As part of an NSF-funded project, Guidelines for Designing Challenging and Rewarding Interactive Science Exhibits (DRL-1612577), the Museum of Science, Boston, CAST, EdTogether, and the University of Rochester held a four-part webinar series on “productive struggle,” a mixed emotional experience during which learners persist through negative feelings like confusion and frustration to achieve a satisfying resolution. In this webinar series, members of the team talk through their thinking and methods in designing productive struggle exhibits and also highlight how designing for emotions can
How can we begin to chart a course toward a future for science museums in which we maintain our status as sources of trusted information, while also fulfilling our potential as sites of genuine participation and social interaction? In 2019, with funding from the National Science Foundation, the New York Hall of Science hosted a three day conference to discuss new and equitable approaches to exhibit design. With leading exhibit designers, educators, researchers, and community engagement specialists, we began to rethink the exhibit design process, toward a goal of helping our museums become more
The Practitioners and Researchers Investigating Sensorimotor Movement (PRISM) Toolkit provides a suite of observation tools for identifying and categorizing gestures, movement, and speech for interactive museum exhibits (espeically those that involve full-body interactions). The tools can be used live in some settings when appropriate, but also can be used on video recordings of exhibit interactions.
This is the summative evaluation report from the Move2Learn Project, a collaboration between researchers and museum practitioners in the US and UK to study embodied learning in the context of early childhood informal learning. This summative report covers the effectiveness of the collaboration and documents best practices for large interdisicplinary teams.
Pull up a chair to learn about Middle Ground, a facilitated exhibition project that stands at the intersection of social science, social justice, place-making and research on informal learning. We’ll describe the exhibition’s content of bias and stereotyping, facilitation by formerly incarcerated community members, and research results on the impact of facilitation. Presentation made by Hsin-Yi Chien, Robert Dixon, Josh Gutwill and Louie Hammonds, Sr.
Nature-based playgrounds—known as playscapes—offer numerous opportunities for young children to learn about nature. In the current study, we focus on teacher talk on playscapes, namely to capture the spontaneous utterances teachers offer when engaging with young children during playscape visits. Two different playscapes were contrasted, both of which featured loose parts, native plants, and running water. The difference in playscape was whether it featured ecosystems: While the rural playscape had a natural forest and a wetland, the urban playscape had a man-made stream and a garden. Ten
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Heidi KloosCatherine MaltbieRhonda BrownVictoria Carr
In 2006, the U.S. Botanic Garden (USBG) decided to conduct an institution-wide study of their visitors—why they come to the Botanic Garden, how they utilize the space, their level of satisfaction with the experience, and overall effectiveness of the USBG’s exhibitions and interpretation—in order to provide input to a strategic planning process that will align its living collections with its educational mission. To date, the only existing data characterizing USBG visitors was gathered in the early 1990s. Since then, the USBG has undergone a major transformation, including complete renovation of
The nature of the learning that occurs with real versus replicated objects and environments is an important topic for museums and science centers. Our comparative, exploratory study addressed this area through an investigation of family visits to two different settings: an operating permafrost research tunnel, and a replica of this permafrost tunnel at a science center. We conducted and analyzed family interviews, grounding our work in the Contextual Model of Learning and ideas about sensory components of learning. We found significant differences between the real and replicated environments
There is a vein of democratic idealism in the work of science museums. It is less about political democracy than epistemological democracy. As a one-time museum educator and a researcher who studies science museums, I have always thought of it in terms of an unspoken two-part motto: “see for yourself–know for yourself.” Although this strain of idealism has remained constant throughout the history of science museums, it has been interpreted differently in different eras, responding (in part) to the social upheavals of the day. In the late 1960s, for example, a new generation of self-described
Science learning occurs throughout people's lives, inside and outside of school, in formal, informal, and nonformal settings. While museums have long played a role in science education, learning in this and other informal settings has not been studied nor understood as deeply as in formal settings (i.e., schools and classrooms). This position paper, written by learning researchers in a science museum engaged in equity and access work, notes that while the researchers consider the ethics of their work regularly and deeply, little formal guidance exists for the ethical challenges they routinely
The AZA Social Science Research Agenda 2020 is intended to be a compass to guide social science social science research by and about zoos and aquariums in the AZA community. It reflects the priorities,trends, and emerging issues that social scientists and practitioners in the AZA community have identified as the most relevant to address to help them meet their missions. While the primary audience for the agenda is the AZA community, its applicability extends beyond the AZA membership to other zoos and aquariums. The key research questions and accompanying sub-questions also hold relevance for
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Joy KubarekJackie OgdenShelly GrowAmy Rutherford
In this comment, we focus on the ways power impacts science communication collaborations. Following Fischhoff's suggestion of focusing on internal consultation within science communication activities, we examine the ways such consultation is complicated by existing power structures, which tend to prioritize scientific knowledge over other knowledge forms. This prioritization works in concert with funding structures and with existing cultural and social hierarchies to shape science communication in troubling ways. We discuss several strategies to address problematic power structures. These