Informal Education Is Essential to Physics

This document, "Informal Education Is Essential to Physics: Recommendations for individuals 2025," by the JNIPER Community, outlines recommendations for individuals and programs to integrate Informal Physics Education (IPE) as an essential physics practice. The overarching goal is a culture shift where IPE is widely recognized and supported.

The recommendations are structured around three main "levers":

• Lever 1: Structures: Amplify existing structures that frame IPE as an essential activity worthy of resource allocation. This involves individual "champions" advocating for structural changes within organizations.
• Lever 2: Engagement of interested, influential, and impacted parties: Identify techniques for recruiting and empowering people to engage in and support IPE. This includes:
  • Tracking and sharing program effectiveness data (quantitative and qualitative).
  • Aligning program goals with funders' missions and incorporating robust evaluation plans in proposals.
  • Meeting with policymakers to advocate for supportive policies and funding.
  • Inviting policymakers, administrators, and faculty to interact with IPE programs.
  • Consistently engaging community members at every stage and level, including co-creating programming.
  • Integrating IPE into research goals, such as studying program design and impact, or engaging the public in data collection.
  • Articulating a relevant value proposition for supporting IPE that resonates with the audience's goals.
• Lever 3: Integrating Research-Based Practices in IPE: Leverage research to understand, develop, and advocate for IPE. This involves:
  • Clarifying the audience and goals of IPE programs through audience analysis and feedback.
  • Engaging in continuous evaluation and assessment, incorporating iterative feedback.
  • Aligning research with program goals, institutional missions, and community needs.
  • Seeking broad expertise and partnerships from various disciplines and community organizations.
  • Engaging in dialogue rather than presenting IPE as a "pitch," celebrating multiple perspectives.
  • Defining success in audience-relevant terms, tailoring metrics to specific contexts (e.g., fostering curiosity for young audiences vs. participant retention for institutions).
  • Collecting a variety of metrics (quantitative and qualitative) to tell a complete story of IPE program impact.
  • Systematically documenting impacts on the audience, facilitators, community, and institutions.
  • Staying informed about the latest IPE research findings and their application to practice.