Student–scientist podcasting across borders: Insights from an international project-based learning approach to ANR communication

Jamie Loizzo; Madison A. Dyment; Kyleigh Hilburn; Caroline Barnett

doi:10.37433/aad.v7i4.745

Authors

Jamie Loizzo University of Florida, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5575-2918
Madison A. Dyment New Mexico State University, USA https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4702-8284
Kyleigh Hilburn New Mexico State University, USA https://orcid.org/0009-0006-9100-960X
Caroline Barnett University of Florida, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5010-1155

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v7i4.745

Keywords:

science communication, project-based learning, dialogic communication, podcasting, sustainability, global communication, SDG 17: Partnetships

Abstract

As science communication increasingly occurs across borders, students should learn to engage experts and audiences through dialogue rather than dissemination alone. This study examined the design, implementation, and outcomes of an international agricultural and natural resources (ANR) communication course in which United States (U.S.)-based undergraduate and graduate students produced a podcast series featuring Canadian ANR experts. Guided by project-based learning and dialogic communication theory, the course emphasized sustained inquiry, collaboration, and public-facing communication. Using a case study design with convergent mixed methods, data were collected from instructor ethnographic journals, student-produced podcast episodes, and post-participation surveys with expert guests. Findings indicated that instructors experienced the partnership and course implementation as highly valuable, though time, coordination, and technical challenges emerged. Analysis of podcast content revealed themes related to sustainable ANR solutions, the importance of diverse perspectives, and systems-level thinking about agriculture, environment, and society. Expert guests reported high satisfaction with communication quality, collaboration, and student competence, while perceiving opportunities to strengthen message effectiveness for public audiences. Results suggest that international podcast-based project learning can effectively support global communication competence and dialogic science engagement when supported by structured scaffolding, iterative feedback, and explicit training in translating complex science for nonexpert audiences.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, C. A. (2007). Likert scales and data analyses. Quality Progress, 40(7), 64-65. https://www.bayviewanalytics.com/reports/asq/likert-scales-and-data-analyses.pdf

Besley, J. C., Dudo, A., & Yuan, S. (2018). Scientists’ views about communication objectives. Public Understanding of Science, 27(6), 708–730. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662517728478

Bonett, D. G. (2002). Sample size requirements for testing and estimating coefficient alpha. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 27(4), 335–340. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986027004335

Chen, G.-M. (2005). A model of global communication competence. China Media Research, 1, 3–11. http://www.wwdw.chinamediaresearch.net/index.php/back-issues?id=42

Cleofas, J. V., & Labayo, C. C. (2024). Youth netizens as global citizens: Digital citizenship and global competence among undergraduate students. Frontiers in Communication, 9, 1398001. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2024.1398001

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage.

Desmedt, C. P., Budts, W., De Vos, M., & Moons, P. (2025). Artificial intelligence-generated podcasts open new doors to make science accessible: A mixed-method evaluation of quality and the potential for science communication. European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 24(6), 885–895. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjcn/zvaf074

Erdogan, N., & Bozeman, T. D. (2015). Models of project-based learning for the 21st century. In A Practice-based Model of STEM Teaching: STEM Students on the Stage (SOS) TM (pp. 31-42). Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-019-2_3

Guetterman, T. C., & Fetters, M. D. (2018). Two methodological approaches to the integration of mixed methods and case study designs: A systematic review. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(7), 900–918. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218772641

Hall, K. L., Vogel, A. L., & Croyle, R. T. (Eds.). (2019). Strategies for team science success: Handbook of evidence-based principles for cross-disciplinary science and practical lessons learned from health researchers. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20992-6

Haynes, S. N., Richard, D. C. S., & Kubany, E. S. (1995). Content validity in psychological assessment: A functional approach to concepts and methods. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 238–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.238

High Quality Project Based Learning. (2018). A framework for high quality project based learning. https://hqpbl.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/FrameworkforHQPBL.pdf

Kelp, N. C., & Paredes, J. (2026). Students as science communicators: Using podcast creation and reflection via collaborative autoethnography to develop students’ science communication skills. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 1(27), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00222-25

Krebs, C. L., Loizzo, J. L., Crandall, R. M., Bunch, J. C., & Lundy, L. K. (2021). Project-based learning impacts on collegiate students’ climate change attitudes, nature relatedness, and science communication skills. NACTA Journal, 65, 506–516. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27157878

Jamieson S. (2004). Likert scales: How to (ab)use them. Medical Education, 38(12), 1217–1218. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.02012.x

Lerma-Mayer, A. (2025). Understanding dialogic relationships in digital science communication. In A. Fage-Butler, L. Ledderer, & K. H. Nielsen (Eds.), Science communication and trust (pp. 259-279). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-96-1289-5_13

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage. https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8

Lorke, J., Ballard, H. L., & Robinson, L. D. (2024). More complex than expected—Mapping activities and youths’ experiences at BioBlitz events to the rosette model of science communication. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 11, Article 1270579. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2023.1270579

Lundström, M., & Lundström, T. P. (2021). Podcast ethnography. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 24(3), 289–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2020.1778221

MacKenzie, L. E. (2019). Science podcasts: Analysis of global production and output from 2004 to 2018. Royal Society Open Science, 6(1), Article 180932. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.180932

McCroskey, J. C., & Teven, J. J. (1999). Goodwill: A reexamination of the construct and its measurement. Communication Monographs, 66(1), 90–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759909376464

McKibben, J. D., & Murphy, T. H. (2021). The effect of authenticity on project-based learning: A quasi-experimental study of STEM integration in agriculture. Journal of Agricultural Education, 62(1), 144–155. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2021.01144

McKinnon, M. (2024). Further discussion of the inherent challenges and subsequent opportunities for developing global science communication curricula. International Journal of Science Education, Part B: Communication and Public Engagement, 14(4), 498–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2024.2412262

Moriba, S., & Edwards, M. C. (2015). Examining the general global competence of students enrolled in an international dimension course: An attempt to internationalize undergraduate education in a college of agriculture. Journal of Human Sciences and Extension, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.54718/JFZL2856

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Communicating science effectively: A research agenda. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/23674

Oliveira, A. W., Oliver Brown, A., Shao, G., Wenghofer, A., Zullo, A. J., & Navarro-Meza, E. (2025). Student podcast-mediated public communication: Fostering social responsibility in undergraduate science. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2025.2575413

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage.

Reincke, C. M., Bredenoord, A. L., & van Mil, M. H. W. (2020). From deficit to dialogue in science communication. EMBO Reports, 21(9), e51278. https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.202051278

Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Sälzer, C., & Roczen, N. (2018). Assessing global competence in PISA 2018: Challenges and approaches to capturing a complex construct. International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.18546/IJDEGL.10.1.02

Toomey, A. H. (2023). Why facts don't change minds: Insights from cognitive science for the improved communication of conservation research. Biological Conservation, 278, Article 109886. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2022.109886

Wood, M. (2023). Science communication as interdisciplinary training. Journal of Science Communication, 22(06), Y01. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.22060401

Yin, R. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Zhao, X., Toronjo, H., Shaw, C. C., Murphy, A., & Taxman, F. S. (2022). Perceived communication effectiveness in implementation strategies: A measurement scale. Implementation Science Communications, 3(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-022-00284-4