This evaluation report provides a brief review of the National Science Foundation (NSF) planning grant, Creating an Early Childhood STEM Ecosystem, as of August 2019. The purpose of the evaluation was to provide an external, independent overview of the work completed and some of the lessons learned to date.
This report presents summative evaluation results for a National Science Foundation funded project entitled Grounding Institutional Partnerships in Structures for Broader Impacts Design (BID). The project represents a collaboration between five institutions: Institute for Learning Innovation, The STEM Research Center at Oregon State University, Scicenter, University of Washington-Bothell, and University of Wisconsin-Madison. BID aimed at creating an inter-institutional structure and toolkit to assist higher education institutions (HEIs) and informal science education organizations (ISEs) in
This study researched whether and how affiliation with the Nanoscale Informal Science Education Network (NISE Net) led to change in informal science education organizations’ (ISEs) practices. The NISE Net provided an opportunity to look at how participation in a large but loosely-structured network of museums, science centers, educators, and scientists can influence museums to experience organizational change and adopt new practices.
By conducting qualitative case studies of a few selected partners, this research aimed to understand the conditions that facilitate or impede the influence of
This document is the final summative evaluation report written by EDC, the external evaluator of the STEM Guides project. The report concludes that the project was highly ambitious, with many dynamic and evolving pieces. It was deemed successful as a model of brokering connections between students aged 10-18 and STEM resources and opportunities in rural Maine communities. The STEM Guides program contributed to the increase in STEM awareness within each community, as well as connecting youth with interesting and relevant STEM experiences.
The Collaboration for Ongoing Visitor Experience Studies (COVES) aims to help science centers gather and share data to better understand visitors’ experiences. For the summative evaluation of COVES, the Museum of Science’s Research and Evaluation Department studied the program’s impacts on participating museums and museum professionals. Specifically, this evaluation was designed to:
Examine participants’ overall satisfaction with the collaboration and their likelihood to recommend it to others;
Understand the impact that COVES is having on Participating Institutions;
Assess whether
Informal Science Education (ISE) and Science Communication (SciComm) are two overlapping but distinct fields that support engagement in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) in a variety of settings. Though fluid boundaries and fuzzy definitions make a clear distinction between ISE and SciComm difficult, the two fields nevertheless exhibit strong differences in core values and goals, based in part on different histories, commitments, and trajectories.
This paper summarizes two studies conducted by the Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE):
A survey
As part of a grant from the National Science Foundation, the National Federation of the Blind (NFB) is conducting regional STEM workshops in partnership with local science museums, entitled NFB STEM2U, for blind youth [youth], grades 3 – 6 and 9-12 [apprentices]. During the fifth regional workshop in San Francisco, CA, the NFB operated two different programs simultaneously: one program for youth and a second program for their parents/caregivers. A third program, for the Exploratorium staff, was conducted earlier to prepare the museum staff to assist with the youth program. A separate report
As part of a grant from the National Science Foundation, the National Federation of the Blind (NFB) is conducting regional STEM workshops in partnership with local science museums, entitled NFB STEM2U, for blind youth [youth], grades 3 – 6 and 9-12 [mentors]. During the fourth regional workshop in Phoenix, AZ, the NFB operated three different programs simultaneously: one program for youth, a second program for their parents/caregivers, and a third program for teachers of the visually impaired. A fourth program, for Arizona Science Center staff, was conducted earlier to prepare the museum staff
InformalScience.org is an online collection of resources designed to serve a broad community of professionals whose work relates to informal education in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). Funded by the National Science Foundation and managed by the Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE), InformalScience hosts a variety of usercontributed resources, including a wiki of evidence-based information on the impacts of informal STEM and a database of over 7,000 reports, articles, project descriptions, and other items uploaded by CAISE and website members.
The
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
This coding framework was developed to categorize the evaluation reports on informalscience.org. Coding categories and related codes were created to align with key features of evaluation reports and the potential coding needs of the five BISE (Building Informal Science Education) synthesis authors.
This monograph has been created by the TEAMS (Traveling Exhibits At Museums of Science) Collaborative, a group of seven small U.S. science centers, to share experiences, observations, and lessons learned with the broader science museum field. Our intention is to help others who might be interested in forming a collaborative to work though some key issues, most of which have to do with the relationships between collaborative members, rather than more technical matters. We hope that this will provide a vision for others as to how collaboration among science centers can work. The monograph looks
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Charles TrautmannMark St. JohnDavid Goudy