Widening participation and public engagement in Biosciences.

We all know the importance of disseminating our science and the impact this can have on our research. It’s quite fair to say that a publication in nature can help with grant funding, invitations to give talks at research conferences, and boost collaborations: “publish or parish” right? So what’s new? Science communication, pathways to impact and public engagement seem to be the new buzz words. Will “ visualise or vanish” be the new phrase?

Many of you may think: how important is public engagement in higher education and what is the evidence? Why do we have to include the public and widen participation? To find out more I travelled to London on 16th of November 2017 to attend a Heads of University Biosciences (HUBS) meeting, organised by the Royal Society of Biology, held at the Natural History Museum. A full programme, covering outreach activities for pupils and sixth form colleges, collaborations with musea, public engagement and policy making and, of course, REF2021.
 Some excellent examples were presented showing highly creative and effective ways to engage with the public. I thought sharing these examples and provide links to find out more would be useful given that impact is here to stay.


Widening participation in Biology 


The meeting started with a presentation from Anna Lisa Alexander from the Imperial College outreach team, very similar to our own public engagement with research unit (PerU). Highlighted projects included collaborations with trapeze artist and the physic department to explain the science behind gravity and atoms, and collaborations between physics and musicians at the Royal Albert hall. Other successful outreach activities include engagement of both parents and children in events, and summer schools where PhD and MRes students teach school students about their own work. The secret to success appears to be access to bespoke learning spaces, including their ‘reach out’ space, which is like our life lab, and tracking students after they attended an event and invite them for follow up activities. Help with placements, meet the professor session (or technician, or PhD student), and masterclasses for writing personal statements can increase admissions and general increased interest in STEM subjects. Always evaluate the evidence for success, by asking feedback and publish quotes from students who attended the sessions. Received a Facebook invitation? first thing you do is looking at who else is going to the same event. Similar reactions occur when students are invited to attend an open day, who else is going? Quotes and case studies help at lot, especially when reaching out to under-represented groups of students and involve international students to engage with their home countries.

Engaging students with science


The authentic Biology outreach programme, funded by the Wellcome Trust, was used as a successful outreach programme that aims to widen student engagement with science. The Bristol group, which was one of 5 universities that received funding (we were also one of them!) have managed to keep the programme going. This includes the involvement undergraduate students who are trained to perform the practical classes in the school. They have to improvise and work in a team, and are more confident than lab based students. See photo. Undergraduate Students created lay guides and quizzes on pcr and how to keep a lab book. The students are assessed by giving a 20-minute science talk to the school children on the school project and write a dissertation on their whole year experience.

Working with musea

The natural history museum hosts 350 scientist who collectively write 700 scientific papers per year. They work with the 80 million specimens held at the museum. Their work is broad and includes: origins and evolution, solar system in earth, biodiversity and taxometry, mapping biodiversity by molecular techniques and Sustainability, from food to environment. The data portal is available to researchers and the public, reaching 2 billion downloads per year. The museum has active citizen science projects, including Earth worm dig and Bio blitz.

They are open for academic collaboration and are a route into working with your local museum. You can contact the researchers by looking at the website, but Ed Santry is happy to help e.santry@nhm.ac.uk.

For the neuroscientists between us, have a look at ‘eyesOnALZ’ which is a big data game where you have to find clogged-up blood vessels by mining an online database. This project would take years by individual researchers and by involving the public this process is speed up in a fun way – You get my point, the scientist get their data, the public learns: a win-win situation.

Working with policy makers and the media

The afternoon session started with Tony Whitney, civil servant from the department of business, economy and industrial strategy (BEIS), responsible for public engagement and policy making. Why is the government investing in public engagement? BEIS is a economy department and the UK research base is of great interest for growth. Research has to be translated and the general public needs to be consulted, for example on new and emerging technologies. The department engages young people with science as well as underrepresented groups. The main aim is to increase public understanding, making science more accessible and to work in partnership to develop government funded research programmes. The ‘Science wise program’, run by BEIS, is working towards better understanding of new and potential controversial topics, e.g. bse crisis, foot and mouth, genetic modification, and nuclear power. The programme aims to establish what does the public thinks and what is acceptable. They work with learned societies, natural history museum, and the science media centre to identify new areas of research and how best to communicate thus science. To find out more click on this link

Next up was Tom Sheldon from the science media centre. 89% adults say traditional media is one of the two most important sources of information about science. 59% says tv is the most regular sources of information 23% say printed newspaper. Has your research area been hyped in the media? Is cancer cured again? coffee prevent Alzheimer’s disease? If you want your science to be covered accurately in the media you have to speak to the journalist yourself. Don’t postpone, journalist will find someone else. But don’ panic, as the science media centre has a strategy to reduce misconceptions and make sure the public gets the correct information, they form the bridge between academics and the media. The science media centre actively approached scientist with expertise, so if you are visible and in the public domain, your opinion is taken into account.

What can we do as academics to increase the impact of our science? Have a look at science wise: Involve.org.uk.

You have to be in it to win it! and use the engagement spectrum: Empower, collaborate, Involve, consult, inform.
 The public cares about Who is going to benefit and who will win? There must be a social need and a clear benefit of the science. Not just looking at genes in a Frankenstein way. Large scale changes are not popular. When does science communication fail? when there is lack of understanding and clarity. It takes time to engage the public, can’t do it in 2 weeks. Public has busy lives too. Key message : Key driver of widening participation is emotional connection and it has to connect to quality of life.

REF2021 and the role of public engagement

(Very brief) summary of the Stern review: *REF2014 helped to identifying what is going on in research in the UK?
*Focus on multidisciplinary approach
*Moving away from individual researchers and more focussed on the unit of assessment, this helps bias towards certain areas for funding and pressures on individuals in departments
*Impact cases help lobby for further funding calls
.

Institutional level impact case studies were suggested but after consultation it was concluded that that cannot be captured by single units of assessment. Only a pilot will happen next year. Further changes include that Impact through public engagement and teaching inside the institute are now eligible. Underlining research does not have to be highly specific based on research paper, a more broader knowledge is now eligible. BUT BUT BUT…. further details will be available following a workshop held in February specifically focusing on public engagement. What will this workshop aim for? A) Good definition of public engagement is needed, B) Difference between impact and dissemination has to be defined C) What type of impacts can arise from public engagement? D) How to evidence ?

All in all, a very informative day on widening participation and public engagement in BioSci news. After a full day of talks we were treated to a tour in the spirit collections. Here are a few snapshots, well worth visiting is you are planning a trip to the natural history museum. What a place to engage the public with science and biology!