Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Design and Evaluation of Intensive
Workshop for Making Short-Time
Science Show Programs
2013.12.17
Gensei Ishimura

Associ...
I am …
• Work at CoSTEP (Communication in
Science and Technology Education and
Research Program), Hokkaido University,
Jap...
Goal of CoSTEP
• The educational organization to nurture
“Science & Technology communicators”.

S&T
communicators
Speciali...
History
• Founded in 2005 at Hokkaido University
as a 5-year project funded by the national
government.
• At April, 2010, ...
Mission
1. To educate S&T communicators
2. To do practice variety of science
communications
3. Research and development of...
Principles
•
•
•
•

Mutual communication
Community based
Learning by practice
Science communicator as a “role” (not restri...
Education, Practice, and
Conceptualization
• Education
– lectures and seminars in the classroom

• Practice
– activities i...
Relation among the 3 processes
application

Education

evaluation

evaluation

evaluation

improvement
systematization

Pr...
Curriculum: 3 major Components
I. Way of thinking in science communication
To understand theoretical constellation of the ...
Curriculum: 7 Elements
3 major components

7 elements
Theoretical framework

I. Way of thinking in science
communication

...
Educational Program
Curriculum framework
3 major
components

program

mission

7 elements
Lectures

I. Way of thinking in
...
3 Yearly Courses for Different Needs
courses

purpose

comprehensive

•To take leadership to plan and manage
science commu...
3 Yearly Courses for Different Needs
courses

purpose

comprehensive

•To take leadership to plan and manage
science commu...
3 Courses for Different Needs
course

number

Selective B

20~30

On site ( Sat. 14:00~15:30)
/ E-learning
On site (Wed. 1...
The 3 day workshop of the “Selective
Course A”
• In this presentation, the workshop of the
“Selective Course A” is focused...
Titles of the 4 Science Shows
1. What is “Skin Beauty*” for You? – Let’s Think of the
Conditions of Beauty and Health of O...
The Design Policy of the Learning
Environment of the Workshop
1. Cycle among expression, sharing, and
reflection
2. The le...
Cycle among
Expression, Sharing, and Reflection
• The author designed
the workshop based
on the concept of the
“cycle amon...
Three
periods

pre-workshop

workshop

post-workshop
Why the Policy?
• For learning through workshop, sharing, reflection, and
long-term context are essentially important.
• T...
The Basic Structure of the Workshop
sharing

sharing

sharing

lectures
Interaction
(group works)
science show
production
...
The Whole
Structure
of the Workshop
in Detail
The Structure of the Workshop
[pre-workshop]
The Structure of the Workshop [day 1]
The Structure of the Workshop [day 2]
The Structure of the Workshop [day 3]
The Structure of the Workshop
[post-workshop]
Pre-Workshop Period
• At the pre-workshop
period, participants
shared their self
introduction sheets by
using an online to...
Self Goal Setting and Self Evaluation
• Before the workshop
began, participants had
decided their own
learning goals, whic...
Short Lectures Given in the Workshop
• Short lectures about
general guidance,
planning, program
designing, writing press
r...
The lecture on
how to design flyers
Outbreak of the Tornado !!
- I’m ready! I’m so brave that
I will run away and hide
without any hesitation –
Group Works
• Using the knowledge
and skills given by the
lectures, participants
developed their science
show programs dur...
Sharing
• The participants
exhibited all
intermediate outputs
(for example, learning
goal worksheets or
notes of mutual
in...
The participants put
their outputs on the
wall to share them each
other.
Mutual Interviews
•

Participants practiced
mutual interviews to
train facilitation skill
and to promote
interaction among...
Daily Reflections
•

Participants reflected
their own activities at
the end of each day,
wrote down their
findings,
achiev...
Real-Time Documentation
• Besides, we introduced
“real-time
documentation”
method, where our
staff took photos of
particip...
Comprehensive Reflection
• After the all science
shows were finished,
each group evaluated
their own performance
by using ...
Post Workshop Period
• At the post workshop
period, they shared
various outputs of the
workshop.
• As a whole, cycle
among...
Several Tools to Realize the Cycle
• We introduced several tools to realize the “cycle
among expression, sharing, and refl...
Learning Goal Work Sheet 1
• Each participant was made decide his/her own
learning goal at the beginning (learning goal
wo...
Questions
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.

What do you especially want to learn in this workshop? Write down
your learning goal?
H...
Learning Goal Work Sheet 2
• They evaluated their achievement by themselves
at the end of the workshop (learning goal work...
Other Tools to Realize the Cycle
1. Exhibit all intermediate outputs (for example, learning
goal worksheets or notes of mu...
Use of Online Tools
• We used some online tools for participants to
share their learning goals and presentation files
for ...
Evaluation
• After the workshop finished, participants
answered the questionnaire to evaluate the whole
workshop, and “the...
General Satisfaction
80

(%)

70
60

A: satisfied
B: relatively satisfied
C: neither
D: relatively unsatisfied
E: unsatisf...
Length of the Workshop
(%)
70
60
A: too long
B: relatively too long
C: appropriate
D: relatively too short
E: too short

5...
Organization of the Workshop
Elements
(%)

60
50

A: good
B: relatively good
C: neither
D: relatively bad
E: bad

40
30
20...
Management of the Workshop
(%)
70
60
A: good
B: relatively good
C: neither
D: relatively bad
E: bad

50
40
30
20
10
0
A

B...
Learning Goal Work Sheet
(%)
60
50
A: good
B: relatively good
C: neither
D: relatively bad
E: bad

40
30
20
10
0
A

B

C

...
Real-Time Documentation
(%)
80
70
60

A: good
B: relatively good
C: neither
D: relatively bad
E: bad

50
40
30
20
10
0
A

...
Pre-Workshop Tasks
(%)
70
60
50

A: good
B: relatively good
C: neither
D: relatively bad
E: bad

40
30
20
10
0
A

B

C

D
...
Use of Online Tools during
Pre-Workshop Period
(%)
60
50
A: good
B: relatively good
C: neither
D: relatively bad
E: bad

4...
Daily Reflection
(%)
60
50
A: good
B: relatively good
C: neither
D: relatively bad
E: bad

40
30
20
10
0
A

B

C

D

E
Conclusion
• The evaluation by participants was good in
general.
• However, the program seemed to have been
slightly too s...
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs

560 views

Published on

Seoul National University - Hokkaido University Joint Symposium & Synergies Symposium, Dec. 17-18, 2013, Seoul National University, Korea

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs

  1. 1. Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs 2013.12.17 Gensei Ishimura Associate Professor Communication in Science & Technology Education & Research Program, Hokkaido University (CoSTEP)
  2. 2. I am … • Work at CoSTEP (Communication in Science and Technology Education and Research Program), Hokkaido University, Japan.
  3. 3. Goal of CoSTEP • The educational organization to nurture “Science & Technology communicators”. S&T communicators Specialists in S&T The society
  4. 4. History • Founded in 2005 at Hokkaido University as a 5-year project funded by the national government. • At April, 2010, Hokkaido University decided to continue the program by its own budget. • Now the 9th yearly program is running.
  5. 5. Mission 1. To educate S&T communicators 2. To do practice variety of science communications 3. Research and development of educational methods To realize better relationship between science, technology, and the society
  6. 6. Principles • • • • Mutual communication Community based Learning by practice Science communicator as a “role” (not restricted to ,socalled, “profession”) • Generalist-oriented (not to exclude specialists but to focus on collaborating with them) • Open to the public in general (not restricted to our university students) • No diploma, no credit, only certification (totally independent of the university’s formal curriculum)
  7. 7. Education, Practice, and Conceptualization • Education – lectures and seminars in the classroom • Practice – activities in the real society with diverse actors (clients, audience, visitors, etc.) • Conceptualization – Description, abstraction, and systematization of education and practice
  8. 8. Relation among the 3 processes application Education evaluation evaluation evaluation improvement systematization Practice improvement Conceptu alization systematization evaluation
  9. 9. Curriculum: 3 major Components I. Way of thinking in science communication To understand theoretical constellation of the field and ‘frame of reference’ which gives basis for agenda setting and decision making for science communicators to handle with practical issues II. Analysis and planning for action To learn basic way of thinking to investigate, analyze, and evaluate information about science and society, in order to give basis for decision making, consensus building, and strategy making III. Practices in science communication To learn basic knowledge and skills necessary for taking effective role through a variety of practices in the real society
  10. 10. Curriculum: 7 Elements 3 major components 7 elements Theoretical framework I. Way of thinking in science communication Trans-science issues Understanding diversity among related actors II. Analysis and Planning for Action Analysis and planning for action Practical methods for expression and communication III. Practices in science communication Practical methods for learning Practices and management in the real society
  11. 11. Educational Program Curriculum framework 3 major components program mission 7 elements Lectures I. Way of thinking in science communication II. Analysis and Planning for Action III. Practices in science communication Seminars Projects To realize better and mutual relationship between science and the society
  12. 12. 3 Yearly Courses for Different Needs courses purpose comprehensive •To take leadership to plan and manage science communication activities in the society Selective A •To learn basic knowledge and skills about science communication •Weight on designing face-to-face communication experience Setective B •To learn basic knowledge and skills about science communication •Weight on scientific writing
  13. 13. 3 Yearly Courses for Different Needs courses purpose comprehensive •To take leadership to plan and manage science communication activities in the society Selective A •To learn basic knowledge and skills about science communication •Weight on designing face-to-face communication experience Setective B •To learn basic knowledge and skills about science communication •Weight on scientific writing
  14. 14. 3 Courses for Different Needs course number Selective B 20~30 On site ( Sat. 14:00~15:30) / E-learning On site (Wed. 18:30~20:00) On site (Sat. 15:00~17:00) Lecture:27 On site ( Sat. 14:00~15:30) / E-learning Seminar:12 20~30 Lecture:27 Project:26 Selective A style Seminar:16 Comprehensive 20~30 Min. req. Intensive (3 days) Lecture:27 On site ( Sat. 14:00~15:30) / E-learning Seminar:12 Intensive (3 days)
  15. 15. The 3 day workshop of the “Selective Course A” • In this presentation, the workshop of the “Selective Course A” is focused, which was the 3day intensive one where participants made shorttime science show programs, held from 25th to 27th of August, 2013. • There were 18 participants, which were divided into 4 groups. • Each group made a 20-minute science show program.
  16. 16. Titles of the 4 Science Shows 1. What is “Skin Beauty*” for You? – Let’s Think of the Conditions of Beauty and Health of Our Skin – 2. “Aha!”s are Falling Down from the Sky - Harm of Volcanic Dust and the Counter Plans – 3. Outbreak of the Tornado !! - I’m ready! I’m so brave that I will run away and hide without any hesitation – 4. A Court Case in the Future “The Murder Case of ‘Doroemon**’” – Let’s Think of the Definitions of Life and Human Nature * beauty because of having beautiful skin ** named after the robot in the popular Japanese comic “Doraemon”
  17. 17. The Design Policy of the Learning Environment of the Workshop 1. Cycle among expression, sharing, and reflection 2. The learning context composed of the three periods: pre-workshop, workshop, and post-workshop
  18. 18. Cycle among Expression, Sharing, and Reflection • The author designed the workshop based on the concept of the “cycle among expression, sharing, and reflection”. Sharing Expression Reflection
  19. 19. Three periods pre-workshop workshop post-workshop
  20. 20. Why the Policy? • For learning through workshop, sharing, reflection, and long-term context are essentially important. • These are typical “meta-learning” experiences and are especially necessary for practitioners of science communication, because of extreme diversity and nonsystematicity of the domain. • Without them, the workshop might become just an “transient entertainment experience”. This is my take-home message.
  21. 21. The Basic Structure of the Workshop sharing sharing sharing lectures Interaction (group works) science show production daily reflection self & mutual evaluation
  22. 22. The Whole Structure of the Workshop in Detail
  23. 23. The Structure of the Workshop [pre-workshop]
  24. 24. The Structure of the Workshop [day 1]
  25. 25. The Structure of the Workshop [day 2]
  26. 26. The Structure of the Workshop [day 3]
  27. 27. The Structure of the Workshop [post-workshop]
  28. 28. Pre-Workshop Period • At the pre-workshop period, participants shared their self introduction sheets by using an online tool and put comments on their sheets each other, which became “seeds” for science show programs.
  29. 29. Self Goal Setting and Self Evaluation • Before the workshop began, participants had decided their own learning goals, which they could change after the workshop began. • At the end of the workshop, they reconfirmed their own learning goals and evaluated their performance by themselves.
  30. 30. Short Lectures Given in the Workshop • Short lectures about general guidance, planning, program designing, writing press releases, designing flyers, and facilitation were given (each of which was in approximately 20 minutes or less).
  31. 31. The lecture on how to design flyers
  32. 32. Outbreak of the Tornado !! - I’m ready! I’m so brave that I will run away and hide without any hesitation –
  33. 33. Group Works • Using the knowledge and skills given by the lectures, participants developed their science show programs during group works. • They discussed about plan of the program, prepare, and rehearse for it.
  34. 34. Sharing • The participants exhibited all intermediate outputs (for example, learning goal worksheets or notes of mutual interviews).
  35. 35. The participants put their outputs on the wall to share them each other.
  36. 36. Mutual Interviews • Participants practiced mutual interviews to train facilitation skill and to promote interaction among them.
  37. 37. Daily Reflections • Participants reflected their own activities at the end of each day, wrote down their findings, achievements, and anything to be improved on sticky notes, and they exhibited them on the wall to share with each other.
  38. 38. Real-Time Documentation • Besides, we introduced “real-time documentation” method, where our staff took photos of participants’ various activities during the workshop and put it on the wall along the “timeline” with short comments.
  39. 39. Comprehensive Reflection • After the all science shows were finished, each group evaluated their own performance by using the result of questionnaire for the audience, and comment papers (goods and bads) written by other groups’ participants. • What’s more, all the participants share their own reflection for the 3-day experience.
  40. 40. Post Workshop Period • At the post workshop period, they shared various outputs of the workshop. • As a whole, cycle among expression, sharing, and reflection occurred in all of the 3 periods.
  41. 41. Several Tools to Realize the Cycle • We introduced several tools to realize the “cycle among expression, sharing, and reflection.”
  42. 42. Learning Goal Work Sheet 1 • Each participant was made decide his/her own learning goal at the beginning (learning goal work sheet 1). The questions were as follows:
  43. 43. Questions a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. What do you especially want to learn in this workshop? Write down your learning goal? How do you think and behave in the workshop to achieve the goal? What kind of role do you try to take during group works? Which part of planning, group works, event preparation, and event operation do you dislike or feel difficult to deal with? Which part of planning, group works, event preparation, and event operation do you like or feel easy to deal with? What do you find or think about, reflecting your study at CoSTEP up to now? What do you especially want to study at CoSTEP from now on? Your promotion comments, etc.
  44. 44. Learning Goal Work Sheet 2 • They evaluated their achievement by themselves at the end of the workshop (learning goal work sheet 2). The questions were as follows: a. If you changed your "learning goal", describe it. b. How well have you achieved you learning goal? Evaluate by yourself. c. What did you realized through the workshop? d. What "the next learning goal" do you want to have after reflecting the workshop?
  45. 45. Other Tools to Realize the Cycle 1. Exhibit all intermediate outputs (for example, learning goal worksheets or notes of mutual interviews) on the wall to share them with each other. 2. Participants reflected their own activities at the end of each day, wrote down their findings, achievements, and anything to be improved on sticky notes, and they exhibited them on the wall to share with each other. 3. Real-time documentation: Our staff took photos of participant’s various activities during the workshop and put them on the wall along “timeline” with short comments. Besides, they uploaded the pictures with comments on the special facebook page to share among each other.
  46. 46. Use of Online Tools • We used some online tools for participants to share their learning goals and presentation files for their self introduction, let them put comments on others’ presentation, and let them share various outcomes of the workshop.
  47. 47. Evaluation • After the workshop finished, participants answered the questionnaire to evaluate the whole workshop, and “the cycle among expression, sharing, and reflection”. • Results were as follows (n=10):
  48. 48. General Satisfaction 80 (%) 70 60 A: satisfied B: relatively satisfied C: neither D: relatively unsatisfied E: unsatisfied 50 40 30 20 10 0 A B C D E
  49. 49. Length of the Workshop (%) 70 60 A: too long B: relatively too long C: appropriate D: relatively too short E: too short 50 40 30 20 10 0 A B C D E
  50. 50. Organization of the Workshop Elements (%) 60 50 A: good B: relatively good C: neither D: relatively bad E: bad 40 30 20 10 0 A B C D E
  51. 51. Management of the Workshop (%) 70 60 A: good B: relatively good C: neither D: relatively bad E: bad 50 40 30 20 10 0 A B C D E
  52. 52. Learning Goal Work Sheet (%) 60 50 A: good B: relatively good C: neither D: relatively bad E: bad 40 30 20 10 0 A B C D E
  53. 53. Real-Time Documentation (%) 80 70 60 A: good B: relatively good C: neither D: relatively bad E: bad 50 40 30 20 10 0 A B C D E
  54. 54. Pre-Workshop Tasks (%) 70 60 50 A: good B: relatively good C: neither D: relatively bad E: bad 40 30 20 10 0 A B C D E
  55. 55. Use of Online Tools during Pre-Workshop Period (%) 60 50 A: good B: relatively good C: neither D: relatively bad E: bad 40 30 20 10 0 A B C D E
  56. 56. Daily Reflection (%) 60 50 A: good B: relatively good C: neither D: relatively bad E: bad 40 30 20 10 0 A B C D E
  57. 57. Conclusion • The evaluation by participants was good in general. • However, the program seemed to have been slightly too short for them to thoroughly experience the “cycle”. • It might be better to share the diagram which is shown in this presentation with the participants , or to develop it together for deeper learning experience.

×