Welcome to this learning resource on UK Science Communication. We hope you find it a useful overview of activity in the UK in this exciting and expanding area of activity.
The aim is to enable people to contribute to this resource and add links to new pages describing science communication. Do add details of your latest activity - on this page, or by creating pages of your own. If you dont know how to edit Wikis, dont worry, its easy. Click on 'edit this page' above, and have a go. Take a look at this short film if you're unsure how the process works.
The biggest supporters of science communication initiatives in the UK are:
and a whole host of other scientific institutions, such as the Institute of Physics.
Departments and schools active in science communication include:
A number of different activities fall into business and community groups. The first of these is called Third Stream activity, which the Higher Education funding councils encourage, which is academic involvement with public services, social enterprises, the arts and cultural institutions.
Industry has also woken up to the idea of communicating science within the context of Corporate Social Responsiblity. If you want to find out more about developing such strategies visit the Corporate Social Responsiblity Academy website, particularly its 'take action' page. Policy developments related to Corporate Social Responsiblity are available on the new Government Gateway on this topic, so we dont need to say much more about that here.
For scientists wanting to find and share information, or just get some support from like-minded colleagues in their outreach work, there is Connecting Science. This online social network is free to join and includes blogs, discussion forums and groups of interest to scientists involved in all kinds of science communication.
The smaller professional societies also have science communication initiatives, but these are too numerous to list here. The major schemes at present are:
Wellcome Trust
Office of Science and Innovation
Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
The Research Councils and Research Councils UK
The Royal Society
The Higher Education Funding Councils
The Royal Institution
The Royal Academy of Engineering
NESTA the National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts
British Science Association
For a list of science-related TV, radio, blogs and podcast channels, visit the Talking Science pages prepared for the British Council.
The BA Media Fellowships scheme, helps scientists find out what it is like to work as a journalist. Scientists will soon be able to learn more about the process of journalism as the BBC plans to open up its training materials to budding reporters at the end of 2007, via its online traing site, BBC Training and Development.
Two key publications are New Scientist and Research Fortnight. For other channels, visit the Talking Science pages prepared for the British Council.
Science press releases are delivered through the press service AlphaGalileo. The professional organisations are the Association of British Science Writers and STEMPRA the Science, Technology, Engineering, Medicine Public Relations Association. Contact between scientists and journalists is aided by the Science Media Centre at the Royal Institution.
Main UK Science Communication Events
For other events, and a list of the UK festivals, visit Talking Science at the British Council.
This list of science centres and museums in the UK available from Talking Science and Ecsite as a clickable map. So if you want to explore museums in a particular region, that's the resource for you.
For more on science centres and museums, including a map of interactive centres, visit the BIG (British Interactive Group) website.
These are small organisations that carry out research in a wide range of disciplines, usually for free, to address the challenges faced by civil society. The emphasis is on the experiences of local communities, and how science shops can help them. Other knowledge transfer mechanisms start with the academic research, and then attempt to 'apply' it in society. With science shops, it is the other way around. Science shops that are attached to universities often bring students into their activities as part of teaching and learning.
Experts used to think about science communication as a simple matter of instruction [Royal Society 1985]. It was a long time before this ‘deficit model’ [Wynne 1991] of science communication was replaced by a second generation approach which favoured two-way communications (‘dialogues’) between experts to influence policy or scientific and technological practice (upstream engagement) [Demos 2004]. The mechanisms used to stimulate public participation in science and policy decision are summarised below. But whilst at first sight these two approaches appeared to be very different, they also had much in common: the topic of engagement was chosen, not by citizens themselves, but by elite science or government.
Third generation approaches to engagement take participation one step further, in that they emphasise the need for dialogue, not only to influence the practices of government and science, but also to influence actions chosen by local communities. In other words, science communication is also important for innovation in, and by, society.
Recent initiatives at the Office of Science and Innovation, the Treasury, NESTA, what was the Department of Trade and Industry, the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, firms and voluntary sector organisations all involve these third generation approaches to engagement, as they take a wide view of what innovation is about: in terms of subject areas, purposes (social, as well as economic benefits) and involving more diverse communities than simply experts in higher education or research alone.
Citizen’s panel Lay public panel meets to discuss issues, statements or refine options
Stakeholder dialogue Open ended, ongoing discussion to identify areas of agreement or disagreement, with communities with an interest in the issue. When managed well, participants determine the agenda.
Stakeholder forum Brings together representatives of key stakeholder groups locally, regionally or nationally. Numbers are usually limited to enable discussion, which can lead to feelings of exclusion.
Stakeholder workshop As above, but task-based.
Round table Discussion forum, sometimes facilitated, used to explore scope and areas of agreement and disagreement. Vulnerable to bias by chair, particularly vocal special interest groups. Transparency problems.
Citizens polls Surveys of more or less representative samples of the population. Reflect bias of question-setter.
Deliberative mapping A method of integrating expert and citizen assessments through face-to-face and computer-enabled dialogues. The process is guided so that participants challenge each other’s perspectives and framing assumptions. The approach can be used to systematically judge how well different options perform according to particular economic, social, ethical and scientific criteria. It is used mostoften with problems that involve multiple factors and require making difficult decisions, frequently without adequate data.
Multi-criteria mapping a novel software-based technique for exploring the links between expert analysis and divergent social values and interests.
Deliberative polling A large, demographically representative group conducts a debate, cross-examining key players. The group is polled on an issue before and after the debate.
Focus group A small group of people discuss an issue guided by a trained facilitator working to a designed protocol. Researchers study the contents of the discussion are studied to investigate shared understandings, attitudes, values and factors that shape these.
Citizen’s jury 12-16 lay people cross-examine expert witnesses, to make a decision, judgement or recommendations. Although not best practice, issues are often framed by commissioning organisation, restricting potential for knowledge exchange.
Discussion groups A small number of people (8-10) engage in facilitated discussion.
Consensus conference Extended information gathering by representative panel of 16 people who request information resources, decide upon questions, cross-examine expert witnesses, and report to the press and the public (over several weekends: longer and more expensive than citizen’s juries) on the consensus.
Lay panel members Non-specialists presence on expert committees. Varying degrees of empowerment, influence and support. Lay members may have an influence the communication skills of experts.
Future search Imagining of preferred futures, and collaborative planning for how to achieve them
Delphi process A set of procedures for eliciting and refining the opinions of a group - usually a panel of experts. An extended method includes lay panel members. It has four basic features: structured questioning, iteration, controlled feedback and anonymity of responses. OSI has used Delphi questionnaires to poll thousands.
‘Planning for real’ Use of 3D models (e.g. cardboard) to represent development plans to engender discussion and comment.
Open house, exhibitions, galleries An open venue for discussion, exhibition or other activity; consultation commissioning body expected to be present to engage in discussion with ‘visitors’.
Public meeting Open meeting with specialists and chair, in formal setting. Usu. Q/A format
Office of Science and Innovation
Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
RCUK and the Higher Education Funding Councils
The Wellcome Trust led the development of UK PubMedCentral to facilitate open access to published research.
In 2006 The UK higher education funding councils and Research Councils UK, in association with the Wellcome Trust, invited proposals from higher education institutions and their partners to become collaborative 'Beacons for Public Engagement'. The funding bodies made a total of up to £8 million has been made available for this pilot initiative.
Beacons brings together the funding bodies for the first time to establish a co-ordinated approach to recognising, rewarding and building capacity for public engagement. The funding bodies see 'public engagement' as involving specialists in higher education listening to, developing their understanding of, and interacting with non-specialists. They define the term 'public' as 'individuals and groups who do not currently have a formal relationship with an HEI through teaching, research or knowledge transfer'.
In academia:
In media and policy:
Holliman, R., Whitelegg, E., Scanlon, E., Smidt, S. and Thomas, J. (2009). (eds.) Investigating science communication in the information age: Implications for public engagement and popular media. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Holliman, R., Thomas, J., Smidt, S., Scanlon, E., and Whitelegg, E. (2009). (eds.) Practising science communication in the information age: Theorising professional practices. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Demos (2004) See-Through Science: Why public engagement needs to move upstream, September.
Miller, S (2001) Public understanding of science at the crossroads, Public Understanding of Science, Volume 10, Number 1, page 115-120, January
Office of Science and Innovation (2006) Guiding Principles for Public Dialogue, London.
Office of Science and Innovation (then Technology) (2000), 'Science and the Public: A Review of Science Communication and Public Attitudes to Science in Britain'.
POST (2001) Open channels: public dialogue in science and technology, POST report number 153, Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, March
Royal Society (2006) Factors Affecting Science Communication, London, June.
Royal Society/Royal Academy of Engineering (2004) ‘Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: Opportunities and Uncertainties’, London
Royal Society (1985) The Public Understanding of Science: The Bodmer Report, London.
Wellcome Trust(2006) 'Engaging Science: Thoughts, deeds, analysis and action', London, May.