Between Education and Opinion-Making

The fields of science education and science communication are said to have developed as disparate fields of research and practice, operating based on somewhat different logics and premises about their audiences. As the two fields share many of the same goals, arguments have been made for a rapprochement between the two. Drawing inspiration from a historical debate between the scholars John Dewey and Walter Lippmann, the present article is a case-oriented theoretical contribution applying models from science education and science communication in relation to a current socio-scientific issue (SSI), the COVID-19 pandemic. The main question of interest is how selected didactic (didaktik) models from science education and science communication can contribute to shed light on the present situation of an ongoing pandemic specifically and socio-scientific issues in general. Three models are synthesised to give a new composite model that may help communicators and educators understand, discuss, and analyse complex socio-scientific issues. The model is subsequently applied on the apparently contradictory issue of Norwegian and Swedish governments’ very different responses to the pandemic, despite grounding their decisions on largely the same scientific evidence and advice. Contrast is made by comparison with another SSI, anthropogenic global warming (AGW). It is argued that the exchange and combination of didactic models from the two fields may open new spaces for cross-pollination and cross-fertilisation to the mutual benefit of both science education and science communication.