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 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
Funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Center for High-rate Nanomanufacturing (CHN) brings together three universities with unique strengths in nanoscience and nanomanufacturing: the University of Massachusetts, Lowell (UML); Northeastern University, Boston (NEU); and the University of New Hampshire, Durham (UNH). The University of Massachusetts Donahue Institute (UMDI) is conducting the five-year evaluation of CHN's education and outreach activities. The evaluation uses multiple sources of evidence to analyze project processes and outcomes. Using quantitative and qualitative
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Center for High-rate NanomanufacturingCarol Lynn AlpertCarol Barry
resourceevaluationProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
Funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Center for High-rate Nanomanufacturing (CHN) brings together three universities with unique strengths in nanoscience and nanomanufacturing: the University of Massachusetts, Lowell (UML); Northeastern University, Boston (NEU); and the University of New Hampshire, Durham (UNH). The University of Massachusetts Donahue Institute (UMDI) is conducting the five-year evaluation of CHN's education and outreach activities. The evaluation uses multiple sources of evidence to analyze project processes and outcomes. Using quantitative and qualitative
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Center for High-rate NanomanufacturingCarol Lynn AlpertCarol BarryUMass Donahue Institute Research and Evaluation Group
resourceevaluationProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
The overall goal of the project was to convene a large-scale, open conference on public participation in scientific research, bringing together science researchers, project leaders, educators, technology specialists, evaluators, and others from across many disciplines to discuss advancing the field of PPSR. The conference included three sessions for posters and conversations, and five plenary sessions of presentations. The meeting culminated in an open meeting to explore strategies for large-scale collaborations to support and advance work across this field of practice, through the development
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
The Schoodic Education and Research Center InstituteJoe E Heimlich
The report is of the treatment of the Flight of the Butterflies IMAX film. 42 individuals participated in four focus groups in two cities and were asked to read the film treatment in advance and were shown a two and a half minute video clip. Participants then completed a four-page questionnaire with open and closed-ended questions, and engaged in an hour-long discussion of the treatment. Survey and focus group questions were designed to elicit audience perspectives on the appeal and scientific content of the script, including discussion of the film concept, use of the large format medium