Visualizing the developing clustering of recommendations around science communication and engagement training

<p dir="ltr">Over the past decade, useful recommendations have emerged from reports and articles examining different aspects of the public engagement training landscape. These recommendations are diverse in scope and focus, but we note some clustering around the individual, programmatic, organizational, and policy levels. Briefly, at the individual level (graduate students, scientists, postdocs, program directors, etc.), we continue to gain understanding about the specific motivations, needs, barriers, and perspectives with respect to science communication and engagement.<br><br>For example, we know that STEM graduate students express concerns about their skills and efficacy in science communication and that their advisors are often not equipped to mentor them in the area.30 Such insights are useful when it comes to designing new trainings and improving current ones. A notable example is the NIH-funded Scientific Communication Advances Research Excellence (SCOARE) program at the University of Texas, which has been equipping faculty advisors in mentoring STEM trainees (via workshops) in science communication. The areas covered include “accommodating trainee linguistic differences, giving actionable feedback, and developing strategies to increase trainee engagement in science communication."</p><p><br></p><p dir="ltr">At the programmatic level, recommendations have highlighted the need for stronger partnerships, increased participant diversity, more coverage of training topics such as inclusive science communication, and more evaluation support, to name a few. Organizational-level recommendations continue to call for structural changes in universities and other institutions to prioritize public engagement with science as part of their core mission. Lastly, policy-level suggestions are collectively coalescing around the idea of formally incorporating public engagement training into degree programs and funding mechanisms. </p><p dir="ltr">References</p><p dir="ltr">Muindi, F. and Luray, J. (2023). ‘Visualizing the Landscape of Training Initiatives for Scientists in Public Engagement in the United States’. <i>Research!America</i>. <a href="https://www.researchamerica.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Visualizing-the-Landscape-of-Training-Initiatives-for-Scienitists-in-Public-Engagement-in-the-U.S._-Nov-2023.pdf " rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.researchamerica.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Visualizing-the-Landscape-of-Training-Initiatives-for-Scienitists-in-Public-Engagement-in-the-U.S._-Nov-2023.pdf </a></p><p dir="ltr"><br></p>