Background/Question/Methods A major problem facing our society is the widening gap between scientists and non-scientists and between humans and nature. Basic knowledge of science and an appreciation for how science is done is one of the key ingredients of a healthy society and a well-supported scientific community. Equally critical is society’s recognition that learning about our planet’s biota is key to our survival. However, with the increasing dominance of technology, more frequent virtual rather than actual experiences, and media’s increasing representation of nature as entertainment, humans are losing their sense of connection to nature and science. Traditionally, the media and informal science education institutions have forged communication pathways between scientists and the public, but these conduits tend towards simplification and sensationalism and often do not convey the passion and content that scientists have. Some scientists are directly involved in transmitting research to the public, but their audiences tend to be the scientifically “active and aware”. The “scientifically unaware” segments of the population that would most benefit from direct input from scientists tend to be the least frequent targets of dissemination by scientists. A major hindrance to scientist outreach is that scholars’ perception that public outreach is minimally valued within the academic reward system. Thus, to gain the benefits of scientist participation in outreach, such activities must maximize impacts and minimize scientists’ time.

Results/Conclusions   In 2004, I initiated the “Research Ambassador Program” to establish direct communication links between researchers and the scientifically unaware public. Researchers from many scientific fields explored ways to engage non-scientist groups that would be interested in his/her area of research because it related to that group’s hobby, trade, or profession. Public audiences included church congregations, prisoners in a medium-security corrections center, at-risk urban youth, state legislators, and audiences of modern dance and musical performances.  Research Ambassadors received an honorarium, a letter of acknowledgment from a high-level academic, assistance with graphics and advice on the appropriate level of language, and evaluation tools. Challenges faced included worry about peer indifference and having slightly less time for traditional academic activities. Participating scientists reported that they found such activities manageable and that in many cases, contact provided a fresh perspective, new ideas, or other values for academic work, including fulfillment of their Broader Impacts (Criterion II) for National Science Foundation grants. In the longer term, they also contributed to an improved social and political climate that supports research activities and funding.