Paper short abstract:

Our netnography analyzes how a Brazilian non-governmental organization, the Medical Cannabis Research and Patient Support Association, APEPI, builds their authority as experts, combining their own lived experience with scientific knowledge.

Paper long abstract:

Activist organizations play an important role in shaping public perception of controversial topics such as appropriate drug use. In 2015, after the mobilization of activists, Brazil legalized one form of medical cannabis by prescription only. In 2016, the Medical Cannabis Research and Patient Support Association (APEPI) registered as a Brazilian non-governmental organization focusing on “awareness, demystification and democratization of the medical use of cannabis” (APEPI, n.d.). Oliveira (2017) analyzed similarities between APEPI members and the lay experts Epstein (1995) described in early AIDS activism. Using netnography, our case study explores APEPI’s cannabis activism such as news, websites, interviews, and documentaries as well as the organization’s recent email newsletters. We explore how this activist organization communicates science and impacts the science-society relationship. We analyze how APEPI builds their authority as experts, combining members’ lived experience with scientific knowledge shared in interviews with scientists and developed in partnership with universities. We attend particularly to the role of these activists as trusted intermediaries for parts of the Brazilian public; the role of the organization in producing grassroots knowledge, especially advice for medical marijuana users; and the types of people, such as celebrities, scientists, and prominent movement leaders, featured in APEPI’s Instagram posts.

Paper short abstract:

Through a series of semi-structured qualitative interviews, this research explores how science education practitioners use science capital as either an ideology, a basis for their approach to science education, or a practicality, drawn upon as a specific social justice tool.

Paper long abstract:

To address issues of inequity and exclusion in the science classroom, Louise Archer and her colleagues established the concept of science capital, a collection of resources and experiences which can inform an individual's ability to engage with science, and their aspirations to pursue post-compulsory science education and careers. Following the initial proposal of the concept in 2014, science capital has become popular in the fields of science education and science communication as a way to consider equity and social justice; many practitioners within these fields have created their own conceptualisations of it and incorporated these conceptualisations into their practice.

Building on Archer’s work, this paper explores the ways in which practitioners have conceptualised and operationalised the concept of science capital in their work planning, delivering and evaluating science-based learning activities. Using semi-structured qualitative interviews, my research shows how practitioners either view science capital as an ideology, meaning it aligns with their internal motivations for working in science education and forms the basis of their approach, or as a practicality, meaning science capital is drawn upon as a specific tool to address equity and social justice, challenging their approach to science education. In showing how a range of practitioners have both aligned with and diverged from Archer’s original conceptualisation of science capital, this paper argues that a nuanced view of science capital is required to develop its value for social justice, and demonstrates the need for sustained support to allow academic research to transform practice towards equity and social justice.

Paper short abstract:

This interview study, based on Theory of practice, offers a new lens for interpreting people’s understandings of and engagements in science in everyday life. This directs to critical reflection on current approaches of promoting science, and to develop new possibilities for advancing equity thereof.

Paper long abstract:

Science education and communication practices aiming to engage people in science often echo institutionalised power structures and deficit-based approaches. There is a call for more inclusive practices and approaches to improve equity, democracy, trust in institutions, and the use of scientific knowledge in societies. Understanding how people engage with science in their everyday lives is a step towards dismantling existing hierarchies and fostering inclusivity. Current practice theory offers a novel approach and analytical lens for interpreting science-related practices as everyday performances and shared entities revealing science-related social norms.

This study explores how people engage in science in their everyday lives, how they define the concept of science and understand science-related practices. Empirical data is based on semi-structured interviews with science centre visitors and people not used to visiting such places. Results were compiled through theory-based and data-driven analysis. Regardless of participants' education or socio-economic status, people reported engagement in science-related practices primarily in the context of working life. Science-related practices were chiefly seen as positive and taken-for-granted everyday doings and sayings. However, most informants implied not being clever enough to engage in science, reflecting perceptions of the breadth of science as well as societal norms connected to institutionalised science.

Overall, this study sheds light on socially shared understandings and normativity of science, while uncovering the diversity of everyday science-related practices. It brings about a critical reflection on the academic approaches of science-promoting practitioners, directing us to develop new possibilities to advance accessibility and equity in the field of science engagement.

Paper short abstract:

In this workshop we will work out how to create ways to work together, share knowledges and practices and build a network of people working on social justice and science communication themes - join us!

Paper long abstract:

In this mid-panel discussion workshop we will discuss what kind of network we might like to develop to support this kind of work internationally, with a view to creating a mutually supportive community of collagues with similar research interests. We will bring examples and some hands-on activities (badges, glue-sticks, zines, stickers....?!) to support sharing ideas and building relationships.

We want to collectively think through what resources already exist (intellectually, pragmatically, infrastructure), to map group needs and assets, and to think about what we would like to do and how. Research on social justice themes often finds itself at the margins of science communication and STS research (Finlay et al, 2021, Orthia & Rasekoala, 2021). We want to figure out how to firm up the space, to make it more recognisable, less vulnerable and more supportive for one another. As Simon Lock (workshop co-facilitator) puts it, thinking with Gayle Rubin (2021, p.354), we are looking to create supportive structures that help us build knowledge and practice around social justice approaches in science communication with a wider field of scholars.

We hope you join us :)

Paper short abstract:

This session will discuss the localisation of science communication resources developed as part of the COALESCE project through co-creation and the establishment of a National and Regional hub network, valuing the complex contextual nature of relationships between science and diverse audiences.

Paper long abstract:

This session will discuss the localisation of science communication resources through the establishment of a network of National and Regional (N&R) hubs.

Relationships between science, technology and society are no longer thought to solely depend on the breadth of information available, but are understood to be deep rooted in specific cultural, political, and socio-economic contexts. Without this consideration, efforts to strengthen these relationships can instead cause further damage.

Oftentimes, resources to support science communicators are funded and developed through projects on a larger (European) scale. While project partners bring unique perspectives from a variety of practices and countries, we must acknowledge the limits of these perspectives when designing activities aimed at audiences not part of the conversation. If the relationships we hope to foster between science and society are deep rooted in context and intersectionality, local expertise and experience must be valued and embedded into science communication endeavours through reciprocal interactions.

Coordinated Opportunities for Advanced Leadership and Engagement in Science Communication in Europe (COALESCE) is a Horizon Europe project tasked with establishing a European Competence Centre (CC) for Science Communication, with co-creation at its core. COALESCE will build a network of N&R hubs to act as a bridge between local science communicators, and the training and tools hosted by the CC, by positioning activities within specific contexts. We will highlight how this network is vital to ensure impact and sustainability of the centre itself, while working to foster positive, equitable relationships between science and diverse audiences across society.

Paper short abstract:

Discuss the opportunities and challenges in terms of equitable practices and processes arising from the work of Cartas com Ciência, a science communication non-profit working in 8 Portuguese-speaking countries in 4 continents to use science as a vehicle for reduction of inequalities.

Paper long abstract:

With the growth of science communication initiatives there is an urgent need to systematically and rigorously reflect on practices, discuss and find new solutions to the challenges related with power and perpetuating inequalities. It is therefore necessary to identify what impacts on and serves equitable science communication, having in mind that disadvantaged communities are not fairly represented, nor is their knowledge fairly valued and taking into account a global perspective of different contexts, countries, cultural clusters. In the case of the Portuguese language, spoken by over 250 million people, science communication is considered an asset in the access to science and knowledge. It is important not to forget historical relations of colonialism that can reproduce structural inequalities and to combat neo-colonialist attitudes, biases and "saviour" complexes. This contribuiton aims to discuss the opportunities and challenges arising from the work of Cartas com Ciência (“Letters with Science”), a science communication non-profit working in 8 Portuguese-speaking countries in 4 continents to use science as a vehicle for reduction of inequalities, which aims to design and implement programmes according to equitable and socially just practices and based on scientific research. Since 2020, Cartas com Ciência has facilitated educational programmes of letter exchanges between over 500 pairs of pupil-scientists in Portuguese-speaking countries. By discussing critically within an equity and social justice lens what has and has not been accomplished regarding the processes and practices, this contribution’s tentative conclusions aim to foster more equitable and critically informed science communication.

MRPA supported by FCT UIDB/00194/2020, BIPD/UI57/10732/2023.

Paper short abstract:

Science communication beyond educated middle classes is crucial. But there’s a lack of an overarching intersectional analysis of excluded audiences. We present a typology of exclusion factors providing a wider understanding of marginalized audiences, opening starting points for inclusive scicomm.

Paper long abstract:

Science communication beyond the scientifically interested and educated white middle classes is no easy matter but all the more important (Scheufele, 2018). The topic has received increasing attention (e.g. Dawson 2019; Judd & McKinnon 2021). However, there is still a lack of systematic overviews – many approaches focus on a limited set of aspects.

We propose a typology of exclusion factors. It builds on an updated research review from Schrögel et al. (2018) and Humm et al. (2020) that attempts to systematize marginalized audiences in science communication and identify the underlying barriers.

A more comprehensive overview with specific starting points for the various identified exclusion factors can provide a basis for a critical reflection and development of a justice-oriented science communication. This input aims to open up a space for discussing intersectional perspectives on science communication practice and research.

Literature

Dawson, E. (2019). Equity, Exclusion & Everyday Science Learning. The experiences of minoritised groups. Routledge.

Humm, C., Schrögel, P., & Leßmöllmann. (2020). Feeling left out: Underserved audiences in science communication. Media and Communication, 8(1), 164–176.

Judd, K., & McKinnon, M. (2021). A systematic map of inclusion, equity and diversity in science communication research: Do we practice what we preach?. Frontiers in Communication.

Scheufele, D. A. (2018). Beyond the Choir? The Need to Understand Multiple Publics for Science. Environmental Communication, 12(8), 1–4.

Schrögel, P., Humm, C., Leßmöllmann, A., Kremer, B., Adler, J., & Weißkopf, M. (2018). Nicht erreichte Zielgruppen in der Wissenschaftskommunikation: Literatur-Review zu Exklusionsfaktoren und Analyse von Fallbeispielen. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-66846-1

Paper short abstract:

This paper explores STEMtelling, a storytelling tool in STS, emphasizing its role in building epistemic cultures. It discusses how STEMtelling, grounded in Helen Longino's criteria for social inquiry, fosters inclusive, collaborative practices and challenges practices of epistemic justice in STS.

Paper long abstract:

Storytelling is often delegated to the borders of scientific discourse. Yet, stories and storytelling practices are both distinct tools of communication and methods of knowledge production to foster pluralistic and reflective engagement in STS. In this paper, I discuss how storytelling, specifically STEMtelling, can become more central to scientific discourse in epistemic cultures and building interdisciplinary scientific inquiry. This paper presents the theoretical basis for STEMtelling, an STS storytelling tool that I developed, as a method of social inquiry. Guided by Helen Longino’s requirements for social inquiry, I argue that STEMtelling establishes an inclusive and collaborative approach to building epistemic cultures that work towards epistemic justice. Through experiences, values, and scientific practices, STEMtelling acts as an entry point for critical discourse in scientific knowledge making. STEMtelling demonstrates how narratives can promote a more robust public and shared standards in understanding multiple epistemologies and disciplinary languages. Additionally, through analysis of historical and contemporary practices of how scientists have engaged with the narrative form, this paper demonstrates how storytelling is essential to scientific knowledge production. Findings from this paper will support the theoretical development of STEMtelling, as a storytelling tool. This research contributes to critical STS debates, offering a novel approach of how STEMtelling can be used to engage in new approaches to epistemic cultures and the structures of scientific knowledge making towards practices of epistemic justice.