Promoting Science Literacy and Awareness across the Globe: the Role of Scientists as Science Ambassadors

Science literacy is crucial for informed decision-making at both individual and societal levels. Despite its global recognition, promoting science literacy faces numerous hurdles. These include cultural, religious, and political polarization of scientific issues, the spread of misinformation, limited access to reliable information, and language barriers. Most outreach programs concentrate on content knowledge, neglecting other aspects of science literacy, such as critical evaluation of scientific expertise and information reliability. Furthermore, existing programs often lack inclusivity, neglecting marginalized and underrepresented communities. This paper addresses the growing need for scientists to engage more effectively with the public, advocating for a more proactive and inclusive approach to science communication. The authors propose that scientists, particularly early-career scientists who are often more adept at engaging younger audiences and leveraging online platforms, have a significant role to play. The "ambassador approach", which promotes dialogue between scientists and non-scientists, is presented as a particularly effective strategy to overcome the challenges of promoting science literacy globally.

The authors cite numerous studies and reports emphasizing the importance of science literacy and the need for increased public engagement with science. They highlight the challenges in achieving this engagement, including societal polarization around scientific issues, the spread of misinformation, and the inadequacy of current outreach methods. The review also emphasizes the need for inclusive practices, ensuring that marginalized communities are not excluded from access to reliable scientific information. Existing research on effective science communication strategies, particularly those emphasizing two-way communication and dialogue, is discussed as a foundation for the proposed "ambassador approach."

The paper employs a qualitative methodology, primarily relying on a descriptive analysis of existing science ambassador programs, particularly the ASM Ambassador Program. The authors analyze the structure, activities, and impact of the ASM program, drawing on examples of specific initiatives undertaken by ASM ambassadors in various regions. This analysis includes examples of successful public engagement strategies implemented by ambassadors in diverse cultural and linguistic contexts. The methodology also includes a review of similar initiatives undertaken by other professional scientific societies, offering comparative insights into the effectiveness of different approaches to science communication. The authors draw on published literature, including reports from scientific societies and peer-reviewed articles, to support their analysis and recommendations. The paper's approach is primarily conceptual, focusing on the development and refinement of strategies for promoting global science literacy, rather than empirical data collection and statistical analysis.

The ASM Ambassador Program, spanning 112 countries and 33 U.S. states, demonstrates the potential of a global network in promoting science literacy. The program's success is attributed to the ambassadors' ability to communicate effectively within their local communities, leveraging shared identities and cultural understanding to build trust. Examples of successful ASM ambassador initiatives are provided, including: the DivulgaMicro program in Brazil, which trains early-career scientists in science communication; outreach activities in Cameroon that address local health issues while respecting cultural norms; and the adaptation of outreach events to virtual formats during the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors also highlight the Young Leaders Circle (YLC), an advisory group composed of current and former ASM ambassadors, which plays a crucial role in providing strategic direction and empowering early-career microbiologists. The success of the ASM model is compared with similar initiatives from other scientific societies, such as the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB), the American Chemical Society (ACS), and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). These comparisons illustrate a range of approaches, including structured training programs, outreach grants, and other ambassador programs. The analysis emphasizes the importance of incorporating pedagogical practices, such as backwards design, to ensure the effectiveness of outreach activities. The paper also underscores the need for two-way communication and dialogue to move beyond the ineffective "deficit model" of science communication. The positive impact of the "ambassador approach" is supported by existing research.

The findings support the central argument that scientist-led ambassador programs are a valuable tool for promoting global science literacy. The success of the ASM Ambassador Program and similar initiatives demonstrates the effectiveness of a decentralized, community-based approach that leverages local expertise and cultural sensitivity. The adaptability of these programs, as evidenced by their response to the COVID-19 pandemic, further highlights their resilience and effectiveness. The discussion section emphasizes the need for improvements in program assessment and evaluation, including more systematic methods for measuring impact and refining strategies over time. The authors argue that a greater focus on two-way communication and dialogue is crucial for building public trust and fostering more effective engagement. This approach needs to be coupled with better training for scientists in science communication and educational pedagogy. The paper highlights the importance of disseminating findings across disciplines to create a more comprehensive understanding of effective science communication practices.

The paper concludes that the "ambassador approach", as exemplified by the ASM program, offers a highly effective strategy for fostering global science literacy. Scientists at all career stages can participate, starting with local initiatives, leveraging the resources of universities and scientific societies. The authors recommend increased investment in and development of similar programs, emphasizing training in science communication, and the adoption of rigorous evaluation methods to enhance their long-term impact. Further research should focus on refining assessment methods and identifying best practices for maximizing the effectiveness of science ambassador programs in diverse cultural and linguistic contexts.

The paper's primary limitation is its reliance on descriptive analysis of existing programs, rather than rigorous empirical research on the effectiveness of the ambassador approach. While the authors cite relevant research, the absence of original data collection limits the paper's capacity to draw definitive conclusions about causal relationships between program activities and outcomes. The focus on the ASM program and similar initiatives also limits the generalizability of the findings to other contexts. The paper acknowledges the need for more comprehensive and systematic evaluation of science ambassador programs to fully understand their impact and effectiveness across various settings.