This paper presents synthesized research on where XR is most effective within a museum setting and what impact XR might have on the visitor experience.
This poster was presented at the 2021 NSF AISL Awardee Meeting.
This poster describes a newly funded collaborative project (9/2021) to engage Planet Word visitors in language science research.
Engage visitors in domain of science often overlooked in the public imagination (language arts -> language science enthusiasts!)
Diversify participants who contribute data to studies
Provide training in research & science communication to a diverse group of students across a range of institutions, including MSIs, broadening participation in STEM
Lower barrier to entry for other language
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Charlotte VaughnDeanna GagnePatrick PlummerYi Ting Huang
This case study of the development of a cross-cultural museum exhibition illustrates value and difficulties of cross-cultural collaboration. University researchers worked with a class of postgraduate science communication students and designers from the Otago Museum to produce a museum exhibition. ‘Wai ora, Mauri ora’ (‘Healthy environments, Healthy people’) provided visibility and public access to information about Māori work. The exhibition assignment provided an authentic assessment of student work, with a professional output. Working on the exhibition involved cross-cultural communication
Charles Darwin is largely unknown and poorly understood as a historical figure. Similarly, the fundamental principles of evolution are often miss-stated, misunderstood, or entirely rejected by large numbers of Americans. Simply trying to communicate more facts about Darwin, or facts supporting the principles of evolution is inadequate; neither students nor members of the public will care or retain the information. On the contrary, building facts into a one-on-one conversational narrative creates an memorable opportunity to learn. Here, we create a digital-media, self-guided question and answer
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
David J. LampeBrinley KantorskiJohn Pollock
On the first day of the Science and Society course at the Cooperstown Graduate Program in Cooperstown, New York, I present the students with an incandescent lightbulb, with clear glass so one can easily see the filament inside. I ask the students how it works and they are able to tell me that the electricity comes in there, runs through the filament here, heats up, and produces light. Then I take out my iPhone and slide it across the table and ask, “How does this work?” Blank stares abound.
The ever-changing nature of academic science communication discourse can make it challenging for those not intimately associated with the field ― scientists and science-communication practitioners or new-comers to the field such as graduate students ― to keep up with the research. This collection of articles provides a comprehensive overview of the subject and serves as a thorough reference book for students and practitioners of science communication.
This set of comments reports experiences from a recent “science-meets-arts”-project in Germany, in which students from the University of Fine Arts in Hamburg (HFBK) shared day-to-day life in climate research groups for several months. The project was envisioned as a process of mutual inspiration with the aim of producing a joint exhibition and symposium at the end. This paper introduces the project as well as the subsequent commentaries and also presents some of my own observations.
Within the UNAM (The National Autonomous University of Mexico) there is an institution, the Dirección General de Divulgación de la Ciencia (DGDC) devoted to the popularization of science through different media such as museums, exhibitions, journals, books, radio and TV programs, internet, workshops for children, demos, shows, plays, summer courses and outreach programs. Most of these products and materials are planned, designed and manufactured by a multidisciplinary team of professionals in the DGDC. Some of our most outstanding projects are: the creation and operation of two science museums
Peer training provides Explainers with the knowledge, skills and confidence to facilitate high quality interactions with visitors. These are skills that carry into their academic, personal and professional lives. Explainers report better grades in school, improved communication skills and better understanding of diverse learning styles. By devoting this high level of time and attention to this valuable resource, we can truly see the significant influence the science center can have on this most valuable, and often underserved, museum audience.
The creation of a scientific culture through the experiences that can be offered in a museum is the central theme in the training of guides at Universum. Emphasising the social importance of science democratisation, providing the public with the chance to enjoy science itself, conceiving it as a human creation of extreme beauty, giving it the chance to be appreciated and enjoyed, presenting it from the different fields where an approach to it is possible, is something difficult to achieve outside a science museum and impossible without the intervention of the anfitriones.
The Science House of the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ) is a space where science is approached through the perspective of culture, seeking interdisciplinarity, stimulating debate among different areas of knowledge, and building a closer and more pleasant relationship between society and scientific knowledge. Work with mediators has gone through significant changes over time and the paths chosen have been modified, re-evaluated and transformed. The presence of mediators can mean the possibility of dialog, conversation, informal chat, and sharing. It has been one of the main
How do people respond to needing information about something as scary as climate change? Yang and Kahlor investigated the role of emotion when people seek new information or stop paying attention to information about climate change. People who were worried about climate change were likely to search out information, and people who were hopeful were not – probably because they didn’t want new information to change their beliefs.