Rather than focusing on how different they are, this literature review details shared characteristics of science museums, science centers, zoos, and aquariums in order to contribute to an ecological view of learning. This article identifies four shared characteristics of these informal science environments: motives and goals, staging of popular science, physical layout, and social exchange and participation. The learning outcomes encompass not only knowledge acquisition but also changes in interests and beliefs.
Within learning environments kids talk can often be seen as disruptive or off task. However, Gutierrez et al reframe how teachers can engage kids talk and welcome diverse activities and linguistic practices to deepen learning and participation. This article explores how teachers allow students to offer local knowledge, reorganize activities, and make meaning that can connect to the official curriculum in unexpected ways.
This study examined the validity of the Draw-A-Scientist Test (DAST), which is commonly used to capture students’ perceptions of scientists. Findings suggest that the DAST is not valid as a sole measurement. The originally identified stereotypical traits are no longer widely held by students.
Integrating technology with reformed-based science instruction that facilitates student inquiry can be challenging for teachers. Campbell, Longhurst, Wang, Hsu, and Coster propose a professional development model that helps teachers use the latest technologies to engage students in authentic science practices.
Why do some people move into science while others move away? Salehjee and Watts collected 12 personal biographies that provide rich descriptions of the different paths—direct or more wavering—that individuals follow. The implications of this study suggest that the informal science sector needs to “keep doors open” for individuals at transition points.
Citizen science has grown significantly as an area of activity around the world with many different models of practice and forms of participation. Citizen involvement in science can be seen as part of a long history of the role of the amateur in science. Research in the USA and UK suggests that citizen science has a powerful potential to support participation in and the learning of science. Increasingly, research has sought to explore and measure the development of 'science literacy', science identity and learning outcomes through citizen science. The scale, focus, and organisation of projects
These materials are aimed at practitioners of citizen science who are considering ways to enhance participation and learning in citizen science projects. This emerging work is a collaborative effort among several institutions seeking to integrate elements of science capital and learning research into the practice of citizen science.
The Museum of the City of New York (MCNY) contracted Randi Korn & Associates, Inc. (RK&A) to conduct a formative evaluation of proposed exhibits for “The Future of the City Lab,” an interactive gallery to be featured in the New York At Its Core exhibition that invites visitors to think about and help design the future of New York City.
How did we approach this study?
The goal of the study was to explore visitors’ opinions and understandings of five specific exhibits—the Introduction Text, the Big Challenges Wall, a Neighborhood Exploration, the “Density” iPad Activity, and the Selfie
This special issue of Science Education & Civic Engagement contains articles on work occurring in a variety of informal STEM education settings, and is dedicated to the memory of former CAISE co-Principal Investigator and adviser Alan Friedman. It was provided in hard copy form to 2016 NSF AISL PI meeting participants.
Access to high quality evaluation results is essential for science communicators to identify negative patterns of audience response and improve outcomes. However, there are many good reasons why robust evaluation linked is not routinely conducted and linked to science communication practice. This essay begins by identifying some of the common challenges that explain this gap between evaluation evidence and practice. Automating evaluation processes through new technologies is then explicated as one solution to these challenges, capable of yielding accurate real-time results that can directly
King et al. [2015] argue that ‘emphasis on impact is obfuscating the valuable role of evaluation’ in informal science learning and public engagement (p. 1). The article touches on a number of important issues pertaining to the role of evaluation, informal learning, science communication and public engagement practice. In this critical response essay, I highlight the article’s tendency to construct a straw man version of ‘impact evaluation’ that is impossible to achieve, while exaggerating the value of simple forms of feedback-based evaluation exemplified in the article. I also identify a
AAAS describes public engagement with science as intentional, meaningful interactions that provide opportunities for mutual learning between scientists and members of the public. Through the Alan I. Leshner Leadership Institute for Public Engagement with Science, AAAS empowers scientists and engineers to practice high-impact public engagement by fostering leaders who advocate for critical dialogue between scientists and the public and lead change to enable their communities, institutions, and others to support public engagement. This bibliography, with additional work on understanding