To continue the discussion around Informal Science Learning, please join authors from April’s special issue and other experts in the field at the 2010 American Association of Museums Conference for the session:

What’s the Evidence Base? Applying the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Report on Informal Science Learning to the Broader Museum Field

Sunday, May 23, 1:15 PM-2:30 PM

Chaired by:
Andrew Shouse, Associate Director, Institute of Science, University of Washington College of Education, Seattle, WA

Presenters:
Marsha Semmel, Deputy Director for Museums and Director for Strategic Partnerships, Institute of Museum & Library Services, Washington, DC
Cecilia Garibay, Principal, Garibay Group, Chicago, IL
Daniel Spock, Director, MN History Center Museum, The Minnesota Historical Society, Saint Paul, MN

Description:
Participants will explore findings of the NAS report on learning science in informal education, including the evidence base for non-school learning, insight on diversifying participation in informal environments and appropriate learning outcomes for informal learning experiences.

by Jessica J. Luke, Karen Knutson

Abstract

The Learning Science in Informal Environments report holds great potential for creating change among those who work in the field of science education. But to what extent can it inform other sectors of the informal education world? This article explores how the LSIE report might influence research and practice in art museums. By comparing the report to a recent study in art education, the authors point out areas of overlap and divergence relative to content and skills, identity, and communities of practice. We suggest several implications for how art museums and science museums might learn from one another. A call to action is made for further research and discussion about common learning goals and outcomes for the art museum experience.

Get the full article.

by Nancy Ross Dribin, Angelique Rickhoff

Abstract

Digital environments are one of the newest methods of resource- and program-creation to be added to the museum toolkit, and are increasingly employed by museums across all fields to support learning. Unfortunately, this category is also one of the least-fleshed-out components in the Learning Science in Informal Environments (LSIE) chapter devoted to media. The report does not take into account the increasingly interwoven nature of media resources, particularly those found in digital environments. It is imperative that museums both become familiar with the breadth of research that is available related to digital environments and that they continue to specifically build an understanding of how this works in a museum setting.

Get the full article.

by Vera Michalchik and Lawrence Gallagher

Abstract

Researchers and practitioners concerned with STEM learning (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) occurring outside the institutional boundaries of schools recognize the need for assessment approaches that accommodate the characteristics of informal learning. These approaches, to be viable, must align with the activities, goals, roles, and outcomes we find in informal settings. A plausible starting point is in making use of naturalistic assessments—people’s own on-going, developing awareness of who can do what under which circumstances. People regularly and informally assess one another to shape and support learning activities, goals, and outcomes. This article seeks to make a case for developing a new research program for assessing learning outcomes by capitalizing on people’s everyday attunements, which are already in place, and by getting more value out of the cultural apparatus that exists for recognizing one another’s capabilities.

Get the full article.

• Vera Michalchik (vera.michalchik@sri.com) is a Senior Social Scientist at SRI International in Menlo Park, California.
• Lawrence Gallagher (lawrence.gallagher@sri.com) is a Research Social Scientist at SRI International in Menlo Park, California.

by James Kisiel, David Anderson

Abstract

The National Research Council report Learning Science in Informal Environments provides a much-needed synthesis of what research says about informal learning. LSIE makes key observations about science learning and emphasizes the challenges faced in trying to understand and document those complex processes. Yet assumptions about how—and under what conditions—people learn science are not necessarily universal constructs. Such assumptions are driven by the theoretical perspectives of the researchers, as well as the culture of the learners themselves. The limited scope of the volume prohibits it from fully addressing such cultural and historical contexts, and the subsequent implications for methodological approaches. Nevertheless, the report is an important starting point for informing educators, researchers, and policy-makers who work with or within informal science institutions.

Get the full article.

by Dennis Bartels, Robert Semper, Bronwyn Bevan

Abstract

Writing from a science museum perspective, the authors argue that the Learning Science in Informal Environments report arrives at a critical time, when growing policy interest in informal learning environments provides new opportunities for the museum field but also introduces potential threats to autonomy, diversity, and creativity. The authors explore critical questions raised in the report, including: 1) whether and how we represent our subject matter as cultural fields of practice, as opposed to fixed collections of facts and artifacts; 2) how we ensure, at a time of increasing interest and scrutiny from policymakers, that we continue to design for a variety of learning opportunities both across and within our institutions, thus sustaining rich, robust learning for more diverse and inclusive audiences; 3) how we develop better assessment questions, methodologies, and instrumentation that can more effectively address the contributions museums make to local learning ecologies. The authors conclude that, at this juncture, it is just as important for the education research community to learn from the practices of the museum field, as it is for the museum field to learn from the research.

Get the full article.

• Dennis Bartels (dbartels@exploratorium.edu) is executive director of the Exploratorium in San Francisco.
• Robert Semper (rsemper@exploratorium.edu) is executive associate director of the Exploratorium and director of programs.
• Bronwyn Bevan (bronwynb@exploratorium.edu) is director of the NSF-funded Center for Informal Learning and Schools, based at the Exploratorium.

by Marsha L. Semmel

Abstract

The Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) has funded hundreds of projects that promote lifelong learning in all disciplines and types of museums and libraries, including museum/library partnerships with schools, universities, and other formal learning organizations. Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits (LSIE) is a milestone in a continuing quest to understand and articulate the impact of informal learning experiences. Its recommendations identify significant issues for future research and practice, with implications beyond science learning. This article places the report in the context of previous and future IMLS work, including increased agency focus on—and resources for—research, evaluation, collaborative projects, and professional development.

Get the full article.

by Andrew Shouse, Bruce V. Lewenstein, Michael Feder, Philip Bell

Abstract

In this article, the editors of the recent National Research Council report Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits discuss the report’s implications for museum professionals. The report is a synthesis of some 2,000 studies and evaluations of learning in non-school settings such as museums. Here we focus on three specific topics discussed in the full report, which we see as particularly important for museum professionals. These are: a framework for developing and studying science learning experiences; cultural diversity as an integral resource for learning; and assessment of learning. Many museums include “learning” among their goals and many researchers concern themselves with how museums and other settings can be organized to support learning. Yet this wealth of research is rarely brought into focus and offered as guidance to the museum community.

Get the full article.

• Andrew Shouse (awshouse@uw.edu) is associate director of the Institute for Science and Mathematics Education and visiting assistant professor of Educational Psychology, University of Washington. 
• Bruce V. Lewenstein (b.lewenstein@cornell.edu) is professor of science communication, Cornell University.
• Michael Feder (mfeder@nas.edu) is a senior program officer with the Board on Science Education, National Research Council.
• Philip Bell (pbell@uw.edu) is director of the Institute for Science and Mathematics Education and associate professor of the Learning Sciences, University of Washington, 1100 NE 45th Street, Suite 200, Seattle, WA, 98105.

by David A. Ucko

Abstract

The National Science Foundation (NSF) funded the National Research Council report Learning Science in Informal Environments to synthesize the growing body of diverse research underlying informal science learning. Intended outcomes were to establish a base for future research, to provide evidence-based guidance for those developing and delivering informal learning experiences, to broaden the definition of “learning” beyond that typically used in formal education, to encourage knowledge sharing across the heterogeneous informal science education field, and to provide a measure of external validation for the value of learning in informal settings. NSF investment in this study is part of a larger ongoing effort by the Informal Science Education program to advance knowledge and practice and build capacity in the field.

Get the full article.

by PINO MONACO AND THEANO MOUSSOURI

Recently, the Smithsonian Institution addressed the challenge of coordinating the articulation of intended learning outcomes for educational programs. Pino Monaco, and Theano Moussouri, got together to discuss the Generic Learning Outcomes (GLOs), and a similar framework proposed by the National Science Foundation in the U.S., as concrete guidelines to provide tangible and assessable shapes to learning outcomes.

Issues discussed and still open for elaboration rotated around the concept of intentionality – why is the informal education community still discussing whether we should or should not have intended outcomes in mind when we facilitate a learning experience?

Furthermore, after presenting examples of how outcome-based evaluations could be integrated within our current practices, the authors recognized the need for further pondering, especially concerning the issue of “measuring learning outcomes.”

• Isn’t a measurement in contrast with a free-choice learning experience?
• How do we measure fun and enjoyment?
• Instead of measuring, could we gather and describe?

Feel free to join the conversation in the Forum by adding your comments below.