Foto: Pixaby At what point an evaluation makes sense.
Briefly analysed
According to some representatives from the field, an evaluation helps to think more about the goals of SciComm. But isn’t the discussion of goals and the target group a step that has to come before? Otherwise, communicators would not be able to reach people in the first place. Only those who communicate with intrinsic motivation deal with it intensively. After all, he or she wants to communicate successfully. If the goals are clear, it makes sense to evaluate them later. This helps to improve the next SciComm and to advance it further.
Reflection First define goals and target groups, then evaluate. Why this order is important. And why an evaluation not always makes sense.
What do I want to achieve with SciComm? Why do I actually communicate? Often there is not enough time in the daily scientific routine to deal intensively with these questions. In addition, you should also evaluate SciComm. But does this always make sense?
Think about goals & target groups
Evaluation is a topic of discussion in the SciComm community. Not only theory and practice differ. There is also a difference of opinion as to whether another important step should be taken before evaluation. Namely, that communicators think about their goals and target audience before they communicate. This does not mean simply stating that you want to “reach more young people”. Who and how old are the young people? What makes them special? What hobbies do they pursue? Effective SciComm requires intensive engagement with the people you are targeting.
Honest SciComm
Because we need communication that actually reaches people. In other words, honest SciComm. Where representatives invest time and resources. Where scientists ask themselves why they communicate. Besides thinking about goals, honest science communication also means communicating problems or setbacks in research. The fact that science communication actually reaches people and later evaluation is meaningful depends strongly on the motivation to communicate.
Communicate without pressure
As soon as scientists have to communicate out of pressure, the quality suffers. Then the choice of a format often falls on what one knows or is currently trendy. Whether it actually reaches people is not up for discussion. Even if the BMBF calls for science communication and this should be part of research and teaching, not everyone has to communicate. It is true that everyone should have the opportunity to communicate and that this should not have a negative impact on the scientific career. But only communicating just to communicate is of no use. On the contrary, it wastes time and resources unnecessarily.
SciComm needs strategy
Only if there is an intrinsic motivation behind the SciComm a critical evaluation is worthit. Because those who are responsible ask themselves beforehand: What do I want to achieve? Which target group am I addressing? These questions are part of the strategy that forms the basic framework for the concept and later the evaluation. Those who are at the beginning of their SciComm career should just go ahead and try it out. But anyone who communicates professionally needs a strategy. It is necessary. Because it formulates exactly what the purpose of SciComm is. Otherwise, formats, events or projects could come to nothing and ultimately have no impact.
If, on the other hand, the communicators know exactly why they are communicating and who they want to reach, an evaluation is worthwhile. By reflecting, one learns and becomes better. The Impact Unit has developed tools for this purpose. The approaches are good because they advance evaluation. But they are two steps ahead of Germany. The field in this country is not yet so far advanced because those who are responsible think too little about the goals and the target group of SciComm. These are the first two steps. Only when that has happened does an evaluation make sense.