Communicating Climate Change: Lessons Learned from a Researcher-Museum Collaboration.

The need for science education and outreach is great. However, despite the ever-growing body of available scientific information, facts are often misrepresented to or misunderstood by the general public. This can result in uninformed decisions that negatively impact society at both individual and community levels. One solution to this problem is to make scientific information more available to the public through outreach programs. Most outreach programs, however, focus on health initiatives, STEM programs, or young audiences exclusively. This article describes a collaboration between the Research and Learning Center at the Fort Worth Museum of Science and History and an interdisciplinary team of researchers from the Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) metroplex area. The collaboration was a pilot effort of a science communication fellowship and was designed to train researchers to effectively convey current science information to the public with a focus on lifelong learning. We focus on the broader idea of a university-museum collaboration that bridges the science communication gap as we outline the process of forming this collaboration, lessons we learned from the process, and directions that can support future collaborations.

INTRODUCTION

Although science museums and universities abound, the communication gap between scientists and the general public continues to grow (1). Over the past few years, these institutions have begun to realize the value of forming collaborations to bridge the gap, and pioneering museums across the United States are beginning to work with universities as they build models for on-site science communication. In one successful model, the NSF-supported Living Laboratory initiative (http://livinglab.org), scientists from the fields of education, psychology, and other social sciences conduct their studies in public view within the museum setting. Children visiting the museum can participate in active studies, and caregivers can talk directly with the scientists to learn more about their areas of expertise. Scientists are trained to communicate clearly with the public, increasing the public’s ability to understand and apply science concepts.

Another model, Portal to the Public (https://popnet.pacificsciencecenter.org/), works to connect local scientists with the public (2). Scientists commit to a specified number of professional development training sessions where they learn how to adapt terminology, engage in theater games to increase awareness, receive training in designing informal learning experiences, and practice communicating their expertise. When the training is complete, researchers set up their educational activities or studies within a public space, such as a museum, zoo, or aquarium, and share their learning with guests. There is evidence from both of these models that when museums collaborate with researchers, mutual and independent learning goals can be achieved (3).

Informing the public about current scientific evidence can strengthen the health of our communities, both at a local and at a global level. Many everyday decisions require a rudimentary understanding of scientific principles, but our decision making often involves substituting what feels right for what is right (4). Increasing exposure to science could help to avoid faulty decision making, improving the chances that scientifically sound facts will feel right when decisions are being made. In museum settings, science communication can be seen as a sphere of interactions among actors, where members of the public participate in the co-creation of knowledge (5). Researchers and museums can benefit from participant feedback regarding what approaches work best to convey scientific knowledge.

Although many science educators agree on the importance of science communication, their biggest obstacle may be finding an audience outside of the classroom. Collaboration between researchers on a project is common. However, apart from public health initiatives, collaboration to communicate basic, up-to-date science principles is often restricted to partnerships between institutions of higher learning and local K–12 schools. The purpose of this article is to describe a recent collaboration between a museum and an interdisciplinary team of researchers, and to offer insights into both the process and the lessons learned.

PILOT STUDY: CLIMATE CHANGE AND EXTREME WEATHER

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (6) underscores the critical role of the public in addressing climate change. This international agreement promotes education, public awareness, and facilitation of public participation in science. Similarly, research investigating climate change supports clear science communication as a key factor in public participation. A study of over 1,000 Americans indicated that the primary factor influencing public actions to address climate change is an understanding of its causes (7). As policymakers question the value of climate change intervention, members of the public are struggling to interpret their roles in environmental protection. According to a meta-analysis of 11,944 abstracts published between 1991 and 2011, 97% of those abstracts taking a position on anthropogenic global warming agreed that human activity is responsible (8), but the public remains unsure of the scientific evidence. This uncertainty may be unsettling to society (9), slowing the public’s response to the risks of climate change (10). The development of proactive and reactive resilience in the public’s response to natural disaster requires a clear, evidence-based understanding of climate change. Studies that show effective methods of education and discussion about climate indicate that discussion should be tailored to the values of the targeted population (11).

For our collaboration, scientists from the fields of microbiology, urban planning and design, physics, computer science, and art, along with a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) meteorologist/educator and a museum educator, worked together to design an interactive unit at the Research and Learning Center (RLC) at the Fort Worth Museum of Science and History. Graduate students also participated, gaining valuable hands-on science communication experience (12). Researchers who participated in the fellowship received training on climate change and educational activities from the NOAA meteorologist/educator; on public perception and local resources from a local TV meteorologist; and on effective science communication from the museum educator. In addition, one of the researchers briefed the team on a previous study in which she had investigated local understandings and misconceptions related to extreme weather, and data from this study were used to inform topic selection for the museum activities.

One purpose of the collaboration was to evaluate the ability of science communication to improve environmental literacy and foster behavior changes. Three primary questions guided the design of the collaboration:

In what ways can public understanding of climate change be strengthened by an interdisciplinary collaboration in a museum setting?

To what extent can climate science misconceptions be clarified through interactions with researchers in a museum educational exhibit?

How can an interdisciplinary collaboration in a museum setting encourage evidence-based decision-making in relation to climate change and disaster response?

This study was approved and conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the Texas Wesleyan University Institutional Review Board (IRB). Although individuals of any age could participate in the activities, participation in the survey was limited to individuals aged 18 years and older, and written consent was required prior to completing voluntary surveys before and after experiencing the event activities.

The study took place at the Fort Worth Museum of Science and History, a well-established DFW institution located in Tarrant County. The museum, which averages one million visitors annually, is positioned to reach a broad audience representing various demographics, as its visitors and members broadly reflects the population of Tarrant County. According to the 2010–2014 American Community Survey 5-year estimates, Tarrant County has a population of 1.9 million people consisting of approximately 50.5% White (non-Hispanic or Latino), 27.3% Hispanic or Latino, 14.9% African American, 4.8 % Asian, and 0.3% Native American (13). Interestingly, this same survey indicates that, although 84.7% of the population reports having a high school education, only 24.5% report having a college degree. Partnering with local university researchers provided museum guests with opportunities to speak and interact with professionals in an academic field in an unintimidating environment. For some individuals, this may have been their first interaction with university personnel.

The research team designed and conducted an interactive educational event on the topic of climate-related extreme weather at the museum’s RLC. Educational components focused on three key areas: Awareness, Preparedness, and Communication. Hands-on, interactive activities that focused on floods, tornadoes, and storms were designed for visitors of all ages, and in-depth educational materials were shared with older children and adults. Activities ranged from learning what to include in an emergency supply kit to testing various materials for water absorption as part of a flash flood–focused activity. Most activities included takeaway items that encouraged preparedness and behavior changes to lessen the impacts of extreme weather at home and in communities. Table 1 provides brief descriptions of the main activities, with additional details provided in Appendix 1.

TABLE 1

Educational components of museum event.

Activity	Description	Educational Outcome
Emergency Supply Kit	Inspect an example of an emergency supply kit; select items for your own kit	Preparedness
How Do Flash Floods Occur?	Test various materials for water absorption or runoff	Awareness
Water Cycle Game	A dice-based game designed to illustrate the complexity of the water cycle	Awareness
So You Want to Be a Meteorologist?	Talk with a NOAA meteorologist about extreme weather in north Texas; learn what it takes to become a meteorologist	Awareness
Storm Experiences	Listen to others’ storm stories and record your own story	Communication
Disaster Response	Test your ability to find information during a disaster	Communication

NOAA = National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Voluntary pre- and post-event surveys were designed to measure general knowledge about extreme weather and climate change, opinions about planning for climate change, willingness to change personal behaviors, and sources of information about climate change (see Appendix 2 for survey details). Specific assessment measures were designed based on climate literacy literature (14, 15). Participants rated their level of agreement with 16 statements covering extreme weather and climate change on a scale of 1 (Disagree) to 4 (Agree). Participants’ pre- and post-event survey responses were compared by Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank tests to detect any differences that might be attributed to participation in the event (Table S2, Appendix 2). The results indicate that participating in events such as this one can influence visitors’ opinions (Table 2). In particular, the participants’ level of agreement with statements about the region’s poor air quality and predisposition to serious floods and droughts seemed to shift toward the “Agree” end of the scale. Although the median in relation to the statement about air quality did not change, the view of 15.9% of respondents shifted toward the “Agree” end of the scale, versus only 2.9% of respondents whose views shifted toward the “Disagree” end of the scale (data not shown). All three of these topics were part of the Awareness activities described in Table 1.

TABLE 2

Significant changes between pre- and post-activity surveys.

Statement	Pre-activity survey (n = 76)		Post-activity survey (n = 71)		p-value
	Median	n	Median	n
The Dallas–Fort Worth area has poor air quality.	3	75	3	70	0.0225
DFW is prone to serious droughts.	3	75	4	70	0.0025
DFW is prone to serious floods.	3	75	4	71	0.0001

Survey responses to the statements were on a scale of 1 (Disagree) to 4 (Agree).

DFW = Dallas–Fort Worth.

In addition to identifying common misconceptions about extreme weather and climate, other data gathered through the pilot study provided a baseline of the museum-going-public’s knowledge about extreme weather and climate change resiliency (Appendix 2). While more than 94% of respondents indicated a willingness to become more environmentally friendly in response to climate change (survey questions 14–16), 24% of respondents feel their personal actions have little effect on climate change and 20% feel that climate systems are too large to be affected by human activity (survey questions 12 and 7, respectively). These findings support the need for effective climate science communication that can encourage behavior change at a local level. The opportunity to interact with researchers is meant to encourage action by the visitors. For example, visitors who had a personal experience with flooding at their homes appeared to engage to a greater degree with the flash flood activity and expressed a desire to avoid flood events in the future, taking with them information on installing rain barrels and planting rain gardens to diminish flash flood effects. Additionally, as children assembled emergency kits, they and their parents discussed their own personal emergency awareness and considered how best to ensure that they and their families were prepared for severe weather or other emergency situations.

The data collected through this survey will serve as a baseline for future collaborations to monitor the long-term effect of outreach on public opinion. Demographic data (Table S1, Appendix 2) collected through the survey will allow further analysis of the factors that might play a role in the decision-making process of the museum patrons. Additional survey data will also be required as the current data set (n = 76) may not accurately reflect the expected demographics of the Dallas–Fort Worth area.

CONCLUSION

Reflecting on the questions that originally guided the collaboration, we can draw the following conclusions:

In what ways can public understanding of climate change be strengthened by an interdisciplinary collaboration in a museum setting? The pre- and post-event survey results indicate that, through interactive activities, it is possible to increase public understanding of the effects of climate change. Statistically significant change can be seen on some topics, but public opinion is still reluctant to change overall.

To what extent can climate science misconceptions be clarified through interactions with researchers in a museum educational exhibit? Although the visitors’ opinions on common misconceptions about the cause and impact of climate change changed from the pre-survey to the post-survey, the changes were slight and not statistically significant. This is likely due to the fact that the activities focused on specific topics related to climate change (awareness, preparedness, and communication) rather than directly confronting the misconceptions surrounding climate change.

How can an interdisciplinary collaboration in a museum setting encourage evidence-based decision-making in relation to climate change and disaster response? The participants’ willingness to alter personal living habits through awareness, preparedness, and communication are not directly measurable by surveys completed during this event, since any changes would occur after data collection ended. However, the participants’ willingness to engage in discussion with the researchers, their acceptance of take-home material to share with others, and their reported willingness to change suggests that the event provided the visitors with information to better make evidence-based decisions in the future.

Lessons learned

Several challenges were encountered during the pilot program. From the researchers’ perspective, the biggest challenge was finding ways to align current research goals with the public outreach activities. Although the participating researchers were eager to interact with museum patrons, designing activities that made current information accessible without being overwhelming was at times daunting. This could be minimized by defining clear goals at the beginning of the collaboration. While brainstorming ideas at the first meeting, what is feasible and what is not should be clarified. Any limitations, whether monetary or physical (e.g., a lack of floor space, time constraints), should be defined early. This will also minimize the decision paralysis that can occur when there are simply too many ideas on the table.

The museum also has challenges to overcome, from interpreting the researchers’ often highly theoretical perspectives to balancing the researchers’ needs with those of museum guests. Insight and careful balance are essential for increasing scientists’ awareness of field-specific jargon and developing appropriate educational activities. The museum provides a real-life context in which to present scientific information to the public through different activities; practical methodologies need to be developed that allow the museum to mediate between the researchers and the museum guests to ensure effective science communication (9).

This experience highlighted areas that could be improved upon in future collaborations. We left the event with our own takeaways: a series of implementation strategies that will enhance any researcher-museum collaboration. These are the fundamental lessons we learned:

Clear communication is essential. The nature of an interdisciplinary collaboration requires merging a variety of perspectives, priorities, and backgrounds. Whether collaborating in an informal learning environment or in a school setting, respectful listening and an accepting atmosphere can enhance communication clarity and educational outcomes for all involved.

Establish clear boundaries. Know your budget, your time constraints, the duration of the commitment, the participants’ capacities, and the project’s physical environment before the project begins. Be aware of your limitations and avoid overreaching your abilities.

Test your activities. Before engaging in a full day (or a school unit) of educational/research activities, take time to practice with individuals who can provide detailed feedback. This effort can help to refine and solidify the impact of the activities.

Be mindful of the audience. In a museum setting, activities should be designed to capture the attention of a variety of age groups and attention spans, as well as the values and interests of the local public (11). Take-away lessons should be scalable, so that everyone learns something: the three-year-old who spends five minutes at the activity; the 12-year-old who invests 20 minutes; the parent who observes the activity; the senior adults who linger with comments and questions. Above all, the activities should be safe and captivating, as well as educational, for all museum guests.

Learn from each other. Whether in a museum or in a school, come with an open mind, and make the effort to listen carefully to other researchers and to participants, including museum guests and students. The interdisciplinary focus of such a project integrates a variety of perspectives, which is important for deepening understanding and encouraging concept application (9).

The potential opportunities and rewards of research-museum collaborations are great. By training researchers in communication skills and providing them with opportunities to interact directly with the general public, museum staff can more effectively facilitate public education on timely topics such as climate change. Researchers are able to work with an interdisciplinary team, gain a new and diverse audience for their data, strengthen research communication skills, and broaden the reach of their findings. Most importantly, the museum-going-public can acquire information and participate in hands-on activities that may improve their knowledge and evidence-based decision-making abilities on critical issues. From our perspective, the benefits of these initiatives far exceed the extra effort and challenges they invoke. Museum-researcher collaborations can provide opportunities and direction to strengthen science education in the future.

Click here for additional data file.