Conference Agenda

In recent years adequate communication of scientific results to the population has become more and more important. Understanding science contributes to participation in society (Davies & Horst, 2016) and is a prerequisite for making informed decisions and actively participating in society. According to the latest Eurobarometer, the situation in Austria is problematic. It has shown that science still tends to be seen as elitist and is usually not well understood. Furthermore, respondents even suggested that it is unnecessary to understand science (European Commission. Directorate General for Communication., 2021). However, the social discourses associated with science communication have also shown that such communication requires solid professional training as well as knowledge of scientific traditions and the "nature of science" to establish "informed trust" among public (Bromme, 2020). Participation in scientific communication and scientific processes goes beyond mere consumption, as shown by the many references to current research and research results.

But how do students perceive science communication and how can it be made more relevant to the target group? The citizen-science-project "We talk about science" investigates the question of relevant content for schoolchildren and encourages them to leave the consuming role, to prepare and communicate scientific topics by themselves. One target group of the project are pupils from secondary schools who have already had contact with science subjects like biology, chemistry and physics in class. Based on the reflection of their own consumption of science communication products (videos, homepages, newspaper reports, etc.), they are instructed and supported to communicate scientific aspects from the two selected current and socially relevant subject areas of electromagnetic radiation and carbon dioxide. Together with science communication and subject experts, additionally supported by student teachers, they design their own science communication products (videos, posts,…) and share those with their community (online and in person).

The second target group of the project are elementary school students in the fourth grade. The first small projects on science communication are investigating which aspects will be perceived at this age and what target group-adequate science communication in elementary school looks like.

The first project phase started in October 2022. The focus was on collecting ideas about scientists, science communicators and the perception of science communication products. Both the image and the resulting trust in representatives of science are addressed. This data is collected using a mixed methods design at participating project schools in classes of different age groups.

The public has been analysed many times (Lippmann 1921; Habermas 2022; Herman/Chomsky 2008). These analyses are often made the basis of media education theories and concepts. The opposite path has not been taken so far. Therefore, the lecture raises the question of how the public sphere should be shaped from a media education perspective. Based on suggestion for a public sphere that suits media education, it is discussed to what extent the public sphere in Austria has a structure that is suitable for the developpment of media literacy by a person.

Open learning as a concept has its origins in distance education and ICT and the use of media in education. This paper aims at tracking the evolving concept of “open learning” in an academic journal for teaching and learning in higher education in one national state: Norway. It was established by the Norwegian University Council and distributed to all teachers at the then four universities and four scientific colleges (4500 copies) with four issues pr year. A host of journals for higher education was established during the same time in Europe and elsewhere – around 1977 – as a response to the beginning massification of higher education globally. The focus on using computers and media in education was evident from the beginning. During its first decade about 15 % of all contributions dealt with this topic. The paper will address what type of information they (N=150) conveyed, in what genre they communicated their messages, and what scientific base they had in theories and generalised experience. In general, the evolution of journals in a particular field is described as a development from a bulletin for a community of practice to a hard-core testbed for acceptable knowledge within a scientific community. This paper will analyse one aspect of a broad journal and follow the discourses within this aspect regarding, what technologies are spoken of, what purposes for its use has been described, which methods have been employed, which political trends are taken into consideration regarding openness, democratic access to education etc.. One assumption presented by Tight (2004) is that journals in the area are relatively a-theoretical. In the paper we will in particular track the use of references of international sources and influences, either by contributions from foreign authors, or in references for papers. The paper will highlight theories that are dominant and influential. One question is whether one might discern international or national trends in the evolution of the field, and which contributions might be provided from the national arena to the international.

One interesting track is to see the technological development from the early implementations of media technologies, computers and language labs, laser discs, and other obscure objects of the 1970/80-ies, to the development of information networks and internet, broadband and social media, and how Learning management systems, blogging, Wikis, digital storytelling and tools for collaboration like Adobe Connect up until ZOOM and Teams, Slack and similar tools make their way into the main ground. One assumption is that these technologies are often referred to as promising and filled with potential use in various contexts. Many will fall into a category of singular case studies, driven by engaged practitioners who enthusiastically endorse positive outcomes and minimize problems or shortcomings. The other dimension described is the double intention of a) improving ordinary teaching in higher education and b) the efforts to increase access to higher education for students of all ages, geographical and social origin. The third dimension analyzed will be the discourses about the future of education and the role of media and ICT in higher education in the years to come. The pandemic/Covid-19-experience becomes visible in its most recent years and sets an agenda for new ideas and problems to be addressed. The issues of GDPR, digital disturbances, adaptive learning, and learning analytics are new terms that spark a continuing and critical discourse about open learning and higher education.

Internationally, digital teaching aids are increasingly being used in schools, and in Norwegian schools schoolbooks are increasingly being replaced by digital knowledge platforms. Store Norske Leksikon (SNL) is, together with Wikipedia, the most used encyclopaedia in Norway. SNL itself refers to 3.4 million users a month, and 600,000 read articles every day (Store norske leksikon, 2023). Wikipedia's own statistics pages show 5 million users (Wikimedia, Unique devices), and respectively 50 million page views per month on the Norwegian version (Wikimedia, Unique devices) and around 28 million monthly page views from Norway on the English-language Wikipedia (Wikimedia, Total page views). Converted, there will then be 2.6 million page views per day. SNL has the Norwegian universities on the ownership side (among others), and has school pupils and students as a stated primary target group (Store norske leksikon, Store norske skole). Wikipedia is often the preferred encyclopaedia for students (Blikstad-Balas & Høgenes, 2014). The encyclopaedia’s presence as a knowledge supplier to the Norwegian school makes it an important arena for ideological and political battle. However, little is known about how ideological battles take place in the construction of knowledge in different encyclopaedias, and they are also differently regulated.

Henriksen (1994) points out that encyclopaedias can have different social roles and shows what the role can mean for the content. When Henriksen systematizes these roles, both SNL and Wikipedia fit into the role of conversation encyclopaedia with a basic idea of ​​informing the public.

The guidelines for what is considered valid knowledge, and therefore what knowledge can be presented, are different for the two encyclopedias. SNL is editorially driven (Store norske leksikon, Om Store norske leksikon), and "... runs a digital knowledge base for the publication of lexical content that is signed and edited by professionals. What we publish must be quality-assured with regard to professional accuracy, source criticism, pedagogy and ease of dissemination" (Store norske leksikon, Foreningen Store norske leksikon). The editors determine the editorial principles and priorities according to which SNL is run (Store norske leksikon, Om Store norske leksikon),). The knowledge in the encyclopedia is created by the editors choosing subject managers, and the subject managers update, manage and write new articles. It is also open for other registered users to submit contributions in the form of comments, articles, proposals for changes, pictures and more (Store norske leksikon, Regler for registrering og publisering), but new content must be approved by the editors. One can therefore say that SNL also fits what Henriksen (1994) calls "the role of professional milieu's mouthpiece". It is typical for this type of encyclopedia that experts are invited in as representatives of their professional traditions and disciplines, and describe what they themselves see as the most important aspects of the subject.

Wikipedia sees itself as a democratic project, where everyone can contribute, and where everyone should have free access to knowledge (Wikipedia, Wikipedia:Purpose). To achieve this objective, Wikipedia is managed according to a set of guidelines and recommendations based on the five pillars (Wikipedia, Wikipedia:Fem søyler). Examples of these are the guideline for neutral point of view, the guideline for verifiable accuracy and the guideline for citing reliable, authoritative sources, all of which help to regulate what is valid knowledge on Wikipedia.

On one hand, we have an encyclopedia where everyone can be heard and contribute their knowledge. On the other hand, we have an encyclopedia where an employed editor selects those who will be allowed to speak, typically these are representatives from professional environments at universities and colleges. Comparative studies have previously been carried out on which of these models is "best" based on a set of normative quality criteria for what an article should contain, the results have in part been divided.