Scholarlink

<p>Making research evidence accessible and relevant to policymakers is one way that the scientific enterprise confers direct societal benefits. With global norms increasingly promoting these types of broader impacts, new initiatives to do so, including training researchers to engage in policy, have flourished. But what should this training entail, and how would we know whether it has been effective? A review of academic and professional literature in fields such as science communication and public affairs suggests that curricula aiming to enhance the capacity of scientists and engineers to engage in policy should broadly cover effective communication skills and knowledge of public policy processes. This finding largely aligns with the learning outcomes sought by leaders of science policy training programs in the Commonwealth of Virginia, a state with among the highest number and diversity of these types of initiatives in the U.S. Training efforts could benefit from evaluation models and measures from academic literature that speak to the same types of educational outcomes. However, the lack of consistent theoretical foundations and constructs across this highly multidisciplinary scholarship reduces their utility. A common framework describing shared conceptual terms and relationships is needed to further establish the study and practice of these interventions at the science-policy interface.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Learning outcomes and evaluation metrics for training researchers to engage in science policy

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年7月21日

查看全文
  • K. L. Akerlof,
  • Todd Schenk,
  • Kelsey Mitchell,
  • Adriana Bankston,
  • Aniyah Syl,
  • Lisa Eddy,
  • Sarah L. Hall,
  • Nikita Lad,
  • Samuel J. Lake,
  • Robert B. J. Ostrom,
  • Jessica L. Rosenberg,
  • Abigail R. Sisti,
  • Christopher T. Smith,
  • Lee Solomon,
  • Anne-Lise K. Velez

摘要

Making research evidence accessible and relevant to policymakers is one way that the scientific enterprise confers direct societal benefits. With global norms increasingly promoting these types of broader impacts, new initiatives to do so, including training researchers to engage in policy, have flourished. But what should this training entail, and how would we know whether it has been effective? A review of academic and professional literature in fields such as science communication and public affairs suggests that curricula aiming to enhance the capacity of scientists and engineers to engage in policy should broadly cover effective communication skills and knowledge of public policy processes. This finding largely aligns with the learning outcomes sought by leaders of science policy training programs in the Commonwealth of Virginia, a state with among the highest number and diversity of these types of initiatives in the U.S. Training efforts could benefit from evaluation models and measures from academic literature that speak to the same types of educational outcomes. However, the lack of consistent theoretical foundations and constructs across this highly multidisciplinary scholarship reduces their utility. A common framework describing shared conceptual terms and relationships is needed to further establish the study and practice of these interventions at the science-policy interface.