Our subject was public engagement with science and technology (PEST). We asked ourselves a deceptively simple question: do philosophy of science or science and technology studies provide any resources for reconceptualising the practices of PEST or refining the messages about science offered in public space?

En route we found that we did. But a more formidable obstacle presented itself. How do we communicate our matters of concern to different publics? Imagine an institution that is unreceptive to basic tenants of gender studies. Are there some core commitments for scholars working in science and technology studies? Do these commitments change when we communicate with non-sts audiences? When a curator strives to present scientific facts free from values, but the values are all around, how do we begin conversation?

 This exhibit is a node. It catalogues some of the barriers we faced in entering the networks of public engagement, and links through a central map to each of the other student-designed exhibits. This map is taken from a collated document we received during a science communication training session. The design of this exhibit has sought to preserve some of materiality of our exchange. My subject is public engagement with science and technology studies.

Continue