Inverness Research has been the external evaluator for CAISE for the past eight years. The year 8 and year 9 report, along with a brief executive summary, highlights findings from the external evaluation of CAISE for this award period, along with comparison data gathered from the previous years’ evaluation efforts. Our evaluation findings show that CAISE is important infrastructure for the ISE field, addressing important needs in the field through resources that are well known, high-quality, widely used, well-designed, accessible, valued and trustworthy.
‘What’s in a Name’ is a collaboration between Harvard Museums of Science & Culture, the Encyclopedia of Life and the Biodiversity Heritage Library. Its goal was to addresses three significant issues: improving public understanding of life on Earth through resources on how scientists describe biodiversity; furthering public understanding of the scientific process, as exemplified by the study of biological species; and creating ways to enable access to the vast amount of data available from museums and libraries. The primary audiences were museum visitors and online users; the materials were
This study was a longitudinal summative evaluation of repeat visitors’ experiences in four Math Moves! exhibitions that were developed as part of a large collaborative exhibition development project called Math Core for Museums, and mounted at four museums around the country: Museum of Science (Boston); Museum of Life & Science (Durham, NC); Explora (Albuquerque); and Science Museum of Minnesota (St. Paul). The summative evaluation purposively selected four family groups at each institution and collected naturalistic data as the 16 groups engaged with the exhibits from 4-6 times over a two
Frontier Scientists is comprised of a website and portfolio of videos created for distribution web-wide and through television broadcast. The goal of this program is to excite the general public about ongoing science in Alaska and the Arctic. This is the summary evaluation of a three-year National Science Foundation grant received by Frontier Scientists. Frontier Scientists contracted PEER Associates to conduct the evaluation. Over the course of the three years, the evaluation was focused on both formative (intended to inform and improve programming) and summative (what has the program