This report details the results of a five-year longitudinal study on the Explainer program at the Exploratorium. Explainers from the summer 1999, fall 1999 and spring 2000 cohorts were interviewed before and after their first semester of work as an Explainer, then followed up with additional interviews three more times at intervals of from one to three years. Additional supplemental data were gathered from a larger set of Explainers via surveys that were administered to these same cohorts before and after their first semester of work, and to a set of Explainer alumni who had been out of the
In this chapter from the book, "Fostering Active Prolonged Engagement: The Art of Creating APE Exhibits," we describe the methods and results from an array of studies designed to assess active, prolonged engagement in science museum visitors.
This article summarizes summative evaluation of the impact on public radio listeners of Earth & Sky, a short-format science radio program airing daily on more than 1,000 commerical and public radio stations in the U.S. as well as on satellite and Internet radio outlets. Earth & Sky’s goals are to make science accessible and interesting and to increase science literacy by providing daily doses of science to listeners with a range of science backgrounds, knowledge and interest. Subsequent to listening to Earth & Sky, the producers hope listeners may be motivated to turn to other sources of
The VOSI questionnaire elicits details of learners’ ideas of what scientists do in the production of valid scientific knowledge. Understanding about scientific inquiry is an integral component of scientific literacy, along with NOS. The VOSI is useful alone, or in combination with the VNOS to gain in-depth insights into respondent’s epistemological views of science. The VOSI targets aspects unique from, but complementary to, the VNOS instrument.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Renee' SchwartzNorman G. LedermanJudith S. Lederman
This survey was designed to assess preservice teachers' perceptions of how their mentoring in science teaching has influenced their ability to teach science. The tool measures personal attributes, system requirements, pedagogical knowledge, modeling, and feedback as factors that comprise beneficial mentoring for science teachers.
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Peter HudsonKeith SkampLyndon Brooks
This essay examines the question of how museum professionals select research methods for summative exhibit evaluation. It explores the ways in which this question historically has been answered in the United States, and it argues that selecting appropriate research methods depends upon understanding the interrelationship between research theories, methods, and designs. It also characterizes this interconnection in relation to different kinds of evaluative questions. The main purpose of the paper is to help museum professionals select an approach to summative evaluation appropriate to specific
Museums and galleries collect more visitor data today than ever before. But how much of it gives us real insight into visitors motivations, behaviour, experiences and responses? And how much of it simply ticks a box on a funding form? Commissioned by some of the UK’s leading institutions, including Tate, The British Museum, V&A and the Imperial War Museum North, Morris Hargreaves McIntyre has tackled this insight deficit head on. In doing so, we have helped these organisations to move beyond the data routinely collected to get to the knowledge they actually need.
Evaluation of the impact of science centers and museums is a growing field of study, because of trends such as increasing competition and financial pressure, demands for greater public accountability and transparency, and government policies that require public institutions to demonstrate their achievements in a variety of areas. As part of this growing focus on impact evaluation, the Association of Science-Technology Centers and a number of individual science centers have jointly funded an international study of the impact of science centers on their local communities. Phase 1 of this study
This research study reports on the evaluation of the outcome and impact of learning as a result of the implementation of Education Programme Delivery Plans in 69 museums in the nine regional museum hubs in England during September, October and November 2005. This is the second study of the impact of learning achieved through museum school services which have been funded through the Renaissance in the Regions programme, which provides central government funding to museums in the English regions. The first study 'What did you learn at the museum today?' was carried out in 2003. The findings of
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Eilean Hooper-GreenhillJocelyn DoddLisanne GibsonMartin PhillipsCeri JonesEmma Sullivan
To begin, this paper describes the climate in science education in the United States, and describes and defines formative assessment. Next, Black & Wiliam’s review and two other important empirical studies will be summarized. Then, a framework characterizing different forms of formative assessment is presented. Non-empirical studies are organized according to this continuum. Finally, the paper describes limitations in the implementation of formative assessment in K-8 science, and summarizes assessment practices that show promise for improving student learning. The important contribution of the
Viewers believe they are learning from giant screen films. But are they really learning, and what are they learning? This article reviews how evaluators look for learning impact and what evaluators have discovered aboutl learning from giant screen films and their adjunct materials.
This study, requested by Smithsonian Secretary Lawrence Small, was conducted between April 2004 and May 2005, over all four seasons, and used the following methods: 1) open-ended interviews with 55 visit groups; 2) formal observations of a sample of 100 visitors, for which the observer estimated the age and gender of visitors and noted their paths, all stops over 3 seconds in length, what displays they looked at, and which hands-on devices they used; 3) a peer review panel comprised of seven ex- hibition specialists (curators, designers,writers, educators, and exhibition developers) who work