By: J. Theodore Repa, Touro College (theodore.repa@touro.edu)Annette deCharon, University of Maine (annette.decharon@maine.edu)Christy Herren, University of Maine (christy.herren@gmail.com)

A Presentation at the 2010 Ocean Sciences Meeting22-26 February 2010

Portland, Oregon

Assumption: Error in the Communication of Ocean Science Research Is a Given: The Goal Is to Minimize It; Can’t Eliminate It

Sources of Error in the Communication Process-Early Models

Person A-Scientist (with behaviors, thoughts, feelings, genetics, diet, and culture): aka-who?

Communicates a Message: aka-what?

Via a Channel of Communication: aka-how?

To Person B-Science Educators (also with behaviors, thoughts, feelings, genetics, diet, and culture): aka-to whom?

Time: aka-when?

Person A, Message, Channel of Communication, Person B and time all sources of error in communication.

Key Principles to Reduce Communication Error-Early Research

The more similar Person A and Person B are on almost any dimension, the more accurate the communication.

Two-way communication is more accurate than one-way communication.

Persons A and B think and feel better about two-way communication than about one-way communication.

Two-way communication takes more time than one-way communication.

Market researchers spend millions annually figuring out how to make the what and how of messages more accurate.

Assumptions: Error in the Communication of Ocean Science Research is a Given: The Goal Is to Minimize It; Can’t Eliminate It

Sources of Error in the Communication Process-Later Models

Encoding: aka-why?Decoding: aka-with what effect?Audience (with behaviors, thoughts, feelings, genetics, diet,

and culture): aka-to whom?Physical Environment: aka-where?Social Environment (norms): aka-where?Political, and Economic Environment:- aka-where?All above additional potential sources of error.

Key Principles to Reduce Communication Error-Later Research

Visual representations of the message increases the accuracy of communication.

There are optimal levels of familiarity and stability of the various environments that lead to increases in the accuracy of communication.

The more similar the scientist (Person A), the science educator (Person B), and the audience are on almost any dimension, the more accurate the communication.

What COSEE-OS Has Learned about How to Reduce Error in Communication of Ocean Science? (Process)

Spent first five years, using R & D evaluation model, refining process of working with ocean scientists to improve communication of their science to science educators

Details of model can be found in our Eos article “Online Tools Help Get Scientists and Educators on Same Page” (Vol. 90, No. 34, 25 August 2009, 289-290)

What COSEE-OS Has Learned about How to Reduce Error in the Communication of Ocean Science (Model Principles)

Adapted from education concept mapping process (way of visually representing non-linear relationship of science concepts) (decoding and encoding)

Provided peer to peer learning environments (ratio 1 scientist to 4-6 science educators) (Person A, Person B, Audience, Environments, Time, Two-Way Communication)

Helped scientist refine their science message by drafting concept map of their presentation using online software tools developed by COSEE-OS (message and channel of communication)

Matched scientist with small group of science educators (to increase similarities between the two)

What COSEE-OS Has Learned about How to Reduce Error in Communication of Ocean Science? (Data Sources)

Pre-workshop survey data from scientists and science educators

Workshop observations and debriefingsPost-workshop survey data from scientists and

science educatorsWeb statisticsRoughly six months post workshop semi-structured

interviews with scientists (response rate 63%-17 out of 27 scientists worked with in 2008-09)

February 2010 Scientist Engagement Survey (response rate 81%-25 out of 31 scientists worked with in 2009)

What COSEE-OS Has Learned about How to Reduce Error in Communication of Ocean Science? (Key Findings)

The workshop format has led to satisfactory two-way communication between scientists and science educators (consistently above 6.0 on a 7.0 scale over multiple workshops).

Scientists report using the concept mapping tools easy to learn and provide a visual, non-linear representation of the way they think about their science.

The interactive process and tools allowed scientists to minimize errors in what they were communicating and allowed science educators to minimize errors in the communication of ocean science concepts to their students.

Questions or Comments?J. Theodore Repa (theodore.repa@touro.edu)Annette deCharon (annette.decharon@maine.edu)Christy Herren (christy.herren@gmail.com)COSEE-OS website (http://cosee.umaine.edu)COSEE Ocean Climate Interactive

(http://cosee.umaine.edu/tools/oci/)Concept Map Builder

(http://cosee.umaine.edu/tools/cmb/)DeCharon, A., Albright, J., Herren, C., Cline, A.H.,

and Repa, J.T. “Online Tools Help Get Scientists and Educators on the Same Page.” Eos, vol. 90 (34), (August 25, 2009), 289-290.