Learning outcomes and evaluation metrics for training researchers to engage in science policy

Making research evidence accessible and relevant to policymakers is one way that the scientific enterprise confers direct societal benefits. With global norms increasingly promoting these types of broader impacts, new initiatives to do so, including training researchers to engage in policy, have flourished. But what should this training entail, and how would we know whether it has been effective? A review of academic and professional literature in fields such as science communication and public affairs suggests that curricula aiming to enhance the capacity of scientists and engineers to engage in policy should broadly cover effective communication skills and knowledge of public policy processes. This finding largely aligns with the learning outcomes sought by leaders of science policy training programs in the Commonwealth of Virginia, a state with among the highest number and diversity of these types of initiatives in the U.S. Training efforts could benefit from evaluation models and measures from academic literature that speak to the same types of educational outcomes. However, the lack of consistent theoretical foundations and constructs across this highly multidisciplinary scholarship reduces their utility. A common framework describing shared conceptual terms and relationships is needed to further establish the study and practice of these interventions at the science-policy interface.