ABSTRACT
While many new programs bridge the arts and sciences, a data-based examination of art-science program design can lead to more efficient programming. The Vanderbilt Institute for Infection, Immunology, and Inflammation Artist-in-Residence program is a virtual program that brings together undergraduate student "artists" and faculty-level "scientists" to generate science-art content. We have recruited over 80 artists and 50 scientists to collaborate in creating visual science communication content. Using self-reported data from both groups, we performed qualitative and quantitative analyses to define sources for negative and positive experiences for artists and scientists. We also identify areas for improvement and key features for in producing a positive experience. We found that artists participants had more positive responses about "learning something new" from the program than scientists. We also found that for both artists and scientists the length of the program and the virtual nature were identified as key features that could be improved. However, the most surprising aspect of our analysis suggests that for both "way of thinking" and "science communication to the public or general audience," were seen as significant beneficial gains for scientists compared to artists. We conclude this analysis with suggestions to enhance the benefits and outcomes of an art-science program and ways to minimize the difficulties, such as communication and collaboration, faced by participants and program designers.
