Class 7: PUS vs. PEST

Two weeks ago we discussed the deficit model and the critical authors who argued that it was an inaccurate picture of the public. This week we talked about the effects knowing this will have on our communication.

Once we acknowledge that science's publics are active and knowledgable, how we communicate needs to take this into account. A one-way flow of scientific 'facts' isn't acceptable any more: we now need to 'engage' people with science and technology. Communication is dialogic, interactive and public-led; using anything from market research to public debates to tailor each communication to its audience and to produce a 'dialogue' between science and the public. We have moved from the Public Understanding of Science to Public Engagement with Science and Technology.

We talked - and you planned - some examples of this new kind of sci-comm: from theatre to interactive computer programmes to model bridge-building or using public nature surveys. Creativity is key, as is remembering your audience.

This week's set reading (now on WebCT, albeit it as an upside pdf) gives some more examples of what one museum thinks of 'dialogue'. Today's powerpoint is also up there, as is next week's reading from a Demos paper (in full - you only need to read the first chapter), which starts us thinking a bit more about what 'dialogue' really is or should be.

And don't forget I have a couple more tickets for the Dana event on Thursday 7th Dec; you need to let me know asap if you want one.