Author:
Sterk Florentine Marnel,van Goch Merel M.
Abstract
AbstractThis chapter reviews the diverse ways in which popularization discourse is analyzed in the current academic literature. First, it discusses goals and formats of text analysis in general. We specifically focus on quantitative text analysis as a way to produce data matrices and qualitative text analysis to categorize data into themes. In the literature, popularization discourse is analyzed either through frameworks or rubrics. Frameworks give insight into textual components, or strategies, whereas rubrics contain assessment criteria. In this chapter, the main insight is that although current frameworks and rubrics do provide insight into popularization discourse as a genre, it is impossible to produce one overarching framework of strategies that make up popularization discourse purely from these frameworks/rubrics. This gap also points to bigger methodological issues in the current academic literature, which are also discussed in this chapter.
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Reference33 articles.
1. Alias, A., & Osman, K. (2015). Assessing oral communication skills in science: A rubric for development. Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education, 30, 107–122. Retrieved from http://apjee.usm.my/APJEE_30_2015/APJEE%2030%20Art%207%20(105%20-%20122).pdf
2. August, T., Kim, L., Reinecke, K., & Smith, N. A. (2020). Writing strategies for science communication: Data and computational analysis. Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 5327–5344. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-main.429
3. Baram-Tsabari, A., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2013). An instrument for assessing scientists’ written skills in public communication of science. Science Communication, 35(1), 56–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547012440634
4. Baram-Tsabari, A., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2017a). Preparing scientists to be science communicators. In P. G. Patrick (Ed.), Preparing informal science educators: Perspectives from science communication and education (pp. 437–471). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50398-1_22
5. Baram-Tsabari, A., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2017b). Science communication training: What are we trying to teach? International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 7(3), 285–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2017.1303756