17069489

1
17069489

Dr. Carina Fearnley

HSPC0036: Engaging the Public with Science

14 Feb 2019

From PUS to PEST: An Astronomical Case Study

There’s a reason why science is one of the basic subjects taught at primary school:

like mathematics and english, a fair understanding of it is near-necessary for everyday life.

As the world grows more dependent on technology and the uses of science, its importance

grows even more. We’ve always known of the importance of understanding the basics, but

ideally, as interest grows the public is able to get even more engaged with science and

technology. Science and technology is more accessible than ever - and now anybody and

everybody has the power to create something that can spread to lengths previously

unimaginable.

This is in addition to the increase in number and depth of the scientific disciplines that

exist, and there is therefore a growing need for the public to be familiar with the scientific

activities - this involves a fair amount of trust in the scientists. However with the rise of post-

truth politics, there has been an increased distrust within some demographics of society. To

combat this, it’s been imperative that scientists change their goal from that of PUS (public

understanding of science) to PEST (public engagement with science and technology). The

latter involves more of a dialogue - a conversation between scientist and layman, as opposed

to a distant authoritative figure. This enables non-experts to become the protagonists in the

scientific decisions, be it in private business, politics or law (Pitrelli, 2003).

17069489
2
Politics and science are forever intertwined, and this plays a big part in the shift

between PUS and PEST. One such example can be found in Astronomy, specifically

surrounding the race to space in the 20th century, a competition that existed between the

Soviets and the Americans. On October 4, 1957, the Soviet Union successfully launched

Sputnik and started the arms race. Seeing as this surrounded the tensions caused by the cold

war, it’s no surprise that there was a patriotic element of public backing, even if the details of

how space exploration happens were fuzzy to the average person. For youth especially, this

new and exciting area of science led to interest: by 1965, the Earth Science Curriculum

Project reported at their conference that there had been an increase in earth science

enrollments in high school students - over 500,000 nationwide (Lewis, 2008). Over the next

few years, earth sciences rapidly grew in popularity in schools (Lewis, 2008).

One can argue, on the other hand, that simply engaging students in the classroom isn’t

what PUS is about. This leads to discussions about who the “public” is, what it means to

“understand”, and how “science” is defined - to which there was never a real conclusion

(Gregory and Miller, 1998). This is why the general “top-down” or “deficit” model is such a

defining characteristic of the PUS school of thought. It lacked the sophistication or

broadening to recognize that for the public to understand something, they must be engaged

with it - and this comes about when the communication is based on the needs and the

competence of the target (Pitrelli, 2003). This is the gap PEST aims to fill, and the science

revolution post the space race started on this note.

Carl Sagan highlighted that planetary science - in a singular lifetime - had turned from

abstract dots in the sky to a scientific wonder, a tourist attraction (Sagan, 1995) and

something of almost emotional attachment - note the uproar that occured when Pluto was

denounced as a planet (Fraknoi, 2007). This is due to a PEST approach of ‘hidden’ science

education through television programs such as The West Wing and NASA-provided images
17069489
3
and similar content. Though these had some political motivation, they were also a sort of

stepping stone into garnering public interest for the bigger, more hands on initiatives. One

example is Project ASTRO. Created by the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, it is a

program that trains college students alongside amateur and professional astronomers to

partner with educators between grade 4-9 (ages 9-15) to bring direct, hands-on planetary

science activities into the classroom (Fraknoi, 2007).

Another non-politically led movement was created by NASA - a group of leaders

were brought together to create a program that focused on conveying the science behind

space exploration, as opposed to using astronauts as a means of propaganda against the

Soviets (Fraknoi, 2007). The aim was to help the small community of astronauts and space

scientists create relationships with schools, museums, nonprofits and so forth. Whilst this was

not entirely successful, it shows a real, targeted aim to move to a PEST approach. Not only

would a good number of these approaches be outside the classroom, but also takes the style in

the classroom away from teaching-to-the-test. (Dean, 2007) This means less memorizing and

more focused on the concepts - and science less as an attempt to arrive at a destination, and

more as a journey in and of itself.

The importance of this only somewhat came about after the launch of Sputnik - it was

then that America realized that science education was lagging in comparison to their mates in

the Eastern world. The bar was potentially too low and there needed to be a reform. When the

United States ended up “winning” the space race by sending the first man on the moon, the

push for interest in science and technology seemed to waiver a bit. In an effort to keep the

ball rolling, since then other organizations such as the National Science Foundation have

formed programs to advance science education, and the American Association for the

Advancement of Science has also launched Project 2061, aimed at producing widespread

science literacy by the time Halley’s Comet makes its next appearance. (Dean, 2007)
17069489
4
A valid criticism of these programs is that they seem to rely on sensationalism from

major events and that they’re irregular in their efforts. A large part of this is due to the lack of

training from scientists to effectively work with the public. Not a lot of astronomers or earth

scientists are found in academia in general, and when they are, many still struggle with

knowing how to educate those with little or no background knowledge. On the flip side,

many trained educators are not well versed in that area of science, and this gap continues to

cause problems. Whilst big events do attract a lot of interest from a wide range of people - if

proper information is not quickly made very accessible, a lot of misconstruing of the truth

and the spread of fake news is possible, especially in today’s climate.

A similar issue can be found in Great Britain, admittedly in a different context. In the

US a large amount of the engagement programs (including some of those aforementioned in

the essay) are funded through NASA and other organizations (government-funded or private).

In the UK, however, a quick search shows that British universities are a big part of the shift

from PUS to PEST (though one must note that in the UK, near all tertiary institutions are

government-funded). This slightly changes the dynamic in the sense that, whilst the scientists

in question are still academics, they often have some background in education if they happen

to be lecturers as well. The gap still remains, however, and there isn’t enough training to

effectively interest and engage (especially young) members of the public.

This isn’t to say that there aren’t museums and exhibitions of the like in the UK, as

well. A field trip to the Royal Observatory in Greenwich is popular amongst KS3 students

(11-14 years old) (Drabble, 2013). Within the classroom, teachers have also become more

and more creative with incorporating astronomy and planetary science into discussions,

despite the fact that it makes up quite weak part of the GCSE curriculum. The fact that these

activities step outside of what may be assessed at GCSE level shows a stepping away from

the strict syllabus method of teaching we saw in PUS and more towards an open, engaging
17069489
5
process we aim for in PEST. However one must assess the actual impact of this: it’s easy to

say that there is a well-rounded attempt at capturing young minds for science but there is not

much room for an actual drive from the students themselves. Whether in class or on field

trips, pupils are generally ‘forced’ to be a part of it, and when uninterested, the desired effect

can go from engagement to simply absorbing information or ‘understanding’ quite quickly.

This makes one question whether there really has been a transition in the subject area

from PUS to PEST. There are so many variables involved in whether the target receiver of

the information is truly engaged. There have been broad actions that have been taken to help

increase these chances, but in reality an academic at any point in time might be a bit more

one-sided than he or she should be, even if they’ve been trained otherwise. The transition

from PUS to PEST, both in astronomy and in science as a whole, might be exaggerated

within the scientific community as the nuances of the approach can be lost the further the

message is spread.

The only real way to measure and understand whether our activities and program are

having the desired effect is to talk to the people targeted. It is easy to forget that the boards

and organizations that are set up are there to serve, and instead focus all decision making in

the power of only a few. This itself goes against the goal of PEST: trying to put the power in

the hands of the public, making them the protagonist of the scientific story.
17069489
6

Works Cited

Dean, Cornelia. “When Science Suddenly Mattered, in Space and in Class.” The New

York Times, The New York Times, 25 Sept. 2007,

www.nytimes.com/2007/09/25/science/space/25educ.html.

Drabble, Emily. “How to Teach ... Astronomy.” The Guardian, Guardian News and

Media, 14 Jan. 2013, www.theguardian.com/education/teacher-blog/2013/jan/14/astronomy-

schools-teaching-resource.

Fraknoi, Andrew. “Societal Impact of Spaceflight.” Societal Impact of Spaceflight, by

Steven J. Dick and Roger D. Launius, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Office

of External Relations, History Division, 2007, pp. 407–419.

Government, USA. “The Launch of Sputnik, 1957.” U.S. Department of State, U.S.

Department of State, 2009, 2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/lw/103729.htm.

Gregory, Jane, and Steve Miller. Science in Public: Communication, Culture, and

Credibility. Plenum Press, 1998.

Lewis, Elizabeth B. “Content Is Not Enough: A History of Secondary Earth Science

Teacher Preparation with Recommendations for Today.” Journal of Geoscience Education,

vol. 56, no. 5, 2008, pp. 445–455., doi:10.5408/jge_nov2008_lewis_445.

Pitrelli, Nico. “The Crisis of the ‘Public Understanding of Science’ in Great Britain.”

Journal of Science Communication, vol. 02, no. 01, 21 Mar. 2003, doi:10.22323/2.02010901.

Sagan, Carl. The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark. Paw

Prints, 2013.

Šošić, Bojan, and Jelena Kalinić. “‘PUS’ and ‘PEST.’” Quantum of Science, 5 Nov.

2017, quantumjk.blogspot.com/2017/11/pus-and-pest.html.