We explored a long-standing community science partnership between the Science Museum of Virginia and Groundwork RVA, a local organization that connects youth with opportunities to enhance greenspaces in Richmond.
The Field Museum contracted RK&A to conduct a summative evaluation of the Grainger Science Hub and the Discovery Squad Carts, two museum experiences facilitated by educators or trained volunteers. The goals of the study are to explore the extent to which visitors interact with programming in the Science Hub and at Discovery Squad Carts and the nature of those interactions, as well as visitor motivations and takeaways.
How did we approach this study?
RK&A conducted observations in the Science Hub and at Discovery Squad Carts to understand the nature of experiences at each. The
The Society for Science and the Public’s Advocate Grant Program provides selected Advocates with funding, resources, and information. Advocates include classroom teachers, school and district administrators, university professors, and informal science educators in community-based programs. The role of the Advocate is to support three or more underserved middle or high school students in the process of advancing from conducting a scientific research or engineering design project to entering a scientific competition. Advocates receive a stipend of $3,000; opportunities to meet and interact with
In August 2012, the National Museum of Natural History (NMNH) contracted with Audience Focus (AF), a Maryland-‐based research and evaluation organization, to evaluate visitors’ experiences with the Scientist Is In program. Specifically, AF was asked to design a comprehensive study that would provide insight into the nature of visitors’ engagement with the program, and how participation in the program influenced visitors’ understanding of and curiosity about science topics, awareness of science careers, perceptions of NMNH as a research institution, and recognition of the connections between
This summative evaluation report focuses on the impact that the Working with a Scientist Program at the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) had on its student participants. Student participants were recruited from regional high schools that are categorized as Title I schools, due to the large population of low income students that they serve. The participants engaged in mentored research activities a UTEP every other Saturday during the spring semester and on weekdays during the summer. Their mentors were professional scientists from different STEM disciplines, such as Chemistry, Immunology
This report comprises the third part of a 4-year evaluation assessing the impact of the Working with a Scientist Program (WWASP) at the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) had on its student-participants. This report includes an assessment of the program’s impact on the third cohort of student-participants. To assess the students’ overall performance, several measures were used. First, a review of participant’s academic performance before and after their involvement in the program was conducted. Second, the impacts that the programs’ cogenerative dialogues (cogens) had in the third cohort of
This report is part of a four-year evaluation assessing the impact of the Working with a Scientist Program (WWASP) at the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) had on its student-participants. This report includes an assessment of the impact on the first two cohorts of student-participants. This program selected participants from local high schools to take part in research activities for the spring and summer semester. To assess the students’ overall performance, several measures were used. First, a review of participant’s academic performance before and after their involvement in the program
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Lizely Madrigal-GonzalezGuadalupe Corral
This report is part of a four-year evaluation assessing the impact that the Working with a Scientist Program at the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) had on its first cohort of participants. Participants were students from a regional high school that were selected to take part in research activities every other Saturday during the Spring semester and on weekdays during the summer. The evaluation components included in this report focus on assessing students’ academic performance and the gains the students made while in the program. It also focused on an assessment of students’ perceptions
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Guadalupe CorralJacqueline LowereeJoseph Negron
While interest in citizen science as an avenue for increasing scientific engagement and literacy has been increasing, understanding how to effectively engage underrepresented minorities (URMs) in these projects remains a challenge. Based on the research literature on strategies for engaging URMs in STEM activities and the project team’s extensive experience working with URMs, the project team developed a citizen science model tailored to URMs that included the following elements: 1) science that is relevant to participants’ daily lives, 2) removal of barriers to participation, such as
This summative evaluation report details the Broad Implementation of the Living Laboratory model--an initiative to promote partnership between museums and cognitive science researchers in order to promote professional learning and involve the public in scientific research. The evaluation investigated the extent of the dissemination effort’s depth, spread, sustainability, and shift in ownership, based on Coburn’s criteria for scale-up (2003). Evaluators collected data from surveys, interviews, focus groups, document review, and observations. Findings about depth suggest that adopters fully
Frontier Scientists is comprised of a website and portfolio of videos created for distribution web-wide and through television broadcast. The goal of this program is to excite the general public about ongoing science in Alaska and the Arctic. This is the summary evaluation of a three-year National Science Foundation grant received by Frontier Scientists. Frontier Scientists contracted PEER Associates to conduct the evaluation. Over the course of the three years, the evaluation was focused on both formative (intended to inform and improve programming) and summative (what has the program
In the previous three years, 144 90-second Earth & Sky radio shows have been produced under sponsorship of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The impact of these shows was explored with a posttest-only experimental design comparing a treatment group that listened to nine daily NASA shows focused on the topic of Antarctica and a control group that listened to nine daily non-NASA shows about whales. Participants were randomly assigned to groups, which did not differ on the variables of gender, age, ethnicity, education, frequency of hearing Earth & Sky, and interest in hearing