Module 22 Companion: Public Engagement with Authentic CONNECTS Resources

A public-engagement session kit that extends Module 22 without replacing its evidence-first presentation curriculum.

Module 22 Companion: Public Engagement with Authentic CONNECTS Resources

This is a companion session kit for Module 22, not a replacement for the existing Scientific Writing and Presentation module.

The existing module teaches a valuable invariant:

adapt vocabulary and depth, but never lower the evidentiary standard.

This companion applies that discipline to public engagement.

Learning objectives

Learners will be able to:

1. explain atlas, projectome, cellular connectome, synaptic connectome, and activity map;
2. explain why IC3 and APEX have complementary roles;
3. use at least one authentic scientific resource rather than a simulated replacement;
4. distinguish program intent, scientific result, and demonstrated impact;
5. communicate one limitation without jargon;
6. formulate one meaningful public or neuroethics question.

60-minute session

0–10 min — One brain, many maps

Use:

• Atlas vs. Connectome
• From Projectome to Synapse

10–25 min — Authentic resource lab

Choose one:

• Allen ABC Atlas using Allen’s own beginner guide;
• FlyWire/Codex as an external connectomics precedent;
• APEX/CONNECTS resources as they become publicly usable;
• IC3/CONNECTS-KB resources as they become publicly usable.

Rule: NeuroTrailblazers provides the learning task, not a duplicate browser manual.

25–40 min — Follow the evidence

Use:

• BRAIN Grant Detective
• Public Impact Wall

Require the chain: intent → capability → artifact → adoption → scientific consequence → translation/public benefit

Stop at the last step actually supported.

40–50 min — Public translation

Learner produces:

• one 60-second explanation;
• one evidence badge: Established / Emerging / Aspirational;
• one sentence beginning, “This evidence does not yet show…”

50–60 min — Ethics and public voice

Prompt:

As brain maps become more detailed, what should researchers, participants, communities, and policymakers be able to decide together?

Assessment

A passing artifact includes:

• one authentic resource;
• one explicit scale label;
• one source/provenance statement;
• one bounded scientific claim;
• one limitation;
• one audience-appropriate “so what?”;
• one ethics/public-engagement question.