2000
DOI: 10.2172/768662
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An Overview of Science Education and Outreach Activities at the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory

Abstract: The U. S. Department of Energy's Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) has an energetic science education program and outreach effort. This overview describes the components of the programs and evaluates the changes that have occurred in this effort during the last several years. Efforts have been expanded to reach more students, as well as the public in general. The primary goal is to inform the public regarding the fusion and plasma research at PPPL and to excite students so that they can appreciate sci… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although both audiences and presenters are reported to be enthusiastic about their participation (Hood, 1994;Koehler et al, 1999;Swim, 1999), most of the published literature consists of outreach program descriptions and advice from experienced program developers (Hood, 1994;Koehler et al, 1999;Munn et al, 1999;Swim, 1999;DeLooper et al, 2000;Evans et al, 2001;Pelaez and Gonzalez, 2002;Dolan et al, 2004;Halford, 2005). These descriptions provide valuable information from experienced practitioners, especially in helping to improve program delivery, but many of the claims made are not supported by evidence gathered using methodologically sound research and evaluation approaches.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although both audiences and presenters are reported to be enthusiastic about their participation (Hood, 1994;Koehler et al, 1999;Swim, 1999), most of the published literature consists of outreach program descriptions and advice from experienced program developers (Hood, 1994;Koehler et al, 1999;Munn et al, 1999;Swim, 1999;DeLooper et al, 2000;Evans et al, 2001;Pelaez and Gonzalez, 2002;Dolan et al, 2004;Halford, 2005). These descriptions provide valuable information from experienced practitioners, especially in helping to improve program delivery, but many of the claims made are not supported by evidence gathered using methodologically sound research and evaluation approaches.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%