ComSciCon-Triangle: Regional Science Communication Training for Graduate Students

Abstract

The ability of scientists to effectively communicate their research, and scientific ideas in general, with a variety of audiences is critical in both academic and non-academic careers. There is currently a dearth of formal and informal science communication training opportunities for graduate students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. This curriculum paper introduces ComSciCon-Triangle, a graduate student–organized science communication workshop for graduate students in STEM at research universities in the Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina, region. Started in 2015, this annual workshop aims to empower graduate students to be more engaged in communicating their research with the public as well as with fellow scientists. Each workshop consists of interactive panel discussions with invited science communicators (science writers, academics, filmmakers, etc.), informal networking opportunities with invited guests and other attendees, and hands-on sessions for improving oral and written communication skills. Analyzing pre- and post-survey data from all ComSciCon-Triangle attendees from 2015 to 2017, we find that workshop attendees feel significantly more confident in their ability to communicate scientific ideas with both the general public and with other scientists, and more confident submitting a written piece to a popular science publication or journal. We discuss how ComSciCon-Triangle serves as a model for local science communication workshops “for graduate students, organized by graduate students.”

Baseline assessment in writing research: A case study of popularization discourse in first-year undergraduate students

“…Although some of the courses researched focus solely on speaking skills (Cirino et al, 2017;Whittington et al, 2013), most were developed to teach writing skills (Boynton, 2018;Brownell et al, 2013a;Bruno & Vercellesi, 2002;Moni et al, 2007;Poronnik & Moni, 2006;Rakedzon & Baram-Tsabari, 2017;Sivey & Lee, 2008). Other courses focus on a combination of the two skills (Heath et al, 2014;Kloepper, 2017;Latimore et al, 2014;Mercer-Mapstone & Kuchel, 2016;O'Keeffe & Bain, 2018;Yeoman et al, 2011). It should be noted that all the above studies are rooted in STEM fields.…”

“…For some of these courses, their effectiveness is based solely on the self-reporting of participating students, who evaluate: their ability to communicate science (Brownell et al, 2013a); learning gains (Cirino et al, 2017); However, one of the prevailing issues with most of the studies described above is their lack of a pretest or baseline assessment. In practice, the assessment of grades and skills in these studies is based solely on post-intervention measurements (Boynton, 2018;Brownell et al, 2013a;Cirino et al, 2017;Heath et al, 2014;Latimore et al, 2014;Mercer-Mapstone & Kuchel, 2016;O'Keeffe & Bain, 2018;Poronnik & Moni, 2006;Yeoman et al, 2011). While some studies apply pre-and posttest surveys geared towards the development of students' self-perception of skills (Brownell et al, 2013a;Cirino et al, 2017;O'Keeffe & Bain, 2018;Poronnik & Moni, 2006;Yeoman et al, 2011), others apply either a post-course survey (Heath et al, 2014;Mercer-Mapstone & Kuchel, 2016), or assessments throughout the course (Latimore et al, 2014).…”

“…In practice, the assessment of grades and skills in these studies is based solely on post-intervention measurements (Boynton, 2018;Brownell et al, 2013a;Cirino et al, 2017;Heath et al, 2014;Latimore et al, 2014;Mercer-Mapstone & Kuchel, 2016;O'Keeffe & Bain, 2018;Poronnik & Moni, 2006;Yeoman et al, 2011). While some studies apply pre-and posttest surveys geared towards the development of students' self-perception of skills (Brownell et al, 2013a;Cirino et al, 2017;O'Keeffe & Bain, 2018;Poronnik & Moni, 2006;Yeoman et al, 2011), others apply either a post-course survey (Heath et al, 2014;Mercer-Mapstone & Kuchel, 2016), or assessments throughout the course (Latimore et al, 2014). Because they lack the appropriate data to make inferences about skill development, such studies can, at best, only offer insights into the current state of students' popularization skills, or into changes in self-perception following a teaching intervention.…”

ComSciConCAN and the Positive Impacts on STEM Graduate Students’ Confidence and Sense of Belonging

“…30 A study into the impacts of U.S. regional Com-SciCon workshops in 2015-2017 found significant improvements in attendees' confidence levels for communicating science with different audiences. 31 ComSciConCAN is an adaptation of the ComSciCon workshops within Canada and, as such, is designed to help STEM graduate students improve their skills in communicating their research with a variety of audiences. In 2021, this conference took place virtually on August 13 th -15 th , and comprised of the following components: a)…”

A case study of the popularization discourse in first-year undergraduate students serves as the baseline assessment in writing research

“…The efficacy of some classes is determined only by the students who participate in those programmes and their selfreporting of their experiences in those classes. These students evaluate a variety of factors in order to determine the efficacy of the classes, including the growth of their employability skills (O' Keeffe & Bain, 2018) and their confidence in their ability to communicate scientific concepts (Cirino et al, 2017), and their overall learning gains. One of the factors that these students consider is the growth of their employability skills (Cirino et al, 2017).…”