Over recent years, there has been much discussion of the status of science communication as a discipline, as a field of empirical research and theoretical reflection. In our own contributions to that discussion, we have tended to raise questions about the possibilities of this ‘emerging discipline’ (Trench & Bucchi 2010). We have some-times drawn attention to the marks of immaturity—notably, the relatively underdeveloped state of theory in the field.
But when a major international academic publisher commissions an anthology of ‘major works’ in our field, we can surely say that science
Traditionally, collaborative technologies are intended to directly support joint, collaborative activity, taking their cues from communication and media. Here, empirical findings are presented about the types of information needs associated with the formation of a knowledge-building community among professional learning technology researchers. Several issues are outlined in designing, facilitating, supporting, and measuring knowledge-building activity in such as community of practice. It is argued that, rather than communication tools, a knowledge-building community is better served by
This chapter explores what is already known about museums and their long-term impact on visitors, the complexities and challenges inherent in trying to study and understand long-term impacts, future research and methodological approaches that we can use to effectively assess the longterm impacts of museum experiences, and the implications of these efforts for practice.
This chapter discusses learning through the manipulation of three-dimensional objects. The opportunity to touch and interact with objects is helpful for young children as they attempt to understand abstract concepts and processes. How might parents guide children in coming to understand the complex and abstract symbolic nature of representational objects?
In this chapter we explore how people build new theories in the context of collaborative scientific thinking. As illustrated by many of the chapters in this volume, our default notion of "scientific thinking" has changed from that of the lone scientist or student toiling away on a magnum opus or in the laboratory, to that of people working as part of collaborative groups who negotiate goals for the task, co-construct knowledge, and benefit from the diverse prior knowledge that each collaborator brings to the table. In some ways, conceptualizing scientific thinking as fundamentally
In the increasingly fierce competition for leisure time and educational spending, museums are seriously challenged by edutainment, the Internet, CD-ROMs, and 500-channel satellite TV. For example, if a child is interested in dinosaurs, 20 years ago a parent would have been likely to take her to the museum to see some fossils. Today, many parents would probably begin by taking her to the computer to search the World Wide Web, where a quick search reveals thousands of dinosaur web pages. If the family did not find a site among these thousands that satisfied the child's curiosity - or if they
Years before encountering their first formal science lessons in elementary school, children may already be practicing scientific thinking on a weekly, if not daily, basis. In one recent survey, parents reported that their kindergartners engaged, on average, in more than 300 informal science education activities per year - watching science television shows, reading science-oriented books, and visiting museums and zoos (Korpan, Bisanz, Bisanz, Boehme, & Lynch, 1997). This strikes us as a lot, but it is likely to pale in comparison to what young children may experience five years from now
The notion that science is unified in one way or another dates back at least to Aristotle, though unity claims since then have been diverse and va riously motivated. By way of introduction to the modern discussion of unity, disunity, and integration, in this first section we examine five historical attempts to unify knowledge: Aristotle’s metaphysical and hierarchical unity; the Enlightenment project of the French Encyclopedists; the systematic unity of Naturphilosophen Lorenz Oken; the methodological unity of the Vienna School’s Encyclopedia of Unified Science; and finally, the organizational
Despite originally being almost exclusively focused on the school context, the National Science Education Standards (NSES) emerged as an amazingly relevant document for the informal context as well. All four of the Standards—Teaching Standards, Content and Inquiry Standards, Professional Development Standards and Assessment Standards—can, should, and as the chapters in this volume clearly attest, have been adapted for use in and by informal education institutions. The importance of debate and discussion, collaborative and shared responsibility for learning and data-based inquiries, and an
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Institute for Learning InnovationJohn H Falk