More Like this

1. FUTURE Science Frontiers

   https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13999249  

   Tominaga, Masako; Walczak, Maureen; Konrad, Kevin; Reilly, Brendan; Schrenk, Matthew (January 2024, Zenodo)

   The Table S1-S6 are curated breakout notes from the NSF-funded FUTURE 2024 Workshop (March 26-28, 2024).  During the workshop, the first day of discussions focused on “Critical science questions that require seafloor sampling,” where participants: (I) defined the important sample types/sampling environment of their research; (II) assessed how well this seafloor environment is currently sampled; (III) reviewed how sample repositories/databases are currently used; and, (IV) evaluated justifications for acquiring new samples. Each breakout session culminated with a discussion of (V) what important science questions could be addressed soon (5–10 years), with existing or forthcoming assets and technologies, versus (VI) what might take longer (10+ years) and/or require the development of new assets or technologies. These motivating topics fed into the second day of discussions, which focused on “Aligning seafloor sampling technology with critical science questions.” Groups were guided by a common set of prompts, including what current resources were essential to the participants’ research, and what were the greatest challenges they faced in recovering the materials needed. The participants also discussed whether they could acquire the materials needed to address their science questions given current US assets (Figure 1 in FUTURE 2024 PI-team, 2024, AGU Advances 2024AV001560), how sample repositories and databases could be optimized for science needs, and the justification for acquiring or developing new technologies. 

   more » « less
2. In the Black Mirror: Youth Investigations Into Artificial Intelligence: In the Black MirrorYouth Investigations Into Artificial Intelligence

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3484495  

   Lee, Clifford H.; Gobir, Nimah; Gurn, Alex; Soep, Elisabeth (April 2022, ACM Transactions on Computing Education)

   Over the past two decades, innovations powered by artificial intelligence (AI) have extended into nearly all facets of human experience. Our ethnographic research suggests that while young people sense they can't “trust” AI, many are not sure how it works or how much control they have over its growing role in their lives. In this study, we attempt to answer the following questions: 1) What can we learn about young people's understandings of AI when they produce media with and about it? 2) What are the design features of an ethics-centered pedagogy that promotes STEM engagement via AI? To answer these questions, we co-developed and documented three projects at YR Media, a national network of youth journalists and artists who create multimedia for public distribution. Participants are predominantly youth of color and those contending with economic and other barriers to full participation in STEM fields. Findings showed that by creating a learning ecology that centered the cultures and experiences of its learners while leveraging familiar tools for critical analysis, youth deepened their understanding of AI. Our study also showed that providing opportunities for youth to produce ethics-centered Interactive stories interrogating invisibilized AI functionalities, and to release those stories to the public, empowered them to creatively express their understandings and apprehensions about AI. 

   more » « less
3. Cogenerative Dialogues and Development of the Culturally Relevant Pedagogical Guidelines for Computational Thinking and Computer Science.

   Sirrakos, G. (January 2023, American Association for the Advancement of Curriculum Studies Annual Meeting)

   In this proposal, we will share some initial findings about how teacher and student engagement in cogenerative dialogues influenced the development of the Culturally Relevant Pedagogical Guidelines for Computational Thinking and Computer Science (CRPG-CSCT). The CRPG-CSCT’s purpose is to provide computer science teachers with tools to enhance their instruction by accurately reflecting students’ diverse cultural resources in the classroom. Additionally, the CRPG-CSCT will provide guidance to non-computer science teachers on how to facilitate the integration of computational thinking skills to a broad spectrum of classes in the arts, humanities, sciences, social sciences, and mathematics. Our initial findings shared here are part of a larger NSF-funded research project (Award No. 2122367) which aims to better understand the barriers to entry and challenges for success faced by underrepresented secondary school students in computer science, through direct engagement with the students themselves. Throughout the 2022-23 academic year, the researchers have been working with a small team of secondary school teachers, students, and instructional designers, as well as university faculty in computer science, secondary education, and sociology to develop the CRPG-CSCT. The CRPG-CSCT is rooted in the tenets of culturally relevant pedagogy (Ladson-Billings, 1995) and borrows from Muhammad’s (2020) work in Cultivating Genius: An Equity Framework for Culturally and Historically Responsive Literacy. The CRPG-CCT is being developed over six day-long workshops held throughout the academic year. At the time of this submission, five of the six workshops had been completed. Each workshop utilized cogenerative dialogues (cogens) as the primary tool for organizing and sustaining participants’ engagement. Through cogens, participants more deeply learn about students’ cultural capital and the value of utilizing that capital within the classroom (Roth, Lawless, & Tobin, 2000). The success of cogens relies on following specific protocols (Emdin, 2016), such as listening attentively, ensuring there are equal opportunities for all participants to share, and affirming the experiences of other participants. The goal of a cogen is to reach a collective decision, based on the dialogue, that will positively impact students by explicitly addressing barriers to their engagement in the classroom. During each workshop, one member of the research team and one undergraduate research assistant observed the interactions among cogen participants and documented these in the form of ethnographic field notes. Another undergraduate research assistant took detailed notes during the workshop to record the content of small and large group discussions, presentations, and questions/responses throughout the workshops. A grounded theory approach was used to analyze the field notes. Additionally, at the conclusion of each workshop, participants completed a Cogen Feedback Survey (CFS) to gather additional information. The CFS were analyzed through open thematic coding, memos, and code frequencies. Our preliminary results demonstrate high levels of engagement from teacher and student participants during the workshops. Students identified that the cogen structure allowed them to participate comfortably, openly, and honestly. Further, students described feeling valued and heard. Students’ ideas and experiences were frequently affirmed, which served as an important step toward dismantling traditional teacher-student boundaries that might otherwise prevent them from sharing freely. Another result from the use of cogens was the shared experience of participants comprehending views from the other group’s perspective in the classroom. Students appreciated the opportunity to learn from teachers about their struggles in keeping students engaged. Teachers appreciated the opportunity to better understand students’ schooling experiences and how these may affirm or deny aspects of their identity. Finally, all participants shared meaningful suggestions and strategies for future workshops and for the collective betterment of the group. Initial findings shared here are important for several reasons. First, our findings suggest that cogens are an effective approach for fostering participants’ commitment to creating the conditions for students’ success in the classroom. Within the context of the workshops, cogens provided teachers, students, and faculty with opportunities to engage in authentic conversations for addressing the recruitment and retention problems in computer science for underrepresented students. These conversations often resulted in the development of tangible pedagogical approaches, examples, metaphors, and other strategies to directly address the recruitment and retention of underrepresented students in computer science. Finally, while we are still developing the CRPG-CSCT, cogens provided us with the opportunity to ensure the voices of teachers and students are well represented in and central to the document. 

   more » « less
4. Findings Report: Workshop on Resilient Supply of Critical Minerals

   Locmelis, Marek; Lueking, Angela; Moats, Michael; Awuah-Offei, Kwame; Alagha, Lana; Fitch, Mark; Krolikowski, Alanna; Clark, Shelby (October 2021, NSF Workshop Reports)

   null (Ed.)

   On August 2-3, 2021, the Thomas J. O’Keefe Institute for Sustainable Supply of Strategic Minerals at Missouri University of Science and Technology (Missouri S&T) hosted the NSF-funded virtual workshop ‘Resilient Supply of Critical Minerals’. The workshop was convened via Zoom and attracted 158 registrants, including 108 registrants from academia (61 students), 30 registrants from government agencies, and 20 registrants from the private sector. Four topical sessions were covered: A. Mineral Exploration and Source Diversification. B. Supply Chain and Policy Issues. C. Improving Mineral Recycling and Reprocessing Technologies. D. Technological Alternatives to Critical Minerals. Each topical session was composed of two keynote lectures and followed by a breakout session that was designed to identify promising pathways towards increasing critical supply chain resilience in the United States. During each breakout session, participants were asked to address five questions: Q1. What are the roadblocks that affect the resilient supply of critical minerals? Q2. What are the most pressing research needs? Q3. What opportunities can lead to the fastest and biggest impact? Q4. What skills training is required to meet future workforce demands? Q5. What other questions should be asked, but are commonly overlooked? Several issues that limit critical mineral supply chain resilience in the United States were identified and discussed in all breakout sessions, including: 1. Insufficient understanding of domestic critical minerals resources. To address this issue, workshop participants highlighted the need for (i) more geologic research to identify new and evaluate existing resources; and (ii) a qualitative and quantitative assessment of critical minerals that may be recovered as by/co-products from existing production streams. 2. Technical limitations of current mineral processing and recycling technologies. To address this issue, workshop participants highlighted the need for (i) innovative mineral processing technologies, including more environmentally friendly chemicals/solvents, and (ii) automated recycling technologies for appliances and e-waste. Participants also highlighted the need for a centralized and simplified way to collect recyclable materials, and incentives for the public to participate in recycling. 3. Long permitting processes for mining and mineral processing operations, with often unpredictable outcomes. To address this issue, workshop participants suggested the development of new critical mineral focused policies with faster processing times and more transparent / predictable decision-making processes. 4. The negative public image of mining and mineral processing operations. To address this issue, workshop participants suggested to design public outreach / education initiatives and to include local communities into decision-making processes. 5. Limited availability of a critical mineral workforce. To address this issue, workshop participants suggested an increased focus on critical mineral specific skill training in higher education institutions, and advanced training of the existing workforce. 

   more » « less
5. Advancing the scholarship and practice of stakeholder engagement in working landscapes: a co-produced research agenda

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s42532-022-00132-8  

   Eaton, Weston M.; Burnham, Morey; Robertson, Tahnee; Arbuckle, J. G.; Brasier, Kathryn J.; Burbach, Mark E.; Church, Sarah P.; Hart-Fredeluces, Georgia; Jackson-Smith, Douglas; Wildermuth, Grace; et al (December 2022, Socio-Ecological Practice Research)

   Abstract Participatory approaches to science and decision making, including stakeholder engagement, are increasingly common for managing complex socio-ecological challenges in working landscapes. However, critical questions about stakeholder engagement in this space remain. These include normative, political, and ethical questions concerning who participates, who benefits and loses, what good can be accomplished, and for what, whom, and by who. First, opportunities for addressing justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion interests through engagement, while implied in key conceptual frameworks, remain underexplored in scholarly work and collaborative practice alike. A second line of inquiry relates to research–practice gaps. While both the practice of doing engagement work and scholarly research on the efficacy of engagement is on the rise, there is little concerted interplay among ‘on-the-ground’ practitioners and scholarly researchers. This means scientific research often misses or ignores insight grounded in practical and experiential knowledge, while practitioners are disconnected from potentially useful scientific research on stakeholder engagement. A third set of questions concerns gaps in empirical understanding of the efficacy of engagement processes and includes inquiry into how different engagement contexts and process features affect a range of behavioral, cognitive, and decision-making outcomes. Because of these gaps, a cohesive and actionable research agenda for stakeholder engagement research and practice in working landscapes remains elusive. In this review article, we present a co-produced research agenda for stakeholder engagement in working landscapes. The co-production process involved professionally facilitated and iterative dialogue among a diverse and international group of over 160 scholars and practitioners through a yearlong virtual workshop series. The resulting research agenda is organized under six cross-cutting themes: (1) Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion; (2) Ethics; (3) Research and Practice; (4) Context; (5) Process; and (6) Outcomes and Measurement. This research agenda identifies critical research needs and opportunities relevant for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers alike. We argue that addressing these research opportunities is necessary to advance knowledge and practice of stakeholder engagement and to support more just and effective engagement processes in working landscapes. 

   more » « less