I think chapter 3 was a good expansion on what we learned in chapter 2. It was very insightful to see how strands are incorporated into real life science learning activities.
The chapter starts off with three main strategies used to support learning. I could personally relate to having experienced many of these methods myself. The first, juxtaposing a learners understanding with actual science facts about the idea, is an interesting one because it creates a bridge between informal knowledge and formal knowledge. The second strategy, providing multiple ways to engage and learn with science, helps create a comprehensive approach, allowing people who learn differently and of different age groups and interests to benefit. The third strategy, interactivity, is in my opinion one of the most important because it directly involves the learner in the learning process and helps them become part of the experience. The chapter goes on to compare the last strategy to Strand 2, Understanding Scientific Content and Knowledge. A museum exhibit contained a bicycle that, when pedaled, displayed a corresponding moving skeleton in the mirror next to them. After the experience, 97% of children could draw a skeleton correctly versus only 3% of children who did not attend the exhibit. The difference is astounding in these two examples and while it is possible that there were confounding variables, many people will agree that being part of interactive experienced does help them learn and reflect on material better.
The chapter goes on to stress that too much interactivity shows no additional benefit, showing how important it is to keep expanding and testing on knew teaching methods. The chapter continues on discussing interactive exhibits by talking about the Cell Lab at the Science Museum of Minnesota. Participants in this lab use wet-lab biology techniques to perform simple science experiments while they are dressed as scientists. This activity touches upon many strands, including the strand of helping the citizen-scientist identify as a scientist, albeit at an early stage. This experiment exemplified several important characteristics: engagement, accessibility, and integration of past and new knowledge.
Next, we learn about Active Prolonged Engagement (APE) exhibits. These experiments tend to be more open ended, for example, the experiment The Mind. Exhibitors were given a variety of exhibits to attend (Strand 1). These exhibits were more ‘personal’ and unusual, causing them to be more fun for people, but at the same time they explored diverse bodies of knowledge (Strand 2). One thing the museum learned form these was that many of these experiments became a social process, fostering social learning.
Next we learn about long-term formal activities. Teens from the St. Louis Science Center worked to plant flowers in a homeless shelter but were faced with environmental obstacles. They brainstormed and improvised a shoeholder to use for planting. They worked in this program for two years, learning how to conduct scientific investigations and skills needed to work with children. A side effect was that their school grades improved. Because the program was so long, the instructors could tailor methods and approaches to face the unique areas of difficulty the students faced, and the students gradually developed an identity. When asked to demonstrate their knowledge, the instructors found that the students had a deep knowledge of the subject. Another example of specific teacher influences was that the students kept fish which died and they wanted to inquire about why they died. The instructors directed them to search for information by themselves and as a result, they gained researching skills. All this was part of Strand 5, learning the tools and vocabulary of science.
Finally, we learn about non-interactive learning via television. The children in the show underwent a methodical procedure to solve the problem of finding out the size a hot air balloon needs to be to stay afloat. When children were tested on what they learned from the show, the results showed an overall understanding of the problem and process used. The show appealed to the children by going at a slow pace, choosing an interesting topic, keeping things clear and as simple as possible, and summarizing everything. This all shows that design is just as important in deciding whether a informal learning method will be effective as whether or not the experience is interactive.
