Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Perspective
  • Published:

Evaluation of the InSightSeers and DART Boarders mission observer programmes

Nature Astronomy volume 8, pages 1521–1528 (2024)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Encouraging diversity in planetary science requires making a particular effort to bring a broader range of people onto the mission teams that are the backbone of the field. Observer programmes, which offer early-career researchers the chance to embed within a mission team during a science meeting, are one way of doing this. Here we present a quantitative analysis of the effectiveness of two observer programmes: InSightSeers and DART Boarders, linked respectively to the InSight and the Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART) missions, using a mixture of one-group pre-test/post-test and one-group post-test only evaluation methods, with a total of 56 participants. We find substantial educational value added to participants from both programmes, with particular strengths being the effectiveness of these programmes at providing an introduction to mission teams and international collaborations. This work demonstrates that mission observer programmes can be an effective way of exposing early-career researchers to planetary science missions.

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Summary of the demographics of the various cohorts.
Fig. 2: InSightSeers’ evaluations from the final cohort.
Fig. 3: Summary of the results.
Fig. 4: Data from the InSightSeers’ mentor evaluations.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

An exemplar application questionnaire, the various surveys used and raw data are available in Supplementary Information and Supplementary Data 1. Raw data have only been edited insofar as to remove personally identifiable information in one location, or to clarify named references to InSightSeers organizer team members in one place. Where this has been done, it has been clearly marked as such.

A copy of the participant agreement to take part in the survey, including approval and consent to publish results from our surveys, is included in Supplementary Information.

References

  1. Rathbun, J. A. et al. Who is missing in planetary science?: Strategic recommendations to improve the diversity of the field. Bull. Am. Astron. Soc. 53, 435 (2021).

  2. Rivera-Valentin, E. et al. Who is missing in planetary science?: Demographic study of the planetary science workforce. Bull. Am. Astron. Soc. 53, 443 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Zellner, N., Rathbun, J., Martindale, N. & Seidel, A. Participation of women in the annual Lunar and Planetary Science Conferences. Earth Space Sci. 9, e2021EA002188 (2022).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  4. Rathbun, J. Participation of women in spacecraft science teams. Nat. Astron. 1, 0148 (2017).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  5. Porter, A. M., White, S. & Dollison, J. 2020 Survey of the Planetary Science Workforce (AIP, AAS Division for Planetary Sciences, 2020).

  6. Mandt, K. E. Increasing diversity on spacecraft mission teams reduces risk. Science 382, eadk7373 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fernando, B. et al. Inclusion of early-career researchers in space missions. Nat. Astron. 6, 1339–1341 (2022).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  8. Izquierdo, K., Du, J., Mukherjee, S. & Chavas, D. Increasing diversity in planetary science through the inclusion and retention of international graduate students. Bull. Am. Astron. Soc. 55, 2023n8i320p02 (2023) .

  9. Schmidt, B. et al. Diversity in action: solutions for a more diverse and inclusive decade of planetary science and astrobiology. Bull. Am. Astron. Soc. 53, 426 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fernando, B. et al. Strategies for making geoscience PhD recruitment more equitable. Nat. Geosci. 16, 658–660 (2023).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  11. Curry, S. MAVEN mission perspectives and approaches to inclusion. Front. Astron. Space Sci. 10, 1162107 (2023).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  12. Daubar, I. J. et al. InSightSeers: early career opportunity to observe the InSight Science Team at work. In Proc. 53rd Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (Universities Space Research Association, 2022).

  13. Rivkin, A. & Chabot, N. The ‘DART Boarders’ program of the Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART) mission. In Proc. Advancing IDEA in Planetary Science (Universities Space Research Association, 2022).

  14. Smith, D. et al. Here to Observe (H2O): opening doors to NASA Planetary Science Division (PSD) missions and mentors for undergraduates from underrepresented institutions. In Proc. 54th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (Universities Space Research Association, 2023).

  15. Morris, J. R. et al. InSightSeers: peering into invited student participation of a mission science team meeting. In Proc. 54th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (Universities Space Research Association, 2023).

  16. Campbell, D. T. & Stanley, J. C. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research (Houghton Mifflin, 1963).

  17. George, M. Teaching focus group interviewing: benefits and challenges. Teach. Sociol. 41, 257–270 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Tesch, A. Implementing pre–post test designs in higher education evaluations. New Dir. Eval. 2016, 85–96 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Behar-Horenstein, L. S. & Niu, L. Teaching critical thinking skills in higher education: a review of the literature. J. Coll. Teach. Learn. 8, 25–41 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Fearon, J. D. Ethnic and cultural diversity by country. J. Econ. Growth 8, 195–222 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Settling In 2018: Indicators of Immigrant Integration (OECD, 2018).

  22. Cervulle, M. The uses of universalism. ‘Diversity statistics’ and the race issue in contemporary France. Eur. J. Cult. Stud. 17, 118–133 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Simon, P. in Social Statistics and Ethnic Diversity: Cross-National Perspectives in Classifications and Identity Politics (eds Simon, P. et al.) 65–87 (Springer, 2015).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The InSightSeers and DART Boarders programmes acknowledge the work of the Europa Clipper team in developing the original mission observer model. The InSightSeers programme was funded in part by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory at the California Institute of Technology under the NASA InSight mission. JPL provided travel support for InSightSeers’ travel and the organizer time needed to undertake this analysis. Additional organizer support was provided by the UK Space Agency under the Space for All programme. The DART Boarders programme was run by the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory under the NASA DART mission. A portion of B.F.’s time was funded by JPL’s InSight closeout funding and the UK Space Agency’s Space for All scheme through Imperial College London. The remainder was funded by the Blaustein Fellowship at Johns Hopkins University. I.J.D. was supported by NASA InSight Participating Scientist grant 80NSSC20K0971. J.C.E.I. was supported by UKSA grants ST/W002515/1 and ST/W002523/1.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Benjamin Fernando

  2. Aeolis Research, Chandler, AZ, USA

    Claire Newman

  3. Department of Earth, Environmental and Planetary Sciences, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA

    Ingrid J. Daubar

  4. Department of Earth, Planetary, and Space Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Caroline Beghein

  5. Space Exploration Sector, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, Laurel, MD, USA

    Nancy L. Chabot & Andrew S. Rivkin

  6. School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

    Jessica C. E. Irving

  7. Department of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

    Catherine L. Johnson

  8. Planetary Science Institute, Tuscon, AZ, USA

    Catherine L. Johnson

  9. Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA

    Mark P. Panning, Sue Smrekar & W. Bruce Banerdt

  10. Institute of Planetary Research, German Aerospace Center (DLR), Berlin, Germany

    Ana-Catalina Plesa

Authors
  1. Benjamin Fernando
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Claire Newman
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ingrid J. Daubar
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Caroline Beghein
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Nancy L. Chabot
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jessica C. E. Irving
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Catherine L. Johnson
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Mark P. Panning
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Ana-Catalina Plesa
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Andrew S. Rivkin
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Sue Smrekar
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  12. W. Bruce Banerdt
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

B.F., I.J.D., C.N. and M.P.P. led the organization of InSightSeers. N.L.C. and A.S.R. led the organization of DART Boarders. All other authors assisted in the organization of InSightSeers and the securing of funding.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benjamin Fernando.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Astronomy thanks Natasha Dowey and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

InSightSeers programme application form, pre- and post-programme evaluation questionnaires and participant agreement.

Supplementary Data 1

Responses to the survey questionnaires.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fernando, B., Newman, C., Daubar, I.J. et al. Evaluation of the InSightSeers and DART Boarders mission observer programmes. Nat Astron 8, 1521–1528 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-024-02434-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-024-02434-1

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing Careers

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Careers newsletter — what matters in careers research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Careers