The chapter highlights the benefits of interaction and communication during the science learning process. It describes how interaction helps learners spark their curiosity in the field (Strand 1) and also helps learners engage in scientific activities and learning practices (Strand 5). But I think that the strands are much more intertwined in the social aspect of science learning. Communication and mediation plays a crucial role in bolstering a learner’s understanding of science and prolonging their interest in the topic.

The conversations that take place in exhibits also prove very useful to designers of informal science learning spaces. For example in the Frogs exhibition, the researchers grouped the different dialogue into five categories: perceptual, conceptual, connecting, strategic, and affective. By analyzing these conversations, they were able to develop a sense of what engaged the participants and how they interacted with the exhibits. It underscored the role of explanation in enhancing the science learning experience, especially for youngsters who received mentoring from knowledgeable adults.

The parent and child relationship in informal science institutions such as museums was also very interesting. The parents always tried to make the experience as meaningful as possible by actively engaging in the learning. Based on the data that many groups collected, higher degrees of adult guidance in museums proved very valuable to younger children, but it is also crucial to not have parents overstep the boundary. The learning should revolve around the child, they should feel challenged by the roles they take on, and sometimes the parents become too involved which proves detrimental to the children.

Our experience in BioBlitz, like in other citizen-science projects, benefited greatly from the interaction with mentors who are experts in their field. Our guide, James, led us through the process of bird watching – teaching us valuable skills and facts, and also maintaining our interest in the activity. Without that relationship, we wouldn’t really know what to do and would have learned much less because we didn’t have someone guiding us through the experience.

This summer was the first time I have worked in an organometallic research lab and was thankfully paired with a mentor to guide me through learning the necessary techniques. He taught me the skills that I needed to be able to work on different experiments and showed me the tips he picked up on through his own experiences. I could have learned some of these lab techniques by reading many lab manuals extensively, but having him there to reinforce the concepts I read and visually show me what to do was very helpful.

The most important point of the chapter is to encourage adults, mentors, and parents to strive to provide support and guidance during their children’s informal science learning stages. This will maximize the benefit of the experience and provide more successful results.

Being able to learn from one another, and engaging with other people through conversation makes the process more meaningful and leads to greater understanding.

Daniel Bibawy

I really liked several of the points that this chapter brought up, the first of which was the was the idea that to really understand what you’re learning you need to reflect and discuss it with others so that you remember it better and understand it better. They did a study with several children while they were watching Sesame Street.They interrupted the show in the middle several times (which I’m sure the kids didn’t appreciate and, if anything, you would think it would break their focus and make them absorb less information from the show) and asked them questions about what they had just watched and had a short discussion with them. They had another group of children who also watched the show uninterrupted and they found that the first group absorbed the information much better. This tactic of discussing what you’re attempting to learn is extremely helpful and important to the learning process. Often times I realize that studying with friends and discussing the material we’re studying helps me absorb the information much better than if I just try to study on my own.

I also liked the methods by which you communicate information discussed in this chapter. The first is perceptual talk, which is simply just pointing out what you see in front of you. The next is conceptual talk, which is wondering about what you see in front of you and discussing this. For example if you’re observing animals, you wonder about what the purpose of what they’re doing at any given moment is. The next is connecting talk, which is connecting what you see in front of you with what goes on in your own life and trying to relate to the science in front of you. Strategic talk is discussing with those learning with you the best way to go about interacting with a specific exhibit. The last is affective talk, which is discussing how the exhibit made you feel and what you took out of it. I think these methods go further than specifically science learning and they affect all kinds of learning, especially conceptual and connective talk. When you begin to wonder about why things that you’re trying to learn are the way they are and can relate to them in your life, you will have a memorable and emotional attachment to them and will retain the information better.

Chapter four mentions different ypes of talking associated within a frog exhibit and the subcatergories of both types. The two that stood out to me the most were perpetual talk is the “process of identifying and sharing what is significant in a complex environment” (69) and the subcategories involved are called identification, naming, pointing out a feature, and quoting from a label. These subcategories reminded me somewhat of the six strands of learning because the categories go from less complex and scientific to increasingly so. Identification is simply pointing out what is being observed, naming is finding out what the object that is being observed is, while the last two involve actual scientific methods such as finding a unique characteristic of the object being observed and reading from the exhibition label to find out more. It was noted that this type of converstaion occurs in about 70 percent and is the most common.
The second type of conversation is conceptual talk and is actually viewed as more scientific and more desirable for scientists to see others achieving than perpetual talking. This category covers “Simple inferences…and complex inferences” (70). Even the simple inferences will provoke more meaningful conversation and will encourage discussion and eventually learning. Because asking questions and brainstorming is so important to the scientific community, it is stressed that this type of learning is what should be aimed for but is not as often achieved as science learners would like. This type of talking occurs in only 56 percent of museums. I think that in order to achieve more of this type of talking, museums should incorporate some interesting “book club” so to speak and encourage participants to brainstorm what they see in small groups.

Mohamed Adnan

10-06-2013

Professor Adams

Seminar 3

Reflection on Chapter 4

The chapter focuses on the importance of communication in learning and informal science. Children learn best when they have others around them to exchange ideas and tackle problems with. Communicating with others is interaction in itself and Chapter 3 explained the importance of interaction because it promotes extensive learning. This was shown in the frog exhibit, where the children would use prior and current knowledge to exchange ideas and learn even more about the topic. Moreover, it is important for an adult to provide the right knowledge to the children so that they are able to learn the right information correctly. The adults may also have to lay a pathway of questions and information so that the children can actually think and use their metacognition. Supported learning is also important as children may feel more comfortable learning from their peers rather than adults. I have noticed this effect while going to exhibits with my younger siblings. They tend to ask each other more questions. Growing up, many of us learned from what was around us, which is why it is important to have a mentor to guide us and to offer us an explanation for whatever questions we have.

Communication is also key among adults and those in science. Research will often talk to others in their fields or foreign fields in order to verify their findings or ask questions about it. I think that true learning comes from the exchanging of ideas from a question and answer type of method. A type of learning that I believe is an effective method that adults should use is called the socratic method. The method is essentially asking questions without providing a direct or immediate answer in order to promote critical thinking. In my experience in working in  lab, my mentor would use this method. At first the method was annoying as I just wanted to know the answer, but after a while I became familiar with the method. Through the process I started to learn more and ingrained more knowledge. I was able to figure out information quickly. My mind was sharper and I essentially became well equipped to engage in experimentation. Without communication, there is always the notion that we would be learning the wrong information. Learning incorrect information leads to incorrect decisions. Thus, the communication and exchanging of information is not an option, but is essential to learn effectively.

Science doesn’t take place in a vacuum. It requires mutual discussion and dissemination of information, and cooperation to verify and improve upon results. Chapter 4 was especially ingratiating to read as a result, as I loved learning about how communication and interaction aid science learning. You can memorize lots of theoretical information in any science by yourself, but in order to verify the truth and to build upon your knowledge, it’s necessary to communicate with others. It’s often said that you don’t really understand something unless you’re able to explain it effectively. By exchanging what we know with others, through teaching and being taught in turn, we can reinforce our knowledge of the sciences and help others build upon their own. From personal example, this is especially true with biology and organic chemistry. The former requires knowledge of multiple processes and facts – by repeating them to others you reinforce and repeat the knowledge in your own mind. In organic chemistry, it’s extremely important to verify with others what you’ve learned and the solution to a problem. Solutions are multi-layered and can be very complicated, so the viewpoint of others are required to ensure that your very process of thinking is correct.

At the same time, some degree of moderation should be kept in mind when interacting and communicating with others. As crucial as it is to learn from others, one shouldn’t ask information from others when it would be detrimental to their own learning or the learning of others. It’s a maxim oft-repeated – if you learn it yourself, you learn it forever. With this in mind, we should remember to respect the role initiative has in learning science. Not only shouldn’t we needle others to explain things to us, but we should also take care not to spoon-feed knowledge to science learners.

One thing Chapter 4 makes very evident is how important human interaction is in learning. It made me think of Vygotsky’s theories on childhood development. He believed that children developed through social interactions and cultural influence, as opposed to his peer Piaget who believed that children were solitary learners who had preset stages of learning and development they were supposed to progress through. Vygotsky asserted: “learning is a necessary and universal aspect of the process of developing culturally organized, specifically human psychological function.”[1]

Our science textbook seems to subscribe to a very Vygotskian point of view on childhood development, learning, and understanding. In chapter 4, it constantly repeats how necessary social interaction is to aid in childhood learning. Children are portrayed as apprentices (to borrow a theory from Vygotsky) who learn from older guides who have more knowledge. This relationship fosters a strong learning community in which a child can “engage with others in questioning, explaining, making predictions, and evaluating evidence.” (SBS, 64).

Another interesting part of the textbook was the discussion of the frog exhibit and the staff reflection on their experience. When Allen discussed visitor reactions and pointed out that visitors choose which exhibits are most interesting to them, it was a reminder that informal science learning can’t force people to learn what they don’t want to learn. When people choose to go to museums, they naturally pay attention to what attracts them the most. Although museum designers and curators can try their best to create educational exhibits, humans will do as they please and pay attention to what they want to. I believe that people learning anything, no matter how big or small, is what’s important. I guess it can be said that museums play the role of facilitators to inspire people to take charge of their own interests.

Chapter 3 of Surrounded by Science goes over some insights gained from research on informal learning environments. These are 3 strategies thought to be key in supporting learning and they are:

• Juxtaposition
• Multiple Modes
• Interactivity

The first is the way in which people’s ideas about science combine with what is being presented to them. It has been found that during a lot of passive learning (where no juxtaposition takes place), people reinforce their initial ideas instead of identifying the differences between their understanding of science and what is presented. In other words, their misconceptions take precedence over what has been established by the scientific community for hundreds of years. Therefore, it is vital when presenting a scientific idea to be aware of the preconceptions that people have and juxtapose it with the correct and scientifically accepted way of thinking.

Additionally it is important to also have multiple ways for people to engage with scientific concepts. It is unlikely that people learning Newton’s first law for the first time would believe it to be true, as it goes against everything that they have experienced thus far. On the other hand, putting these people into a weightless environment, such as the ‘vomit comet’ or a free-falling elevator, will make them learn about this concept pretty quickly. For a safer approach, a near-by air hockey table equipped with puck and mallet may suffice.

A third tool for supporting learning is called interactivity; allowing a person to physically interact with the phenomenon. It is a specific case of the second strategy (multiple modes), and to continue using the example of Newton’s first law, a person could be taken into space and given a little push. The fact that the person (now in motion) will not stop should solidify his/her faith in the new knowledge that he/she has grasped. Alternatively, a clip from the new movie Gravity may suffice: this. Observe how not only is Sandra Bullock’s linear motion conserved, but also the rotation acquired when she detached from the robotic arm.

“In another study, Margaret Haefner and Ellen Wartella, both researchers in communications studies, found that older siblings could help their younger brothers and sisters understand plot elements in educational programming. Through explanations and laughter, ‘older children did influence the younger children’s general evaluations of the program characters.’ Even though these studies were not on science programming, their results suggest that active engagement during viewing could have a positive impact for science learning as well.” – page 65

I am the youngest of three siblings, with a significant age gap between all of us. There is 11 years between me and my older brother, and six years between my sister and me. I have always felt that my position in my family has had a lot to do with my interests and academic development. The fact is, that by the time I was learning to speak, I was surrounded by my older siblings and their friends, and wanted to be like them and understand them and their vocabulary. I watched their tv shows, and played their games, and read their books. At the dinner table, I wanted to know what they learned in school, and understand it. My brother read the first Harry Potter book to me in first grade. I still remember my sister’s fifth grade science project on the difference between baking soda and baking powder. By being a part of my siblings lives and conversations, I wanted and needed to keep up.

Chapter four addresses the importance of conversation on informal science. Researchers record conversations taking place to see what people are learning and interested in. I think that’s really brilliant, and can show exactly what people are curious about. The dialogue between child and adult is interesting, but I think the conversations between and older and younger child can really tell you what that younger child is thinking. I look back at my childhood and realize so much of what I did and learned and enjoyed learning about came from the things that I spoke about with my older siblings.