A research project that is only expert-driven may ignore the role of local knowledge in research, often gives low priority to the development of a comprehensive communication strategy to engage the community, and may not deliver the results of the study to the community in an effective way. Objective: To demonstrate how a research program can respond to a community research need, establish a community-academic partnership, and build a co-created citizen science program. Methods: A place-based, community-driven project was designed where academics and community members maintained a reciprocal
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Univeristy of Wisconsin- StoutMonica Ramirez-AndreottaMark BrusseauJanick ArtiolaRaina MaierA Jay Gandolfi
The Maker Movement has taken the educational field by storm due to its perceived potential as a driver of creativity, excitement, and innovation (Honey & Kanter, 2013; Martinez & Stager, 2013). Making is promoted as advancing entrepreneurship, developing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce, and supporting compelling inquiry-based learning experiences for young people. In this paper, we focus on making as an educative inquiry-based practice, and specifically tinkering as a branch of making that emphasizes creative, improvisational problem solving. STEM-rich
This paper presents a conceptual framework for analyzing how researchers and district leaders perceive and navigate differences they encounter in the context of research-practice partnerships. Our framework contrasts with images of partnership work as facilitating the translation of research into practice. Instead, we argue that partnership activity is best viewed as a form of joint work requiring mutual engagement across multiple boundaries. Drawing on a cultural-historical account of learning across boundaries (Akkerman & Bakker, 2011) and evidence from a study of two longterm partnerships
In this paper, commissioned as part of a consensus study on successful out-of-school STEM learning, we draw on the research literature to consider (1) what is known about the impact of tinkering and making experiences on school-aged children’s learning (interest in, engagement with and understanding of STEM in particular); (2) the emerging design principles and pedagogies that characterize tinkering and making programs; and (3) the specific tensions and possibilities within this movement for equity-oriented teaching and learning.
This report is a product of the Setting the Agenda for Giant Screen Research Workshop held October 18, 2013 in Albuquerque, NM, which grew out of many years of discussions about the potential of the giant screen (GS) format to educate, engage and entertain, and in response to the multiple calls for research on GS films. Over the course of one day, invited participant thought leaders representing GS filmmakers, marketers, exhibitors and distributors joined with immersive practitioners and academic researchers to identify the key research questions for a GS research agenda. However, as the term
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Giant Screen Cinema Association (GSCA)Mary Nucci
This dissertation examined changes in urban youth’s attitude towards science as well as their perception of the informal science education setting and third space opportunity provided by the BioBus, a mobile science lab. Findings from this study suggested that urban youth’s attitude towards science changed both positively and negatively in statistically significant ways after a BioBus visit and that the experience itself was highly enjoyable. Furthermore, implications for how to construct a third space within the urban science classroom and the merits of utilizing the theoretical framework
Mythbusters: The Explosive Exhibition is a traveling exhibit based on the popular television show. When housed at the Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago, it included a traditional, interactive free flow exhibition space followed by a live facilitated show. This paper describes results from an experimental study about the effects of the Live Show on the learning of and attitudes towards science. A pre-test was given to 333 children entering the exhibit. A post-test was given to 80 children after they walked through the free-flow portion of the exhibit and to 191 children after they watched
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Museum of Science and IndustryAaron Price
Today’s standardized testing methods are too narrow for measuring 21st-century learning that occurs across time and diverse social contexts, from formal to informal and embodied to virtual. This paper uses the concept of “connected learning” to illustrate what 21st-century education involves; it then describes research methods for documenting this learning.
To improve science education for culturally and linguistically diverse students, schools and communities can create “mutual benefit partnerships” to identify and address local problems. Through the example of the Chicago River Project, Bouillion and Gomez illustrate how such partnerships can connect formal learning contexts with the rich ways communities experience science outside of school.
One challenge in scaling up effective educational programs is how to adjust implementation to local contexts. One solution that the authors Penuel, Fishman, Cheng, and Sabelli propose is “design-based implementation research,” (DBIR) in which researchers and practitioners collaboratively identify problems and strategies during implementation while learning from this process to support innovations in new contexts.
In order to attract and retain underrepresented student groups (USGs) who aspire to major in STEM fields, educators recognize that science and math instruction must improve and also develop students’ non-cognitive and social-emotional skills. Foremost in that effort is Xavier University of Louisiana, a historically black and Catholic university located in the heart of New Orleans. Throughout the past thirty years, Xavier compiled an extraordinary record as a top producer of African Americans who receive bachelor’s degrees in biology, chemistry, and physics. Although Xavier enrolls only
In 2010 the Royal Society journal Biology Letters published an article, ‘Blackawton bees’, which caused something of a sensation: the findings, on bees’ foraging patterns, were original, but the true originality lay in the fact the experiments were in part devised, and the paper written, by a group of 8- to 10-year-old children at Blackawton Primary School in Devon (Blackawton et al., 2011).[1] The article attracted considerable media attention, troubling, as it did, the boundaries of professional science, and distinctions between scientific practice and education, not to mention the