Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Adding Dialogue to Citizen Science
Adding Dialogue to Citizen Science
Adding Dialogue to Citizen Science
Adding Dialogue to Citizen Science
Adding Dialogue to Citizen Science
Adding Dialogue to Citizen Science
Adding Dialogue to Citizen Science
Adding Dialogue to Citizen Science
Adding Dialogue to Citizen Science
Adding Dialogue to Citizen Science
Adding Dialogue to Citizen Science
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Adding Dialogue to Citizen Science

207

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
207
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • The NSF has a center for ISE CLO recognized as leaders in CS and ISEWe & colleagues defined the field of Citizen Science & provided recommendations for its improvementRecommendations from report widely cited, used in NSF grant proposals, some of which were funded: National Geographic, Audubon, and University of Minnesota.
  • How those other steps might relate to dialogue.
  • The challenge in doing this is precisely in the assumption that people make evidence-based decisions, particularly in contexts related to risk. It has been assumed that people are rational, analytical, and essentially make decisions cognitively. More recently, particularly in the context of climate change, it is being recognized that the affective elements of emotion, of values and trust, are just as much at play. So that when people are confronted with evidence, it can variably be interpreted as something that is or is not of pressing concern.
  • Transcript

    • 1. Center for the Advancement of <br />Informal Science Education (CAISE)<br />CAISE Inquiry Group Report, July 2009<br />Public Participation in Scientific Research: Defining the Field and Assessing its Potential for Informal Science Education<br />Bonney, R., Ballard, H., Jordan, R., McCallie, E., Phillips, T., Shirk, J., and Wilderman, C.<br />
    • 2. Scientist/ Technician<br />Public Participants<br />Steps in scientific process:<br />Define a question/issue<br />Gather information<br />Develop explanations<br />Design data collection methods<br />Collect data/samples<br />Analyze samples<br />Analyze data<br />Interpret data/conclude<br />Disseminate conclusions<br />Discuss results/inquire further<br />
    • 3. PPSR models:<br />Contributory<br />Collaborative<br />Co-Created<br />Define a question/issue<br />Gather information<br />Develop explanations<br />Design data collection methods<br />Collect data/samples<br />Analyze samples<br />Analyze data<br />Interpret data/conclude<br />Disseminate conclusions<br />Discuss results/inquire further<br />
    • 4. Project FeederWatch<br />Contributory<br />Boundary ofNorthern Range<br />2005<br />2000<br />1995<br />1990<br />
    • 5. Shermans Creek Conservation Association<br />Co-created<br />Flickr photo, sierraclub<br />Flickr photo, 900hp<br />
    • 6. Science center citizen science participation distribution:<br />Define a question/issue<br />Gather information<br />Develop explanations<br />Design data collection methods<br />Collect data/samples<br />Analyze samples<br />Analyze data<br />Interpret data/conclude<br />Disseminate conclusions<br />Discuss results/inquire further<br />
    • 7. Canadian Community Monitoring Network<br />(Pollock and Whitelaw 2005; Vaughan et al 2003)<br />timely  accessible  relevant  useful<br />
    • 8. Environmental activities<br />Values and perspectives<br />Recording<br />Experience(internal)<br />Information(external)<br />Empowerment<br />Interpretation<br />Decision making<br />Adapted from Lawrence 2009<br />
    • 9. Engaging researchers: Potentials<br />
    • 10. Engaging researchers: Challenges<br />Logistic<br /><ul><li> Researcher aren’t everywhere</li></ul>Perceived<br /><ul><li> Interpreting complex ideas
    • 11. Making the global local
    • 12. Engaging diverse stakeholders
    • 13. Controversy/advocacy</li></li></ul><li>Decisions about risk<br />Rational<br />Analytical<br />Cognitive<br />Emotional<br />Value-based<br />Affective<br />(Leiserowitz 2006)<br />

    ×