In this paper, the authors synthesize three types of research-practice partnerships (RPPs) for informal learning. The article includes descriptions of example partnerships between local researchers and informal educators from the Hive NYC Learning Network, Community Practice Research Collaboration, and California Tinkering Afterschool Network. The synthesis paper concludes with a review of characteristics commonly found in partnerships in informal science education.
This paper describes Synergies, an on-going longitudinal study and design effort, being conducted in a diverse, under-resourced community in Portland, Oregon, with the goal of measurably improving STEM learning, interest and participation by early adolescents, both in school and out of school. Authors examine how the work of this particular research-practice partnership is attempting to accommodate the six principles outlined in this issue: (1) more accurately reflect learning as a lifelong process occurring across settings, situations and time frames; (2) consider what STEM content is worth
Scientific literacy is an important educational and societal goal. Measuring scientific literacy, however, has been problematic because there is no consensus regarding the meaning of scientific literacy. Most definitions focus on the content and processes of major science disciplines, ignoring social factors and citizens’ needs. The authors developed a definition of scientific literacy for the California 4-H Program from the citizen’s perspective, concentrating on real-world science-related situations. The definition includes four anchor points: science content; scientific reasoning skills
QuarkNet is a national program that partners high school science teachers and students with particle physicists working in experiments at the scientific frontier. These experiments are searching for answers to fundamental questions about the origin of mass, the dimensionality of spacetime and the nature of symmetries that govern physical processes. Among the experimental projects at the energy frontier with which QuarkNet is affiliated is the Large Hadron Collider, which is poised at the horizon of discovery. The LHC will come on line during the 5-years of this program. QuarkNet is led by a group of teachers, educators and physicists with many years of experience in professional development workshops and institutes, materials development and teacher research programs. The project consists of 52 centers at universities and research labs in 25 states and Puerto Rico. It is proposed that Quarknet be funded as a partnership among the ESIE program of EHR; the Office of Multidisciplinary Activities and the Elementary Particle Physics Program (Division of Physics), both within MPS; as well as the Division of High Energy Physics at DOE.
DATE:
-
TEAM MEMBERS:
Mitchell WayneRandal RuchtiDaniel Karmgard
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.
This study examined the validity of the Draw-A-Scientist Test (DAST), which is commonly used to capture students’ perceptions of scientists. Findings suggest that the DAST is not valid as a sole measurement. The originally identified stereotypical traits are no longer widely held by students.
Integrating technology with reformed-based science instruction that facilitates student inquiry can be challenging for teachers. Campbell, Longhurst, Wang, Hsu, and Coster propose a professional development model that helps teachers use the latest technologies to engage students in authentic science practices.
Why do some people move into science while others move away? Salehjee and Watts collected 12 personal biographies that provide rich descriptions of the different paths—direct or more wavering—that individuals follow. The implications of this study suggest that the informal science sector needs to “keep doors open” for individuals at transition points.
This special issue of Science Education & Civic Engagement contains articles on work occurring in a variety of informal STEM education settings, and is dedicated to the memory of former CAISE co-Principal Investigator and adviser Alan Friedman. It was provided in hard copy form to 2016 NSF AISL PI meeting participants.
Access to high quality evaluation results is essential for science communicators to identify negative patterns of audience response and improve outcomes. However, there are many good reasons why robust evaluation linked is not routinely conducted and linked to science communication practice. This essay begins by identifying some of the common challenges that explain this gap between evaluation evidence and practice. Automating evaluation processes through new technologies is then explicated as one solution to these challenges, capable of yielding accurate real-time results that can directly
King et al. [2015] argue that ‘emphasis on impact is obfuscating the valuable role of evaluation’ in informal science learning and public engagement (p. 1). The article touches on a number of important issues pertaining to the role of evaluation, informal learning, science communication and public engagement practice. In this critical response essay, I highlight the article’s tendency to construct a straw man version of ‘impact evaluation’ that is impossible to achieve, while exaggerating the value of simple forms of feedback-based evaluation exemplified in the article. I also identify a
AAAS describes public engagement with science as intentional, meaningful interactions that provide opportunities for mutual learning between scientists and members of the public. Through the Alan I. Leshner Leadership Institute for Public Engagement with Science, AAAS empowers scientists and engineers to practice high-impact public engagement by fostering leaders who advocate for critical dialogue between scientists and the public and lead change to enable their communities, institutions, and others to support public engagement. This bibliography, with additional work on understanding