theoretical underpinnings to help students better understand the need for developing such skills.

Encourage students to aim for diverse communication objectives. Here, many students intuitively aimed to increase knowledge and awareness. Similarly, scientists focus more on this traditional knowledge-based objective than other equally important objectives (Besley et al., 2018 ). Nevertheless, scientists, and thus science students, need to aim beyond just increasing knowledge and awareness as many other objectives are key to effective SciComm (Besley et al., 2018 ). Specifically, appropriate for science students are the objectives of boosting interest and excitement, conveying warmth and respect, conveying shared values, and listening and demonstrating openness (Fig. 1 ). Further, having an audience take action is an assumed, ultimate goal of communication (Besley et al., 2018 ); here, about half of the students’ plans made this goal explicit. More work is needed to know if students are thinking about an ultimate goal for their SciComm. Together, our work suggests that the curriculum should provide support to help students identify their broader goals and specific objectives for SciComm.

How to communicate science

Give students practice with multiple media types. Here, many students planned to use audio and video, but then executed their SciComm with print media. A recent report concluded that Gen Z (people born between the mid-1990s and the mid-2000s) prefer video over print for learning, whereas Millennials (people born in the early 1980s to mid-1990s) prefer print (Pearson Education Inc., 2018 ). The students studied here were composed of approximately 75% Gen Z and 20% Millennials. One explanation for our results could be that the students had ambitions to increase the knowledge and awareness of their audience using a medium which they themselves prefer and commonly consume (video) but potentially experienced logistical constraints that directed them to a simpler media (print) that could still reach a large audience (e.g., Lincoln’s switch from podcast to print). Scientists have increasingly connected with the public, using print, audio, and video remotely due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (ASBMB, 2020 ). Therefore, students need practice with a variety of media types, especially on a variety of platforms as communication with the public evolves.

Example curricula

There are a few published examples of integrated SciComm and science curriculum that may help science students develop their SciComm skills. These are organized either as whole courses or modules within science courses. Examples of whole courses include an undergraduate neuroimmunology and writing course (Brownell et al., 2013a ) and a biotech and SciComm course (Edmondston et al., 2010a , 2010b ). Examples of the modular approach have been documented in the contexts of junior high school (Spektor-Levy et al., 2008 , 2009 ), undergraduate physics (Arion, 2016 ; Arion et al., 2018 ), mid-level undergraduate biology, physics, and chemistry (Mercer-Mapstone & Kuchel, 2016 ), and upper-level undergraduate biology (Yeoman et al., 2011 ). Additionally, we applied the EEES framework to develop and assess a module for introductory undergraduate biology students (Wack et al., 2021 ). These curricula may be excellent sources for instructors looking for guidance on how to help their students develop SciComm skills.

Assessment and feedback

Vital components of learning are assessment and feedback. Assessment of students should be based on the learning goals and objectives that instructors make explicit at the beginning of any lesson (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005 ) and thus can vary considerably. The options to assess SciComm lessons include what others in the literature have done, including using a closed-response quiz where students apply their knowledge of SciComm (Wack et al., 2021 ); asking for students to report on their gained skills (Yeoman et al., 2011 ); measuring perceptions, value, and confidence in communicating science (Brownell et al., 2013a ; Edmondston et al., 2010a ); and characterizing the skills students demonstrate as we have done here. Additional assessment could include input from the audience to gauge the effectiveness of the communication. These assessment options can be used to provide feedback to students so that they may reflect on their performance and how they may perform better in the future—an important step in developing lasting skills.

Limitations and future directions

We recognize the limitations of this research and suggest how future studies could augment this work. For instance, we intentionally omitted giving the students the framework in the instructions and rubric so that we could observe a baseline of SciComm skills. Future work should investigate how providing different scaffolds, or support such as the framework, affects students’ SciComm skills.

By using content analysis of student work, we were able to provide rich descriptions of students’ SciComm skills. Future work should use student interviews and reflective journaling to triangulate evidence on SciComm skills. When only a few students described a certain element, it reduced our ability to establish themes for how students commonly address an element and limits the generalizability of the results. Nevertheless, our findings on these elements provide some anecdotal examples of what one might expect from their students or study population.

Many of the elements of SciComm are intertwined, as are best practices for SciComm. For example, the audience one targets (e.g., young children) will impact the platform they choose (e.g., a classroom, not Twitter). These interconnections led to occasional overlap in our coding (e.g., engagement/dialogue, types/levels) and results could be influencing other results. Nonetheless, descriptions of each element provided a comprehensive survey of the students’ baseline skills and thus were important to characterize individually.

We recognize that this is just one class in one context; much more work needs to be done in a variety of contexts, and separate results based on student demographics, to gain additional perspectives on undergraduate life science students’ baseline SciComm skills. For example, repeating this study with larger groups of students in more disciplines would improve statistical strength; additionally, larger samples would allow for testing the effects of age or experience on outcomes so that these results may be extrapolated to other institutions and other disciplinary contexts across STEM fields.

SciComm is an important scientific practice for which undergraduate science students should develop skills. To effectively help students develop these skills, it is important to understand what baseline skills students have. Here, we used the EEES framework to explore the SciComm skills students in an environmental science course demonstrated with little training. Despite not being given the framework, students included several of the 13 elements, especially those which were explicitly asked for in the assignment instructions. Students exhibited SciComm skills similar to scientists who are novice in SciComm but showed promising development by following many of the instructions and refining their work from planning to execution. Together with the recommendations we make for how instructors can use these findings, a curriculum that is grounded in effective science communication can help undergraduate science students develop meaningful SciComm skills.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Student products, specifically, are available in the figshare repository, https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14544072 (Bergan-Roller & Yuan, 2021 ).

Abbreviations

Elements for Effective Science Communication framework

Written documents students submitted to plan their SciComm

Evidence students submitted of their executed SciComm

The combination of students’ plans and products

Question and answer

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2

Communicating science with non-experts

ACARA. (2012). The Australian Curriculum—Science . https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/ .

American Association for the Advancement of Science (2011). Vision and change in undergraduate biology education: a call to action . In American Association for the Advancement of Science .

Google Scholar  

American Chemical Society. (2015). Undergraduate professional education in chemistry: 2015 ACS Guidelines for Bachelor’s Degree Programs. Retrieved August 15, 2018, from https://www.acs.org/content/dam/acsorg/about/governance/committees/training/2015-acs-guidelines-for-bachelors-degree-programs.pdf .

American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. (2020). Shaping the narrative: Effective science communication in the COVID-19 era . Retrieved August 11, 2020, from https://www.asbmb.org/meetings-events/shaping-the-narrative .

Arion, D. N. (2016). Improving science communication and engaging the public in astronomy and nature. American Astronomical Society, AAS Meeting #227, Id.446.01 , 227 . Retrieved September 18, 2017, from  http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016AAS...22744601A .

Arion, D. N., OConnell, C., Lowenthal, J., Hickox, R. C., & Lyons, D. (2018). Public science education and outreach as a modality for teaching science communication skills to undergraduates. American Astronomical Society, AAS Meeting #231, Id. 216.04 , 231 . Retrieved August 14, 2018, from  http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018AAS...23121604A .

Ausubel, D. P. (2012). The acquisition and retention of knowledge: A cognitive view . Springer Science & Business Media. https://books.google.com/books?id=wfckBAAAQBAJ .

Bergan-Roller, H. E., Galt, N. J., Helikar, T., & Dauer, J. T. (2018). Using concept maps to characterise cellular respiration knowledge in undergraduate students. Journal of Biological Education. , 54 (1), 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2018.1541001 .

Bergan-Roller, H. E., & Yuan, S. (2021). Shivni et al_IJSTEMED_Student products . Figshare.  Retrieved May 15, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14544072 .

Besley, J. C., Dudo, A., & Yuan, S. (2018). Scientists’ views about communication objectives. Public Understanding of Science , 27 (6), 708–730. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662517728478 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Besley, J. C., & Nisbet, M. (2013). How scientists view the public, the media and the political process. Public Understanding of Science , 22 (6), 644–659. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662511418743 .

Bielefeldt, T. (2014). Know the ISTE Standards for Students, Standard 2: Communication and Collaboration | ISTE . Retrieved May 11, 2021, from  https://www.iste.org/explore/ISTE-Standards-in-Action/Know-the-ISTE-Standards-for-Students%2C-Standard-2%3A-Communication-and-Collaboration .

Binder, T., Sandmann, A., Sures, B., Friege, G., Theyssen, H., & Schmiemann, P. (2019). Assessing prior knowledge types as predictors of academic achievement in the introductory phase of biology and physics study programmes using logistic regression. International Journal of STEM Education , 6 (1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0189-9 .

Blancke, S., Grunewald, W., & De Jaeger, G. (2017). De-problematizing ‘GMOs’: Suggestions for communicating about genetic engineering. In Trends in Biotechnology (Vol. 35, Issue 3, pp. 185–186). Elsevier Ltd, 35 (3), 185–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2016.12.004 .

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology , 3 (2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa .

Brownell, S. E., Price, J. V., & Steinman, L. (2013a). A writing-intensive course improves biology undergraduates’ perception and confidence of their abilities to read scientific literature and communicate science. AJP: Advances in Physiology Education , 37 (1), 70–79. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00138.2012 .

Brownell, S. E., Price, J. V., & Steinman, L. (2013b). Science communication to the general public: Why we need to teach undergraduate and graduate students this skill as part of their formal scientific training. Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education : JUNE : A Publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience , 12 (1), E6–E10 Retrieved September 13, 2017, from . http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24319399

Castellini, O. M., Walejko, G. K., Holladay, C. E., Theim, T. J., Zenner, G. M., & Crone, W. C. (2007). Nanotechnology and the public: Effectively communicating nanoscale science and engineering concepts. Journal of Nanoparticle Research , 9 (2), 183–189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-006-9160-z .

Cicerone, R. J. (2006). Celebrating and rethinking science communication. Focus , 6 (3).

Clemmons, A. W., Timbrook, J., Herron, J. C., & Crowe, A. J. (2020). BioSkills Guide: Development and national validation of a tool for interpreting the Vision and Change core competencies. CBE—Life Sciences Education , 19 (4), ar53, 19 (4), ar53. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-11-0259 .

Data USA. (2018). Data USA:Biology . Retrieved August 11, 2020, from  https://datausa.io/profile/cip/biology .

Department of Science and Technology. (2014). Science engagement framework . Retrieved August 11, 2020, from https://www.npep.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Science-Engagement-Framework.pdf .

Edmondston, J., Dawson, V., & Schibeci, R. (2010a). Undergraduate biotechnology students’ views of science communication. International Journal of Science Education , 32 (18), 2451–2474. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903514598 .

Edmondston, J., Dawson, V., & Schibeci, R. (2010b). Are students prepared to communicate? A case study of an Australian degree course in biotechnology. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education , 8 (6), 1091–1108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9234-3 .

Eichhorn, K., Thompson, C., Vampola, D., Messere, F., & Manseur, R. (2010). Infusing communication skills in an engineering curriculum . Retrieved August 14, 2018, from  https://peer.asee.org/infusing-communication-skills-in-an-engineering-curriculum.pdf .

European Commission. (2002). Science and Society Action Plan . Retrieved August 14, 2018, from https://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/pub_gender_equality/ss_ap_en.pdf .

Hamlyn, B., Shanahan, M., Hanson, T., Mortimer, E., Lewis, H., O’Donoghue, E., & Burchell, K. (2015). Factors affecting public engagement by researchers . Retrieved August 14, 2018, from  https://wellcome.ac.uk/sites/default/files/wtp060032.pdf .

Jia, H., & Liu, L. (2014). Unbalanced progress: The hard road from science popularisation to public engagement with science in China. Public Understanding of Science , 23 (1), 32–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662513476404 .

Joint Task Force on Undergraduate Physics Programs. (2016). Phys21: Preparing Physics Students for 21st-Century Careers . Retrieved December 10, 2020, from https://www.compadre.org/JTUPP/docs/J-Tupp_Report.pdf .

Kolodinsky, J. (2018). Ethical tensions from a ‘science alone’ approach in communicating genetic engineering science to consumers. In Ethical tensions from new technology: The case of agricultural biotechnology . Retrieved May 11, 2021, from  https://www.google.com/books/edition/Ethical_Tensions_from_New_Technology/WJJqDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=thical+Tensions+from+a+%C3%A2%E2%82%AC%CB%9CScience+Alone%C3%A2%E2%82%AC%E2%84%A2Approach+in+Communicating+Genetic+Engineering+Science+to+Consumers&pg=PA12&printsec=frontcover .

Kulgemeyer, C. (2018). Impact of secondary students’ content knowledge on their communication skills in science. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education , 16 (1), 89–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9762-6 .

Kulgemeyer, C., & Schecker, H. (2013). Students explaining science—Assessment of science communication competence. Research in Science Education , 43 (6), 2235–2256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-013-9354-1 .

Lazarowitz, R., & Lieb, C. (2006). Formative assessment pre-test to identify college students’ prior knowledge, misconceptions and learning difficulties in biology. In International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, Issue 4, pp. 741–762). Springer, 4 (4), 741–762. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-005-9024-5 .

Leshner, A. I. (2007). Outreach training needed. Science (New York, N.Y.) , 315 (5809), 161, 315 (5809), 161. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1138712 .

Mercer-Mapstone, L. D., & Kuchel, L. (2017). Core skills for effective science communication: A teaching resource for undergraduate science education. International Journal of Science Education, Part B , 7 (2), 181–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2015.1113573 .

Mercer-Mapstone, L. D., & Kuchel, L. J. (2016). Integrating communication skills into undergraduate science degrees: A practical and evidence-based approach. Teaching & Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal , 4 (2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.4.2.11 .

Nah, S., McNealy, J., Kim, J. H., & Joo, J. (2020). Communicating artificial intelligence (AI): Theory, research, and practice. Communication Studies , 71 (3), 369–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2020.1788909 .

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and M. (2017). Supporting students’ college success: The role of assessment of intrapersonal and interpersonal competencies (J. Herman & M. Hilton (eds.)). National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24697 .

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and M (2017). Communicating science effectively . National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/23674 .

National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on risk perception and communication. (1989). Improving risk communication. National Academies Press. Retrieved August 14, 2018, from  https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=gj8rAAAAYAAJ .

National Research Council (U.S.), & Committee on Programs for Advanced Study of Mathematics and Science in American High Schools. (2002). Learning and understanding. In Learning and Understanding . National Academies Press. Retrieved August 14, 2018, from  https://doi.org/10.17226/10129 .

Neuendorf, K. A. (2017). The content analysis guidebook , (2nd ed., ). Sage. https://www.google.com/books/edition/_/nMA5DQAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PP1 . https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071802878 .

NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states . Retrieved August 14, 2018, from  http://www.nextgenscience.org/trademark-and-copyright .

Novak, J. D. (2010). Learning, creating, and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://books.google.com/books?id=dXiMAgAAQBAJ , DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203862001

Pearson Education Inc. (2018). Beyond millennials: The next generation of learners . Retrieved May 18, 2020, from https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/news/news-annoucements/2018/The-Next-Generation-of-Learners_final.pdf .

Quitadamo, I. J., & Kurtz, M. J. (2007). Learning to improve: Using writing to increase critical thinking performance in general education biology. CBE Life Sciences Education , 6 (2), 140–154. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.06-11-0203 .

Rainie, L., Funk, C., & Anderson, M. (2015). How scientists engage the public . Retrieved August 14, 2018, from  http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/02/15/how-scientists-engage-public/ .

Riemer, M. J. (2007). Communication Skills for the 21st Century Engineer. Journal of Engineering Education , 11 (1), 89–100 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299507876 .

Royal Society (Great Britain), & Bodmer, W. (1985). The public understanding of science . Retrieved August 14, 2018, from .

Saxe, K., & Braddy, L. (2015). A common vision for undergraduate mathematical sciences programs in 2025 .

Scheufele, D. A. (2013). Communicating science in social settings. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America , 110 (Supplement 3), 14040–14047. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1213275110 .

Scheufele, D. A., & Krause, N. M. (2019). Science audiences, misinformation, and fake news. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America , 116 (16), 7662–7669. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1805871115 .

Spektor-Levy, O., Eylon, B.-S., & Scherz, Z. (2008). Teaching communication skills in science: Tracing teacher change. Teaching and Teacher Education , 24 (2), 462–477. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TATE.2006.10.009 .

Spektor-Levy, O., Eylon, B.-S., & Scherz, Z. (2009). Teaching scientific communication skills in science studies: Does it make a difference? International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education , 7 (5), 875–903. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-009-9150-6 .

Tanner, K., & Allen, D. (2005). Approaches to biology teaching and learning: Understanding the wrong answers—Teaching toward conceptual change. Cell Biology Education , 4 (2), 112–117. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.05-02-0068 .

Upadhyay, B., & DeFranco, C. (2008). Elementary students’ retention of environmental science knowledge: Connected science instruction versus direct instruction. Journal of Elementary Science Education , 20 (2), 23–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03173668 .

VanWynsberghe, R., & Khan, S. (2007). Redefining case study. International Journal of Qualitative Methods , 6 (2), 80–94 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/160940690700600208 .

Vosniadou, S. (2013). International handbook of research on conceptual change (S. Vosniadou (ed.); 2nd ed.). Routledge.

Wack, J., Jaeger, C. P., Yuan, S., & Bergan-Roller, H. E. (2021). A framework and lesson to engage biology students in communicating science with nonexperts. The American Biology Teacher , 83 (1), 17–25. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2021.83.1.17 .

Wiggins, & McTighe. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd Expand). Assn. for Supervision & Curriculum Development. http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-By-Design-Grant-Wiggins/dp/1416600353 .

Yeoman, K. H., James, H. A., & Bowater, L. (2011). Development and evaluation of an undergraduate science communication module. Bioscience Education , 17 (1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3108/beej.17.7 .

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the faculty member who instructed the course for providing access to her class and supporting the project. We thank Dr. Devarati Bhattacharya for her advice on content analysis. We thank Dr. Jaime Sabel, Dr. Jenny Dauer, the NIU DBER group, and the anonymous reviewers for their input on earlier versions of this manuscript.

This project was funded by the Department of Biological Sciences, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, and the Division of Research and Innovative Partnerships at Northern Illinois University, as well as the Summer Internship Grant Program at Northwestern University. Funds were used to support the authors in their work on this project. The funders had no input on any aspect of this project.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Biological Sciences, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Northern Illinois University, 447 Montgomery Hall, DeKalb, IL, 60115, USA

Rashmi Shivni, Christina Cline & Heather E. Bergan-Roller

Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA

Morgan Newport

Department of Communication, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, USA

Shupei Yuan

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

RS analyzed and interpreted the data and substantively revised the manuscript. CC acquired, analyzed, and interpreted the data and wrote portions of the manuscript. MN analyzed and interpreted the data and wrote portions of the manuscript. SY helped conceive the work, and substantively wrote and revised the manuscript. HBR helped conceive and design the work, analyzed and interpreted the data, and substantively wrote and revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Heather E. Bergan-Roller .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file s1:.

Assignment instructions

Additional file S2:

Assignment Rubric

Additional file S3:

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Shivni, R., Cline, C., Newport, M. et al. Establishing a baseline of science communication skills in an undergraduate environmental science course. IJ STEM Ed 8 , 47 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00304-0

Download citation

Received : 17 August 2020

Accepted : 02 July 2021

Published : 23 July 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00304-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Science communication
• Environmental science
• Undergraduate
• Content analysis

Browse Course Material

Course info, instructors.

• Prof. John Durant
• Dr. Bina Venkataraman

Departments

• Science, Technology, and Society

As Taught In

• Academic Writing
• Nonfiction Prose
• Technical Writing

Learning Resource Types

Science communication: a practical guide, course meeting times.

Lectures: 1 session / week, 3 hours / session

Course Aims

• To provide an introduction to popular science communication in the broader contexts of (a) the role of communication in science, and (b) the cultural, practical and policy-related role of science communication in wider society;
• To provide intellectual resources for constructive critical analysis of popular science communication in a variety of real-world settings;
• To cultivate students’ practical communication skills, with particular emphasis on effective speaking, writing and exhibiting on scientific and science-related topics to a variety of audiences;
• To provide students with a range of resources and skills for effective communication of complex material;
• To provide students with the opportunity to undertake a substantial practical project in either science writing or science exhibiting.

Skloot, Rebecca. The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks . Broadway Publishers, 2011. ISBN: 9781400052172.

Other required readings (and required audio, video and exhibition materials) are listed separately on the readings page.

Course Requirements and Assessment

The course will comprise two 90-minute seminars per week, at 11:30am – 1:00pm on Mondays and Wednesdays throughout the fall semester. The Monday seminars are devoted mainly to seminar discussion of key topics, and the Wednesday seminars are devoted mainly to work (individually, and in groups) on practical communication projects.

Students are required to attend and participate actively in the seminars. Students who are unable to attend a seminar for medical or other reasons should inform the professor in advance. Unexplained poor attendance and failure to participate actively in seminars will affect the overall grade on the course.

Assignments (which may involve reading, listening to or viewing relevant sources before class, written composition, or exhibition-related work) will be set on a weekly basis. It is essential that students should complete pre-class assignments, as this will be essential to effective participation in the relevant seminar discussions.

This is a communications intensive (CI-HW) class. CI-HW subjects are a subset of CI-H subjects concentrating more particularly on the writing process. Given how important revision is to composition, many assignments will be revised. The emphasis in all the CI-HW sections is on writing: the writing process, from pre-writing through drafting, revising, and editing; and the rhetorical dimensions of writing: the audience for whom one is writing, and the purpose for which one is writing—to argue, inform, persuade, explain, convince, and so on.

Grades on the course will be based on the following marking scheme:

Class Calendar and Overview

You are leaving MIT OpenCourseWare

12 examples of stunning science communication

Photo by CDC on Unsplash

Unlikely as this might seem from social media platforms, we’re living in a golden age of science communication.

As newspapers and magazines struggle to fund specialist science reporters, it might seem like science communication is on the back foot. 

But as we show in this piece, new digital tools are making it possible for science communicators to tell important, fascinating, and funny science stories to the general public.

In this guide, we look at: 

• What is science communication?
• Common attributes of effective science communication
• Why is science communication important?
• 12 stunning science communication examples.

What is science communication?

Science communication is the practice of informing and inspiring the general public about scientific knowledge. Science communication takes many forms, from longform journalism and podcasts to social media posts and seminars.

In recent years, science communication has become a greater priority in the scientific community, especially in response to increases in misinformation on everything from  climate change  and vaccines to telecommunications.

Some of the leaders in science communication include the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), the Public Library of Science (PLOS), and NASA.

Why is science communication important?

To address urgent issues.

As we've seen in the pandemic and climate change, communicating science is critical to solving the world's most urgent issues. While it's not always a fair fight — too often, misinformation travels the world while the scientific truth is tying its shoe laces — it's a hugely necessary one, for public health and the planet.

To make science more transparent

As we discuss in our piece on  storytelling and the impact of academic research , most basic science is funded by the public. At the same time, the public communication of this science — that is, the published articles and books — tend to be stuck in academia behind a hugely expensive paywall. 

Whatever the merits of this system, the science community needs to communicate in order to continue to justify the investment of their main stakeholders: the public.  

To educate non-scientists

The public understanding of science is a good thing in its own right, and plenty of science of communication is produced simply to educate the public about what we know — and don't know — about life, the universe, and everything.* 

Science education initiatives can also aim to increase public engagement on the most critical issues of our time.

* With apologies to Douglas Adams. 

To educate decision makers

It's good to educate the public; however, it's critical to educate those making decisions. While we sometimes like to imagine — or hope — that our leaders are informed about the most important issues we face, the truth is rather less inspiring. In most countries, leaders have varied points of view about science, and scientific literacy is not evenly distributed.

While it might be considered a 'stretch goal', one clear aim of science communication is to inspire better understanding of science by policy makers. Ideally, this can lead to evidence based public policy and decision-making by governments across the board.

To inspire the next generation of scientists

For the future of our economies, environments, and societies, it's critical that the next generation of talented people embrace a career in the sciences (including social sciences) — and develop great communication skills along the way. The best way to do this is inspire them with excellent scientific communication. 

To inspire local communities 

All science happens somewhere, and it's important for science communicators to engage with their local communities. While this is often difficult — there are only 24 hours in a day, after all — it's a key tactic improve science literacy among the public.

Great community outreach can even inspire contributions to science by amateurs in the local community, otherwise known as citizen science.  

What do the BBC, Nature, and Cambridge University have in common? They craft stunning, interactive web content with Shorthand. And so can you! Publish your first story for free — no code or web design skills required. Get started.

The University of Queensland

Science communication is often based on specific research outputs — usually technical journal articles. The most effective science communication, though, finds a way of placing technical research in a larger narrative context. 

That is, they tell a story. 

Out of Africa from The University of Queensland begins with a herbal tea widely consumed in West Africa in the 1960s, before introducing the more technical — and serendipitous — process of scientific discovery at the University of Oxford thirty years later. 

The piece is a fascinating introduction to the science of plant-based peptides, and makes it clear why research into peptides and proteins from the natural world is so important today. 

Image captions

Out of Africa from the University of Queensland begins with a herbal tea widely consumed in West Africa in the 1960s, before introducing the more technical — and serendipitous — process of scientific discovery at the University of Oxford thirty years later. 

The piece is a fascinating introduction to the science of plant-based peptides, and makes it clear why research into peptides and proteins from the natural world is so important today.

Imperial College London

The difference between a good science story and a great one often comes down to the quality of its visual assets.

Over the last few years, web publishing standards have risen dramatically. Once upon a time, you might have been able to get away with cheap stock photography or low-resolution photos. 

But that was the old web, and times have changed. Now, the best science stories are truly immersive, with rich photography, videos, illustrations, and scroll-based visual effects. 

Mission to the Sun from Imperial is a slightly unfair example — not every science communicator gets to tell the story of a literal journey to space. But it’s still a great example of a story that makes the most of its visual assets. 

The difference between a good science story and a great one often comes down to the quality of its visual assets .

Mission to the Sun from Imperial is a slightly unfair example — not every science communicator gets to tell the story of a literal journey to space. But it’s still a great example of a story that makes the most of its visual assets.

The best science stories on the web benefit from excellent story design. This is true of many of New Zealand media company Stuff’s feature stories.   

‘Story design’ is a broad term, but it generally refers to how a story’s producer arranges various story elements — including text, video, imagery, and visual techniques — to best engage the reader. 

In Root & Branch , the Stuff team consider the thorny problem of land use, reforestation, and climate change in Aotearoa. They do an amazing job of explaining a complex science story, punctuating their text with graphs, infographics, video, illustrations, and stunning photography. 

If you're looking for more examples like this one, check out our guide,  8 examples of powerful data stories , and our introduction to data storytelling .

Sometimes, the most effective way to tell a science story is to focus on the process — especially when the process includes months-long expeditions to the Arctic.

Science journalist Shannon Hall of Nature tells just that story . Beautifully illustrated with photos of weather balloons, arctic skies, and — of course — polar bears, her story shows us the complexity and risk involved in collecting Arctic climate data.

Along the way, we learn about the current state of Arctic sea ice, and what that might mean for climate change in the future.

Clare College

Not all science communication happens on the page. Colleges and universities, for example, host an enormous number of guest lectures and panel discussions during the academic year — often aimed at non-expert audiences. 

With COVID-19, many institutions are looking for ways to replicate that experience online. For their Gala Week, Clare College produced a virtual event using digital stories and embedded video, featuring talks from many of their scientists. 

University of Utah

Members of the public are often most interested in the impact scientific research has on our world. This is the focus of the University of Utah team in They Emerge Transformed , which presents the science of burn treatment through the stories of burn survivors.

With striking photography and detailed portraits, the story leaves the reader in no doubt about the importance of research into burn treatments at the University of Utah’s Health Burn Center. 

The University of Cambridge

Not every scientist travels to the arctic or sends rockets into space. For stories with less inherent drama, digital storytelling techniques can be used to capture the reader’s attention. 

This is the approach taken by Louise Walsh in Silent Witnesses . She uses starkly beautiful images to show how research into tree rings is contributing to solutions to our planet’s most urgent issues. 

This is the approach taken by Louise Walsh in Silent Witnesses . She uses starkly beautiful images to show how research into tree rings is contributing to solutions to our planet’s most urgent issues.

United Nations Development Programme

For better and worse, science communication is competing with every other form of entertainment on the web. Many readers following the links to science stories will also have tabs open to Facebook, Twitter, blogs, and media outlets. 

To keep the attention of the reader, science communicators need to publish to the highest standards of the modern web. This includes the basics, such as being mobile-friendly and using high quality media assets. 

It also means taking advantage of modern web-based visual techniques — such as scroll-based animation — which have been proven to increase audience engagement rates and dwell time. 

The UNDP uses these techniques in their exceptional story, A Wilderness of Water. With rich video and beautiful historical — if erroneous — maps, the UNDP introduces the science while forcefully communicating the urgency of protecting our oceans.

Some subjects just lend themselves to visual storytelling. Indonesia’s Secret Forests takes us into the underground network of caves and rivers — with mysterious creatures — in the heartland of Java.

The piece uses video and photography to showcase the inherent natural beauty of the environment. But the piece also teaches the reader about the wonders of the local ecosystem, and highlights its fragility in the face of tourism and agriculture. 

During the COVID-19 pandemic, data journalists around the world have provided a critical public service by documenting the spread of the virus. This has often involved interrogating data provided by government agencies, and sometimes required uncovering truths that public officials have tried to conceal. 

We’ve gathered a collection of these stories built with Shorthand on our blog . 

For this guide, we’ll focus on just one example. Over the course of the pandemic, Sky News have maintained a series of interactive charts and maps visualising its spread around the world. Presented with spare commentary and minimalist story design, the Sky News team allows space for the data to speak for itself. 

The story is a powerful depiction of the spread of the virus. 

Journalists are always interested in telling longform stories — but these stories don’t always fare well on the web. With the rise of digital storytelling platforms, though, this is quickly changing. We’re currently seeing a boom in visual, longform science stories. 

The BBC have published many such stories. One great example is The road to clean energy , which is a deep-dive into the data around clean energy in the UK. 

The use of data visualisations, images, illustrations, and pull-quotes breaks up the text of the story, producing a compelling and immersive reading experience. 

The University of Oxford

Some of the best science stories are published by museums.

Making the most of their amazing collections and expert staff, the Museum of Natural History at the University of Oxford have built a detailed digital story to introduce their ‘First Animals’ exhibition. 

With so much rich material at their fingertips, the museum uses maps, video, illustrations, and high resolution photos of their fascinating collection items to tell the story of Earth’s “mysterious early animals.” Learn about molecular clocks, Snowball Earth, and the Cambrian Explosion.  

With so much rich material at their fingertips, the museum uses maps, video, illustrations, and high resolution photos of their fascinating collection items to tell the story of Earth’s “mysterious early animals.” Learn about molecular clocks, Snowball Earth, and the Cambrian Explosion. 

Publish your first story free with Shorthand

Craft sumptuous content at speed. No code required.

Science Communication Resources

Are you looking for ways to communicate the impact of your research? The Graduate School has compiled a list of internal and external resources for students looking to improve their science communication. This list includes resources for communicating with colleagues, students, journalists, and the public.

Courses Open Broadly to Graduate School Students

BIOETHICS 605: Contemporary Issues in Bioethics and Science Policy :

The course will focus on 'Professional and Scholarly Writing' (Fall) and 'Communicating Science and Bioethics' (Spring). In the fall, we delve into how and where we express ideas about bioethics and science policy in writing. We begin from first principles: Why do we write? What can good writing do for us? How do we know when we're done? During the semester we will write clear, thoughtful, analytic and creative pieces in bioethics and science policy. The spring course provides students with practical training in the communication of scientific research and bioethical issues to the media, policy makers, and the general public. Recent instructors: Michael Waitzkin, Misha Angrist, Brian Southwell

BIOETHICS 591: Topics in Science Policy

During this independent research study, students will analyze science policy developments across government, including executive and agency actions, as well as proposed legislation and judicial decisions. Students will regularly produce policy brief summaries that overview the policy, explain the science at issue, present relevant background information, provide context concerning endorsements and opposition, and expound upon related legislation and governmental actions. Instructor consent required. Recent instructors: Nita Farahany, Gopal Sreenivasan, Jory Weintraub, William Krenzer, Thomas Williams, Sharron Docherty, Kearsley Stewart, Michael Waitzkin, Michael Clamann, Aubrey Incorvaia

PUBPOL 510S: Science and the Media: Narrative writing about Science, Health, and Policy

Those who write about science, health and related policy must make complex, nuanced ideas understandable to the nonscientist in ways that are engaging and entertaining, even if the topic is far outside the reader's frame of reference. Course examines different modes of science writing, the demands of each and considers different outlets for publication and their editorial parameters. Students interview practitioners of the craft. Written assignments include annotations of readings and original narratives about science and scientists. Course considers ways in which narrative writing can inform and affect policy. Prerequisites: a 200-level science course and/or permission of the instructor. Instructor: Angrist

Courses Open to Students in Specific Departments OR PROGRAMS

Pratt school of engineering.

EGR 790: Science Communication for Engineers

Special topics course. General engineering topics intended for graduate students only. Pratt graduate students only. Instructors: Marcie Pachino, Angus Bowers

Pratt also offers the following courses that may help engineering students build communication skills more broadly.

• EGR 505: Oral Communications for Engineers
• EGR 705: Academic Presentations for Engineers
• EGR 506: Academic & Professional Writing for Engineers I
• EGR 706: Academic & Professional Writing for Engineers 2
• EGR 790: PhD Writing for Engineers
• EGR 790: PhD Academic Presentations for Engineers

University Program in Genetics and Genomics

UPGEN 700: Critical Skills in Scientific Presentations

This is a required course for first year UPGEN program. In this course, students will focus on communicating science effectively to their peers. This course has a large peer to peer interaction component. Grading is based on class participation and a final "exam" which consists of an oral presentation. This course also has a career development component, consisting of a panel discussion with senior students in the UPGEN program on choosing a thesis lab, an overview of the preliminary exam process, and a panel discussion with UPGEN program alumni who have chosen diverse career paths. UPGEN students only.

Courses for International Graduate Students

The GS courses below are open to all graduate students who may be new to writing in academic English. Engineering students should take advantage of courses through Pratt's Graduate Communications and Intercultural Programs (GCIP).

• GS726: EIS Writing in STEM Fields
• GS 721: Oral Communication
• GS730: EIS Academic Writing II
• GS 731: Academic Presentations
• GS732: EIS Advanced Academic Writing for PhD Students

Duke Center for Data and Visualization Sciences offers workshops and data-related resources as well as online learning opportunities , where you can click on a topic area and then on a title to get links to videos and other resources.

Duke Graduate Academy virtual mini-courses : Duke Graduate Academy virtual courses, which are open to graduate and professional students and postdocs, often focus on Science Communication and related topics, such as “Science and Research Communication” and “Public Speaking for Everyone.”

Duke Program on Medical Misinformation : Duke Clinical and Translational Science Institute hosts a workshops series for clinical practitioners discussing how to engage in empathetic and meaningful conversations with patients about medical misinformation. These workshops are for anyone who has a professional role that includes caring for, guiding, or consulting with patients.

English for International Students 1-on-1 Consultations : Assistant Dean and Director of EIS Brad Teague offers individual appointments focusing on course presentations, conference talks, oral exams, and interviews. Students should come to each session with a specific speaking task as well as a list of aspects of language they wish to work on. Students may receive feedback on pronunciation, word choice, grammar, and presentation skills.

Duke Science & Society has produced a five-part series introducing the fundamentals of science communication.

• Why Communicate about Science?
• Who Is Your Audience?
• What Should We Say about Science?
• How Can We Reach Audiences?
• When Should We Communicate about Science?

Duke Science & Society students and faculty have also put together a series of blog posts about SciComm as well as a video archive of workshops on topics such as “It’s Not What You Say, it’s How You Say It: Communicating Health Information to Teens,” and “Science Sonnets: The Poetry of Good SciComm.”

Duke Presenting Clinical and Translational Science (PCATS ): Principles and Techniques for Developing and Delivering Effective Scientific Presentations in video modules.

Effective Academic Posters : A poster is a great way to share a short, coherent research story which viewers can take in within a few minutes. Poster sessions are the key way that new ideas are shared in many disciplines and are often great ways to get feedback on your work. From Trinity College’s Undergraduate Research Support

Pratt Graduate Communications and Intercultural Programs : Any Duke graduate student can take advantage of the video library of past events on communication and intercultural strategies.

The Duke Research Blog welcomes contributions from graduate student bloggers interested in building their science communication skills. You'll gain feedback and coaching from expert science writers and a published clip to show for your effort. Contact Robin A. Smith or Karl Bates to learn more and get involved.

Write for The Graduate School's professional development blog : Would you like to share your terrific science communication experiences with your fellow graduate students? Read past posts by student contributors Jameson Blount , Hannah Kania , and Jacqueline Nikpour . New contributors welcome!

Duke GRADx Talks : All Graduate School students are invited to present in the annual GRADx Talks, held during Duke's Graduate and Professional Student Appreciation Week. Students in the sciences as well as engineering, humanities, arts, and social sciences are invited to share a question that drives their research in a presentation accessible to a broad audience. Read about the value of participating in a blog post from Chris Bassil .

Duke UCEM Research Summit : Sloan Scholars and Affiliates in their second year are invited to share a research question that drives them in a presentation accessible to a STEM audience. The University Center of Exemplary Mentoring (UCEM) serves students in the physical sciences and engineering.

Workshops, Conferences, and Professional Associations

American Association for the Advancement of Science Mass Media Fellowships : This highly competitive program strengthens the connections between scientists and journalists by placing advanced undergraduate, graduate, and post-graduate level scientists, engineers and mathematicians at media organizations nationwide.

ComSciCon-Triangle : The annual local ComSciCon meeting. Read about ComSciCon-Triangle on The Graduate School’s Professional Development Blog.

ComSciCon : ComSciCon is a series of workshops   focused on the communication of complex and technical concepts organized by graduate students, for graduate students. ComSciCon attendees meet and interact with professional communicators, build lasting networks with graduate students in all fields of science and engineering from across the US and Canada, and write and publish original works.

SciPep Conferences : SciPEP ( Sci ence  P ublic  E ngagement  P artnership) seeks to ensure scientists are supported to be effective communicators and, if appropriate, active in engaging the public.

Science Communicators of North Carolina : SCoNC is dedicated to connecting science communicators and cultivating a love of science across North Carolina.

National Association of Science Writers : The National Association of Science Writers is a community of journalists, authors, editors, producers, public information officers, students and people who write and produce material intended to inform the public about science, health, engineering, and technology.

Online Training Modules and Resources

The Open Notebook : features science writing master classes, online workshops, blog posts about the craft of science writing, and resources to connect scientists and journalists.

Science Communications Lab : The Science Communication Lab is an innovative non-profit that uses film and multimedia storytelling to capture the wonder, nuance, complexity, and processes of science.

SciLine : SciLine aims to link local reporters with scientists.

Science Rising Resources for Training : Science Rising is a nonpartisan movement fighting for science, justice, and equity in our democracy. SR offers training resources for Science Communication.

Engagement and Storytelling : A digital guide to telling an engaging story about your project from the Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science at Stony Brook University.

NC State Science Communication Resources and Self-Education Workshops : North Carolina State University's Leadership in Public Science program has compiled a list of readings and online training workshops for science communication.

Storytelling in Science Writing : University of Guelph’s online module on narrative art in science writing.

Three Minute Thesis : University of Queensland, Australia offers a video series on scholars presenting their complex research in simple, 3-minute videos.

Triangle Area Science Communication and Outreach Resources : A spreadsheet of local Triangle-area Science Communication resources collated by a UNC graduate student.

Are we missing anything?

Know of any more science communication resources relevant to Duke graduate students? Drop us an email to suggest a new resource. 

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts

Career Guide  06 September 2019

Science communication

Most of the time, researchers aim to communicate the results of their work to other researchers. Sometimes, however, they feel the need to get their science across to a larger audience. Here is a collection of articles to help scientists communicate science effectively to the public and policymakers.

• Career Guide content
• Jobs and training

How I harnessed media engagement to supercharge my research career

My initial exposure to the world’s media was serendipitous, but I’ve learnt to be proactive about it — and reaped the benefits.

How a spreadsheet helped me to land my dream job

A shared spreadsheet, passed from generation to generation, helps graduate students in management navigate the academic job market. Whatever your field of study, you can make one, too.

• Silvia Sanasi

Bullied in science: I quit my job and launched an advocacy non-profit

Ahead of the Academic Parity Movement’s annual conference, co-founder Morteza Mahmoudi describes how it supports whistle-blowers.

• Morteza Mahmoudi

This geologist communicates science from the ski slopes

How Karin Kirk finds a balance between twin careers of science writing and skiing instruction.

• Miles Lizak

How sacked whistle-blower Susanne Täuber’s career fared after she spoke out

Denied promotion, Täuber describes what happened to her after she publicly challenged her university’s gender-equity policy.

• Susanne Täuber

Crossing the generational divide: what established scientists and early-career researchers can learn from each other

Astrophysicist and Shaw prizewinner Victoria Kaspi describes how science forums can help researchers of all ages to share ideas and career concerns.

• Kamal Nahas

How to craft a research project with non-academic collaborators

If you’re working with indigeneous researchers, citizen scientists or local communities, find out about their expectations, including ones around payment and authorship.

Engaged in collaborative research? Try a touch of intellectual humility

Being open to the limitations of their knowledge can help researchers to foster interdisciplinary and cross-cultural collaborations.

• Jane Palmer

Pack up the parachute: why global north–south collaborations need to change

Global-south researchers want equal partnerships that value intellectual exchange.

• Virginia Gewin

How to create a lab-group logo that stands out from the crowd

An eye-catching logo says a lot about your lab’s research, workplace culture and collaborative potential. Take time to get it right.

Fourteen things you need to know about collaborating with data scientists

Experimentalists often need help to analyse data. Here’s how to ensure your collaboration is productive.

• Michele Tobias
• Tyler Shoemaker

How to hatch, brew and craft the perfect maths partnership

Mathematicians and their collaborators discuss the joys and challenges of working together on projects in science and the arts.

• Rachel Crowell

How I mixed microbiome research with public-health advocacy

Evolutionary geneticist Aashish Jha studies the gut microbiome of infants while advocating for better hygiene and health care in their marginalized communities.

• Saugat Bolakhe

How scientists are using WhatsApp for research and communication

The messaging tool can help to reach collaborators and study participants in areas where Internet connectivity is poor.

• Christine Ro

How I found a broader impact as a PhD student through podcasting

I’ve learnt new skills and communicated science further afield through my immunology podcast, Inflammatory Content , says Kellen Cavagnero.

• Kellen J. Cavagnero

How a lab visit for people with neurological conditions inspired the global Pint of Science festival

Co-founder Praveen Paul describes how she went from neuroscientist to running an annual event across 26 countries.

• Eleanor Lawrence

How not to chatter like a toddler when giving a scientific presentation

Are we hardwired to overstuff presentations with details? Four simple steps can overcome this tendency, says David Rubenson.

• David Rubenson

How to protect research ideas as a junior scientist

Ijeoma Opara learnt some hard lessons after getting scooped in a grant application.

• Ijeoma Opara

How vlogging with my students enriched our science

Shooting video clips has fostered collaborations and showcased my students’ strengths in making science accessible.

Science communication with a French twist

Sarah Gagliano Taliun’s mother tongue is English, science’s lingua franca. Her move to a French-speaking university presented challenges and opportunities.

• Sarah Gagliano Taliun

Webcast: How art and design can showcase your science

Three experts explain how to use design principles to better communicate scientific data.

• Jack Leeming

African scientists engage with the public to tackle local challenges

Science-engagement initiatives in Africa disseminate knowledge and bridge the gap between research and the continent’s people.

• Abdullahi Tsanni

I’m a lip-reading scientist: here’s how I can discuss science with you

Supporting deaf and hard-of-hearing researchers requires thought and planning from colleagues, but science benefits greatly, says Denis Meuthen.

• Denis Meuthen

Broaden your scientific audience with video animation

Academic writing can go only so far. Use video and animations in plain language to explain why your research matters, says Alvina Lai.

Why I work unpaid to keep the Yemen Geological Museum open

Despite an ongoing civil war and economic crisis, museum manager Fahd Albarraq and his colleagues want Yemenis to continue visiting the museum’s collection.

• Shihab Jamal

Tips for collaborating with scientists, from a philosopher

Make language inclusive and agree on your aims in advance.

• Michael Paul Nelson

Radio days: science-communication tips from a panel-show scientist

Psychologist Ann-Marie Creaven regularly discusses her research on Ireland’s most listened-to station.

• Ann-Marie Creaven

How to get media coverage and boost your science’s impact

A good communications strategy can get your research seen by decision makers, says Rebecca Fuoco.

• Rebecca Fuoco

Don’t focus on English at the expense of your science

A language barrier can be a challenge, but there are better ways to spend your resources, says Zhanna Anikina.

• Zhanna Anikina

Being fluent in a second language can boost your research

Scientists who speak different languages can bring science to a whole new audience — and use it to their advantage, says Jamie Sugrue.

• Jamie Sugrue

Good presentation skills benefit careers — and science

Despite many competing demands, there are compelling reasons for researchers to prioritize developing the skills that will improve their presentations.

Collaborations with artists go beyond communicating the science

Scientists and artists are working together as never before, finds a Nature poll. Both sides need to invest time, and embrace surprise and challenge.

‘All my art is curiosity-driven’: the garden studio where art and physics collide

Geraldine Cox mixes the palettes of art and physics by illustrating phenomena such as light-interference patterns.

• Amber Dance

How to shape a productive scientist–artist collaboration

Researchers and artists reflect on the partnerships that have created career opportunities and forged a deeper public understanding of science.

The sound of stars

Composer David Ibbett encodes the dreams and details of complex physics phenomena into music to help audiences appreciate their splendour.

• David Ibbett

A mammoth discovery: oldest DNA on record from million-year-old teeth

Researchers sequence the oldest DNA ever recovered, and the people bringing art and science together.

• Benjamin Thompson
• Shamini Bundell

How the arts can help you to craft a successful research career

Engaging in a creative pursuit can stimulate creativity and foster boldness and tenacity in the lab and beyond.

Why your scientific presentation should not be adapted from a journal article

In trying to be rigorous, scientists frequently pack presentations with content from journal articles. The result can be incomprehensible and a lost opportunity.

How memorable melodies can make your research sing

Writing songs for open-mic sessions at a Boston bar helped scientist-songwriter Saurja DasGupta to communicate his research more confidently.

• Saurja DasGupta

Working Scientist podcast: How to craft and communicate a simple science story

Ditch jargon, keep sentences short, stay topical. Pakinam Amer shares the secrets of good science writing for books and magazines.

• Pakinam Amer

How the coronavirus pandemic is changing virtual science communication

Researchers flocked to join Skype a Scientist after COVID-19 closed their labs. The squid biologist who founded it explains how the science-communication platform has adapted.

• Nikki Forrester

Working Scientist podcast: How to sell your public outreach ideas to funders

Funding agencies and societies love novel approaches to science communication. Here is some expert advice on how to grab their attention.

Working Scientist podcast: How films and festivals can showcase your science

Pakinam Amer explores how science communication translates to film, comedy clubs, and virtual space clubs.

What Hollywood can teach researchers about scientific storytelling

Josh Ettinger says that screenwriting classes and a stint as a TV production intern have boosted his science-communication skills.

• Josh Ettinger

How to transition from the lab to full-time science communicator

Friends, family, peers and professors might struggle to understand your motivations for leaving the lab to work in science communication.

Coronavirus conversations: Science communication during a pandemic

How researchers can tackle an “infodemic” of hearsay, speculation and fake news.

Working Scientist podcast: Science communication made simple

Funders require that researchers clearly explain their science to a general audience. Pakinam Amer discovers the secrets of sound science communication.

Top tips for getting your science out there

Craig Cormick explains how scientists can get their arguments across to members of the public.

• Craig Cormick

Exposing the secret life of whales at the World Economic Forum

Palaeontologist Nick Pyenson highlights the importance of scientific evidence to business and policy leaders.

• Nick Pyenson

The ant-bite video that changed my approach to science communication

By making videos about the first steps of his research, Adrian Smith has realized the production value of his science.

• Adrian Smith

Feeling stuck? Close your laptop, stop your field measurements and write a poem

Sam Illingworth explains how poetry can help to communicate and celebrate your science.

• Sam Illingworth

From academia to freelance curator

A chance visit to the Science Museum in London brought Emily Scott-Dearing into science communication.

• Emily Scott-Dearing

Lessons I’ve learnt from creating a science podcast

Making a podcast as a side project involves a steep learning curve, and although it might never beat Serial in the podcast rankings, the process can have myriad other benefits, says Katherine Bassil.

• Katherine Bassil

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

• Skip to main content
• Skip to main navigation

Science Communication Master's Program

• Publications
• Students & Alumni
• Graduate fellowships

We offer world-class training in science journalism.

Our alumni thrive in fulfilling, lifelong careers.

Read published work by our students and alumni.

Prepare for success with academic and on-the-job training.

Program  News

About the  Program

There is a huge gap between scientists and the public, but graduates of the Science Communication Masters Program at UCSC are working to bridge that gap.

Slug  Newscenter

Program  Highlights

Our 3rd director: Erika Check Hayden

An International Student's Guide to Freelancing

Student articles

Our  Alumni

Graduates by year

Testimonials

Alumni articles

Our  Partners

Physical & Biological Sciences Division

CSUMB Science Illustration Program

• Report an accessibility barrier
• Land Acknowledgment
• Accreditation

Last modified: August 16, 2021 128.114.113.82

We use cookies to enhance our website for you. Proceed if you agree to this policy or learn more about it.

• Essay Database >
• Essays Examples >
• Essay Topics

Essays on Science Communication

2 samples on this topic

Writing a bunch of Science Communication papers is an implicit part of present-day studying, be it in high-school, college, or university. If you can do that unassisted, that's just awesome; yet, other learners might not be that savvy, as Science Communication writing can be quite difficult. The database of free sample Science Communication papers offered below was set up in order to help flunker learners rise up to the challenge.

On the one hand, Science Communication essays we publish here distinctly demonstrate how a really exceptional academic paper should be developed. On the other hand, upon your request and for an affordable price, a professional essay helper with the relevant academic experience can put together a high-quality paper example on Science Communication from scratch.

MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology

• Machine learning
• Social justice
• Black holes
• Classes and programs

Departments

• Aeronautics and Astronautics
• Brain and Cognitive Sciences
• Architecture
• Political Science
• Mechanical Engineering

Centers, Labs, & Programs

• Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL)
• Picower Institute for Learning and Memory
• Lincoln Laboratory
• School of Architecture + Planning
• School of Engineering
• School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences
• Sloan School of Management
• School of Science
• MIT Schwarzman College of Computing

Science communication competition brings research into the real world

Press contact :.

Previous image Next image

Laurence Willemet remembers countless family dinners where curious faces turned to her with shades of the same question: “What is it, exactly, that you do with robots?”

It’s a familiar scenario for MIT students exploring topics outside of their family’s scope of knowledge — distilling complex concepts without slides or jargon, plumbing the depths with nothing but lay terms. “It was during these moments,” Willemet says, “that I realized the importance of clear communication and the power of storytelling.”

Participating in the MIT Research Slam, then, felt like one of her family dinners.

The finalists in the 2024 MIT Research Slam competition met head-to-head on Wednesday, April 17 at a live, in-person showcase event. Four PhD candidates and four postdoc finalists demonstrated their topic mastery and storytelling skills by conveying complex ideas in only 180 seconds to an educated audience unfamiliar with the field or project at hand.

The Research Slam follows the format of the 3-Minute Thesis competition, which takes place annually at over 200 universities around the world. Both an exciting competition and a rigorous professional development training opportunity, the event serves an opportunity to learn for everyone involved.

One of this year’s competitors, Bhavish Dinakar, explains it this way: “Participating in the Research Slam was a fantastic opportunity to bring my research from the lab into the real world. In addition to being a helpful exercise in public speaking and communication, the three-minute time limit forces us to learn the art of distilling years of detailed experiments into a digestible story that non-experts can understand.”

Leading up to the event, participants joined training workshops on pitch content and delivery, and had the opportunity to work one-on-one with educators from the Writing and Communication Center, English Language Studies, Career Advising and Professional Development, and the Engineering Communication Labs, all of which co-sponsored and co-produced the event. This interdepartmental team offered support for the full arc of the competition, from early story development to one-on-one practice sessions.

The showcase was jovially emceed by Eric Grunwald, director of English language learning. He shared his thoughts on the night: “I was thrilled with the enthusiasm and skill shown by all the presenters in sharing their work in this context. I was also delighted by the crowd’s enthusiasm and their many insightful questions. All in all, another very successful slam.”

A panel of accomplished judges with distinct perspectives on research communication gave feedback after each of the talks: Deborah Blum, director of the Knight Science Journalism Program at MIT; Denzil Streete, senior associate dean and director of graduate education; and Emma Yee, scientific editor at the journal Cell .

Deborah Blum aptly summed up her experience: “It was a pleasure as a science journalist to be a judge and to listen to this smart group of MIT grad students and postdocs explain their research with such style, humor, and intelligence. It was a reminder of the importance the university places on the value of scientists who communicate. And this matters. We need more scientists who can explain their work clearly, explain science to the public, and help us build a science-literate world.”

After all the talks, the judges provided constructive and substantive feedback for the contestants. It was a close competition, but in the end, Bhavish Dinakar was the judges’ choice for first place, and the audience agreed, awarding him the Audience Choice award. Omar Rutledge’s strong performance earned him the runner-up position. Among the postdoc competitors, Laurence Willemet won first place and Audience Choice, with Most Kaniz Moriam earning the runner-up award.

Postdoc Kaniz Mariam noted that she felt privileged to participate in the showcase. “This experience has enhanced my ability to communicate research effectively and boosted my confidence in sharing my work with a broader audience. I am eager to apply the lessons learned from this enriching experience to future endeavors and continue contributing to MIT's dynamic research community. The MIT Research Slam Showcase wasn't just about winning; it was about the thrill of sharing knowledge and inspiring others. Special thanks to Chris Featherman and Elena Kallestinova from the MIT Communication Lab for their guidance in practical communication skills. ”

Double winner Laurence Willemet related the competition to experiences in her daily life. Her interest in the Research Slam was rooted in countless family dinners filled with curiosity. “‘What is it exactly that you do with robots?’ they would ask, prompting me to unravel the complexities of my research in layman’s terms. Each time, I found myself grappling with the task of distilling intricate concepts into digestible nuggets of information, relying solely on words to convey the depth of my work. It was during these moments, stripped of slides and scientific jargon, that I realized the importance of clear communication and the power of storytelling. And so, when the opportunity arose to participate in the Research Slam, it felt akin to one of those family dinners for me.”

The first place finishers received a $600 cash prize, while the runners-up and audience choice winners each received $300.

Last year’s winner in the PhD category, Neha Bokil, candidate in biology working on her dissertation in the lab of David Page, is set to represent MIT at the Three Minute Thesis Northeast Regional Competition later this month, which is organized by the Northeastern Association of Graduate Schools.

A full list of slam finalists and the titles of their talks is below.

  PhD Contestants: 

• Pradeep Natarajan, Chemical Engineering (ChemE), “What can coffee-brewing teach us about brain disease?”
• Omar Rutledge, Brain and Cognitive Sciences, “Investigating the effects of cannabidiol (CBD) on social anxiety disorder”
• Bhavish Dinakar, ChemE, “A boost from batteries: making chemical reactions faster”
• Sydney Dolan, Aeronautics and Astronautics, “Creating traffic signals for space”

  Postdocs: 

• Augusto Gandia, Architecture and Planning, “Cyber modeling — computational morphogenesis via ‘smart’ models”
• Laurence Willemet, Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, “Remote touch for teleoperation”
• Most Kaniz Moriam, Mechanical Engineering, “Improving recyclability of cellulose-based textile wastes”
• Mohammed Aatif Shahab, ChemE, “Eye-based human engineering for enhanced industrial safety” 

Research Slam organizers included Diana Chien, director of MIT School of Engineering Communication Lab ; Elena Kallestinova, director of MIT Writing and Communication Center ; Alexis Boyer, assistant director, Graduate Career Services, Career Advising and Professional Development (CAPD); Amanda Cornwall, associate director, Graduate Student Professional Development, CAPD; and Eric Grunwald, director of English Language Studies. This event was sponsored by the Office of Graduate Education, the Office of Postdoctoral Services, the Writing and Communication Center, MIT Career Advising and Professional Development , English Language Studies, and the MIT School of Engineering Communication Labs.

Share this news article on:

Related links.

• MIT Research Slam
• Research Slam YouTube channel
• MIT Career Advising and Professional Development (CAPD)
• Graduate Student Professional Development
• Writing and Communication Center
• MIT School of Engineering Communication Lab
• MIT English Language Studies

Related Topics

• Contests and academic competitions
• Science communications
• Graduate, postdoctoral
• Technology and society
• Science writing
• Career Advising and Professional Development

Related Articles

Third annual MIT Research Slam showcase highlights PhD and postdoc communication skills

MIT Research Slam showcases postdoc and PhD communication skills

Third annual Science Slam becomes first virtual Research Slam

Previous item Next item

More MIT News

Professor Emeritus David Lanning, nuclear engineer and key contributor to the MIT Reactor, dies at 96

Read full story →

Discovering community and cultural connections

MIT Supply Chain Management Program earns top honors in three 2024 rankings

New treatment could reverse hair loss caused by an autoimmune skin disease

Study: Heavy snowfall and rain may contribute to some earthquakes

How AI might shape LGBTQIA+ advocacy

• More news on MIT News homepage →

Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA, USA

• Map (opens in new window)
• Events (opens in new window)
• People (opens in new window)
• Careers (opens in new window)
• Accessibility
• Social Media Hub
• MIT on Facebook
• MIT on YouTube
• MIT on Instagram

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Welcome to the Purdue Online Writing Lab

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

The Online Writing Lab at Purdue University houses writing resources and instructional material, and we provide these as a free service of the Writing Lab at Purdue. Students, members of the community, and users worldwide will find information to assist with many writing projects. Teachers and trainers may use this material for in-class and out-of-class instruction.

The Purdue On-Campus Writing Lab and Purdue Online Writing Lab assist clients in their development as writers—no matter what their skill level—with on-campus consultations, online participation, and community engagement. The Purdue Writing Lab serves the Purdue, West Lafayette, campus and coordinates with local literacy initiatives. The Purdue OWL offers global support through online reference materials and services.

A Message From the Assistant Director of Content Development 

The Purdue OWL® is committed to supporting  students, instructors, and writers by offering a wide range of resources that are developed and revised with them in mind. To do this, the OWL team is always exploring possibilties for a better design, allowing accessibility and user experience to guide our process. As the OWL undergoes some changes, we welcome your feedback and suggestions by email at any time.

Please don't hesitate to contact us via our contact page  if you have any questions or comments.

All the best,

Social Media

Facebook twitter.

Spotlight: Collaborative Writing to Solve Real-World Problems

The Communication Spotlight features innovative instructors who teach written, oral, digital/technological, kinetic, and visual communication modes.

What is the assignment .

Collaborative Technical Proposal

The students collaborate as a team across different engineering disciplines to produce a technical proposal (written paper and verbal presentation) to solve a real-world problem. The proposed technology should be new (never seen before) or improve an existing product. Think about this as a problem in search of a technology solution, NOT a technology in search of a problem to solve. The proposal should address the solution’s technical feasibility and provide credible evidence to validate the problem, target customer, competition, development timeline, cost estimations, and user risk management, all critical issues that need to be addressed to bring any idea into fruition in the industry.

How does it work?

I like this assignment because it asks students to learn and practice multifaceted skills, including critical thinking, problem-solving, and team collaboration. The assignment challenges students to identify real-world problems and develop innovative solutions by applying technical knowledge in practical scenarios. The students practice iterative critical thinking (evidence-based research) during the outlining process to validate and organize their points of view before any drafting should begin. The writing then focuses on self-reflection, iterative peer editing, and feedback for improvements. The students’ learning outcome is the ability to communicate a technical solution to a real problem effectively and with credibility, both in written and oral forms. The goal is to persuade a broad audience, such as senior executives and investors, to invest in their ideas. Additionally, the structured feedback process and collaborative environment foster professional growth, leadership skills, and ethical considerations in a workplace-like setting. This comprehensive learning experience is designed to prepare students academically and professionally, equipping them with a growth mindset, grit, and agency needed to succeed in ever-changing future workforce demands.

What do students say?

Aside from technical knowledge, I believe it’s also essential for engineers to demonstrate strong communication skills. These skills will help clearly and effectively present complicated ideas and technical plans or create technical reports for company leaders or academic peers. Additionally, I find communication very beneficial for productive collaboration and valuable for engineers when working with others across different projects and disciplines. – Student A

Communication is essential in engineering; ideas could never become reality without communication. It takes clear communication and teamwork to manufacture new products and explain them to others. Engineers must be able to discuss their creations with a diverse audience, most unfamiliar with their area of expertise. – Student B 

Being able to communicate with others effectively is essential for engineers. This is especially true in work environments where engineers must collaborate and pitch proposals to managers and directors. The ability to communicate is a skill that all engineers should continuously work on to express their ideas more clearly and effectively. – Student C 

Communication is essential for engineers because every calculation or design we create would linger on paper without it. Ideas would not be able to come to fruition, and nothing would be built. Communicating thoughts or ideas may be complex for engineers because we spend most of the time designing and understanding how things work. However, practicing delivering presentations and preparing articles or documents allows us to learn how to explain our thoughts and ideas. – Student D

Student Artifact: 

Proposal Excerpt:

“The proposed EzBreathe inhaler attachment, along with the integrated smartphone app, is designed to help people manage their asthma more effectively. By integrating a spirometer and nitric oxide level measurements, patients will be able to assess their lung function and any indication of airway swelling on a regular basis using the corresponding user-friendly app. The app will also include features such as clear and concise results, tips for correct breathing techniques to properly inhale the prescribed amount of medicine, and reminders to help patients stay consistent with treatment and assessment. The Asthma Therapy Assessment Questionnaire (ATAQ) will also be integrated into the app to evaluate patients’ asthma control and management. Based on this, patients will be notified when they need more intense treatment and what areas of management they can improve on.”

Read the Full Proposal Here

The 2021-2022 UCI Writing Award-winning technical proposal EzBreathe demonstrated exemplary mastery of all learning outcomes. The proposal showed excellence in critical thinking and analysis, use of evidence and research, development and structure, and language and style conventions. The added challenge for this proposal is its goal, where the team needed not only to address the technical feasibility of their solution to solve a real-world problem, but also had to go beyond their engineering studies to address business value questions such as customer and competitive analysis, critical for product development in the professional world. Moreover, since the proposal’s target audience is not just engineers, the team explained all the topics convincingly with appropriate background and context so that even a non-technical audience can follow and easily understand. While the technical proposal demonstrated writing excellence, it is even more remarkable considering this project was completed by a team, and each member is from a different engineering discipline: biomedical engineering, chemical engineering, civil engineering, and material science engineering. To produce one technical proposal of such detail where every part of the content is cohesively aligned from the beginning to the end is already challenging for one person, let alone a group of students with different majors and time commitments. Each member in this project has demonstrated their respective substantive contributions and excellence in teamwork, as well as additional learning outcomes assessed for the course needed for success in the professional world. 

Why does this work?

This collaborative writing assignment provides students with the opportunity to think critically about a real-world technical program with their classmates and practice developing their writing processes as a team. This assignment also underscores the importance of providing students with a specific audience – in this case, potential investors – to write for.  

Check out these resources for developing collaborative and audience-aware assignments in your communication classes:

• Collaborative Writing Assignment Resources from UCONN Writing Center
• Group Writing Strategies and Pitfalls from UNC Writing Center
• Start thinking about audience, genre, and the rhetorical situation with Understanding Writing Situations from WAC Clearinghouse

You may also like...

Spotlight: Assigning a Creative Short Story in a Gender & Sexuality Studies Course

Spotlight: Engaging Public Audiences with Multimedia

Master of Fine Arts in Creative Writing The Write Stuff for Writers

Credit Hours

View Courses

100% online, 8-week courses

Transfer in up to 50% of the degree total

Grow Your Writing Passion into a Career with Liberty’s Online MFA in Creative Writing

Many people write creatively, but few hone their skills to develop their writing craft to its highest form. Even fewer learn the other skills it takes to become a successful writer, such as the steps needed to get a book published and into the hands of readers. Liberty’s 100% online Master of Fine Arts (MFA) in Creative Writing can help you develop your writing passion into a career so you can set your works free to impact culture and the world.

Employers in every industry need professionals who have strong writing skills, so you can be confident that your ability to write effectively can also help set you apart in your current career. With in-demand writing expertise and the ability to customize your degree with electives in literature or writing practice, Liberty’s online MFA in Creative Writing can help you achieve your professional writing goals.

Our online MFA in Creative Writing is designed to help you build on your writing skills with specific workshops dedicated to the craft of fiction, poetry, creative nonfiction, or screenwriting. With a work-in-progress approach to writing practice and mentorship from our faculty of experienced writers and scholars, you can learn the specific skills you need to make your writing stand out.

Ranked in the Top 10% of Niche.com’s Best Online Schools in America

• What Sets Us Apart?
• Private Nonprofit University
• 600+ Online Degrees
• No Standardized Testing for Admission
• Transfer in up to 75% of an Undergrad Degree
• Transfer in up to 50% of a Grad/Doctoral Degree

Why Choose Liberty’s MFA in Creative Writing?

Our online MFA in Creative Writing is mainly offered in an 8-week course format, and our tuition rate for graduate programs hasn’t increased in 9 years. Through our program, you can study the writing process and develop your creative skills through workshops with experienced writing professionals. With our flexible format, you can grow in your creative writing while continuing to do what is important to you.

As a terminal degree, the online MFA in Creative Writing can also help you pursue opportunities to teach writing at the K-12 or college level. You will gain comprehensive and in-depth exposure to writing, literature, publishing, and many other professional writing skills that you can pass on to students. Partner with the Liberty family and learn under faculty who have spent years in the field you love. Your career in professional writing starts here.

What Will You Study in Our MFA in Creative Writing?

The MFA in Creative Writing program is designed to help you become an excellent creative writer across the genres of creative fiction, nonfiction, screenwriting, and poetry. You can learn how to produce aesthetically and culturally engaged creative works while gaining professional knowledge and practice. You will also study foundational contemporary literature so that you have a background in studying important works to draw on for your writing.

To help you in your professional writing, you will also study many essential skills in editing, layout, and the business of publishing so that you can best position yourself for success in the market. Through your creative writing courses and workshops, you can develop your craft so that you will be ready for your thesis project.

Here are a few examples of the skills Liberty’s MFA in Creative Writing can help you master:

• Marketing your projects and pursuing new writing opportunities
• Organizing writing and adapting it to different types of writing
• Tailoring writing to specific audiences and markets
• Understanding what makes art effective, compelling, and impactful
• Writing compelling stories that engage readers

Potential Career Opportunities

• Book and magazine writer
• Business communications specialist
• Creative writing instructor
• Publications editor
• Screenwriter
• Website copy editor and writer
• Writing manager

Featured Courses

• ENGL 600 – Editing, Layout, and Publishing
• ENGL 601 – Writing as Cultural Engagement
• ENGL 603 – Literary Theory and Practice
• WRIT 610 – Writing Fiction

Degree Information

• This program falls under the College of Arts and Sciences .
• View the Graduate Arts and Sciences Course Guides (login required).
• Download and review the Graduate Manual for MFA .

Degree Completion Plan (PDF)

Not sure what to choose?

Speak to one of our admissions specialists to help you choose the program that best fits your needs.

• Tuition & Aid

Your success is our success, which is why we are committed to providing quality academics at an affordable tuition rate. While other colleges are increasing their tuition, we have frozen tuition rates for the majority of our undergraduate, graduate, and doctoral programs for the past 9 years – and counting.

All Tuition & Fees

Financial Aid & Scholarships

Financial Aid Forms & Eligibility

Scholarship Opportunities

Admission Information for the Master of Fine Arts in Creative Writing (MFA)

Admission requirements.

• A non-refundable, non-transferable $50 application fee will be posted on the current application upon enrollment (waived for qualifying service members, veterans, and military spouses – documentation verifying military status is required) .
• Unofficial transcripts can be used for acceptance purposes with the submission of a Transcript Request Form .
• Creative Writing Sample – A creative writing sample of one creative writing work of at least 2,500 words or a culmination of creative writing samples totaling 2,500 words.*
• Applicants whose native language is other than English must submit official scores for the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) or an approved alternative assessment. For information on alternative assessments or TOEFL waivers, please call Admissions or view the official International Admissions policy .

*A sample of one or more poems totaling a minimum of 750 words may also be submitted. Song lyrics are not accepted at this time as writing samples.

Preliminary Acceptance

If you are sending in a preliminary transcript for acceptance, you must:

• Be in your final term and planning to start your master’s degree after the last day of class for your bachelor’s degree.
• Complete a Bachelor’s Self-Certification Form confirming your completion date. You may download the form from the Forms and Downloads page or contact an admissions counselor to submit the form on your behalf.
• Submit an official/unofficial transcript to confirm that you are in your final term. The preliminary transcript must show a minimum of 105 completed credit hours.
• If you are a current Liberty University student completing your undergraduate degree, you will need to submit a Degree/Certificate Completion Application .
• Send in an additional, final official transcript with a conferral date on it by the end of your first semester of enrollment in the new master’s degree.

Dual Enrollment

Please see the Online Dual Enrollment page for information about starting graduate courses while finishing your bachelor’s degree.

Transcript Policies

Unofficial college transcript policy.

Unofficial transcripts combined with a Transcript Request Form can be used for admission. Official transcripts are required within 60 days of the admissions decision or before non-attendance drops for the first set of matriculated classes, whichever comes first, and will prevent enrollment into future terms until all official transcripts have been received.

Before sending unofficial college transcripts, please make sure they include the following:

• Your previous school’s name or logo printed on the document
• Cumulative GPA
• A list of completed courses and earned credit broken down by semester
• Degree and date conferred (if applicable)

Official College Transcript Policy

An acceptable official college transcript is one that has been issued directly from the institution and is in a sealed envelope. If you have one in your possession, it must meet the same requirements. If your previous institution offers electronic official transcript processing, they can send the document directly to [email protected] .

If the student uses unofficial transcripts with a Transcript Request Form to gain acceptance, all official transcripts must be received within 60 days of the admissions decision or before non-attendance drops for the first set of matriculated classes, whichever comes first. Failure to send all official transcripts within the 60-day period will prevent enrollment into future terms until all official transcripts have been received.

Admissions Office Contact Information

(800) 424-9596

(888) 301-3577

Email for Questions

[email protected]

Email for Documents

[email protected]

Liberty University Online Admissions Verification

1971 University Blvd.

Lynchburg, VA 24515

Ready to Apply?

Submit your application online or over the phone.

Apply by phone: (800) 424-9595

Liberty University is dedicated to providing world-class educational experiences to military students across the globe.

Who May Qualify?

• Active Duty
• Reserve/National Guard
• Veterans/Retirees
• Spouses of Service Members and Veterans/Retirees
• Current Department of Defense Employees

Available Benefits:

• Tuition discounts – $275 per credit hour for graduate courses
• Additional discount for veterans who service in a civilian capacity as a First Responder (less than $625 per course) *
• 8-week courses, 8 different start dates each year, and no set login times (may exclude certain courses such as practicums, internships, or field experiences)

*Not applicable to certificates.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is an mfa in creative writing.

A Master of Fine Arts degree, or MFA, is a terminal degree in an artistic craft that demonstrates that you have achieved the highest level of training and skill in your discipline. Like a doctorate, an MFA often allows you to teach courses at the graduate level while also providing many opportunities for scholarship and leadership in education. If you want to grow your creative writing skills to become the best writer you can be, then the Master of Fine Arts can help you get there.

How will students work towards developing their writing skills?

With creative writing workshops and a thesis project, you will receive support and guidance to help you become the best writer you can be.

How long will it take to complete the MFA in Creative Writing?

You can complete the MFA in Creative Writing in just 48 credit hours!

Inner Navigation

• Why Choose Liberty?
• What Will You Study?
• Admission Information

Have questions?

Are you ready to change your future?

Apply FREE This Week*

Request Information

*Some restrictions may occur for this promotion to apply. This promotion also excludes active faculty and staff, military, non-degree-seeking, DGIA, Continuing Education, WSB, and certificate students.

Request Information About a Program

Request info about liberty university online, what program are you interested in, choose a program level.

Choose a program level

Bachelor’s

Master’s

Certificate

Select a Field of Study

Select a field of study

Select a Program

Select a program

Next: Contact Info

Legal full name.

Enter legal full name

Legal Last Name

Enter legal last name

Enter an email address

Enter a phone number

Full Address

Enter an address

Apt., P.O. Box, or can’t find your address? Enter it manually instead .

Select a Country

Street Address

Enter Street Address

Enter State

ZIP/Postal Code

Enter Zip Code

Back to automated address search

Start my application now for FREE

Help | Advanced Search

Computer Science > Human-Computer Interaction

Title: corporate communication companion (ccc): an llm-empowered writing assistant for workplace social media.

Abstract: Workplace social media platforms enable employees to cultivate their professional image and connect with colleagues in a semi-formal environment. While semi-formal corporate communication poses a unique set of challenges, large language models (LLMs) have shown great promise in helping users draft and edit their social media posts. However, LLMs may fail to capture individualized tones and voices in such workplace use cases, as they often generate text using a "one-size-fits-all" approach that can be perceived as generic and bland. In this paper, we present Corporate Communication Companion (CCC), an LLM-empowered interactive system that helps people compose customized and individualized workplace social media posts. Using need-finding interviews to motivate our system design, CCC decomposes the writing process into two core functions, outline and edit: First, it suggests post outlines based on users' job status and previous posts, and next provides edits with attributions that users can contextually customize. We conducted a within-subjects user study asking participants both to write posts and evaluate posts written by others. The results show that CCC enhances users' writing experience, and audience members rate CCC-enhanced posts as higher quality than posts written using a non-customized writing assistant. We conclude by discussing the implications of LLM-empowered corporate communication.

Submission history

Access paper:.

• Other Formats

References & Citations

• Google Scholar
• Semantic Scholar

BibTeX formatted citation

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Code, data and media associated with this article, recommenders and search tools.

• Institution

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs .