| 1 |
İletişim Kavramı |
Ders izlencesi İletişim Sosyolojisi
|
|
| 2 |
Bilim İletişimi |
• Burns, T. W., O'Connor, D. J., & Stocklmayer, S. M. (2003). Science communication: a contemporary definition. Public Understanding of Science, 12(2), 183-202.
• Mulder, H., Longnecker, N., & Davis, L.S. (2008). The State of Science Communication Programs at Universities Around the World. Science Communication, 30, 277 - 287.
• Dijkstra, A. M., de Bakker, L., van Dam, F., & Jensen, E. A. (2020). Setting the scene. In F. van Dam, L. de Bakker, A. M. Dijkstra, & E. A. Jensen (Eds.), Science communication. An introduction (pp. 1-17). World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte Ltd. https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/9789811209888_0001
• Stocklmayer, S., & Bryant, C. (2012). Science and the public—What should people know? International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 2(1), 81-101. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2010.543186
|
|
| 3 |
Çerçeveleme ve önceleme |
• Berland, L.K. and Hammer, D. (2012), Framing for scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49: 68-94. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20446
• Carver, R. B.; Wiese, E. F. & Breivik, J. (2014). Frame Analysis in Science Education: A Classroom Activity for Promoting Media Literacy and Learning about Genetic Causation, International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 4:3, 211-239, DOI: 10.1080/21548455.2013.797128
• Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing Theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 10(1), 103-126. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.103054
• Druckman, J. N., & Lupia, A. (2017). Using Frames to Make Scientific Communication More Effective. In K. H. Jamieson, D. M. Kahan, & D. A. Scheufele (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Science of Science Communication. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190497620.013.38
• Önceleme: http://yenimedya.info/2020/04/11/priming/
• Çerçeveleme: http://yenimedya
|
|
| 4 |
Bilim İletişimi ve bilim öğretimi |
• Baram-Tsabari, A. and Osborne, J. (2015), Bridging science education and science communication research. J Res Sci Teach, 52: 135-144. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21202
• Kohen, Z. and Dori, Y.J. (2019), Toward narrowing the gap between science communication and science education disciplines. Rev Educ, 7: 525-566. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3136
• Nielsen, K. H. (2013). Scientific communication and the nature of science. Science & Education, 22(9), 2067-2086.
• Strauss, J., Shope III, R. E., & Terebey, S. (2005). Science Communication Versus Science Education: The Graduate Student Scientist As A K-12 Classroom Resource. Journal of College Teaching & Learning (TLC), 2(6). https://doi.org/10.19030/tlc.v2i6.1831
Ek okumalar
• Falade, B. A., & Bauer, M. W. (2018). ‘I have faith in science and in God’: Common sense, cognitive polyphasia and attitudes to science in Nigeria. Public Understanding of Science, 27(1), 29-46.
• Meyer, G. (2016). In science communication, why does the idea of a public deficit always return? Public Understanding of Science, 25(4), 433-446.
• Bauer, M. W. (2009). The evolution of public understanding of science—discourse and comparative evidence. Science, technology and society, 14(2), 221-240.
|
|
| 5 |
Okul Dışı Öğrenme ve bilim iletişimi |
Banks, J., Au, K., Ball, A. F., Bell, P., Gordon, E., Gutierrez, K., … Zhou, M. (2007). Learning in and out of school in diverse environments: Life-Long, Life-Wide, Life-Deep. The LIFE Center (The Learning in Informal and Formal Environments Center), University of Washington
National Research Council. (2009). Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits. Washington, D.C., United States: National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12190
Needham, C., McCallie, E., Bell, L., Lohwater, T., Falk, J., Lehr, J., … Wiehe, B. (2009). Many Experts, Many Audiences: Public Engagement with Science and Informal Science Education. A CAISE Inquiry Group Report. Washington, D.C., United States. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/eth_fac/12/
|
|
| 6 |
Bilim öğretiminde sosyal medya |
Klar S, Krupnikov Y, Ryan JB, et al. (2020) Using social media to promote academic research: Identifying the benefits of twitter for sharing academic work. PLoS ONE 15(4): e0229446. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0229446.
Mueller-Herbst JM, Xenos MA, Scheufele DA, et al. (2020) Saw It on Facebook: The Role of Social Media in Facilitating Science Issue Awareness. Social Media and Society 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120930412.
Huber, B., Barnidge, M., Gil de Zúñiga, H., & Liu, J. (2019). Fostering public trust in science: The role of social media. Public Understanding of Science, 28(7), 759–777. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662519869097
Carr, C. T., & Hayes, R. A. (2015). Social Media: Defining, Developing, and Divining. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 23(1), 46-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870.2015.972282
QUEST: toolkit for science communication on social media https://questproject.eu/toolkits/
Bucchi, M., & Saracino, B. (2016). “Visual Science Literacy” Images and Public Understanding of Science in the Digital Age. Science Communication, 38(6), 812-819.
|
|
| 7 |
Kapsayıcı bilim iletişimi |
Dawson, E. (2014). Equity in informal science education: Developing an access and equity framework for science museums and science centres. Studies in Science Education, 50(2), 209-247. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2014.957558
Dawson, E. (2014). “Not designed for us”: How science museums and science centers socially exclude low-income, minority ethnic groups. Science Education, 98(6), 981-1008. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21133
DiCenzo, C., Menezes, S., Smith, H., Murray-Johnson, K., Azizi, M., & McDuffie, K. (2021). Inclusive science communication starter kit. Metcalf Institute, University of Rhode Island. https://inclusivescicomm.org/resources/
Falling Walls Foundation. (2020). Breaking the wall to astronomy for the vision-impaired.
YESTEM Project UK Team. (2020). The Equity Compass: A tool for supporting socially just practice. https://www.yestem.org
Ek okumalar
Judd, K., & McKinnon, M. (2021). A Systematic Map of Inclusion, Equity and Diversity in Science Communication Research: Do We Practice what We Preach? Frontiers In Communication, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.744365
Milani, E., Ridgway, A., Wilkinson, C. & Weitkamp, E. (2021). Reaching Underserved Audiences: How Science Communicators are Making New Connections Using Innovative Techniques. https://www.rethinkscicomm.eu/projectdeliverables/
https://youtu.be/eWcUEnDbku8
|
|
| 8 |
Ara sınav |
Sınava hazırlık |
|
| 9 |
Filimler, Bilimkurgu, Sanat
|
https://youtu.be/oLCTJQ-GCLQ
https://youtu.be/i73J7rNEJsk
Gouyon, J. B. (2016). Science and film-making. Public Understanding of Science, 25(1), 17-30.
Rose, C. (2003). How to teach biology using the movie science of cloning people, resurrecting
the dead, and combining flies and humans. Public Understanding of Science, 12(3), 289-296.
Asimov, I. (1965, June). Future? Tense! The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction, 100-109.
Reinsborough, M. (2017). Science fiction and science futures: Considering the role of fictions in public engagement and science communication work. Journal of Science Communication, 16(4), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.16040307
https://youtu.be/1SuJlqtB6UQ
https://youtu.be/kT4RhR6Pvfc
https://youtu.be/64XSRbal-YA
https://youtu.be/Jz7shk3ymzs
https://youtu.be/96jYktj1l14
[1] Vint, S. (2021). Science fiction. MIT Press. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/book/9374190
[2] ASU Center for Science and the Imagination: https://csi.asu.edu/about-us/
[3] Shelley, M. (2017). Frankenstein: Annotated for scientists, engineers, and creators of all kinds. D. H. Guston, E. Finn, & J. S. Robert (Eds.). MIT Press. (Original work published 1818)
Further reading
Reinsborough, M. (2017). Science fiction and science futures: Considering the role of fictions in public engagement and science communication work. Journal of Science Communication, 16(04), C07. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.16040307
[1] Kirby, D. & Ockert, I. (2021). Science and technology in film: Themes and representations. In M. Bucchi & B. Trench (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology (3rd ed., pp. 77-96). Routledge.
[2] Haynes, R. D. (1994). From Faust to Strangelove. Johns Hopkins University Press.
[3] Haynes, R. D. (2016). Whatever happened to the ‘mad, bad’ scientist? Overturning the stereotype. Public Understanding of Science, 25(1), 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662514535689
[4] Chin, J. M. & Workewych, L. (2016). The CSI Effect. In Oxford Handbooks Online. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199935352.013.28
|
|
| 10 |
Kültür ve
Bilim sermayesi
|
Archer, L., DeWitt, J., & Willis, B. (2014). Adolescent boys’ science aspirations: Masculinity, capital, and power. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21122
Archer, L., Dawson, E., DeWitt, J., Seakins, A., & Wong, B. (2015). “Science capital”: A conceptual, methodological, and empirical argument for extending Bourdieusian notions of capital beyond the arts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(7), 922–948. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21227
Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2012). Science aspirations, capital, and family habitus. American Educational Research Journal, 49(5), 881–908. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831211433290
Jensen, E., & Wright, D. (2015). Critical Response to Archer et al. (2015) “Science capital”: A conceptual, methodological, and empirical argument for extending Bourdieusian notions of capital beyond the arts. Science Education, 99(6), 1143–1146. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21208
Ek okuma
Guenther, L., Weingart, P., & Meyer, C. (2018). “Science is everywhere, but no one knows it”: assessing the cultural distance to science of rural South African publics. Environmental
Communication, 12(8), 1046-1061.
|
|
| 11 |
Bilim iletişimi ve cinsiyet |
Mostafa T (2019) Why don’t more girls choose to pursue a science career? PISA in Focus. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/02bd2b68-en.
[12] Chimba, M., & Kitzinger, J. (2010). Bimbo or boffin? Women in science: An analysis of media representations and how female scientists negotiate cultural contradictions. Public Understanding of Science, 19(5), 609–624. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662508098580
[13] Crettaz von Roten, F. (2011). Gender Differences in Scientists’ Public Outreach and Engagement Activities. Science Communication, 33(1), 52–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547010378658
[14] Demailly Z, Brulard G, Selim J, et al. (2020) Gender differences in professional social media use among anaesthesia researchers. British Journal of Anaesthesia 124(3): e178–e184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2019.12.030.
[15] Ke Q, Ahn YY and Sugimoto CR (2017) A systematic identification and analysis of scientists on Twitter. PLoS ONE 12(4): e0175368. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175368
Lewenstein, B. (2019). The need for feminist approaches to science communication. Journal of Science Communication, 18(4), C01. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.18040301
Mitchell, M., & McKinnon, M. (2019). ‘Human’ or ‘objective’ faces of science? Gender stereotypes and the representation of scientists in the media. Public Understanding of Science, 28(2), 177–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662518801257
Previs, K. K. (2016). Gender and Race Representations of Scientists in Highlights for Children: A Content Analysis. Science Communication, 38(3), 303–327. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547016642248
|
|
| 12 |
Karar vericiler açısından bilim iletişimi |
https://youtu.be/TIuoMxs0CwU
https://youtu.be/0FF270a8194
https://youtu.be/-geJu46wHiA
Suhay, E., Cloyd, E., Heath, E., & Nash, E. (2019). Recommended Practices for Science Communication with Policymakers [Report]. American University School of Public Affairs, AAAS, & Durham University. https://www.american.edu/spa/scicomm/recommended-practices-intro.cfm
Suhay, E. (2017). The Politics of Scientific Knowledge. In Nussbaum, J. F. (Ed.) Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.107
|
|
| 13 |
Bilim iletişiminin muhatapları kimlerdir? |
Burns, M., & Medvecky, F. (2018). The disengaged in science communication: How not to count audiences and publics. Public Understanding of Science, 27(2), 118-130.
Guenther, L., Weingart, P., & Meyer, C. (2018). “Science is everywhere, but no one knows it”: assessing the cultural distance to science of rural South African publics. EnvironmentalCommunication, 12(8), 1046-1061.
Bucchi, M. (1996). When scientists turn to the public: Alternative routes in science communication. Public Understanding of Science, 5(4), 375.
Andrews, E., Weaver, A., Hanley, D., Shamatha, J., & Melton, G. (2005). Scientists and public outreach: Participation, motivations, and impediments. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53(3), 281-293.
|
|
| 14 |
Bilimsel okuryazlık ve bilim iletişimi. |
Thomas, Geoffrey;, and John Durant. 1987. ‘Issues and Perspectives Why Should We Promote the Public Understanding of Science ?’ Scientific Literacy Papers: A Journal of Research in Science, Education and Research |
|
| 15 |
Eğitsel oyunlar ve bilim iletişimi |
https://www.scicommbites.org/post/the-gamification-of-science-communication
https://www.meeplemountain.com/articles/board-games-as-science-communication/
https://www.seamonster.co.za/visualisation-gamification-and-science-communication/
|
|
| 16 |
Final sınavı |
Projeörnekleri makaleler |
|
| 17 |
Final sınavı |
Sınava hazırlık |
|
TÜRKÇE
ENGLISH