An official website of the United States government
Youth-focused community and citizen science (CCS) is increasingly used to promote science learning and to increase the accessibility of the tools of scientific research among historically marginalized and underserved communities. CCS projects are frequently categorized according to their level of public participation and their distribution of power between professional scientists and participants from collaborative and co-created projects to projects where participants have limited roles within the science process. In this study, we examined how two different CCS models, a contributory design and a co-created design, influenced science self-efficacy and science interest among youth CCS participants. We administered surveys and conducted post-program interviews with youth participation in two different CCS projects in Alaska, the Winterberry Project and Fresh Eyes on Ice, each with a contributory and a co-created model. We found that youth participating in co-created CCS projects reflected more often on their science self-efficacy than did youth in contributory projects. The CCS program model did not influence youths’ science interest, which grew after participating in both contributory and co-created projects. Our findings suggest that when youth have more power and agency to make decisions in the science process, as in co-created projects, they have greater confidence in their abilities to conduct science. Further, participating in CCS projects excites and engages youth in science learning, regardless of the CCS program design.
more »
« less
Diversifying Large-Scale Participatory Science: The Efficacy of Engagement through Facilitator Organizations
Large-scale, scientist-led, participatory science (citizen science) projects often engage participants who are primarily white, wealthy, and well-educated. Calls to diversify contributory projects are increasingly common, but little research has evaluated the efficacy of suggested strategies for diversification. We engaged participants in Crowd the Tap through facilitator organizations like historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs), predominantly white institutions, high school science classrooms, and corporate volunteer programs. Crowd the Tap is a contributory project focused on identifying and addressing lead (Pb) contamination in household drinking water in the United States. We investigated how participant diversity with respects to race, ethnicity, and homeownership (a proxy for income) differed between participation facilitated through a partner organization and unfacilitated participation in which participants came to the project independently. We were also interested in which facilitators were most effective at increasing participant diversity. White and wealthy participants were overrepresented in unfacilitated participation. Facilitation helped increase engagement of people of color, especially Black and lower-income households. High schools were particularly effective at engaging Hispanic or Latinx participants, and HBCUs were important for engaging Black households. Ultimately, our results suggest that engagement through facilitator organizations may be an effective means of engaging diverse participants in large-scale projects. Our results have important implications for the field of participatory science as we seek to identify evidence-based strategies for diversifying project participants.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1713562
- PAR ID:
- 10483152
- Publisher / Repository:
- Ubiquity
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Citizen Science: Theory and Practice
- Volume:
- 8
- Issue:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 2057-4991
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 58
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Citizen science harnesses the power of nonscientist observations, often resulting in a vast network of data. Such projects have potential to democratize science by involving the public. Yet participants are mostly white, affluent, and well-educated, participants that contribute data from their residence or places they frequent. The geography of the United States is heavily segregated along lines of race and class. Using a Census Tract-level hurdle model, we test the relationship between the locations of the rain gauges from the citizen science project Community Collaborative Rain, Hail, and Snow Network (CoCoRaHS) with continuous variables for percent non-Hispanic white and median household income. We find whiter and more affluent Census Tracts are significantly more likely to have a rain gauge. The highly localized nature of precipitation combined with the uneven geography of storm-water infrastructure make data missing from citizen science projects like CoCoRaHS of vital importance to the project’s goals. We warn that scientific knowledge created from citizen science projects may produce scientific knowledge in service of wealthy, whiter communities at the expense of both communities of color and low-income communities.more » « less
-
Abstract The bulk of research on citizen science participants is project centric, based on an assumption that volunteers experience a single project. Contrary to this assumption, survey responses (n = 3894) and digital trace data (n = 3649) from volunteers, who collectively engaged in 1126 unique projects, revealed that multiproject participation was the norm. Only 23% of volunteers were singletons (who participated in only one project). The remaining multiproject participants were split evenly between discipline specialists (39%) and discipline spanners (38% joined projects with different disciplinary topics) and unevenly between mode specialists (52%) and mode spanners (25% participated in online and offline projects). Public engagement was narrow: The multiproject participants were eight times more likely to be White and five times more likely to hold advanced degrees than the general population. We propose a volunteer-centric framework that explores how the dynamic accumulation of experiences in a project ecosystem can support broad learning objectives and inclusive citizen science.more » « less
-
In this paper, we report on the impacts of the ProQual Institute—a $1M award via the NSF ECREHR Core Research program in 2019—as it nears the end of its funding period. The ProQual Institute’s goal is to build national capacity for STEM education research by engaging technical STEM from across the U.S. in cohorts that participate in an 8-week course on qualitative and mixed methods educational research techniques, followed by engagement in several communities of practice to continue supporting participant research projects and building participants’ confidence as educational researchers. This project was funded based on impact rather than knowledge generation; thus, this paper will report on the impacts of the ProQual Institute in terms of participants served and evaluated outcomes and project team observations. The key evaluation questions we answered were: (1) To what extent did the project design and implement a high-quality and culturally responsive training program? (2) What knowledge and skills did participants gain because of participation in the ProQual Institute? (3) How could the ProQual Institute be built upon to improve participant outcomes?more » « less
-
Abstract Contributory science—including citizen and community science—allows scientists to leverage participant‐generated data while providing an opportunity for engaging with local community members. Data yielded by participant‐generated biodiversity platforms allow professional scientists to answer ecological and evolutionary questions across both geographic and temporal scales, which is incredibly valuable for conservation efforts.The data reported to contributory biodiversity platforms, such as eBird and iNaturalist, can be driven by social and ecological variables, leading to biased data. Though empirical work has highlighted the biases in contributory data, little work has articulated how biases arise in contributory data and the societal consequences of these biases.We present a conceptual framework illustrating how social and ecological variables create bias in contributory science data. In this framework, we present four filters—participation,detectability,samplingandpreference—that ultimately shape the type and location of contributory biodiversity data. We leverage this framework to examine data from the largest contributory science platforms—eBird and iNaturalist—in St. Louis, Missouri, the United States, and discuss the potential consequences of biased data.Lastly, we conclude by providing several recommendations for researchers and institutions to move towards a more inclusive field. With these recommendations, we provide opportunities to ameliorate biases in contributory data and an opportunity to practice equitable biodiversity conservation. Read the freePlain Language Summaryfor this article on the Journal blog.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.627
