There is no author summary for this book yet. Authors can add summaries to their books on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Zusammenfassung

Der vorliegende Beitrag zeigt grundlegende Kriterien der sozialwissenschaftlichen Methode der Beobachtung auf und ordnet ihr Potenzial im Rahmen der Evaluation von Wissenschaftskommunikation ein. Der Beitrag geht dabei hauptsächlich auf eventbezogene Formate der externen Wissenschaftskommunikation ein, nennt aber auch Potenziale der (teilnehmenden) Beobachtung bei der Evaluation der Entstehung journalistischer Formate oder im Rahmen interner Wissenschaftskommunikation. Es wird insbesondere zwischen qualitativ und quantitativ ausgeprägten Formen der Beobachtung unterschieden und dargelegt, welche Schritte für eine erfolgreiche Durchführung zu beachten sind. Dabei werden auch Probleme und Herausforderungen bei der Anwendung der Methode genannt, derer durch die Beachtung bestimmter Gütekriterien vorgebeugt werden kann. Abschließend nennt der Beitrag Anwendungsszenarios und Beispiele für Beobachtungen im Rahmen von evaluativer Wissenschaftskommunikationsforschung.

Related collections

Most cited references 19

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Book: not found

Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation in den Sozial- und Humanwissenschaften

Nicola M. Döring, Jürgen Bortz (2016)

0 comments Cited 118 times – based on 0 reviews

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Is Open Access

Evaluation of Science Communication: Current Practices, Challenges, and Future Implications

Ricarda Ziegler, Imke Ronja Hedder, Liliann Fischer (2021)

Scientifically substantiated evaluations are pivotal to ensuring the effectiveness and improvement of the growing number of science communication projects. Yet current evaluation practices are still lacking in various respects. Based on a systematic review of evaluation reports, an online survey of, as well as discussion rounds with science communication practitioners in the German-speaking countries, we discuss three main challenges of science communication evaluation: (1) There is a conflation of impact goals and measurable project objectives as well as a lack of precise definitions of objectives and target groups, which complicates the assessment of the projects' success. (2) Although many evaluations highlight the impact-oriented interest of those responsible, the methods chosen rarely allow scientifically valid evaluations of effects. The lack of comparative reference points and the partially unsuitable use of self-report measures are key issues in this regard. (3) The fact that few evaluation processes are made transparent and that formative evaluation designs are a rarity indicates a tendency to understand evaluations as the final ‘success story’ of a project rather than a learning process. This stands in the way of a constructive discussion of the actual impact of science communication. Our exploratory insights contribute to an understanding of the weaknesses of science communication evaluation and needs in the field. They also provide impulses for future improvements in the field for the stakeholders in practice, research, funding, and science management.