Developing Scientists through Outreach

In a 2006 study, using a national database that followed children's career aspirations over multiple years, Tai and his colleagues showed that among students who went on to attend 4-year colleges, those who planned to pursue science-related careers in grade 8 (at age 14) were 1.9 times more likely to obtain a Bachelor's degree life sciences and 3.4 times more likely to obtain a Bachelor's degree in physical sciences and engineering. These outcomes were true even for students with average middle school grades, suggesting that early intention matters a great deal.

In subsequent work Tai found that 70% of scientists and 69% of science graduate students reported becoming interested in science in elementary and middle school. However, most did not decide which area of science to pursue until high school, leaving ample scope for mentors to help students build and refine their interests. "All along the educational path, you're going to have an impact," Tai said. "Working with young people is very important."

Many scientists and graduate students say they became interested in science in elementary or middle school. (Image courtesy of Robert Tai)

Most recently, Tai and his colleagues developed a framework of eight instructional strategies that can be used in schools and informal learning settings. For example, some activities involve competition; others involve discovering, building, or making something, or collaborating on a project; and some involve a combination of learning strategies. Although children tend to prefer some strategies over others, all the strategies use skills that are important in the professional world.

The researchers created a survey to assess the types of learning strategies students in a typical classroom find most engaging, and whether their preferred strategies correlate to an interest in a science-related career. So far, the survey has been given once to 7157 students in grades 3–12 in one large urban and three smaller school districts; ultimately, each student will be surveyed four times—twice a year for 2 years. The researchers recorded whether students' parents had professional or nonprofessional jobs but not whether the jobs were science-related, because such a category proved difficult to define.

Tai developed FOCIS (Framework for Observing Children's Interactions with Science) to identify the types of instructional strategies that different STEM programs invite children to engage in. (Image courtesy of Robert Tai)

The team found that some of the preferred learning styles were tied to an interest in STEM careers. Students with a strong preference for discovery-related activities in elementary school were 1.9 times more likely to indicate interest in a science-related career compared to those with neutral scores for that learning style; in middle school the students with a strong preference for discovery were 3 times more likely to indicate interest in a science career. Weaker but still significant connections to science careers were noted in all age groups among children with a strong preference for making things.

The data also revealed gender differences. Boys were three times more likely in elementary school and four times more likely in middle school to be interested in a science-related career. Boys and girls showed similar interest in discovery and problem-solving activities in grades 3 and 4, but older girls had less interest in these activities. Girls were also less interested in competition-based activities. The language of the survey also mattered: girls expressed less interest in activities that involved making things when the word "build" was used instead of the word "make."

An audience member asked whether the connection Tai observed between early interest in STEM and the achievement of a STEM college degree and career applies to children from underrepresented minority groups. It does, Tai replied, but the connection is weaker for these children than it is for white middle-class children. Data from the learning styles study will allow researchers to further explore this question, he added. In response to a question about how best to engage children in one-time sessions, Tai suggested designing activities that include multiple instructional strategies.

Integrating outreach and research

Emily Rice, an astronomer at the College of Staten Island and the American Museum of Natural History, described her synergistic work at the intersection of research and science outreach. Rice codirects an NYC-based research group called Brown Dwarf New York City (BDNYC). Because scientists can obtain detailed observations of brown dwarfs using space-based and large ground-based telescopes, the objects serve as a proxy for studying the properties of exoplanets, which are more difficult to observe directly.

Rice conducts a variety of outreach activities in addition to her research. Some, such as invited presentations, planetarium shows, and the occasional media appearance, are fairly standard for scientists. Others are more unusual. She and collaborators make parody videos, with titles including Sh%t Astronomers Say, Fund Me Maybe, and ThriftCode. She is also an organizer for a series of science presentations staged in bars called Astronomy on Tap, a concept that is starting to spread around the world, and she runs, with a collaborator, an astronomy fashion blog called STARtorialist.

Balancing research and outreach, Rice said, is less about equalizing the weight of different aspects of her career and more like balancing a chemistry equation—the balance can change depending on the conditions of the reaction. Another analogy might be a spectrum, with the two activities on opposite ends, she said, "but really, a lot of the activities we do as scientists and science mentors are somewhere on the spectrum, not at one end or the other." Perhaps the important thing is not balancing science and outreach, Rice suggested, but rather integrating them.

When planning her talk, Rice asked her students to brainstorm action words associated with research and outreach. In fact, all the words—exploring, modeling, writing—apply to both activities. (Image courtesy of Emily Rice)

Despite her career success, Rice said, she suffers from impostor syndrome. As a graduate student she often felt the need to hide some of her outreach work for fear she would not be taken seriously as a researcher. Some academics still maintain that research and outreach are mutually exclusive, that engaging in one only takes time away from the other. But in fact, Rice noted, astronomy research no longer involves sitting alone at a telescope on a dark night. Rather, it is both collaborative and competitive, and increasingly public-facing. Thus to be successful as researchers, scientists need outreach skills—the ability to communicate both with others in the scientific community and with the public.

Perhaps most importantly, the integration of outreach and research changes the scientific community itself, by attracting a more diverse group more reflective of the demographics of the general population to the field. Outreach is also about communicating, to outsiders and insiders, about who has access to the research community and who identifies as a scientist.

Rice added that not everyone who is trained as a scientist must remain in a science career; indeed, when trained scientists enter fields like education, communication, and entrepreneurship, they often broaden those fields, increasing science literacy and support for science in society.

Panel: what do subject experts want from outreach experience?

Moderator Jeanne Garbarino of the Rockefeller University began the first day's panel discussion by observing that outreach can be a tough sell at academic institutions. She asked the panelists to comment on how it could be incentivized and sustained. The metrics of success for academic scientists are research and publications, not community involvement, noted Julie Nadel, a fellow at the American Society for Human Genetics and the National Genome Research Institute. Marcus Lambert, director of diversity and student services at Weill Cornell Graduate School of Medicine suggested that making outreach more prominent requires strategic thinking. Andrea Unser of Glauconix Inc. advocated adding these activities to the curriculum, either as requirements of training grants or through course credit, noting that students in her PhD program at the University of Albany could get seminar credits for participating in mentoring activities with children in the community.

The panelists recommended viewing outreach as a set of transferable skills, with a return on investment for the university in the form of trainees learning science communication, establishing a positive reputation for the institution, and giving back to the community. Nadel noted that as a graduate student at Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the Bronx, she knew that people in the neighborhood viewed the institution as impenetrable—that nobody knew what was going on inside—and she saw that as a lost opportunity.

Garbarino asked the panelists to define outreach, and all described it broadly as any interaction with the community or any time spent away from day-to-day tasks listening to, guiding, or engaging others. Demographically, Nadel said, many researchers who engage in outreach are women and minorities, people who are often personally invested in the success of underrepresented groups. Also involved are scientists who plan to leave or have left the bench.

"Institutions are going through a transition where the average trainee is not going to make it to a top-tier research track," Lambert said. Administrators and faculty therefore need to help students consider alternative careers. But students in traditional career tracks can also benefit from participating in mentoring and outreach, and students trained in pedagogy become more competitive scientists. Nadel noted that researchers may be reluctant to engage in STEM mentoring out of fear that they will be asked questions that they might not know the answer to on the spot. She encouraged them to go ahead anyway, because, she said, experiencing these spontaneous interactions "really helps your scientific thought process."

Garbarino asked panelists about the ideal qualities of people who do outreach. A passion for science, Nadel answered; an ability to laugh a lot and say when you don't know something, Unser said; finally, Lambert said, a real care for the people you interact with—because that's what makes kids in outreach programs come back.

Interested students attend a matching fair, where they vie for positions at participating organizations in fields including education, health care, economic development, and environmental sustainability. Students receive 14 hours of training that covers the specific placement as well as civic engagement more broadly. During the placement, each student meets regularly with program managers at the CUNY institution, attends monthly workshops with other participants, and completes personal and program evaluations.

In end-of-year assessments, most students show growth in initiative, leadership, communication, and other skills valued by employers. "There are implications here for students' professional tracks," Stephenson said. The experience can also lead to employment directly. Last year, 45% of students considered extending the experience through fellowships, internships, volunteering, or paid positions. Site supervisors say that CUNY students often emerge as more effective advocates for clients compared to other interns and report that they provide meaningful contributions to the work of the organization. Stephenson suggested that these outcomes may occur because CUNY students identify with the communities they serve, sometimes having faced the issues their placement organization aims to address.

Stephenson would like to expand STEM education opportunities in the CUNY Service Corps program; another goal is to share the CUNY model with other higher education institutions. She offered to provide further details about the program with anyone interested in setting up something similar.

CUNY students who participated in the Service Corps reported improvements in multiple skills and qualities that employers seek. (Image courtesy of Rachel Stephenson)

Jenny Correa, an associate program officer at the Pinkerton Foundation, manages a portfolio of STEM mentoring programs in New York City. She intimately grasps the mentee perspective, having started as one herself. At age 16, she fell in love with science as a summer intern at New York Hall of Science, a Queens science museum, where she stayed for 14 years, eventually running one of its educational programs until being recruited to Pinkerton. At root, she said, mentoring programs, whatever their content, rely on building long-term, trusting relationships between children and adults. Program goals change with age. For elementary-school children, the goals are to build excitement about STEM topics and to demonstrate that STEM activities are within children's grasp. In middle school, the idea is to extend that initial excitement while also exposing students to career possibilities. In high school, the aim is to engage students in meaningful work experience, be it in a laboratory or in a community garden.

Mesler told the audience it has been particularly challenging to decide how to scale-up Classroom Champions. The organization is not limited by geography, because mentors interact with classrooms virtually, but its leaders have had to be thoughtful about maintaining program quality. Mentors can work with 5–10 classrooms at a time, and the organization wants to maintain the special connection children in each classroom feel to "their" athlete, despite having never met in person. There are about 4000 Olympic, Paralympic, and other elite athletes who could serve as mentors for Classroom Champions, and Mesler expects to recruit about 10% of them. But the organization hopes to serve 50 000 students per year within 5 years. "We are eventually going to spread out into other sports and other genres," he said. "If we can do this with an ice dancer in Washington Heights, we can do it with anyone—it's simply an adult who cares, and who is doing something significant."

Kriegel and Groome agreed that a reasonable goal for programs is to recruit 10% of an expert group as mentors. The Academy's goal with the Afterschool STEM Mentoring Program is to have a million learners by 2020—a daunting number. Correa noted that her portfolio includes boutique programs, each of which serves some 60–100 children in a distinct community and is unlikely to grow, along with larger programs that are encouraged to expand.

One way to build capacity, Groome and Correa noted, is to deputize college and high school students who have gone through a particular program as mentors themselves. Mentees then benefit from being taught by people close to their own age, and new mentors gain the skills and confidence to teach content they have learned. Mentees in these programs may not have considered careers as scientists or teachers, and receiving credit or pay to spend a semester or summer leading younger peers may encourage them to rethink their potential. Groome noted plans at the Afterschool STEM Mentoring Program to embrace this approach in the near future.

Mentors tend to find it rewarding to see the results of their service, and program infrastructure should be designed so that they feel supported and appreciated. Programs should strive to allow mentors to develop their own skills and track their own growth, and should avoid burdening mentors with bureaucratic requirements. Classroom Champions mentors connect with each other online to build camaraderie and offer feedback. Groome noted that learning how to give and receive critical feedback is an important skill. Staff at the Afterschool STEM Mentoring Program would like to implement a set of prompts—"what" (as in, what did you do), "so what", and "now what"—that would help mentors reflect on and share their experiences, and look forward.

Finally, the panelists discussed ways to share best practices among mentoring and outreach programs and to fill in gaps in existing efforts. Four years ago, Pinkerton launched a network of after-school STEM mentoring programs with a framework to collaboratively assess the different efforts and identify things that could be done differently. Correa reported that the organization would consider funding any new and interesting model arising from the group; two initiatives that have been launched are now serving 4000 children. "I would like to see that every kid in New York City has access to a number of different STEM opportunities, both in and out of school," she said.

Finding common ground

In the last session, participants broke into eight groups to discuss goals for their organizations, for their fields, and for the learners they aim to serve. They also considered the changes needed to make these goals easier to achieve. Participants then reported the highlights of their conversations.

• Group 1 emphasized the importance of collecting data on the benefits and outcomes of specific programs. Dedicated staff managing this process would ensure that it is done consistently and treated as a requirement rather than as an afterthought. The participants recommended that institutions already collecting data on the efficacy of outreach work centralize it so that other program directors can gain insight into what has been tried. They also reiterated that attitudes toward outreach need to change, because currently, outreach practitioners are often seen as failed scientists.
• Group 2 highlighted the need to create protected time for graduate students to participate in mentoring and outreach. Also crucial, the group said, is stable and consistent, even if modest, financial support for outreach programs, so that they do not face the threat of shutdown year-to-year.
• Group 3 similarly discussed ways to keep programs running over the long term, with multiple generations of mentors and mentees remaining involved. They also noted the need to systematically measure STEM mentoring programs and to support sustained training and development for mentors. Such training could perhaps be coordinated with the Education and/or Psychology Departments at institutions to incorporate knowledge from these disciplines.
• Group 4 agreed that the university administration could play a greater role, particularly by guaranteeing protected time for outreach. The group also described the culture change needed for people to recognize the value of outreach. Scientists are under immense time pressures, and a successful outreach model would be centralized, with a dedicated staff to ensure that graduate students emerge with training and skills useful for the non-laboratory careers they may wish to pursue.
• Group 5, returning to systemization, noted the importance of soft metrics, such as authenticity of experience and long-term results and engagement. The group also suggested expanding programs to seek mentors in local businesses, to expose students to different types of leaders and promote cross-disciplinary interests and ideas.
• Group 6 recommended that programs remove artificial barriers to mentoring, such as the misconception that people who are quiet in class would not make good mentors. Convincing high-level administrators—say, a Provost—to find time to mentor could create buy-in among scientists and lower administrators. The group also suggested that mentoring programs emulate Google and other informal communication structures that have led to innovation.
• Group 7 proposed that STEM mentees could benefit if programs treated science learners as language learners—striving, in other words, to make concepts easier to understand. Meanwhile, they thought, recruiting experts might be easier if the benefits of participation, such as much-improved communication skills, were made clearer.
• Group 8 brainstormed a list of groups with whom STEM outreach and mentoring programs should seek better relationships: schools of education and science within institutions, policy makers, industry scientists, and academic researchers with diverse urban and rural perspectives. Such bridge-building could also help scientists make research activities more accessible to the public.

In closing, Phillip Ortiz of the State University of New York noted that STEM skills are highly valuable because of their applicability to life skills and to a wide range of STEM and non-STEM professions. He also encouraged attendees to consider mentoring and outreach not as one-time effects, like changing the orbit of a meteor by striking it with a rocket, but rather as long-term interactions that change the trajectories of both mentor and mentee.