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.

中文翻译：

---

在教育与舆论之间

据说科学教育和科学传播领域已经发展为不同的研究和实践领域，它们的运作基于与受众不同的逻辑和前提。由于这两个领域有许多相同的目标，因此人们一直在争论两者之间的和解。本文从约翰·杜威和沃尔特·李普曼学者之间的历史辩论中汲取灵感，是一项以案例为导向的理论贡献，将科学教育和科学传播的模型应用于当前的社会科学问题 (SSI)，即 COVID-19大流行病。感兴趣的主要问题是，从科学教育和科学传播中选择的教学（didaktik）模型如何有助于阐明当前流行病的具体情况和一般的社会科学问题。三个模型被综合起来给出一个新的复合模型，可以帮助传播者和教育者理解、讨论和分析复杂的社会科学问题。该模型随后被应用于挪威和瑞典政府对这一流行病的反应截然不同的明显矛盾的问题上，尽管他们的决定基本上是基于相同的科学证据和建议。通过与另一个 SSI 人为全球变暖 (AGW) 进行比较来形成对比。