Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
INTRODUCTION It is necessary to adapt the methodology of scientific divulgation to the age, social condition and initial interest of the public. We focused especially in the initial educational stages, childhood and adolescence, as it is still a very accessible audience open to unfamiliar topics. The purpose of the present work is to encourage young students to be not only interested, but captivated by science through active participation, as well as to form early career scientist to success on teaching and divulgating science, a new revalued skill in the scientific sphere1.
Evaluation of two methods of scientific outreach for adolescents in Barcelona (Catalonia, Spain).
Belén Gonzalez-Gaya1,2, María-Carmen Fernández-Pinos1, Elena Jurado1, Begoña Jiménez2
Jordi Dachs 1 1 Department of Environmental Chemistry (IDAEA - CSIC), Barcelona, Catalunya, Spain
2 Institute of Organic Chemistry (IQOG-CSIC), Madrid, Spain. *Email: [email protected]
References 1) Fraser Russell, T. W.; Megan, A.; Fraser, F.; Broadbelt, L. J., Graduate student teaching fellowship program. Chemical Engineering Education 2014, 48, (1), 37-41.
CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK - Concept acquisition and productivity of students between 16-18 years
old were higher when visiting the research center than at the classroom; whereas students between 12-15 years old showed better learning results in their own classroom.
- Learning depend on personal characteristics (i.e. age or social condition) and therefore a good outreaching technique should be well oriented to the target public, as it is shown that depending on the divulgation methodology there are differences on teaching success.
- Long lasting learning evaluation is the next step to guarantee a completely victorious outreaching. Will the adolescent fix what they learnt?
OBJECTIVES - To compare two different outreaching
methods towards an adolescent audience
- To interpret positive and negative teaching techniques
METHODOLOGY The first divulgation method was tested during the Catalonian
program CSIC at the Classroom, and consisted on the visit of PhD
students to the schools involved in the program. There, the young
scientists explained their work in the context of environmental
pollution and distribution of organic pollutants over the planet. After
this introduction, the students worked by themselves on real news
about organic pollution and figure out a possible technical research
on the topic. The figurative investigation is then expressed on a
scientific poster. The key of this method is that science is brought to
the own surrounding of the teenagers directly in their school.
The second method was used during the CSIC Science Week
program, and comprised real sampling and laboratory work with
different environmental matrices where organic pollutants are found.
The students were divided into work groups and each one sampled a
environmental matrix: air, water or plankton. After sampling, each
group explained to the rest of the students the accomplished work by
a scientific poster. Watching real scientific research tends to impress
youngsters and have a good effect on their interest and attention on
the explained topic.
Low Medium High
RESULTS Parameters to measure and compare both outreaching methods include: fixed factors that may bias the results (age, social level) and valuable factors to evaluate presenter success on transmitting science knowledge (participation, concept acquisition and productivity).
