A new kind of education to build bridges between science and society?

During his talk last night, Bruce Alberts called for the need to build bridges between science and other fields like law, policy, and politics.  He suggested that individuals with strong backgrounds in science (a PhD and a track record of research experience) would be well-suited to such a role.  In a comment during the Q & A, I suggested that those with training in the humanistic and social studies of science (e.g., philosophers and sociologists of science) might fulfill such a role as well.  Philosophers of science, for example, often spend years getting informal training in science, but are also adept at conceptual analysis and in examining inferences scientists make when going from data to conclusions.  Furthermore, some philosophers have made important contributions to science policy specifically by making use of these skills (Kristin Shrader-Frechette comes to mind).  To me, this suggests the need to widen the search in looking for those who might build bridges between science and policy and who would be useful resources when policy makers want to translate scientific findings into well-informed policies, especially in cases where there is a lack of scientific consensus.  (Thus, I was pleased to see that David Castle will be one of the speakers.)

This also makes me wonder if a new type of undergraduate and graduate education is called for in this matter.   Some of the earlier posts suggested that there are particular skills needed (presumably to do this kind of bridging or translation work), such as public speaking and management of people and budgets.  These posts seemed to suggest that it would be best to incorporate such training in graduate programs for science students.  I certainly agree that this would be extremely beneficial.  However, I also think it would be useful to train people specifically to do interdisciplinary work that would make them perfectly suited to build the kinds of bridges called for last night.  Coincidentally, I was recently hired as a new faculty member at the University of Waterloo in new program called "Knowledge Integration", which began in 2008.  One of the main aims of this program is to educate students in a way that will enable them to contribute to larger social and scientific problems that elude a single disciplinary response.  As we see it, many problems need to be solved from multiple perspectives and universities need to train people who can think from different perspectives, talk across disciplines, and have the requisite skills to bring people together.  To that end, we require students to take public speaking, critical thinking, courses on the nature of knowledge (which expose them to highly regarded, practicing scientists and to actual research in various fields), and courses on design that give them the opportunity to present technical knowledge to the public in the form of a museum exhibit that they create themselves; during their studies they're also taught project management and how to "play well with others".

The more I get to know our program and our exceptional students, and the more I hear about the need for "connectors" who can bridge gaps between science and society, the more I think that a new type of education - such as the one my colleagues have developed at Waterloo - is desperately needed.  In fact, as some scholars working on issues of trust and distrust between scientific and lay communities have argued, while we certainly need additional training for scientists (along the lines that others have suggested in this forum), we *also* need people working outside of science, who on the one hand have informal training in the relevant sciences and thus the ability to speak knowledgeably to scientists, but on the other can take a different and perhaps wider perspective and help to cultivate trust between communities.

I am curious to hear what others think of this.  Also, I am sure there are other programs out there with similar aims as ours, and I would love to hear about those as well.