PRR Project

Summary

Besides furthering the most productive disciplinary scientific fields at the University of Coimbra, one of the key strategic research areas the University of Coimbra would like to address on a permanent basis with the FCT Tenure Call is that of Science Communication, Societal Engagement and Community Outreach.  These are transversal areas that are coming into their own in terms of Research, and represent, in our opinion, an out-of-the-box potential for future high level and impactful research activities other than the typical disciplinary audiences, with clear societal implications and the ability to engage communities outside of academia. In order to do this robust research programs linked to permanent positions are needed, with different emphasis, not ad-hoc part time efforts linked to short-term objectives or project milestones and deliverables, as has been mostly the case thus far. We have included six such positions in our application, which intersect and interconnect(but do not overlap), including Science Communication, Science Entrepreneurship & Innovation and Research-based organization of outreach structures (Museum, Botanical Garden and Exploratório-UC/Ciência Viva). This policy is in line with the social responsibility of research institutions, not only in providing added value and curated information, but in performing meaningful research into the impact of these activities, and basing future developments on the results of said research.For this Science Communication profile, the Researcher is expected to perform research in science communication, from the standpoint (or starting point) of disciplinary researchers and research centers (I&D Units). There are several key questions (and hypotheses stemming from them) that the Researcher could address in their research program. What kind of scientific discoveries are deemed worthy of communicating to wider audiences by researchers in different fields, and why? How is priority determined from a scientific standpoint? What simplification or framing strategies are applied in order to make science more appealing to a non-academic public? How is science communicated from researchers to different target audiences, and is that issue actually discussed? What kinds of strategies, venues and models are involved? How can different types of audiences be involved in more participatory research and novel cocreation strategies? Does citizen involvement in the production of science communication tools increase their reach? Crucially, what is the impact of these different efforts and strategies in different members of the community, and what role can science-based communication play in terms of disinformation or “fake news” dissemination (and how can we reconcile that these aspects seem more prevalent in more science-educated societies)? Furthermore, how are different fields active in science communication? Are there field-based biases at any level? Or specific differences that researchers in different areas/fields need to pay attention to? Finally, can we use this research to help adjust strategies and increase impact, while training researchers in novel paradigms in science communication that may arise? And can ways of evaluating and rewarding such activities in a meaningful manner be proposed, thus aligning with the CoARA guidelines related to career development? These are some aspects that have been researched and discussed in this field, which is quickly coming into its own, and deserves dedicated and focused researchers.The hired researcher would be fully dedicated to this field of study, and, as in other fields they would therefore be expected to participate in teams that submit funding proposals in this consolidating field, attend specialized scientific meetings, create/participate in networks, publish results and outcomes of their research, or organize certified advanced training courses, and discussion fora. In so doing, they would, in essence, also serve internally as an ambassador for key policy changes towards the scientific community, and contribute towards the awareness of our local ecosystem in terms of importance of science communication and the tools available to implement such activities. This is notably important towards incoming researchers and career development at all levels, where a science communication aspect is a key aspect of almost all proposals from most financing agencies. The field of science communication is no longer tenable without clear, impactful and reproducible research, as is the case in any other field. We believe that the Rectory needs to be summoned on this specific topic, so as both to ensure a transversal research plan, and to not burden individual research centers.