Dr Jeffrey Crelinsten

Engaging Youth in Innovation

By Jeffrey Crelinsten

Last year, many of our agendas were crowded with meetings about innovation. At almost every gathering, at least one person stood up to emphasize the importance of reaching Canadian youth. Yet today, in the cold light of a new year, there’s little evidence of a coherent strategy for engaging youth in innovation.

During the late 1980s, there was a growing perception within government, business and education that engaging youth in research and entrepreneurship was critical. In response to this perceived need, the federal government created Science Culture Canada, a granting program that awarded grants to a wide variety of organizations involved in promoting science, technology, engineering and math to young people and other non-specialist audiences. A number of federal government departments developed their own youth outreach initiatives.

Stimulated by the Science Culture Canada funding, and other funding from science-based departments and agencies (SBDAs), provincial governments and the private sector, a significant number of youth outreach organizations and initiatives emerged across the country. Others that had existed prior to the program grew with the enhanced support. In 1995, Industry Canada and Merck Frosst Canada hosted a number of these organizations at the first “Partners in Innovation Culture” conference. I was involved in organizing this conference, and I remember the many and diverse activities that were going on around the country. I also recall how excited the practitioners of the art were to share their experiences.

The Science Culture Canada program was terminated in 1999, but private sector and other funding has continued to sustain youth outreach organizations and activities. While funding is always tight, there is a well-established sector doing important work in many communities. Canada has several national organizations such as the Youth Science Foundation, Shad Valley, Let’s Talk Science, Actua, Canadian Science Writers’ Association and many provincial and regional institutions (e.g. Science Alberta Foundation, science centres and museums) and initiatives (e.g. Innovators in Schools, Engineer-in-Residence, Women in Science & Engineering). The private sector supports much of this activity through donations and in-kind participation.

In 2000, NSERC created its PromoScience program, largely to fill the void left by the demise of Science Culture Canada. The program has an annual budget of $2 million to support organizations and groups involved in science promotion. Some SBDAs (e.g. National Research Council, Environment Canada) continue to maintain their own youth outreach programs, although there is no coordination among groups. Some provincial governments have also implemented their own youth outreach funding programs. In 1999, for example, the Ontario government created a fund of $5 million over five years to support youth outreach initiatives in Ontario.

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MUST INCREASE SUPPORT

Despite these continuing efforts, the investments are extremely small compared to those being made annually to fund research. The federal government alone spent more than $1.5 billion on university research in 2002. Allocating 3% of even half of this total to youth outreach would mean an additional $22.5 million. Compare this with the $2 million annual PromoScience budget.

If we are serious about engaging youth in innovation, we need to invest more in facilitating their participation. One way to accomplish this goal could be to bring more youth into contact with university researchers.

Unfortunately, a serious obstacle to such a plan exists within our universities. The university reward system is increasingly based on research, and university faculty are more likely to resent time or resources spent on activities that take them away from their research. Communicating with journalists, presenting work to non-specialists in government or business, discussing their field with elementary and secondary teachers and students are not priorities.

There are, of course, notable exceptions to this rule. Some universities have innovative outreach programs targeted to high school students to recruit new undergraduates. Some university faculty members are excellent popularizers of their discipline and spend significant time giving public lectures, school presentations and media interviews. However, if one measures the commitment by dollars invested in outreach as compared to those invested in research, the overall level of commitment to outreach is miniscule.

Some of the major research funding agencies in the US have recognized the need for the research community to become more involved in outreach activities. NASA’s Office of Space Science has formally adopted Education & Public Outreach (E/PO) guidelines for researchers applying for funding.

Seven evaluation criteria have been developed to guide researchers proposing outreach activities and for reviewers to use as the basis for evaluating proposals. The National Science Foundation requires applicants proposing major projects (e.g. research centres) to include outreach in their proposals, with a specific line item in the budget for outreach.

In Canada, the same strategy is not necessarily appropriate, because levels of funding are generally lower. But the principle is worth exploring. The federal granting councils and the Canada Foundation for Innovation, all of which received new funding in the latest federal budget, should consider ways to fund outreach activities involving recipients of their grants. So should provincial granting bodies charged with funding university research.

As a prelude to formulating effective policies in Canada, it would be wise to build upon the expertise that resides in the outreach sector. Policy makers might consider possible models for partnerships between universities and the public/youth outreach sector. The outreach sector has the expertise, experience and contacts with the target audiences. The universities have the research expertise and contacts with the research community. An effective partnership has each party doing what it knows best.

Let’s hope that the momentum created by the innovation discussions of last year provides the incentive for government and universities to do something innovative about engaging youth in innovation.

Dr Jeffrey Crelinsten is a partner in The Impact Group and co-publisher of RE$EARCH MONEY.