Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
1 like660 views
This document outlines the design and evaluation of an intensive workshop at Hokkaido University aimed at developing science and technology communicators. It describes the workshop's curriculum, structure, and methodologies, emphasizing the importance of mutual sharing and reflection in learning. The workshop achieved general satisfaction among participants, although it was noted that the duration may have been too short for comprehensive experience.
![The Structure of the Workshop
[pre-workshop]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/designandevaluationofintensiveworkshop4-131217172455-phpapp02/85/Design-and-Evaluation-of-Intensive-Workshop-for-Making-Short-Time-Science-Show-Programs-28-320.jpg)
![The Structure of the Workshop [day 1]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/designandevaluationofintensiveworkshop4-131217172455-phpapp02/85/Design-and-Evaluation-of-Intensive-Workshop-for-Making-Short-Time-Science-Show-Programs-29-320.jpg)
![The Structure of the Workshop [day 2]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/designandevaluationofintensiveworkshop4-131217172455-phpapp02/85/Design-and-Evaluation-of-Intensive-Workshop-for-Making-Short-Time-Science-Show-Programs-30-320.jpg)
![The Structure of the Workshop [day 3]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/designandevaluationofintensiveworkshop4-131217172455-phpapp02/85/Design-and-Evaluation-of-Intensive-Workshop-for-Making-Short-Time-Science-Show-Programs-31-320.jpg)
![The Structure of the Workshop
[post-workshop]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/designandevaluationofintensiveworkshop4-131217172455-phpapp02/85/Design-and-Evaluation-of-Intensive-Workshop-for-Making-Short-Time-Science-Show-Programs-32-320.jpg)
Design and Evaluation of Intensive Workshop for Making Short-Time Science Show Programs
- 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. I am … • Work at CoSTEP (Communication in Science and Technology Education and Research Program), Hokkaido University, Japan.
- 3. Goal of CoSTEP • The educational organization to nurture “Science & Technology communicators”. S&T communicators Specialists in S&T The society
- 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. 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. 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. 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. Relation among the 3 processes application Education evaluation evaluation evaluation improvement systematization Practice improvement Conceptu alization systematization evaluation
- 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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”
- 22. 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
- 23. 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
- 25. 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.
- 26. The Basic Structure of the Workshop sharing sharing sharing lectures Interaction (group works) science show production daily reflection self & mutual evaluation
- 27. The Whole Structure of the Workshop in Detail
- 28. The Structure of the Workshop [pre-workshop]
- 29. The Structure of the Workshop [day 1]
- 30. The Structure of the Workshop [day 2]
- 31. The Structure of the Workshop [day 3]
- 32. The Structure of the Workshop [post-workshop]
- 33. 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.
- 38. 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.
- 40. 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).
- 41. The lecture on how to design flyers
- 42. Outbreak of the Tornado !! - I’m ready! I’m so brave that I will run away and hide without any hesitation –
- 43. 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.
- 48. Sharing • The participants exhibited all intermediate outputs (for example, learning goal worksheets or notes of mutual interviews).
- 49. The participants put their outputs on the wall to share them each other.
- 50. Mutual Interviews • Participants practiced mutual interviews to train facilitation skill and to promote interaction among them.
- 53. 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.
- 56. 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.
- 60. 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.
- 63. 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.
- 65. Several Tools to Realize the Cycle • We introduced several tools to realize the “cycle among expression, sharing, and reflection.”
- 66. 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:
- 67. 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.
- 68. 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?
- 69. 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.
- 70. 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.
- 71. 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):
- 72. 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
- 73. 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
- 74. 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
- 75. 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
- 76. 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
- 77. 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
- 78. 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
- 79. 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
- 80. 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
- 81. 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.