In February 2013, the Atomic Heritage Foundation (AHF) brought together historians, sociologists and other scholars, as well as museum directors and thought leaders from the informal science education field to engage in a two-day discussion to explore ways to engage the public in the topic of the development of the atomic bomb in the context of history, society and culture. The workshop, titled "Transforming the Relationship Between Science and Society: The Manhattan Project and Its Legacy," had as its overarching goal to identify how the Manhattan Project might best be interpreted in a
In this article, "Visitor Studies Today" Editor Chris Parsons discusses resources for planning and budgeting for evaluation projects. Parsons suggests several websites that offer overviews from different perspectives for professionals just getting started in evaluation or need a bit of a refresher.
This paper is based on comments made at "Exhibition Excellence: The 14th & 15th Annual Exhibition," a session at the American Association of Museum annual meeting in Portland, OR, May 20, 2003. This review focuses "attention to people" from quantitive data compiled by Whitney Watson of the Missouri Historical Society from the 2002 and 2001 submissions and the author's notes for 2000 and 1999.
This paper discusses how museums can encourage chaperones to facilitate deeper experiences for students during field trips. The authors describe how the California Science Center's ThinkSCIENCE! Pathways field trip program addresses this issue. Pathways asks chaperones to become facilitators by using "chaperone sheets," sets of materials containing gallery-specific questions, activities, and points of interest to help chaperones engage students in discussion. This article cites findings from a rigorous formative evaluation of these chaperone sheets and the program in general.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Kimberly BurtnykDavid Combs
resourceresearchProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
This forum article was adapted from a White Paper presented in 2005 at the National Academies in Washington D.C., by VSA President-Elect Kathleen McLean. This provocative article suggests that there is a gap between the world-views of museum practitioners and those of visitor studies professionals and academic researchers. Although many of the questions being asked by practitioners appear similar to research with which we are familiar, it is suggested that these results are not always accessible to practitioners in a form that can be easily applied.
This is a webinar presentation of the Common Guidelines for Education Research and Development, developed by the National Science Foundation and the U.S. Department of Education. The presentation outlines the background, organization and content, and implications of the Guidelines. The presentation may also be helpful for researchers and practitioners who are developing informal STEM learning project proposals.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
National Science FoundationU.S. Department of Education
This article develops an argument that the type of intervention research most useful for improving science teaching and learning and leading to scalable interventions includes both research to develop and gather evidence of the efficacy of innovations and a different kind of research, design-based implementation research (DBIR). DBIR in education focuses on what is required to bring interventions and knowledge about learning to all students, wherever they might engage in science learning. This research focuses on implementation, both in the development and initial testing of interventions and
This funding solicitation for FY2014 in the Advancing Informal STEM Learning (AISL) program at the National Science Foundation seeks to advance new approaches to and evidence-based understanding of the design and development of STEM learning in informal environments; provide multiple pathways for broadening access to and engagement in STEM learning experiences; advance innovative research on and assessment of STEM learning in informal environments; and develop understandings of deeper learning by participants. The AISL program supports five kinds of projects: 1) Pathways, 2) Research in
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
National Science FoundationNational Science Foundation
resourceresearchProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
This paper provides an overview of the Audience Research Consortium of Toronto, comprised of the Art Gallery of Ontario, the Metropolitan Toronto Zoo, the Ontario Science Center and the Royal Ontario Museum. These groups have a shared vision of attracting a larger and more diverse audience-one that includes nontraditional and multicultural groups. This paper outlines how this group developed, acquired funding, hired a consulting group, and created a proposal and research plan. Preliminary findings are also briefly summarized.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Art Gallery of OntarioRoyal Ontario MuseumOntario Science CentreMetropolitan Toronto ZooWoods Gordon Management Consultants
resourceresearchProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
In this paper, evaluator Marilyn G. Hood, Ph.D. of Hood Associates discusses learning opportunities from projects, programs and plans that don't go as planned. Hood presents examples from her career and argues that it is essential to report failed or difficult experiences to the rest of the field to help colleagues avoid the same problems and to advance the field of visitor studies.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Marilyn G. Hood, Ph.D.
resourceresearchProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
This paper presents a transcript from a panel discussion at a VSA program gathered to explore issues of concern related to the life of the "in-house evaluator." Three panelists, experience in-house evaluators, discuss their personal solutions to these issues and contradictions raised by this unique position, in the hope of helping professionals new to the task.
In this note from the editor of "Visitor Studies Today!", Kris Morrissey introduces the issue with an update on the annual VSA conference. Morrissey also discusses two new columns in the issue: one on thoughts and experiences with the processes or products of evaluation and one on technology.