The 2009 Report Summary on the Evaluation of the Science Connections Program

The 2009 Science Connections Program Evaluation report by the Evaluation and Business Planning Section of the then Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (DIISR) was not publically available as at June 2015. On approaching the government department for a copy of the report the publications coordinator advised that the report would not be publically available and provided a two page summary on the Evaluation of the Science Connections Programs (SCOPE). A brief narrative of this summary follows.

The report summary outlined the progression of SCOPE, a national program operating from within a government department. The evaluation of the SCOPE program was in turn the primary precursor of, and largely prompted, the development of the IA strategy.

Introduced in 2004, the SCOPE program received $23 million in funding over seven years for ‘promoting awareness of the importance of science, engineering and innovation in Australia's economic and social development, as well as encouraging young Australians to pursue science- based careers’ (p. 1) and to ‘provide a suite of measures to achieve its overall objectives’ (p. 1).

This internal review of the SCOPE program was assessed against the measures of ‘Expenditure Review Principles’: ‘appropriateness, efficiency, effectiveness, integration, performance assessment and strategic policy alignment’ (p. 1). In particular, the review focussed on the following issues directly relating to SCOPE:

• Whether there was still a need for government intervention in raising science awareness and developing and retaining skills in science;

• If the current program represents the best response to any need to promote the awareness and value of science and innovation;

• Assessing if the SCOPE suite of initiatives represent the best mix of interventions taking into account changing business, social and environmental conditions;

• How SCOPE’s science promotion activities relate to other government initiatives (eg. Questacon, CSIRO, the ABC and state governments); and

• What future initiatives might be considered in order to meet the needs of target communities (pp. 1-2).

The outcomes of the review found that SCOPE has

had a broad reach and has made some significant achievements...[and it] delivers important outcomes including the Prime Minister’s Prize for Science, National Science Week, the ABC Science Project, the Science and Engineering Challenge and the Ultimo Science Festival (p. 2).

The review highlighted that the primary focus of SCOPE initiatives was encouraging young people to pursue science-based careers, similar to other reports of this nature and consistent with the IA strategy. As an outcome of the review the ‘evaluation found the need to rebalance Australian Government activity to place more emphasis on supporting basic science awareness promotion’ and that better science communication outcomes could be ‘achieved through greater coordination of science awareness resources within the [DIISR] portfolio’ (p. 2). These

statements imply that there is a need for continued support of this type of program, and that future incarnations will have more definitive guidelines, key performance indicators, and greater national coordination.

SCOPE’s focus on the ‘public awareness of science’, in line with other contemporary reports, suggests the language and objectives of the SCOPE program is in contrast to the usual trend in science communication. Again, like other reports of a similar age, the terminology used here is arguably a product of its time and precedes the prolific use of ‘engagement’ as a description of science communication.

A key outcome of the review was the statement on the future of science communication calling for the development of a ‘national science communication strategy’ (p. 2) and commentary on the government’s ongoing role in support of this national strategy. The authors highlighted the need for continued national support for science communication, to include the development of a successor program following the cessation of funding for SCOPE. The authors stated that what is needed is greater coordination and stronger leadership from within the portfolio in

coordinating science communication activities across the whole of government. To achieve this the authors recommended the introduction of a ‘separate area within the portfolio to exercise strategic leadership, policy development and improved coordination of the many participants in science awareness’ (p. 2).

The upshot of this review is that the authors identified that SCOPE had reached the end of its practical life. This narrative contextualises science communication in Australia, because a direct outcome of this report was the establishment of a steering committee to oversee the development of the national strategy to achieve a ‘scientifically engaged Australia’ – the IA report.

Two studies entitled Community Interest and Engagement with Science and Technologyin Victoria Report - anoriginal 2007 study (Quantum Market Research, 2007) and an updated 2011 study Community Interest and Engagement with Science and Technology in Victoria Report (Sweeny Research, 2011) – provided key data on the publics’ interest in and attitudes towards science and technology, and informed the development of the IA strategy. These

studies focus on the Victorian public, yet form a representative sample of the Australian public. The addition of the latter study creates a longitudinal data set, the first of its kind focussed specifically on the Australian publics’ views towards science and technology.

Report 4: 2007 Survey of the Victorian Publics’ Interest and Engagement with Science