Informal learning institutions, such as museums, science centers, and community-based organizations, play a critical role in providing opportunities for students to engage in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) activities during out-of-school time hours. In recent years, thousands of studies, evaluations, and conference proceedings have been published measuring the impact that these programs have had on their participants. However, because studies of informal science education (ISE) programs vary considerably in how they are designed and in the quality of their designs, it
But many young people face signifcant economic, cultural, historical, and/or social obstacles that distance them from STEM as a meaningful or viable option— these range from under-resourced schools, race- and gender-based discrimination, to the dominant cultural norms of STEM professions or the historical uses of STEM to oppress or disadvantage socio-economically marginalized communities (Philip and Azevedo 2017). As a result, participation in STEM-organized hobby groups, academic programs, and professions remains low among many racial, ethnic, and gender groups (Dawson 2017). One solution to
Informal learning institutions (ILIs) create opportunities to increase public understanding of science and promote increased inclusion of groups underrepresented in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) careers but are not equally distributed across the United States. We explore geographic gaps in the ILI landscape and identify three groups of underserved counties based on the interaction between population density and poverty percentage. Among ILIs, National Park Service lands, biological field stations, and marine laboratories occur in areas with the fewest sites for informal
Final External Evaluation Report for Informal STEM Learning at Biological Field Stations, an NSF AISL Exploratory Pathways project, which studied the pedagogical and andragogical characteristics of informal educational outreach activities at field stations. This report summarizes the project team’s major research activities and the contextual factors that supported that work.
Appendix includes interview protocol.
There is a vein of democratic idealism in the work of science museums. It is less about political democracy than epistemological democracy. As a one-time museum educator and a researcher who studies science museums, I have always thought of it in terms of an unspoken two-part motto: “see for yourself–know for yourself.” Although this strain of idealism has remained constant throughout the history of science museums, it has been interpreted differently in different eras, responding (in part) to the social upheavals of the day. In the late 1960s, for example, a new generation of self-described
Science learning occurs throughout people's lives, inside and outside of school, in formal, informal, and nonformal settings. While museums have long played a role in science education, learning in this and other informal settings has not been studied nor understood as deeply as in formal settings (i.e., schools and classrooms). This position paper, written by learning researchers in a science museum engaged in equity and access work, notes that while the researchers consider the ethics of their work regularly and deeply, little formal guidance exists for the ethical challenges they routinely
From 2018 to 2020, the Emerging Research on Identity, Representation & Inclusion in Museums project team set out to document graduate-level research on identity in the museum field, and support professionals’ ongoing research and publishing on these topics. Researchers at Knology synthesized over 90 graduate student theses about identity and museums from 2000 to 2018. In parallel, we interviewed a sample of the authors whose work appeared in the literature review, to understand how identity research has played a role in their careers. To support new and ongoing identity research, we hosted a
Diversity, equity, accessibility, and inclusion (DEAI) have become central concerns for museums. Across the field, leaders are asking—with increasing urgency—how museums can diversify their visitors, staff, and boards; create welcoming and inclusive environments and workplaces; and ensure that museum offerings reflect a broad range of interests, experiences, and needs.
Museums have approached DEAI efforts in different ways and at different levels, from developing special exhibits and events for specific audiences to offering staff diversity training to board development. Despite more than
The AZA Social Science Research Agenda 2020 is intended to be a compass to guide social science social science research by and about zoos and aquariums in the AZA community. It reflects the priorities,trends, and emerging issues that social scientists and practitioners in the AZA community have identified as the most relevant to address to help them meet their missions. While the primary audience for the agenda is the AZA community, its applicability extends beyond the AZA membership to other zoos and aquariums. The key research questions and accompanying sub-questions also hold relevance for
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Joy KubarekJackie OgdenShelly GrowAmy Rutherford
This study researched whether and how affiliation with the Nanoscale Informal Science Education Network (NISE Net) led to change in informal science education organizations’ (ISEs) practices. The NISE Net provided an opportunity to look at how participation in a large but loosely-structured network of museums, science centers, educators, and scientists can influence museums to experience organizational change and adopt new practices.
By conducting qualitative case studies of a few selected partners, this research aimed to understand the conditions that facilitate or impede the influence of
This paper examines the differences and challenges encountered when trying to create informal blended (virtual and hands-on) engineering design STEM activities. It contrasts the creation of STEM activities for formal and informal learning environments, stressing that the differences extend far beyond the length of the activity or depth of any learning goals. The discussion begins with an examination of differences between the two learning environments that need to be taken into consideration. These differences include the physical environments, organizational structures, and the goals or
This paper discusses findings from the use of the Wise Guys and Gals (WGG) Observation of WGG Youth Protocol in a blended learning environment. The protocol was used to assess youth engagement when completing blended engineering design challenges at two Boys and Girls Clubs. WGG is a project funded through a grant from the National Science Foundation and which brings blended learning design challenges to middle school aged learners in informal STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) settings. This paper explores the feasibility of using the observation protocol to collect data