Educational value of different types of exhibits in an interactive science and technology center

Science Education

Volumn 91, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 967-987

  Afonso, Ana S ^a   Gilbert, John K ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINHO   (Portugal)

^b UNIVERSITY OF READING   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 35949000895     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20220     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Allen, S. (2002). Looking for learning in visitor talk: A methodological exploration. In G. Leinhardt, K. Crowley, & K. Knutson (Eds.), Learning conversations in museums (pp. 259-303). Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum.
2. Allen, S., & Gutwill, J. (2004). Designing with multiple interactive: Five common pitfalls. Curator, 47(2), 199-212.
3. Alt, M. B., & Shaw, K. M. (1984). Characteristics of ideal museum exhibits. British Journal of Psychology, 75, 25-36.
4. Afonso, A. S., & Gilbert, J. K. (2006). The use of memories in understanding interactive science and technology exhibits. International Journal of Science Education, 28(13), 1523-1544.
5. Boisvert, D. L., & Slez, B. J. (1995). The relationship between exhibit characteristics and learning-associated behaviors in a science museum discovery space. Science Education, 79(5), 503-518.
6. Borun, M. (2002). Object-based learning and family groups. In S. G. Paris (Ed.), Perspectives on object-centered learning in museums (pp. 245-259). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. Borun, M., & Dritsas, J. (1997). Developing family-friendly exhibits. Curator, 40, 178-196.
8. Burns, T. W., O' Connor, D. J., & Stocklmayer., S. M. (2003). Science communication: A contemporary definition. Public Understanding of Science, 12, 183-202.
9. Clement, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students' preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10), 1241-1257.
10. Creative Research Ltd. (1993). Launch pad visitor research (stage II findings). London: Author.
11. Dunbar, K. (2001). The analogical paradox. Why analogy is so easy in naturalistic settings, yet so difficult in psychological laboratory. In D. Gentner, J. K. Holyoak, & B. N. Kokinov (Eds.), The analogical mind perspectives from cognitive science (pp. 313-334). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Erickson, F. (1998). Qualitative research methods for science education. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 1155-1173). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
13. Falk, J., & Storksdieck, M. (2005). Using the contextual model of learning to understand visitor learning from a science center exhibition. Science Education, 89(5), 744-778.
14. Feher, E. (1990). Interactive museum exhibits as tools for learning: Exploration of light. International Journal of Science Education, 12, 35-39.
15. Feher, E., & Rice, K. (1988). Shadows and anti-images: Children's conceptions of light and vision, II. Science Education, 72(5), 637-649.
16. Gentner, D. (1989). The mechanisms of analogical learning. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 199-241). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
17. Gilbert, J. K. (1995). Learning in museums: Objects, models and text. Journal of Education in Museum, 16, 19-21.
18. Gilbert, J. K. (2001). Towards a unified model of education and entertainment in science and technology centres. In S. Stocklmayer, M. Gore, & C. Bryant (Eds.), Science communication in theory and practice (pp. 123-141). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
19. Gilbert, J. K., & Stocklmayer, S. (2001). The design of interactive exhibits to promote the making of meaning. Museum Management and Curatorship, 19(1), 41-50.
20. Gilbert, J. K., & Watt, D. M. (1983). Concepts, misconceptions, and alternative conceptions: Changing perspectives in science education. Studies in Science Education, 10, 61-98.
21. Gopher, D. (2003). Attention. In L. Nadel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of cognitive science (pp.220-226). London: Nature Publishing Group.
22. Gregory, J., & Miller, J. (1998). Science in public: Communication, culture, and credibility. Cambridge MA: Perseus.
23. Harré, R. (1972). The philosophy of science: An introduction survey. London: Oxford University Press.
24. Kokinov, B., & French, R. M. (2003). Computational models of analogy making. In L. Nadel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of cognitive science (pp. 133-118). London: Nature Publishing Group.
25. McClafferty, T. P. (1995). Did you hear the message? Visitors use and understanding of a sound exhibit at interactive science centres. Poster presented at the annual conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA.
26. McClafferty, T. P. (2000). Visitors' use and understanding of interactive exhibits and learning of scientific concepts. Unpublished PhD thesis, Science and Mathematics Education Centre, Curtin University of Technology.
27. Novick, L. (1988). Analogical transfer, problem similarity, and expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 14(3), 510-520.
28. Rennie, L. J., Feher, E., Dierking, L. D., & Falk, J. H. (2003). Towards an agenda for advancing research on science learning in out-of-school settings. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(2), 112-120.
29. Rix, C., & McSorley, J. (1999). An investigation into the role of school-based interactive science centres may play in the education of primary-aged children. International Journal of Science Education, 21(6), 577-593.
30. Ross, H. B. (1987). This is like that: The use of earlier problems and the separation of similarity effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 13(4), 629-639.
31. Sandifer, C. (2003). Technological novelty and open-endedness: Two characteristics of interactive exhibits that contribute to hold the visitor attention in science museum. Journal of Research in Science and Technology, 40(2), 121-137.
32. Shapere, D. (1982). The concept of observation in science and philosophy. Philosophy of Science, 49(4), 485-525.
33. Spiro, R., Feltovick, P. J., Coulson, R. L., & Anderson, D. K. (1989). Multiple analogies for complex concepts: Antidotes for analogy-induced misconception in advanced knowledge acquisition. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 498-531). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
34. Stocklmayer, S. (2001). Reaching the public-communicating the vision. In S. Stocklmayer, M. Gore, & C. Bryant (Eds.), Science Communication in theory and practice (pp. 143-148). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
35. Stocklmayer, S., & Gilbert, J. K. (2002a). New experiences and old knowledge: Towards a model for the personal awareness of science and technology. International Journal of Science Education, 24(8), 835-858.
36. Stocklmayer, S., & Gilbert, J. K. (2002b). Informal chemical education. In J. K. Gilbert, O. de Jong, R. Justi, D. F. Treagust, & J. H. van Driel (Eds.), Chemical education: Towards research-based practice (pp. 143-164). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.