This practitioner guide summarizes lessons learned from a three-year design-based research project focused on using elements of narrative (such as characters, settings, and problem frames) to evoke empathy and support girls' engagement in engineering design practices. The guide includes a summary of the driving concepts and key research findings from this work, as well as design principles for creating narrative-based engineering activities. Six activity case studies illustrate the design principles in action, and facilitation tips and observation tools offer practical guidance in developing
“Not a place for me” is often one of the main reasons people choose not to visit art museums.
Such perceptions of art museums call for institutions to create wider and more diverse entry points for visitors. At the Art Institute of Chicago—envisioned by our first president as a “museum of living thought”—we seek to continually expand art historical narratives by bringing together a plurality of perspectives and voices to processes of research, scientific and creative inquiry, and to increasingly varied modes of public engagement with art. To achieve these goals we developed a multifaceted
The Art of Science Learning Project (AoSL) is a National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded initiative, founded and directed by Harvey Seifter, that uses the arts to spark creativity in science education and the development of an innovative 21st century STEM workforce. This research was guided by three main hypotheses: (1) Arts-based innovation training, compared to traditional innovation training, improves an individuals creative thinking skills including critical thinking, divergent thinking, problem identification, convergent thinking and problem solving; (2) Arts-based innovation training
This tool was created by Museum of Science, Boston Design Challenges educators and the Research and Evaluation team, intended to record observations of children’s engagement in the engineering design process during participation in design-based activities in a science museum setting. It consists of a checklist of behaviors corresponding with steps of the engineering design process, previously developed for the program based on state and national standards, educator input, and past evaluator observations. The behavioral checklist matches to parts of the engineering design process, including
At the Conner Prairie Interactive History Park, visitors to the Create.Connect exhibition can use “make and test” activities developed in collaboration with the Science Museum of Minnesota. As one part of the evaluation of this exhibition, the team identified five indicators that suggest learning and that the activities should promote. The team did not expect the presence of these behaviors to guarantee that learning was occurring, but the activities were designed to promote learning through these behaviors and their absence would signal problems. These indicators are an example of one way a
This report details the findings from an exploratory research study conducted by the Research and Evaluation Department at the Museum of Science, Boston about this exhibition, which came to be known as Provocative Questions (PQ). This investigation was guided by the following questions: 1. Will visitors engage in socio-scientific argumentation in an un-facilitated exhibit space, and are they aware that they are doing so? 2. How do the un-facilitated exhibits impact visitors’ socio-scientific argumentation skills? For the exploratory research study, visitors were cued to use the exhibits and