Pub Date : 2022-04-01DOI: 10.1080/10645578.2022.2056397
Rebecca M. Teasdale
Abstract Evaluative criteria define a “successful” intervention and direct what evaluation questions to ask, data to collect, and conclusions to draw. This study analyzes the criteria that underpin a sample of summative evaluation reports from InformalScience.org to understand how success was defined and investigated. Summative evaluation is often framed as an examination of effectiveness in achieving desired outcomes, and every report in the sample did investigate this criteria domain. Further, nearly all studies addressed multiple outcome categories, reflecting a mix of cognitive, affective, and behavioral outcomes. In addition, rather than focusing exclusively on the intervention’s effectiveness, most reports addressed criteria from other domains. Particular attention was directed to intervention design and implementation and visitor experience, and some reports examined equity and relevance. Findings reveal complex, multidimensional definitions of success associated with informal STEM education and raise implications for evaluation capacity building related to design, methods, and reporting.
{"title":"How Do You Define Success? Evaluative Criteria for Informal STEM Education","authors":"Rebecca M. Teasdale","doi":"10.1080/10645578.2022.2056397","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2022.2056397","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Evaluative criteria define a “successful” intervention and direct what evaluation questions to ask, data to collect, and conclusions to draw. This study analyzes the criteria that underpin a sample of summative evaluation reports from InformalScience.org to understand how success was defined and investigated. Summative evaluation is often framed as an examination of effectiveness in achieving desired outcomes, and every report in the sample did investigate this criteria domain. Further, nearly all studies addressed multiple outcome categories, reflecting a mix of cognitive, affective, and behavioral outcomes. In addition, rather than focusing exclusively on the intervention’s effectiveness, most reports addressed criteria from other domains. Particular attention was directed to intervention design and implementation and visitor experience, and some reports examined equity and relevance. Findings reveal complex, multidimensional definitions of success associated with informal STEM education and raise implications for evaluation capacity building related to design, methods, and reporting.","PeriodicalId":45516,"journal":{"name":"Visitor Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"163 - 184"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43543556","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-30DOI: 10.1080/10645578.2022.2051387
Eric Knackmuhs
Abstract This study sought to determine the long-term memories from a visit to Eastern State Penitentiary in Philadelphia, PA. Unstructured phone interviews were conducted with participants two years after their visit. Results suggest that participants could recall both episodic and semantic memories. They recalled a visceral, emotional, and memorable experience. Furthermore, they learned about, reflected upon, and shared knowledge they gained of contemporary and controversial criminal justice issues. The implication of these results is that other prison museums can likely engage visitors in meaningful discussion of contemporary issues.
{"title":"Long-Term Memories from Visiting a Prison Museum","authors":"Eric Knackmuhs","doi":"10.1080/10645578.2022.2051387","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2022.2051387","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study sought to determine the long-term memories from a visit to Eastern State Penitentiary in Philadelphia, PA. Unstructured phone interviews were conducted with participants two years after their visit. Results suggest that participants could recall both episodic and semantic memories. They recalled a visceral, emotional, and memorable experience. Furthermore, they learned about, reflected upon, and shared knowledge they gained of contemporary and controversial criminal justice issues. The implication of these results is that other prison museums can likely engage visitors in meaningful discussion of contemporary issues.","PeriodicalId":45516,"journal":{"name":"Visitor Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"151 - 162"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45117170","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-04DOI: 10.1080/10645578.2022.2032927
J. Packer, R. Ballantyne, K. Hughes, J. Sneddon, J. Lee
Abstract The value priorities, pro-environmental beliefs and pro-environmental behaviors of zoo/aquarium staff, volunteers, visitors and non-visitors are examined to test whether they differ in ways that may impact zoos’ effectiveness in communicating environmental messages. Online surveys were completed by 607 staff (including 157 educators), 339 volunteers, 1444 frequent visitors, 2321 occasional visitors and 350 non-visitors across 12 sites in North America and Australia. Multivariate analysis of variance was used to compare different categories of staff; and to compare educator, volunteer, visitor and non-visitor groups, in relation to their values and pro-environmental beliefs and behaviors. Educators and volunteers were found to ascribe greater importance to self-transcendence values than visitors, and this was reflected in their pro-environmental beliefs and behaviors. These differences may hinder educators’ ability to design and present environmental messages that resonate with current and potential visitors whose values may differ significantly from their own. Suggestions for mitigating this are discussed.
{"title":"Differences between Zoo/Aquarium Staff and Visitors’ Values, Beliefs, and Pro-Environmental Behaviors: Consequences for Environmental Communication","authors":"J. Packer, R. Ballantyne, K. Hughes, J. Sneddon, J. Lee","doi":"10.1080/10645578.2022.2032927","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2022.2032927","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The value priorities, pro-environmental beliefs and pro-environmental behaviors of zoo/aquarium staff, volunteers, visitors and non-visitors are examined to test whether they differ in ways that may impact zoos’ effectiveness in communicating environmental messages. Online surveys were completed by 607 staff (including 157 educators), 339 volunteers, 1444 frequent visitors, 2321 occasional visitors and 350 non-visitors across 12 sites in North America and Australia. Multivariate analysis of variance was used to compare different categories of staff; and to compare educator, volunteer, visitor and non-visitor groups, in relation to their values and pro-environmental beliefs and behaviors. Educators and volunteers were found to ascribe greater importance to self-transcendence values than visitors, and this was reflected in their pro-environmental beliefs and behaviors. These differences may hinder educators’ ability to design and present environmental messages that resonate with current and potential visitors whose values may differ significantly from their own. Suggestions for mitigating this are discussed.","PeriodicalId":45516,"journal":{"name":"Visitor Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"85 - 103"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47728315","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-10DOI: 10.1080/10645578.2021.2018251
Luise Reitstätter, Karolin Galter, Flora Bakondi
Abstract “Do they read? Oh, yes, they do,” was the conclusion of a paper identifying the proof of label use in visitors’ in-gallery conversations versus the difficulties of observing them reading. This paper methodologically refines this research question by asking how exactly exhibit labels are used. Answers are derived from an empirical study that analyzed viewing behavior both before and after the reinstallation of a museum’s collection through mobile eye tracking (MET), subjective mapping, and questionnaires. As the introduction of interpretive labels was one of the major changes implemented, the paper demonstrates differences in visitors’ responses to the artworks with or without contextual information. Analytical emphasis rests on the exploration of patterns in the process of decision making (differentiating between visitors’ reading affinities); visual engagement (analyzing the combined activities of looking and reading); and memory (echoing label texts in visitors’ artwork reflections). Our findings show that all visitors read, albeit to very different extents, the majority being medium-affinity readers; that the basic viewing pattern “art-label-art” becomes more complex with more text and more visitors on-site; and that art interpretations deepen and differ through additional information. The power of labels to guide eyes and thoughts suggests their intentional use in museum and curatorial practice.
{"title":"Looking to Read: How Visitors Use Exhibit Labels in the Art Museum","authors":"Luise Reitstätter, Karolin Galter, Flora Bakondi","doi":"10.1080/10645578.2021.2018251","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2021.2018251","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract “Do they read? Oh, yes, they do,” was the conclusion of a paper identifying the proof of label use in visitors’ in-gallery conversations versus the difficulties of observing them reading. This paper methodologically refines this research question by asking how exactly exhibit labels are used. Answers are derived from an empirical study that analyzed viewing behavior both before and after the reinstallation of a museum’s collection through mobile eye tracking (MET), subjective mapping, and questionnaires. As the introduction of interpretive labels was one of the major changes implemented, the paper demonstrates differences in visitors’ responses to the artworks with or without contextual information. Analytical emphasis rests on the exploration of patterns in the process of decision making (differentiating between visitors’ reading affinities); visual engagement (analyzing the combined activities of looking and reading); and memory (echoing label texts in visitors’ artwork reflections). Our findings show that all visitors read, albeit to very different extents, the majority being medium-affinity readers; that the basic viewing pattern “art-label-art” becomes more complex with more text and more visitors on-site; and that art interpretations deepen and differ through additional information. The power of labels to guide eyes and thoughts suggests their intentional use in museum and curatorial practice.","PeriodicalId":45516,"journal":{"name":"Visitor Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"127 - 150"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47669721","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-04DOI: 10.1080/10645578.2021.2015948
David M. Sobel, Laura W. Stricker
Abstract This project examines how the order of messaging during parent–child interactions at a museum exhibit affects children’s engagement with the exhibit. Parents and 4-7-year-olds (N = 64) played at a circuit block exhibit. They were first given blocks with descriptive (e.g., “This is a battery.”) or discovery-prompting (e.g., “There is no wrong way to play.”) messages, and after 90 seconds, given more blocks with the other message type. Children who received discovery-prompting messages second – after being allowed to explore the affordances of the circuit blocks with the descriptive messages – played at the exhibit longer, and participated in more circuit-building challenges on their own. Parents were also sensitive to the order of the messaging; it related to the ways in which they interacted with their children at the exhibit. We conclude by considering how the timing of messages families receive at an exhibit relates to the way they engage with the exhibit. Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2021.2015948 .
{"title":"Messaging Matters: Order of Experience with Messaging at a STEM-Based Museum Exhibit Influences Children’s Engagement with Challenging Tasks","authors":"David M. Sobel, Laura W. Stricker","doi":"10.1080/10645578.2021.2015948","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2021.2015948","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This project examines how the order of messaging during parent–child interactions at a museum exhibit affects children’s engagement with the exhibit. Parents and 4-7-year-olds (N = 64) played at a circuit block exhibit. They were first given blocks with descriptive (e.g., “This is a battery.”) or discovery-prompting (e.g., “There is no wrong way to play.”) messages, and after 90 seconds, given more blocks with the other message type. Children who received discovery-prompting messages second – after being allowed to explore the affordances of the circuit blocks with the descriptive messages – played at the exhibit longer, and participated in more circuit-building challenges on their own. Parents were also sensitive to the order of the messaging; it related to the ways in which they interacted with their children at the exhibit. We conclude by considering how the timing of messages families receive at an exhibit relates to the way they engage with the exhibit. Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2021.2015948 .","PeriodicalId":45516,"journal":{"name":"Visitor Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"104 - 125"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47875860","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-17DOI: 10.1080/10645578.2021.1993727
Priscila Campos dos Santos Coelho, Jessica Norberto Rocha, L. Massarani
Abstract This qualitative study analyses conversations among teens during a visit to AquaRio, the Marine Aquarium of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, aiming to elucidate how they engage, participate and what interests them the most when having this experience. Twenty teenagers, divided into groups, were invited to visit the aquarium in an out-of-school context and answer pre- and post-visit questionnaires to characterize their sociocultural profiles, interest in Science and Technology issues, opinions on their experiences during the visit. Their visits were recorded with a subjective camera, and the videos were later coded using a research protocol focused on conversation content. We found that the most frequent conversations revolved around: the exhibit itself (function, design, and experience); their visit and observation of the animals and tanks with links drawn to the teens’ universe; and associations with prior or personal knowledge. They commented on the experience while observing exhibit elements, lighting, and signage texts. Movies, cartoons, related fictional characters, and elements of daily life came up repeatedly during their conversations. According to our findings, there is evidence that the adolescents enjoyed the visit and were highly engaged, as expressed in their delight over the animals and the exhibit environment. Finally, we argue that a great challenge for aquariums staff is to design circulation paths, exhibits, and activities that meet adolescents’ interests and thus provide conservation education experiences that are perceived as enjoyable and engaging.
{"title":"What Do Adolescents Talk about When They Visit an Aquarium? A Case Study at the Marine Aquarium of Rio De Janeiro","authors":"Priscila Campos dos Santos Coelho, Jessica Norberto Rocha, L. Massarani","doi":"10.1080/10645578.2021.1993727","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2021.1993727","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This qualitative study analyses conversations among teens during a visit to AquaRio, the Marine Aquarium of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, aiming to elucidate how they engage, participate and what interests them the most when having this experience. Twenty teenagers, divided into groups, were invited to visit the aquarium in an out-of-school context and answer pre- and post-visit questionnaires to characterize their sociocultural profiles, interest in Science and Technology issues, opinions on their experiences during the visit. Their visits were recorded with a subjective camera, and the videos were later coded using a research protocol focused on conversation content. We found that the most frequent conversations revolved around: the exhibit itself (function, design, and experience); their visit and observation of the animals and tanks with links drawn to the teens’ universe; and associations with prior or personal knowledge. They commented on the experience while observing exhibit elements, lighting, and signage texts. Movies, cartoons, related fictional characters, and elements of daily life came up repeatedly during their conversations. According to our findings, there is evidence that the adolescents enjoyed the visit and were highly engaged, as expressed in their delight over the animals and the exhibit environment. Finally, we argue that a great challenge for aquariums staff is to design circulation paths, exhibits, and activities that meet adolescents’ interests and thus provide conservation education experiences that are perceived as enjoyable and engaging.","PeriodicalId":45516,"journal":{"name":"Visitor Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"60 - 84"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47430827","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-07DOI: 10.1080/10645578.2021.1977084
M. Hwalek, Cassandra Solomon-Filer, Deborah L Wasserman
Abstract Many visitor studies researchers use Retrospective Pretest (RPT) methods to document outcomes. Research literature compares the validity of RPT with traditional pretest-posttests. This article reviews visitor study and informal learning literature about how RPT has been used to evaluate programs in museums, aquariums, parks/recreation, zoos, and tourism. It furthers discussions about response shift bias, arguing that response shift can be either intentional or inadvertent. The type of response shift is important in determining when RPT should be used. We argue that RPT is the best choice when the program intends to shift participants’ understanding of constructs being measured, and when comparing intervention with non-intervention groups. The literature review found that RPT results usually focus on statistical significance testing. RPT data offer much more learning when the results are also examined from other perspectives. This article describes additional analyses of RPT data that can assess the applicability of programs to intended audiences.
{"title":"Retrospective Pretests: Recent Use in Visitor Studies Research and Ways to Make Them More Informative","authors":"M. Hwalek, Cassandra Solomon-Filer, Deborah L Wasserman","doi":"10.1080/10645578.2021.1977084","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2021.1977084","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Many visitor studies researchers use Retrospective Pretest (RPT) methods to document outcomes. Research literature compares the validity of RPT with traditional pretest-posttests. This article reviews visitor study and informal learning literature about how RPT has been used to evaluate programs in museums, aquariums, parks/recreation, zoos, and tourism. It furthers discussions about response shift bias, arguing that response shift can be either intentional or inadvertent. The type of response shift is important in determining when RPT should be used. We argue that RPT is the best choice when the program intends to shift participants’ understanding of constructs being measured, and when comparing intervention with non-intervention groups. The literature review found that RPT results usually focus on statistical significance testing. RPT data offer much more learning when the results are also examined from other perspectives. This article describes additional analyses of RPT data that can assess the applicability of programs to intended audiences.","PeriodicalId":45516,"journal":{"name":"Visitor Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"1 - 21"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43324482","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-17DOI: 10.1080/10645578.2021.1963129
S. Price, C. Jewitt, Theano Moussouri
Abstract This article presents a qualitative analysis of family interaction around digital interactive tabletop exhibits. Parents play a teaching role in museum visits, using strategies from encouragement, to giving directions about using exhibits, to offering explanations that connect an exhibit to children’s previous experiences. Touchscreens and touch tables offer different ways of engaging families in museums, raising questions around how these interactive tabletops support family collaboration, specifically their role in fostering scaffolding forms of activity. A multimodal analysis using video data of family interactions around three tabletop exhibits examines the role of digital exhibit design in fostering family collaboration and adult scaffolding behavior. Findings show that particular design elements in exhibit set up, expert video/audio and touch interaction influenced family formation around the exhibit, adult scaffolding and family engagement with the exhibit activity. The article draws on these findings to inform the design of interactive tabletop exhibits for family collaboration.
{"title":"Supporting Family Scaffolding and Collaboration Through Digital Interactive Tabletop Exhibits","authors":"S. Price, C. Jewitt, Theano Moussouri","doi":"10.1080/10645578.2021.1963129","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2021.1963129","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article presents a qualitative analysis of family interaction around digital interactive tabletop exhibits. Parents play a teaching role in museum visits, using strategies from encouragement, to giving directions about using exhibits, to offering explanations that connect an exhibit to children’s previous experiences. Touchscreens and touch tables offer different ways of engaging families in museums, raising questions around how these interactive tabletops support family collaboration, specifically their role in fostering scaffolding forms of activity. A multimodal analysis using video data of family interactions around three tabletop exhibits examines the role of digital exhibit design in fostering family collaboration and adult scaffolding behavior. Findings show that particular design elements in exhibit set up, expert video/audio and touch interaction influenced family formation around the exhibit, adult scaffolding and family engagement with the exhibit activity. The article draws on these findings to inform the design of interactive tabletop exhibits for family collaboration.","PeriodicalId":45516,"journal":{"name":"Visitor Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"22 - 40"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47459630","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-13DOI: 10.1080/10645578.2021.1930467
L. McGuire, A. J. Hoffman, K. Mulvey, M. Winterbottom, F. Balkwill, K. Burns, M. Chatton, M. Drews, N. Eaves, G. Fields, A. Joy, F. Law, A. Rutland, A. Hartstone-Rose
Abstract The impact of educators in informal science learning sites (ISLS) remains understudied from the perspective of youth visitors. Less is known about whether engagement with educators differs based on the age and gender of both visitor and educator. Here, visitors (5–17 years old) to six ISLS in the United States and United Kingdom (n = 488, female n = 244) were surveyed following an interaction with either a youth (14–18 -years old) or adult educator (19+ years old). For participants who reported lower interest in the exhibit, more educator engagement was related to greater self-reported learning. Younger children and adolescents reported more engagement with an adult educator, whereas engagement in middle childhood did not differ based on educator age. Participants in middle childhood showed a trend toward answering more conceptual knowledge questions correctly following an interaction with a youth educator. Together, these findings emphasize the promise of tailoring educator experiences to visitor demographics.
{"title":"Impact of Youth and Adult Informal Science Educators on Youth Learning at Exhibits","authors":"L. McGuire, A. J. Hoffman, K. Mulvey, M. Winterbottom, F. Balkwill, K. Burns, M. Chatton, M. Drews, N. Eaves, G. Fields, A. Joy, F. Law, A. Rutland, A. Hartstone-Rose","doi":"10.1080/10645578.2021.1930467","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2021.1930467","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The impact of educators in informal science learning sites (ISLS) remains understudied from the perspective of youth visitors. Less is known about whether engagement with educators differs based on the age and gender of both visitor and educator. Here, visitors (5–17 years old) to six ISLS in the United States and United Kingdom (n = 488, female n = 244) were surveyed following an interaction with either a youth (14–18 -years old) or adult educator (19+ years old). For participants who reported lower interest in the exhibit, more educator engagement was related to greater self-reported learning. Younger children and adolescents reported more engagement with an adult educator, whereas engagement in middle childhood did not differ based on educator age. Participants in middle childhood showed a trend toward answering more conceptual knowledge questions correctly following an interaction with a youth educator. Together, these findings emphasize the promise of tailoring educator experiences to visitor demographics.","PeriodicalId":45516,"journal":{"name":"Visitor Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"41 - 59"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10645578.2021.1930467","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44624246","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/10645578.2021.1939984
Molly L. Kelton
Abstract Formal and informal educators often struggle with the question of whether and how school fieldtrips might productively connect school- and museum-based learning. I share findings from a video-based ethnographic study of 5th- through 7th-grade fieldtrips to a museum mathematics exhibition. Through a collection of case analyses of situated talk and interaction, I describe three distinct interactional practices by which teachers and students can relate learning mathematics in the classroom and on the museum floor. Findings help further elucidate the potential nature of situated interactions during school fieldtrips while pointing to the possibility that teachers and learners are making more connections between the classroom and the museum than might be made visible by attention to instructional design or written assessments alone. Moreover, teachers and students can forge these connections in ways that build on the kinds of open-ended material encounters, unanticipated curiosities, and playful engagements that are hallmarks of intended visitor experiences at free-choice science centers.
{"title":"Mathematics Learning Pathways on a School Fieldtrip: Interactional Practices Linking School and Museum Activity","authors":"Molly L. Kelton","doi":"10.1080/10645578.2021.1939984","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2021.1939984","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Formal and informal educators often struggle with the question of whether and how school fieldtrips might productively connect school- and museum-based learning. I share findings from a video-based ethnographic study of 5th- through 7th-grade fieldtrips to a museum mathematics exhibition. Through a collection of case analyses of situated talk and interaction, I describe three distinct interactional practices by which teachers and students can relate learning mathematics in the classroom and on the museum floor. Findings help further elucidate the potential nature of situated interactions during school fieldtrips while pointing to the possibility that teachers and learners are making more connections between the classroom and the museum than might be made visible by attention to instructional design or written assessments alone. Moreover, teachers and students can forge these connections in ways that build on the kinds of open-ended material encounters, unanticipated curiosities, and playful engagements that are hallmarks of intended visitor experiences at free-choice science centers.","PeriodicalId":45516,"journal":{"name":"Visitor Studies","volume":"24 1","pages":"220 - 242"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10645578.2021.1939984","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41435307","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：