PERCEPTIONS, PRACTICALITIES, PRESSURES: GEOSCIENCE COMMUNICATION PRACTITIONERS’ UNDERSTANDING OF SCIENCE COMMUNICATION MODELS

Geoscience communication practitioners (those who communicate geoscience to non-specialists) are increasingly looked upon for developing innovative ways to engage audiences. Based on the geoscience communication literature, practice is often solely discussed through a practical lens and is not guided by theory. Science communication theory has been applied in varied contexts, particularly the science communication models (deficit, dialogue, participatory). Despite this, it is not clear if geoscience communication practitioners are aware of these commonly accepted approaches in science communication. Therefore, this research aims to uncover practitioners’ understandings of the models through their knowledge, perceptions, and interest in the science communication models. Other aspects addressed are the practicality of the science communication models and what factors may influence the use of the models. In understanding these important factors, we can understand what support practitioners need to communicate geoscience effectively.

Representative practitioners of various sub-disciplines of geoscience communication were selected for this research. They include individuals working and volunteering in informal youth education, teacher professional development, geo-heritage/tourism, citizen science, geo-art, knowledge mobilization, museums, public outreach, geo-enthusiast organizations, media, and geo-policy. A mixed-methods approach was used to evaluate practitioners’ perspectives, including pre-interview surveys, interviews, a small interactive activity, and a post-activity survey. In general, the findings suggest that diverse practitioners may not be aware of the names of the models but are familiar with the approaches the models aim to conceptualize. Thematic analysis of preliminary interview data suggests that funding, resources, and time are limitations to utilizing the participatory model. Preliminary results also suggest that external factors (e.g. executive oversight) influence how practitioners communicate geoscience.