In this brief article, Jacksonville State University's Stephen Bitgood offers informal professionals six suggestions for preventing student misbehavior during school field trips to museums or zoos. Bitgood, a former child psychologist, suggests that good planning is the key to any successful field trip.
In this article, Jacksonville State University's Stephen Bitgood discusses findings from a study that examined two aspects of the public image of visitor facilities: the expectations of what is likely to be found at different types of facilities; and, some general perceptions of these different types of visitor facilities. Facility types included science museums, history museums, historic sites, state parks, natural history museums, and art museums.
In this article, Sydney Donahoe discusses visitor research at the San Diego Wild Animal Park. Donahoe explains three main reasons for conducting this research: advertising and marketing campaigns, to improve their product, and to assess visitor learning and enjoyment.
In this article, staff at the University of Florida's Florida Museum of Natural History discuss the efforts of the Learning in Informal Settings Program, including three international evaluation studies.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
John J. Koran, Jr.Mary Lou KoranBetty Dunckel CampAnne E. Donnelly
The University of Washington’s Museology Program, in partnership with the Woodland Park Zoo and the Learning in Informal and Formal Environments Research Center is developing a model of university-community collaboration where students work with client museums, zoos and aquaria to evaluate exhibits and programs under the guidance of a research mentor. Students will gain experience in audience research and evaluation, as well as in project management, collaboration, and leadership. Staff at participating museums will advance their personal knowledge about visitors and the field of museum evaluation. The project will prepare a new generation of evaluators and museum practitioners through an innovative apprentice-styled laboratory that integrates the strengths of mentoring, fieldwork, academics, and client-centered experiences. Project Advisors include John Falk, Julie Johnson, Randi Korn, Marjorie Schwarzer, and Patterson Williams. Project started January, 2009 with 24 graduate students in the first cadre.
Most free-choice science learning institutions, in particular science centers, zoos, aquariums, and natural history museums, define themselves as educational institutions. However, to what extent, and for which visitors, do these free-choice learning settings accomplish their educational mission? Answering this question has proven challenging, in large part because of the inherent variability of visitors to such settings. We hypothesize that the challenges of measuring free-choice science learning might be diminished if it were possible to pool populations during analysis in ways that reduced
Science beyond the schoolhouse is the subject of this close-up look at informal science--education in non-traditional settings, including Boys and Girls Clubs, 4-H, zoos, aquariums, and public television. More than a dozen writers draw on personal experiences to tell why they became informal science educators and how they use the history and theory of traditional science education in their work. Among the features of this book for informal science educators are a resource directory and a special section on program evaluation. Articles include: (1) "The Symbiosis of Formal and Informal
This study at the National Aquarium in Baltimore (NAIB) was conducted to assess four key aspects of the visitor experience: (1) incoming conservation knowledge, attitudes, and behavior of NAIB visitors; (2) patterns of use and interaction with exhibition components throughout the NAIB; (3) exiting conservation knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of visitors; and (4) over time, how the NAIB experience altered or affected individuals' conservation knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors. Three hundred six visitors participated in the study, which was conducted from March through July, 1999. The
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Institute for Learning InnovationJohn H FalkLeslie AdelmanSylvia James
Considerable time and effort have been invested in understanding the motivations of museum visitors. Many investigators have sought to describe why people visit museums, resulting in a range of descriptive categorizations. Recently, investigators have begun to document the connections between visitors' entering motivations and their exiting learning. Doering and Pekarik have proposed starting with the idea that visitors are likely to enter a museum with an “entry narrative” (1996; see also Pekarik, Doering and Karns 1999). Doering and Pekarik argue that these entry narratives are likely to be
As more and more people look to institutions of informal education os places where science education occurs (Kimche, 1978; Tressell, 1980), increased attention has focused upon assessing learning in these out-of-school settings. In particular, instituions such as museums, nature centers, and zoos have devoted considerable efforts towards developing evaluation techniques. A multitude of procedures and approaches have been tired. These include questionnaires (Eason & Linn, 1976; Borun, 1977), empirical testing designs (Screven, 1974; Snider, Eason, & Friedman, 1979; Wright, 1980), and various
Marino et al. (2010) recently published a critique of a three-year National Science Foundation—funded investigation of the impact of zoo and aquarium visits on the public's understanding of animals and their attitudes toward conservation (Falk, Heimlich, & Bronnenkant, 2008; Falk, Reinhard, Vernon, Bronnenkant, Deans, & Heimlich, 2007; Heimlich, Bronnenkant, Witgert, & Falk, 2004). This critique of that critique will show that Marino et al. seriously misrepresent both the intent of the research and the methods used. The methods used by Falk and his colleagues were consistent with current