The Role of Emotion in Informal Science Learning: Testing an Exploratory Model

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 45-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy L. Staus ◽  
John H. Falk
2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (03) ◽  
pp. Y05 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Jensen

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 problematic tendency, evident in the article, to view the role of ‘impact evaluation’ in advocacy terms rather than as a means of improving practice. I go through the evaluation example presented in the article to highlight alternative, impact-oriented evaluation strategies, which would have addressed the targeted outcomes more appropriately than the methods used by King et al. [2015]. I conclude that impact evaluation can be much more widely deployed to deliver essential practical insights for informal learning and public engagement practitioners.


2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (02) ◽  
pp. A01 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helena Thuneberg ◽  
Hannu Salmi

This meta-article aims to explore the role of uncertainty in knowing in informal science learning contexts. Subjects (N=2591) were sixth-graders from four countries. In addition to the correct and incorrect questionnaire alternatives, there was a "don't know" option to choose if uncertain of the answer. The unique path-analysis finding showed that the role of motivation was uniformly positive on correct and negative on uncertainty of answers. In all contexts the number of correct answers increased, incorrect and uncertain answers decreased. Interestingly, although there was no more difference in knowledge pro boys after the intervention, the girls were still more uncertain.


Author(s):  
Nancy L. Staus ◽  
John H. Falk ◽  
Aaron Price ◽  
Robert H. Tai ◽  
Lynn D. Dierking

AbstractDespite the fact that most science learning takes place outside of school, little is known about how engagement in informal science learning (ISL) experiences affects learners’ knowledge, skill development, interest, or identities over long periods of time. Although substantial ISL research has documented short-term outcomes such as the learning that takes place during a science center visit, research suggests that the genuine benefits of informal experiences are long-term transformations in learners as they pursue a “cascade” of experiences subsequent to the initial educational event. However, a number of major methodological challenges have limited longitudinal research projects investigating the long-term effects of ISL experiences. In this paper we identify and address four key issues surrounding the critical but challenging area of how to study and measure the long-term effects or impacts of ISL experiences: attribution, attrition, data collection, and analytic approaches. Our objective is to provide guidance to ISL researchers wishing to engage in long-term investigations of learner outcomes and to begin a dialogue about how best to address the numerous challenges involved in this work.


2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 433-447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric E. Goff ◽  
Kelly Lynn Mulvey ◽  
Matthew J. Irvin ◽  
Adam Hartstone-Rose

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document