Dataset Information

Establishing a baseline of science communication skills in an undergraduate environmental science course.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Seminal reports, based on recommendations by educators, scientists, and in collaboration with students, have called for undergraduate curricula to engage students in some of the same practices as scientists-one of which is communicating science with a general, non-scientific audience (SciComm). Unfortunately, very little research has focused on helping students develop these skills. An important early step in creating effective and efficient curricula is understanding what baseline skills students have prior to instruction. Here, we used the Essential Elements for Effective Science Communication (EEES) framework to survey the SciComm skills of students in an environmental science course in which they had little SciComm training.

Results

Our analyses revealed that, despite not being given the framework, students included several of the 13 elements, especially those which were explicitly asked for in the assignment instructions. Students commonly targeted broad audiences composed of interested adults, aimed to increase the knowledge and awareness of their audience, and planned and executed remote projects using print on social media. Additionally, students demonstrated flexibility in their skills by slightly differing their choices depending on the context of the assignment, such as creating more engaging content than they had planned for.

Conclusions

The students exhibited several key baseline skills, even though they had minimal training on the best practices of SciComm; however, more support is required to help students become better communicators, and more work in different contexts may be beneficial to acquire additional perspectives on SciComm skills among a variety of science students. The few elements that were not well highlighted in the students' projects may not have been as intuitive to novice communicators. Thus, we provide recommendations for how educators can help their undergraduate science students develop valuable, prescribed SciComm skills. Some of these recommendations include helping students determine the right audience for their communication project, providing opportunities for students to try multiple media types, determining the type of language that is appropriate for the audience, and encouraging students to aim for a mix of communication objectives. With this guidance, educators can better prepare their students to become a more open and communicative generation of scientists and citizens.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40594-021-00304-0.

SUBMITTER: Shivni R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8299166 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective: The objective of this article is a description of the longitudinal communication curriculum in the Model Medicine Curriculum (MSM) at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin. The authors describe the planning and integration of the curriculum into the study program, outline how communicative competence is taught and evaluated in the MSM, and identify which challenges need to be mastered in the process. Project description: Starting with the introduction of the MSM in 2010, students have been spending 102 class hours, spread out over seven semesters, practicing social and communicative competences in the interactive small group format "Communication, Interaction & Teamwork (KIT)". The course contents are closely linked to the topics covered each semester and increase in complexity over the course of their studies. The contents are selected by the KIT planning group whose members continually check the curriculum's timeliness and determine any changes. Students as well as instructors have opportunities for evaluating KIT throughout, and their evaluations are taken into consideration as KIT continues to be updated. Instructors from different disciplines teach KIT courses. They participate in mandatory didactic trainings that prepare them to teach KIT. During their 4th and 9th semesters, respectively, students take summative exams that test their communicative competence. Results: According to the semester evaluations by students and instructors, students participating in KIT improved their conversation management skills (students: M=2.2, SD=1.1, instructors: M=1.9, SD=0.7, on a scale of 1-5). In addition, students and graduates rate KIT to be (very) relevant, consider the degree to which it is taught in the MSM to be (very) high, and consider KIT to be a meaningful part of the curriculum. Students taking the summative exams in their 4th and 9th semesters achieve a mean score of 75.9%, respectively 76.9%, in the purely communicative stations and 82.6%, respectively 83.3%, in the global evaluation of communicative competence in clinical-practical stations. Discussion: Survey and exam results alike indicate that the communication training is well accepted by students and instructors and that the training led to an improvement in general and specific communicative skills. Due to a lack of control groups or a pre-post design, it has thus far not been possible to unequivocally demonstrate a causal relationship between communicative competence trainings and good test results. Quality control measures, such as trainings for instructors and regular course evaluations, have been designed to address any challenges in the implementation of the communication curriculum at the faculty level. Conclusion: Building on the experience with the Charité's Reformed Medical Curriculum, a longitudinal, competence-based communication curriculum was integrated into the MSM's overall curriculum. This measure remedied a gap in the medical training that many graduates of regular study programs had previously bemoaned (Jansen 2010 [1]).

Project description:BackgroundPatient-clinician communication training is a core component of the undergraduate medical program. As with all areas of medicine, the best available evidence for teaching these skills should be incorporated into training programs. Examining the volume, type and design-quality of publications in this field can help to determine whether research is following a natural scientific progression to inform interactional skills training. This study aimed to review: (i) whether the proportion of publications examining teaching interactional skills to undergraduate medical students by study type, across three time-periods (2007-2008, 2011-2012, 2015-2016), changed over time (i.e. measurement, descriptive or interventions studies); and (ii) the proportion of intervention studies meeting Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) research design criteria.MethodsMedline, PubMed, PsycInfo and the Cochrane Database were searched for studies published in English from 2007 to 2016. Title and abstract reviews were performed for the included years. Articles were examined against the inclusion/exclusion criteria and those included were coded into descriptive, measurement or intervention categories.ResultsA total of 243 relevant publications were identified. Fifty-two were published from 2007 to 2008, 75 from 2011 to 2012 and 116 from 2015 to 2016. Most identified studies were descriptive (63%), followed by measurement studies (22%) and intervention studies (15%). The proportion of descriptive studies increased significantly over time. However, the proportion of intervention studies did not change and the proportion of measures studies significantly decreased. Of the 37 intervention studies identified within the three time-periods, only 16 (43%) met EPOC study design criteria.ConclusionsThe largest proportion of identified studies were descriptive, however, descriptive research is not sufficient to ensure communication skills training can effectively improve interactions between clinicians and patients. A more rigorous approach to research in this area is needed to inform education strategies.

Project description:BACKGROUND:In the last three decades there is a growing recognition in the dental profession that dental education must go beyond teaching the technicalities of dentistry and include professionalism and communication skills that the future dentist may need. Such skills are best taught in a student-centered way. Literature suggests that student-centered elements are difficult to introduce in traditional, teacher-centered curricula. This is especially true in post-communist countries where higher education was under strict state control for decades. The aim of the piece of research presented here was to investigate how difficult it is to introduce a student-centered career skills course in a traditionally teacher-centered dental curriculum. METHODS:Considering the needs of our final-year dental students and Super's model of career development, we created an undergraduate curricular career skills course running for two semesters in two languages (Hungarian and English). The primary aim of the course is to help students with their career expectations and develop their identity as a professional workforce. The secondary aim is to teach skills that students can use when applying for a job. At the end of the semesters, we assessed our students' satisfaction with various aspects of the course by using a questionnaire. Results were analyzed item-wise and according to the main aspects of the course (i.e., groups of items organized around a particular aspect). RESULTS:General satisfaction with the course was high, and practical skills training (such as CV and motivation letter writing) got the highest scores. From the answers it appears that the students were the least comfortable with having to deal with their personal values and preferences. CONCLUSIONS:While it is common for universities to offer various forms of career intervention, to our knowledge, no other university offers a curricular career skills course specifically for dental students. Our student-centered course designed in a problem-based learning framework worked even in a traditionally teacher-centered educational environment, where university students are rarely encouraged to be active participants in courses. By sharing our experience, we would like to encourage our fellow dental educators working in similar environments to devise and offer such courses.