Essentials for Public Engagement

GRAD 9070 University of Missouri

Spring 2017

Time: Wednesdays 10:00am-11:50am

Location: Townsend Hall 105

Course Instructor: Dr. Susan Renoe

Email:

Office and Office Hours:310C Jesse Hall; Appointments available upon request

*There may be changes to the syllabus and calendar throughout the semester. All changes will be announced in class and posted on the course website. You will be responsible for changes.

COURSE DESCRIPTION:This course will focus on understanding the role of scholarship and research in society, how to integrate public needs with research, and how researchers can effectively engage individuals and groups.

COURSE GOALS:

Upon course completion, students should:

  • Understand different types of public engagement
  • Understand how to develop a Community Engagement plan
  • Understand the purpose and value of public engagement in their research career
  • Understand career options for public engagement

EXPECTATIONS:

Students will be asked to:

  • Write a Community Engagement Plan
  • Write a proposal for an outreach project
  • Prepare a 3MT pitch

ATTENDANCE/ LATE WORK POLICY:

Students are expected to attend every class, to arrive on time, and to participate in class discussions. Missing class more than two times without a legitimate excuse will result in a deduction of 25 points per absence after the second one. If class is missed for an excused reason, please notify me in advance, if possible and students will be responsible for any work missed. An excused absence does not excuse an assignment and late work will not be accepted.

GRADING SCALE:

Grade / Points / Percentage
A / 900-1000 / 90-100
B / 800-899 / 80-89
F / 799 or below / 79 or below

GRADE POINT DISTRIBUTION:

Assignment / Points / Percentage (%)
Community Engagement Plan / 300 / 30
Reading & Homework / 250 / 25
Attendance & Participation / 300 / 30
3MT/Elevator Pitch / 150 / 15
Total / 1000 / 100

COURSE SCHEDULE*:

*Course schedule is subject to change.

Topics/Goals / Readings/ Resources and Assignments
Week 1: January 17, 2018
Introduction to Public Engagement
Engaged Scholarship
Building Your Community Engagement
Identity
Land-Grant Mission / Readings:
  • Calleson, D. C., Jordan, C., & Seifer, S.D. (2005). Community-engaged scholarship: Is faculty work in communities a true academic enterprise? Academic Medicine, 80(4), 317-321.
  • Doberneck, D., Glass, C., & Schweitzer, J. (2010). From Rhetoric to Reality: A Typology of Publically Engaged Scholarship. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 14(4), 5-35.
  • Fitzgerald, H. E., Bruns, K., Sonka, S.T., Furco, A., & Swanson, L. (2012). The centrality of engagement in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 16(3), 7-27.

Week 2: January 24, 2018
Community Engagement 101 & Types of Engagement
Writing your outreach and engagement plan
Assessment
Developing Network and Collaborators / Readings:
  • Successful Community Engagement statements from selected faculty at MU
  • Holbrook, J. B. (2012). Re-assessing the science-society relation: The case of the US National Science Foundation's broader impacts merit review criterion (1997-2011). Technology in Society, 27(4), 437-451.
  • Sardo, M., & Grand, A. (2016). Science in culture: Audiences’ perspective on engaging with science at a summer festival. Science Communication, 38(2), 251-260.
  • Colson, V. (2011). Science blogs as competing channels for the dissemination of science news. Journalism, 12(7), 889-902.
Assignment: Interview a faculty member on what their Community Engagement is, how they implement it, how important it is to them.
Next, contact a community partner and ask how outreach/mentoring helps them. Write up a paragraph or two of your findings for discussion
Week 3: January 31, 2018
Bridging Science and the Arts
Readings:
  • Radziwill, Nicole M.; Benton, Morgan C.; and Moellers, Cassidy (2015) "From STEM to STEAM: Reframing What it Means to Learn," The STEAM Journal: Vol. 2: Iss. 1, Article 3. DOI: 10.5642/steam.20150201.3
  • Catchen, Ruth (2013) "Reflections ~ How STEM becomes STEAM," The STEAM Journal: Vol. 1: Iss. 1, Article 22. DOI: 10.5642/steam.201301.22
  • Pfeiffer, F.M., (2017) et al. "When Theatre Comes To Engineering Design: Oh How Creative They Can Be” Journal of Biomechanical Engineering 139:7.DOI: 10.1115/1.4036793
Assignment: Submit a 1 paragraph overview of Community Engagement plan.
Week 4: February 7, 2018
Science Communication
Readings:
  • Weigold, M. F. (2001). Communicating science a review of the literature. Science Communication, 23(2), 164-193.
  • Pearson, A. R., & Schuldt, J. P. (2015). Bridging Climate Communication Divides Beyond the Partisan Gap. Science Communication, 37(6), 805-812.
  • Peters, H. P. (2013). Gap between science and media revisited: Scientists as public communicators. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(Supplement 3), 14102-14109.
Assignment: Prepare a 3-Minute Thesis (3MT)/elevator pitch to present in class.
Week 5: February 14, 2018
Elevator Pitches
Presentation of 3MT/Elevator Pitches in class / Readings:
  • Visit Mizzou’s 3MT website for tips and help with developing your talk:

Week 6: February 21, 2018
Mentoring Undergraduates
Readings:
  • Linn, M. C., Palmer, E., Baranger, A., Gerard, E., & Stone, E. (2015). Undergraduate research experiences: Impacts and opportunities. Science,347(6222), 1261757.
  • Weiler, L., Haddock, S., Zimmerman, T. S., Krafchick, J., Henry, K. and Rudisill, S. (2013), Benefits Derived by College Students from Mentoring At-Risk Youth in a Service-Learning Course. American Journal of Community Psychology, 52: 236–248.
  • The Institute for Broadening Participation. (2012). The Mentoring Manual: IBP guide to mentoring for all program participants. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

Week 7: February 28, 2018
Broadening Participation
Readings:
  • Intemann, K. (2009). Why diversity matters: Understanding and applying the diversity component of the National Science Foundation’s broader impacts criterion. Social Epistemology, 23(3-4), 249-266.
  • Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(41), 16474-16479.
Assignment: Community Engagement Plan outline due
Week 8: March 7, 2018
Social Media
Readings:
  • Lee, N. M., & VanDyke, M. S. (2015). Set It and Forget It The One-Way Use of Social Media by Government Agencies Communicating Science. Science Communication, 37(4), 533-541.
  • Brossard, D. (2013). New media landscapes and the science information consumer. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(Supplement 3), 14096-14101.
Assignment: Post a scientific article onto a social media outlet (Facebook, Instagram, Twitter) and see how many retweets or likes you get. In class, we will discuss strategies to employ.
Week 9: March 14, 2018
Evaluation
Readings:
  • Clewell, B. & Fortenberry, N. (Eds.). (2009). Frameworkfor Evaluating Impacts of Broadening Participation Projects. Arlington, VA: The National Science Foundation.
  • Common Guidelines for Education Research and
Development
  • Visit the Broader Impacts Network website and view theEvaluation Tool Kit

  • Read Informal Science’s website information on Evaluation

Week 10: March 21, 2018
Citizen Science/Participatory Research
Readings:
  • Bonney, R., Shirk, J. L., Phillips, T. B., Wiggins, A., Ballard, H. L., Miller-Rushing, A. J., & Parrish, J. K. (2014). Next steps for citizen science. Science, 343(6178), 1436-1437.
  • Flicker, S. (2008). Who benefits from community-based participatory research? A case study of the Positive Youth Project. Health Education & Behavior, 35(1), 70-86.
Assignment: Look for a citizen science that was not discussed in class. Write up a paragraph or two on what techniques make this project accessible and novel.
Week 11:Spring Recess
NO CLASS
Week 12: April 4, 2018
Pre-Collegiate Education
Examples of K-12 Outreach
Why target this population?
Making partnerships with teachers / Readings:
  • Morgan, P. L., Farkas, G., Hillemeier, M. M., & Maczuga, S. (2016). Science Achievement Gaps Begin Very Early, Persist, and Are Largely Explained by Modifiable Factors. Educational Researcher, 45(1), 18-35.

Week 13: April 11, 2018
The Proposal Review Process
Readings:
  • BI Guiding Principles and Questions
  • NSF Grant Proposal Guide Merit Review Principles

Week 14: April 18, 2018
Community Engagement Panel of Experts/Review Panel
Peer Review
Week 15: April 25, 2018
Putting it All Together: Role Models and Examples
Attend BI Summit
Week 16: May 2, 2018
Audience
Presentation of Final Community Engagement Plan

UNIVERSITY POLICIES:

Academic Dishonesty

Academic integrity is fundamental to the activities and principles of a university. All members of the academic community must be confident that each person's work has been responsibly and honorably acquired, developed, and presented. Any effort to gain an advantage not given to all students is dishonest whether or not the effort is successful. The academic community regards breaches of the academic integrity rules as extremely serious matters. Sanctions for such a breach may include academic sanctions from the instructor, including failing the course for any violation, to disciplinary sanctions ranging from probation to expulsion. When in doubt about plagiarism, paraphrasing, quoting, collaboration, or any other form of cheating, consult the course instructor.

Students with Disabilities

If you anticipate barriers related to the format or requirements of this course, if you have emergency medical information to share with me, or if you need to make arrangements in case the building must be evacuated, please let me know as soon as possible.

If disability related accommodations are necessary (for example, a note taker, extended time on exams, captioning), please register with theMU Disability Center, S5 Memorial Union, 573-882-4696, and then notify me of your eligibility for reasonable accommodations. For other MU resources for persons with disabilities, click on "Disability Resources" on the MU homepage.

Intellectual Pluralism

The University community welcomes intellectual diversity and respects student rights. Students who have questions or concerns regarding the atmosphere in this class (including respect for diverse opinions) may contact the departmental chair or divisional director; the director of theOffice of Students Rights and Responsibilities; theMU Equity Office, .

All students will have the opportunity to submit an anonymous evaluation of the instructor(s) at the end of the course.

Executive Order #38, Academic Inquiry, Course Discussion and Privacy

University of Missouri System Executive Order No. 38 lays out principles regarding the sanctity of classroom discussions at the university. The policy is described fully insection 200.015of the Collected Rules and Regulations. In this class, students may not make audio or video recordings of course activity, except students permitted to record as an accommodation undersection 240.040of the Collected Rules. All other students who record and/or distribute audio or video recordings of class activity are subject to discipline in accordance with provisions ofsection 200.020of the Collected Rules and Regulations of the University of Missouri pertaining to student conduct matters.

Those students who are permitted to record are not permitted to redistribute audio or video recordings of statements or comments from the course to individuals who are not students in the course without the express permission of the faculty member and of any students who are recorded. Students found to have violated this policy are subject to discipline in accordance with provisions ofsection 200.020of the Collected Rules and Regulations of the University of Missouri pertaining to student conduct matters.