The Developing Guidelines for Designing Challenging and Rewarding Interactive Science Exhibits project is a Research in Service to Practice grant running from 10/1/2016-9/30/2021. We have used a Design-Based Research (DBR) approach to refine a framework about exhibit design practices that support learners through the emotional aspects of “productive struggle” as we built three science museum exhibits.
This poster was presented at the 2021 NSF AISL Awardee Meeting.
In The Nature of Community: SCIENCES, we share the lessons learned from an innovative partnership designed to leverage the strengths of two nonprofit organizations—a large cultural institution and a smaller, deeply-rooted community-based organization, both of which offer informal science education expertise.
You’ll read first-hand reflections of how staff members, community leaders and members, children, and adults experienced this partnership: the expectations, surprises, challenges, successes, and lessons learned. We hope the description of this partnership inspires other organizations to
How does focusing on “community science literacy” change the role of an informal science learning center?
This poster was presented at the 2019 NSF AISL Principal Investigators meeting.
U!Scientist is an in-gallery touch table adaptation of the popular online citizen science project Galaxy Zoo. Taking advantage of the social opportunities in a museum setting, the project aims not only to enhance visitors’ science self-efficacy but also to encourage visitors to discuss their choices with friends and family.
This poster was presented at the 2019 NSF AISL Principal Investigators Meeting.
This poster shares an example of how the project team for the Developing Guidelines for Designing Challenging and Rewarding Interactive Science Exhibits has been applied design principles to support the emotional state of productive struggle in an interactive science museum exhibit. It discusses the three stages of productive struggle (emotional disequilibrium, persistence, and productivity), puts those in an applied context, and discusses the team's research methods which include a combination of self-report and biometric measures.
This research paper critically explores the common definitions and perceptions of Making that may potentially disenfranchise traditionally underrepresented groups in engineering. Given the aspects of engineering design that are commonly integrated into Making activities, the Maker movement is increasingly recognized as a potentially transformative pathway for young people to developing early interest and understanding in engineering. However, “what counts” as Making can often be focused heavily on electronic-based and computational forms of Making, such as activities that involve 3D printers
This issue of Legacy—which had a record number of submissions from interpreters wanting to write on the subject—deals with the challenges of making science accessible, engaging, and relevant to visitors to interpretive sites. How do we take information and ideas that can be highly technical or specicialized to a certain field of study and make it pertinent to visitors whose expertise lies elsewhere? The articles that follow tackle that subject.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Alyssa Parker-GeismanTim WatkinsPatrick Kark
Supported by the National Science Foundation, the Global Soundscapes! Big Data, Big Screens, Open Ears project employs a variety of informal learning experiences to present the physics of sound and the new science of soundscape ecology. The interdisciplinary science of soundscape ecology analyzes sounds over time in different ecosystems around the world. The major components of the Global Soundscapes project are an educator-led interactive giant-screen theater show, group activities, and websites. All components are designed with both sighted and visually impaired students in mind. Multimedia
Citizen science offers youth and educators unique opportunities to observe and explore the world through authentic research experiences that are necessary for robust STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) learning. STEM learning is key to fostering informed and engaged youth who are ready to tackle the challenges of our future. Our increasingly complex world depends on helping youth cultivate skills needed to think critically and creatively about 21st Century challenges— skills such as observation, communication, and data literacy. STEM gives all students the building blocks for
Constructivist education theory postulates (Fosnot, 1996; Hein, 1998) that visitors learn actively and create their own meanings as they interact with the world. This raises challenges for visitor studies, since it may be difficult to plan a reasonable evaluation strategy for exhibitions if visitors’ actions and outcomes cannot be determined in advance. Constructivist theory also requires an appropriate evaluation approach (Hein, 1997). This paper illustrates the use of a combination of methodologies that allow visitors’ meanings and activities to emerge as they visit an interactive, non
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Elsa BaileyKerry BronnenkantJudith KelleyGeorge HeinMuseum of Science, Boston
resourceresearchProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
During the preparation of the 2010 Science & Engineering Indicators, there arose a concern about measures of public knowledge of science, and how well they capture public knowledge for Chapter Seven of the Indicators. A workshop at NSF in October 2010 concluded that the process of measuring and reporting public knowledge of science should start with the question of what knowledge a person in the public needs, whether for civic engagement with science and science policy, or for making individual decisions about one’s life or health, or for feeding one’s curiosity about science. This starting
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
John BesleyMeg BlanchardMark BrownElaine Howard EcklundMargaret GlassTom GuterbockA. Eamonn KellyBruce LewensteinChris ToumeyDebbie RexrodeColin Townsend
In an information free-for-all why should scientists bother to add their voice? In this commentary piece I argue there is an increasingly important role for scientists amongst the growing ranks of public intellectuals and the many who style themselves as such. First, we must become the sifters and sorters. We need to be willing to use our research and analytical skills to identify what is valuable amongst all the noise, and, if necessary, to volubly reject what is not. And, second, we need to create and defend the space everyone needs for deep thought and consideration. We need to influence