The Challenge of Communicating Research to the Public
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages:5-10 Instructions:
The Challenge of Communicating Research to the Public
Communicating research to the public can be challenging for a number of reasons. One of the main challenges is that the language and concepts used in research are often technical and specialized, making it difficult for non-experts to understand. Additionally, research findings can be complex and nuanced, which can make them difficult to convey in a clear and simple manner.
The Challenge of Communicating Research to the Public
Another challenge is that research findings are often presented in a way that is geared towards other experts in the field, rather than the general public. This can make it difficult for non-experts to access and understand the information, and can also lead to confusion or misinterpretation of the findings.
Another challenge is the way the media cover scientific research, as the media may overhype or sensationalize findings, or present them in a way that is not entirely accurate. This can lead to confusion and mistrust among the public, as well as a distorted understanding of the research.
Another challenge is the research may be complex or heavily contextualized and difficult to accurately convey in the limited space of news articles or sound bites.
Despite these challenges, there are many strategies that researchers can use to help communicate their findings to the public more effectively. One approach is to use plain language and avoid technical jargon, and to use analogies, examples and illustrations to help explain complex concepts.
Another approach is to use multiple communication channels, such as social media, public lectures and talks, and interactive web-based tools, to reach a wider audience.
Another approach is to collaborate with science journalists and communicator to help disseminate the research to the general public in a clear, accurate, and compelling way.
Another approach is to provide various levels of detail, from summary to in-depth, of the research information for different audiences to ensure the information is easily understood by a general audience.
In conclusion, communicating research to the public can be challenging but it is an important task for researchers, who should be aware of the challenges and make an effort to overcome them by using effective communication strategies that engage their audience and make the information accessible, accurate and credible.
The Challenge of Communicating Research to the Public
RUBRIC
Excellent Quality
95-100%
Introduction 45-41 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Literature Support
91-84 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Methodology
58-53 points
Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score
50-85%
40-38 points
More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.
83-76 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.
52-49 points
Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality
0-45%
37-1 points
The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.
75-1 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.
48-1 points
There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow