4 of 27

SUMMARY OF TYPES OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Provide or financially support training in effective public engagement
Support the creation of public engagement programs that scientists can participate in
Codify the importance of public engagement in official documents such as:

Laboratory contracts
Faculty handbooks
Professional society strategic plans
Experimental collaboration constitutions
Merit criteria used by institutions that fund research

5 of 27

SUMMARY OF TYPES OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Consider public engagement, along with activities such as service and teaching, in:

Hiring
Tenure
Promotion
Other reviews

Fund public engagement work as part of grant proposals

6 of 27

SUMMARY OF TYPES OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Incorporate public engagement into conferences and meetings in the form of:

Plenary talks
Parallel sessions
Public lectures
Training opportunities for conference participants
Public engagement opportunities for conference participants

Recognize and reward scientists who contribute to public engagement efforts
As individual scientists, encourage others, including peers, mentees and students, by participating in and discussing the importance of public engagement

7 of 27

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SPECIFIC GROUPS

8 of 27

PARTICLE PHYSICS COMMUNITY

Recommendations for research groups

Provide opportunities for mentees to receive training in various areas of public engagement. Encourage mentees to think of high-quality engagement as something that can be learned to do, rather than an innate skill.
Provide mentees with public engagement opportunities.
Set expectations within the research group that some time should be devoted to public engagement.
Provide funding for public engagement, in the form of supporting travel and/or materials.
Model the importance of public engagement by participating in this work.
Discuss best practices and experiences with public engagement within the research group.
Encourage sharing of skills and knowledge not only from the PI, but also allow knowledge to flow up from the trainees, who may bring their own experiences, modes of engagement, and access to audiences via different platforms.

9 of 27

PARTICLE PHYSICS COMMUNITY

Recommendations for experimental collaborations

Each experiment should identify an individual or group of individuals who are willing to spend some of their time on science outreach. The collaboration should enact a tax on member institutions to support outreach or should identify funds directly originating from the funding agencies that should be earmarked to support public engagement.
Experimental collaborations should codify the collaboration’s commitment to outreach in their governing documents. This will allow public engagement to remain a priority through changes in experimental leadership.
Experiments should include presentations on public engagement in plenary sessions of collaboration meetings.
When experimental collaborations make public announcements, the individuals responsible for public engagement should be heavily involved.

10 of 27

PARTICLE PHYSICS COMMUNITY

Recommendations for conference organizers

For each conference, there should be one or more public lectures or other public engagement activities, to be held on the weekend or evening so as to improve the chances of good attendance. In the case of public lectures, care must be taken to select a speaker with experience speaking with a general audience. Attendance will be larger if the lecture covers a topic that is interesting to a general audience.
Conference organizers should engage local university or laboratory press officers, who are familiar with the potential audiences in the area, to help plan and advertise public engagement activities. Applications to host scientific conferences should include information about how this will occur and about any opportunities to provide public engagement training to conference attendees.
Conference organizers should ensure that at least one parallel session is devoted to public engagement.
Conference organizers should ensure that at least one plenary talk is devoted to public engagement.�

11 of 27

UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES

Recommendations for departments, schools and colleges

Formally incorporate recognition of public engagement in hiring, tenure and promotion decisions, by considering public engagement efforts either on their own or in conjunction with service and teaching.
Formally incorporate leadership in the area of public engagement in the process of choosing the department chair.
Codify these requirements in the faculty handbook.
Financially support efforts to provide scientists training in public engagement. �

12 of 27

UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES

Recommendations for university leadership

Formally incorporate recognition of public engagement in hiring, tenure and promotion decisions, by considering public engagement efforts either on their own or in conjunction with service and teaching.
Highlight public engagement efforts externally, in communications with alumni and the public.
Highlight public engagement efforts internally, in communication with campus communities.
Financially support efforts to provide scientists training in public engagement.
Financially support public engagement efforts. �

13 of 27

NATIONAL LABS

Provide training in public engagement.
Provide opportunities for employees and users to participate in public engagement activities.
Identify individuals with talent and interest in public engagement and consider this effort to be part of their assigned duties.
Recognize the value of public engagement activities and offer compensatory time off for such efforts.
Prior to making an offer in hiring decisions, require a statement from hiring managers on selected candidates’ outreach achievements and potential.
Require that all promotion packages have a statement on employee’s outreach efforts and achievements.
Include outreach in annual merit reviews.
Include an outreach category for annual performance awards, in line with other achievements, such as managerial, technical, and publication achievements.
Lay out expectations for public engagement in staff handbooks. �

14 of 27

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND POLICY MAKERS

Recommendations for OSTP

If OSTP recognizes the link between (1) public engagement of scientists with the public and (2) potential support for and benefits of scientific research to the public, they can serve as real drivers of progress. This recognition could manifest itself in:

strategies that are crafted to include public engagement as a priority in action plans, and
the inclusion of public engagement in prioritization memos written by OSTP. �

15 of 27

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND POLICY MAKERS

Recommendations for Congress

Expand funding for the National Science Foundation and the Office of Science in the Department of Energy, which will create space in those budgets for public engagement activities.
Provide sufficient funds for workforce development, which can support training programs that include public engagement from scientists.
Maintain a focus on diversifying the workforce, which can help support public engagement programs that are targeted to reach groups that are under-represented in our field.

16 of 27

INSTITUTIONS THAT FUND RESEARCH

Recommendations for DOE

Add public engagement to merit review criteria.
Financially support efforts to provide scientists training in public engagement.
Financially support efforts to create public engagement programs specifically designed to reach marginalized groups.
Continue to set expectations in laboratory contracts that the national laboratories participate in public engagement.
Include funding in support of the Community Engagement Frontier as a part of the Snowmass process. This should include support for workshops that provide training and strategy development for public engagement in particle physics.

17 of 27

INSTITUTIONS THAT FUND RESEARCH

Recommendations for NSF

Continue to require a broader impacts statement in merit reviews.
Continue to award grants to scientists who include public engagement plans in their grant proposals.

18 of 27

INSTITUTIONS THAT FUND RESEARCH

Recommendations for private foundations

Ensure that a percentage of funding goes toward public engagement.
Explicitly make calls for public engagement proposals.
Fund public engagement training for scientists.

19 of 27

PROFESSIONAL BODIES AND SOCIETIES

Recommendations for AAAS and APS

Continue providing public engagement training.
Continue organizing public engagement activities in conjunction with scientific conferences.
Recommend conference hosts include in their proposals information about how they will support public engagement—for large conferences, require it.
Recommend conference hosts provide public engagement training in their programming —for large conferences, require it.
Recommend conference hosts involve local public affairs professionals in training and public engagement planning.
(continues)

20 of 27

PROFESSIONAL BODIES AND SOCIETIES

Recommendations for AAAS and APS (continued)

Prioritize activities that will allow the largest number of physicists to participate.
Continue honoring scientists who participate in public engagement with awards.
Continue supporting research into effective public engagement.
Continue to codify these programs in APS and AAAS strategies and planning documents.
Help members push for recognition of and support for public engagement efforts at all levels, from funding agencies through university departments.

21 of 27

PROFESSIONAL BODIES AND SOCIETIES

Recommendations for DPF

Take full ownership of the public engagement recommendations and institutionalize this responsibility within the DPF leadership structure.
Continue to include the Community Engagement Frontier in the Snowmass process.
Advocate for funding for Community Engagement Frontier activities within the Snowmass process.
Provide public engagement training.
Continue offering public lectures in conjunction with scientific conferences.
Organize public engagement activities for multiple scientists to participate in in conjunction with scientific conferences, including prioritization processes like Snowmass.
(continues)

22 of 27

PROFESSIONAL BODIES AND SOCIETIES

Recommendations for DPF (continued)

Recommend conference hosts include in their proposals information about how they will support public engagement.
Recommend conference hosts provide public engagement training in their programming.
Recommend conference hosts involve local public affairs professionals in training and public engagement planning.
Honor scientists who participate in public engagement with awards.
Codify the inclusion of public engagement plenary sessions and parallel sessions in DPF conferences.
Help members push for recognition of and support for public engagement efforts at all levels, from funding agencies through university departments.
Encourage DPF members to participate in APS public engagement training programs and activities.

23 of 27

ENGAGING MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES

24 of 27

CHECKLIST FOR INSTITUTIONS �ENGAGING MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES

Consider the audience

Who specifically are we hoping to reach with this event? Why are we hoping to reach these communities?
How can we plan this event to make it maximally beneficial to these communities? What elements of this plan can we continue to use in other events?
What are the best ways to communicate about this event with members of these communities? Can we continue going to those same channels to communicate about other events?
Have we created a process by which we take time to evaluate the success of the event after it concludes? What metrics (both qualitative and quantitative) will we use? Which of these metrics will we continue to use in evaluating other events?

25 of 27

CHECKLIST FOR INSTITUTIONS �ENGAGING MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES

Identify and remove barriers

Are there logistical barriers (e.g. time of day, day of the week, public transportation access, affordability, safety concerns, financial barriers) to our events that make them inaccessible to these communities? What will we do to address these barriers?
Have we allowed adequate lead time and budget to make this event accessible to all members of these communities, including those with disabilities? Have we identified partnership or staffing needs required to make the event accessible?

26 of 27

CHECKLIST FOR INSTITUTIONS �ENGAGING MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES

Value partnerships

What members of these communities will make good partners in this event? Have we made sure they’re involved in planning the event? Have we secured an adequate budget to support fair compensation for our partners as co-creators of the event, prior to requesting their labor?
Do any members of these communities work for our institution? If they do, do they work in roles with decision-making power (e.g. managerial positions), or do they work primarily in service roles? If members of these communities do not work at our institution, or work only in lower-level positions, is our institution making any effort to change this?
Are members of these communities who work for our institution participating in this event? If so, are they receiving the support they need to take on this effort and fulfill their other job duties? Do they have decision-making power over the planning and execution of the event? Are they being fairly compensated and recognized for their efforts?

27 of 27

CHECKLIST FOR INSTITUTIONS �ENGAGING MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES

Build lasting relationships

Is this event a part of a larger effort to build relationships with members of these communities? If so, what is the long-term plan? Who will be responsible for enacting it?
Are there ways in which our institution is causing harm to members of these communities? If so, how is our organization working to change this?
Do any members of these communities work for our institution? If they do, do they work in roles with decision-making power (e.g. managerial positions), or do they work primarily in service roles? If members of these communities do not work at our institution, or work only in lower-level positions, is our institution making any effort to change this?
How are representatives of our institution involved in these communities outside of this event? Are there ways our institution can work with members of these communities on their priorities, even ones that do not directly benefit our institution?