People in conversation

The Scientific Citizenship Initiative

Scientists in SCi Training

“To really unlock the potential of scientific discovery—to really help people—we need scientists to understand that there is a role for community engagement.”

Natalie Kofler, co-Director

Scientific Citizenship Initiative

From combatting infectious diseases to mitigating the effects of climate change, new developments in scientific research and technology have the potential to transform the world. So, what’s stopping them?

It might be a gap in science education. The training scientists receive in graduate school is focused on communicating data to other scientists: how to prepare a graph, order the slides in a presentation, and write accurate descriptions of the research. But there’s still a gap, says Natalie Kofler, co-Director of the Scientific Citizenship Initiative (SCi)—and it may be hampering the impact of scientific discovery.

The leaders behind SCi believe that science is most effective when scientists are also active citizens, who can listen and learn from many people and steer research to benefit everyone. The goal of SCi’s array of courses and workshops is to train scientists in a new domain: to become responsible participants in their communities and to create a scientific culture that supports inclusivity, equity, cooperation, and service.

“The incentives of science education are misaligned with the skills needed to address the world’s biggest challenges,” said Kofler. “SCi is a place for young scientists to develop the broader skills they need.”

Communication, Collaboration, Impact

Scientists are rarely taught the need for community partnerships and reciprocal communication, of strong relationships and the skills to navigate contentious issues.

“We wanted to move away from the deficit mindset, the idea that people are simply missing the relevant facts and data,” Kofler explained. “People usually don’t respond well to a barrage of numbers and technical terms. To really unlock the potential of scientific discovery—to really help people—we need scientists to understand that there is a role for community engagement.”

To meet these ambitious goals, SCi collaborated with Essential Partners co-Executive Director Katie Hyten to help design a semester-long “Ditching the Deficit Model” science communication course. 

The course helps scientists conceptualize effective community engagement, move beyond the old one-way communication model, and facilitate discussions across diverse perspectives. Through an active, hands-on curriculum—a hallmark of EP’s teaching—students are introduced to the 6 P’s framework for designing conversations, then they design an engagement proposal for a real research project. Many used their own research, bringing their newfound skills back to the lab.

“The partnership with EP was crucial for the richness and depth of our course,” said Kofler. “It is so different from other courses that scientists take. What we did with EP is way ahead of the curve of science education—and now we need the powers that be to keep up!”

In SCi’s groundbreaking course, scientists are equipped with elements of EP’s Reflective Structured Dialogue (RSD) framework as a way to foster heathy relationships built on trust and mutual respect.

Societal Challenges to Scientific Advancements

For one PhD student at Harvard University, it didn’t take long to recognize the potential for dialogue to supercharge her own research—and the work of others.

“After taking the course, I attended a conference on cataloging global biodiversity,” they said. At first, the topic seemed too abstract for an application of dialogue. But the new tools and skills were on her mind.

“At one point,” they explained, “I just noticed that most attendees were from a handful of English-speaking countries. We are all traveling large distances to collect samples or observations, then returning to our labs.” Why aren’t we collaborating with locals, she wondered, who have expertise in their immediate environment? Why don’t we have local labs and local researchers?

The divergent, inequitable histories of scientific development and education had created a gap. “Dialogue has the potential to close this gap. We could build authentic relationships with skeptical local communities, which could unlock their expertise and lead to broader investments in local science infrastructure. With the right tools, we can navigate the biases and difficult histories that are so often a barrier to collaboration.”

Building local relationships and science infrastructure, this PhD candidate feels, could unlock a huge step forward in the research itself. 

“There’s an incredible opportunity to leverage improved communication and community engagement tools, like Reflective Structured Dialogue, to help build a more collaborative model for research. It could make the research more efficient and advance the science more quickly—while also developing local science infrastructure. This would not have occurred to me without the SCi course, which provided a whole new lens.”

Other challenges faced by SCi students include community resistance to human genome research to treat chronic diseases and opposition to environmental engineering, such as altering plants to capture more carbon from the atmosphere or designing mosquitoes that stop the spread of endemic diseases. Community mistrust leads to a host of problems, from biased sample sets to public protests.

By equipping scientists with the skills and tools of RSD, Essential Partners is helping facilitate crucial two-way communication between scientists and communities. Dialogic engagement lets community needs and concerns inform the research, encourages more inclusive and equitable practices, and makes new real-world innovations possible.

Related Impact Stories