There are a number of places evaluators can share their reports with each other, such as the American Evaluation Association’s eLibrary, the website informalscience.org, and organizations’ own websites. Even though opportunities to share reports online are increasing, the evaluation field lacks guidance on what to include in evaluation reports meant for an evaluator audience. If the evaluation field wants to learn from evaluation reports posted to online repositories, how can evaluators help to ensure the reports they share are useful to this audience? This paper explores this question through
The Massachusetts Linking Experiences and Pathways Follow-on (M-LEAP2) is a three-year longitudinal empirical research study that is examining prospectively how early formal and informal STEM education experiences are related to gender-based differences in STEM achievement-related choices in middle and high school. M-LEAP2 serves as a complement to - and extension of - a prior NSF-funded study, M-LEAP, which was a largely quantitative research study that followed overlapping cohorts of 3rd - 6th grade female and male students for three years. M-LEAP surveyed over 1,600 students, 627 student-parent pairs, and 134 second parents in 8 diverse public schools across Massachusetts. In contrast, M-LEAP2 is a heavily qualitative three-year study using in-depth interviews with a diverse range of 72 of these students and their families to study how formal and informal science experiences shape the students' science-related beliefs, interests, and aspirations as they progress though middle and high school.
This paper draws on ethnographic data to bring equity to the fore within discussions of tinkering and making. Vossoughi, Escudé, Kong & Hooper argue that equity lies in the how of teaching and learning through specific ways of: designing making environments, using pedagogical language, integrating students’ cultural and intellectual histories, and expanding the meanings and purposes of STEM learning. The authors identify and exemplify emergent equity-oriented design principles within the Tinkering After-School Program—a partnership between the Exploratorium and the Boys and Girls Clubs of San
The adoption of the Next Generation Science Standards means that many educators who adhere to model-based reasoning styles of science will have to adapt their programs and curricula. In addition, all practitioners will have to teach modeling, and model-based reasoning is a useful way to do so. This brief offers perspectives drawn from Lehrer and Schauble, two early theorists in model-based reasoning.
This literature review raises questions about how scientific argumentation is taught in schools. Manz argues that argumentation needs to be situated in real scientific questions and practices and makes suggestions for how to make argumentation an authentic science activity for students.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Sara Heredia
resourceresearchProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
In this research article, Allen and Penuel investigate how science teachers make decisions about implementation of reform based on their understanding of coherence between professional development and the standards, curriculum and assessment in their local context. This research will support ISE that design and facilitate science teacher professional development.
Many research interventions may show initial positive results, but studies show that these results tend to fade when research structures and supports are removed from the local contexts. In this paper, Gutierrez and Penuel make the case for rethinking what is meant by “rigor” in educational research. To drive truly meaningful and sustainable educational improvement efforts, there is a need for jointly negotiated research that integrates the perspectives, ideas, work, practical considerations, and analysis of educational practitioners. The authors argue that standards for rigorous research
This Barron and Bell article provides a foundational overview for how “cross-setting learning” can equitably engage all youth across formal and informal educational contexts. The paper offers: 1) a review of research; 2) descriptions of supports and challenges to cross-setting learning, including learner interest and identity; and 3) suggestions for research and assessments that capture learning for underrepresented youth.
Vossoughi and Bevan (2014) conducted a literature review of educational research on making and tinkering. They considered what was known about learning opportunities for young people afforded by high-quality tinkering and making experiences. Specifically they reviewed the historical roots of making, the emerging design principles that characterized tinkering and making programs, the pedagogical theories and practices that lead to supportive and collaborative learning environments, as well as the possibilities and tensions associated with equity-oriented teaching and learning.
The resources on this handout were shared by participants of the “Bridging the practice-research gap” forum, which took place on InformalScience.org from July 6-17, 2015.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Association of Science-Technology CentersGrace Troxel
As providers of informal STEM education, including libraries, grapple with the issue of offering inclusive programs and meeting the needs of their specific communities, potential program facilitators seek knowledge and guidance to develop and deliver effective STEM programming for underserved populations. Key questions that might be asked include: Have best practices been identified for effectively engaging underserved audiences? What key strategies, if any, have emerged from previous informal science education efforts that can inform new program development? Over the past 10 to 20 years
Today, policy makers, funders, and government agencies alike are grappling with the need to use resources efficiently and effectively in order to make a measurable difference in addressing some of today’s pressing significant social, cultural, and educational challenges. When dealing with such complex and “wicked” problems as global warming, hunger, substance abuse, education and skills development (including competencies in STEM disciplines), it’s not enough for an organization to deliver results that contribute only to its bottom line. Increasingly, civic and philanthropic leaders are