Marcellus Matters

1. Marcellus Matters Living With Risk Can Give You Gas: Engaging Adults in Science and Energy Terry Noll, project coordinator Margaret Hopkins, team member Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research Penn State University

2. Marcellus Matters • 3-year project funded by National Science Foundation – Informal Science Education • Targeting adults living in rural areas which historically have few resources for informal science programming • 15-member, multi-disciplinary team (faculty and researchers from Earth & Mineral Sciences, Education, Agricultural Sciences, Arts & Architecture) • PI: Michael Arthur, Geosciences

3. Marcellus Matters Project goals: • To increase participants’ knowledge of science and engineering related to energy consumption, production and policy • To build a shared science-and-energy knowledge base to aid in community decisionmaking • To apply the skills of scientific inquiry and investigation (citizen science) • To develop strategies for deliberation of complex environmental issues

4. Marcellus Matters Four programs: • Marcellus Environmental Planning Workshop • Marcellus Community Network • Marcellus Community-Based Performance • Marcellus Community Science Volunteer Program

6. Session Locations

7. Marcellus Matters Three specific regions • Coal country • Clearfield, Jefferson and Elk counties • History of natural resource extraction and legacy of environmental impacts from coal mining • Northern Tier • Clinton, Sullivan, Lycoming counties • Areas with tourism economy and little to no history of natural resource extraction • Southwestern Pennsylvania • Washington, Fayette and Greene counties • History of natural resource extraction and corporate presence

8. Marcellus Matters Marcellus Community-Based Performance • Live theater, original plays • Actors and scientists from the project • Two versions • Scenes and a multi-media performance • Landowner, landman; family conflict • Based on web postings • Live radio show (with sound effects, singing) • Focus on who to believe/how to evaluate conflicting information • Followed by facilitated group discussions • Opportunity for participants to interact with scientists • Opportunity for participants to respond to the vignettes

9. Marcellus Matters Clearfield County Post-performance evaluations, post-performance interviews of participants and post-performance evaluations by actors • Why people attended (interest in how relates to property, environment, economy etc.) • Perception of the event (lots of factual info, info/points of view that are new, balance of performance and info) • Thoughts about views (want to hear what others say; multiple valid points of view; can learn from what others say

10. Marcellus Matters What we have learned from post-performance evaluations • Live theater creates new relationships between community members and scientists • Live theater is effective at generating dialogue – the vignettes/scenes provide new avenues for talking and sharing about Marcellus • Live theater can defuse some of the tensions surrounding Marcellus development • Live theater can be a means of presenting information; people reported they learned

11. Marcellus Matters What we are still experimenting with: • The best venue • Audience comes to us? • Going to the audience? • Theatre vs county fair? • The best form • Structuring the post-performance conversation • Responding to audience but directing the response • Trained facilitators: allowing actors to stay with their roles and their characters’ points of view • Balancing the affective experience of theater and presentation of science-based information

12. Marcellus Matters Marcellus Community Science Volunteers • Modeled after Master Gardener and Master Naturalist program • Eight-weeks of classes • Once/week; 2.5 hours • Saturday session of field work (water testing) • Rig tour • Volunteer commitment • Clearfield County (2 groups)

13. Marcellus Matters Sessions (some combined) • Energy systems and choices • Nature of science • Geology of Marcellus Shale • Engineering • Hydrogeology and water testing • Land use planning • Community impacts • Economic and workforce development • Dialogue skills

14. Marcellus Matters Session structures • Hands-on, group activities • Well siting activity, landowners with conflicting values • Visuals • Correlation/causation data exercise • Energyville • Data collection • Lectures (engineering) • Media reports • Session materials • Readings • Powerpoints • Additional resources

15. Marcellus Matters Who participated? • Senior Environmental Corps volunteers, county and township officials, school superintendent, high school science teacher, business owners, admissions officer with a technical institute, landowners • Range of educational levels (individuals with low literacy skills and individuals with graduate degrees) • More opposed to development than favored • Fairly even split by gender

16. Marcellus Matters Why they participated • Most in search of more information about water impacts • Will this contaminate my water supply? • What happens if my water contains methane? • Interest also high in understanding the geology, injection wells (seismicity) and engineering • Many were confused by conflicting media reports, reports of conflicting data • Most wanted information they could trust

17. Marcellus Matters Formative and Summative Evaluations • Pre- and post-test • Weekly evaluations of session structure (effective? ineffective?), content (too simple? too complex?) • Weekly reflections on each session (draw upon in conversation? used in work?) • Focus groups • Post-summative evaluation • Delayed summative evaluation

18. Marcellus Matters Evaluation instruments are measuring: • Gains in knowledge of geology, energy policy, water issues • Acquisition of science skills (data collection, analysis, interpretation) • Sharing of knowledge gained with others • Engagement with emerging technologies • Confidence in facilitation skills

19. Marcellus Matters Participants’ responses: • Wanted more technical information, more local information • Enjoyed hands-on activities but understood need for lecture/presentations • Appreciated opportunities for extensive Q&A with scientists • Questioned inclusion of community impacts, facilitation skills

20. Marcellus Matters What we learned: • Providing science-based information is not enough • Need to engage participants in understanding the development of scientific knowledge • Build understanding and awareness of peer review—how it works, what it means—and scientific consensus • “They want us to tell them whether this is a good thing or a bad thing—science can’t do that.”

21. Marcellus Matters Challenges: • Balancing people’s demand for content with their need to understand how science is an ongoing and cumulative process • Explaining what scientists know and don’t know (discomfort with uncertainty) • Addressing “world views” • Developing infrastructure to sustain relationship with Marcellus Community Science volunteers • Citizen science research projects

22. Marcellus Matters Next steps: • Marcellus Community Science Volunteer Program • Clinton County (March 25-May 13) • Sullivan County (Summer 2013) • Marcellus Community Based Performance Program – Clinton County, May 2013 • Marcellus Environmental Planning Workshop Pilot (Spring 2013)

23. Marcellus Matters Reports from external evaluator can be found at http://informalscience.org/project/show/1983 For more information, contact Terry Noll, project coordinator, tmg3@psu.edu