Teaching scientific evidence and critical thinking for policy making

IF 2.5 Q3 BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS Biology Methods and Protocols Pub Date : 2024-04-11 DOI:10.1093/biomethods/bpae023
Natalia Pasternak Taschner, Paulo Almeida
{"title":"Teaching scientific evidence and critical thinking for policy making","authors":"Natalia Pasternak Taschner, Paulo Almeida","doi":"10.1093/biomethods/bpae023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n While there is worldwide tendency to promote the use of scientific evidence to inform policy making, little has been done to train scientists and policy makers for this interaction. If we want to bridge the gap between academia, scientific knowledge and policy, we must begin by providing formal training and skill building for actors and stakeholders. Scientists are not trained to communciate and inform policy, and policy makers are not trained to understand scientific process and assess evidence. Building an environment where this collaboration can flourish depends on teaching competencies and abilities specific for decison-making processess. As professors of policy with a background in science, we have started teaching preliminary courses on the use of scientific evidence in policy making. Feedback from students and institutions has been positive, paving the way for similar courses in other schools and institutions and maybe even new career paths. This paper is intended to share our experience in designing and teaching courses aimed at training policy makers. Moving forward we plan to include training for science majors, thus encompassing the two main sides of this dialogue and opening new career opportunities for scientists and policy makers.","PeriodicalId":36528,"journal":{"name":"Biology Methods and Protocols","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biology Methods and Protocols","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/biomethods/bpae023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While there is worldwide tendency to promote the use of scientific evidence to inform policy making, little has been done to train scientists and policy makers for this interaction. If we want to bridge the gap between academia, scientific knowledge and policy, we must begin by providing formal training and skill building for actors and stakeholders. Scientists are not trained to communciate and inform policy, and policy makers are not trained to understand scientific process and assess evidence. Building an environment where this collaboration can flourish depends on teaching competencies and abilities specific for decison-making processess. As professors of policy with a background in science, we have started teaching preliminary courses on the use of scientific evidence in policy making. Feedback from students and institutions has been positive, paving the way for similar courses in other schools and institutions and maybe even new career paths. This paper is intended to share our experience in designing and teaching courses aimed at training policy makers. Moving forward we plan to include training for science majors, thus encompassing the two main sides of this dialogue and opening new career opportunities for scientists and policy makers.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
教授科学证据和批判性思维,促进政策制定
虽然全世界都倾向于促进利用科学证据为决策提供信息,但在培训科学家和决策者进行这种互动方面却鲜有作为。如果我们想弥合学术界、科学知识和政策之间的差距,就必须从为参与者和利益相关者提供正规培训和技能建设开始。科学家没有接受过沟通和为政策提供信息的培训,决策者也没有接受过了解科学过程和评估证据的培训。建立一个能让这种合作蓬勃发展的环境,有赖于传授决策过程中特有的能力。作为具有科学背景的政策教授,我们已经开始教授有关在决策中使用科学证据的初步课程。学生和机构的反馈都很积极,为在其他学校和机构开设类似课程铺平了道路,甚至可能开辟了新的职业道路。本文旨在分享我们在设计和教授旨在培训政策制定者的课程方面的经验。今后,我们计划纳入对理科专业学生的培训,从而涵盖这一对话的两个主要方面,为科学家和决策者开辟新的职业机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Biology Methods and Protocols
Biology Methods and Protocols Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Agricultural and Biological Sciences (all)
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
2.80%
发文量
28
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊最新文献
Optimizing Western blotting immunodetection: Streamlining antibody cocktails for reduced protocol time and enhanced multiplexing applications. Live cell fluorescence microscopy-an end-to-end workflow for high-throughput image and data analysis. A reproducible method to study traumatic injury-induced zebrafish brain regeneration. Cluster analysis identifies long COVID subtypes in Belgian patients. Unpacking unstructured data: A pilot study on extracting insights from neuropathological reports of Parkinson's Disease patients using large language models.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1