Skip to main content

Community Repository Search Results

resource evaluation Aquarium and Zoo Exhibits
The goal of this evaluation was to determine how museum visitors responded to the museum's existing live animal exhibits and identify recommendations for their new Live Animal Garden exhibit.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS: Jordan Brick Claire Dorsett Yu Wen Wong Christine Reich Leigh Ann Mesiti
resource evaluation Public Programs
This annual report presents an overview of Saint Louis Science Center audience data gathered through a variety of evaluation studies conducted during 2015. This report includes information on the Science Center's general public audience demographics and visitation patterns, gives an overview of visitors' comments about their Science Center experience, summarizes major trends observed in the Science Center's tool for tracking educational programs, and presents highlights from a Membership study, a formative evaluation of a new Makerspace exhibition, and program evaluation of a workshop for the
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS: Elisa Israel Sara Davis Kelley Staab Morey Group
resource evaluation Public Programs
This study explored the effect of depth of learning (as measured in hours) on creativity, curiosity, persistence and self-efficacy. We engaged ~900 parents and 900 students across 21 sites in Washington, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Alabama, Virginia and the United Arab Emirates, in 5-week (10-hr) Curiosity Machine programs. Iridescent trained partners to implement the programs. Thus, this analysis was also trying to establish a baseline to measure any loss in impact from scaling our programs and moving to a “train-the-trainer” model. We analyzed 769 surveys out of which 126 were paired. On
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS: Iridescent
resource evaluation Public Programs
The data collection for this project involved three audiences: (1) a post-event survey completed by participants at the 'Eight-Legged Encounters' event, (2) a club experience survey completed by middle school students in an after-school club, and (3) focus groups, observations, and end-of-course evaluations conducted with students in the BIOS 497/897 'Communicating Science through Outreach' seminar class at the University of Lincoln, Nebraska. Year two data collection was completed from September 2013 - March 2014. Appendix includes survey.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Eileen Hebets
resource evaluation Public Programs
The National Partnerships for Afterschool Science (NPASS) Project was led by The Center for Science Education (CSE) at Education Development Center, Inc. (EDC) in Newton, MA in partnership with the Lawrence Hall of Science (LHS) in Berkeley, CA, with funding from the National Science Foundation (NSF). The NPASS project approach relied on a professional development training and mentorship model to build the capacity of community-based organizations (CBOs) to lead high-quality, hands-on science and engineering activities in their afterschool programming. An overarching project research question
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS: Peggy Vaughan Colleen Manning Miriam Kochman Irene F Goodman Education Development Center
resource evaluation Community Outreach Programs
The CASE program served communities that are underrepresented in current museum audiences. CASE served both females and males from underrepresented minority groups, primarily African American, Latino, and Asian. The most frequent participants were younger than 20 years-old and African American. CASE succeeded in making informal science learning accessible in participating communities. CASE served a total of 10,971 individuals between September 2004 and December 2008. Across the five years, families in the eight participating sites had a grand total of 358 opportunities to attend science
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS: Colleen Manning The Franklin Institute Miriam Kochman Irene F Goodman
resource evaluation Public Programs
Visitors to the Science Museum of Minnesota provided feedback on the books, How Small Is Nano? and Is That Robot Real? in order to assess the books and their ability to impart knowledge of nanoscience. The visitors, 63 adults in all, read one of the books to the child or children accompanying them, then answered a series of questions about their experience including their interest in and enjoyment of the book they read, as well as the age appropriateness of the book. The report compares and contrasts the two books throughout.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS: Sarah Cohn Jane Miller