Measuring the impact of a science center on its community

A range of sources support science learning, including the formal education system, libraries, museums, nature and Science Centers, aquariums and zoos, botanical gardens and arboretums, television programs, film and video, newspapers, radio, books and magazines, the Internet, community and health organizations, environmental organizations, and conversations with friends and family. This study examined the impact of one single part of this infrastructure, a Science Center. This study asked two questions. First, who in Los Angeles (L.A.) has visited the California Science Center and what factors best describe those who have and those who have not visited? Second, does visiting the California Science Center impact public science understanding, attitudes, and behaviors and if so, in what ways? Two random telephone surveys of L.A. county adults 18 years of age and over (n ¼ 832; n ¼ 1,008) were conducted; one in 2000, shortly after the opening of the totally redesigned and rebuilt Science Center and one in 2009, roughly a decade after opening. Samples were drawn from five racially, ethnically, and socio-economically diverse communities generally representative of greater L.A. Results suggest that the Science Center is having an important impact on the science literacy of greater L.A. More than half of residents have visited the Science Center since it opened in 1998 and self-report data indicate that those who have visited believe that the Science Center strongly influenced their science and technology understanding, attitudes, and behaviors. Importantly, Science Center visitors are broadly representative of the general population of greater L.A. including individuals from all races and ethnicities, ages, education, and income levels with some of the strongest beliefs of impact expressed by minority and low-income individuals. The use of a conceptual ''marker'' substantiates these conclusions and suggests that the impact of the Science Center might even be greater than indicated by the mostly self-report data reported here. 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 48: 1-12, 2011

[1]  D. Layton,et al.  Science for Specific Social Purposes (SSSP): Perspectives on Adult Scientific Literacy , 1986 .

[2]  B. Rogoff,et al.  Everyday Cognition: Development in Social Context , 1999 .

[3]  Lynn D. Dierking,et al.  Investigating public science interest and understanding: evidence for the importance of free-choice learning , 2007 .

[4]  J. Falk,et al.  Learning from Museums: Visitor Experiences and the Making of Meaning , 2000 .

[5]  Jon D. Miller.  Public Understanding of, and Attitudes toward, Scientific Research: What We Know and What We Need to Know , 2004 .

[6]  C. Atman,et al.  How people learn. , 1985, Hospital topics.

[7]  John H. Falk,et al.  Using the contextual model of learning to understand visitor learning from a science center exhibition , 2005 .

[8]  Ian S. Ginns,et al.  Development of knowledge about electricity and magnetism during a visit to a science museum and related post‐visit activities , 2000 .

[9]  Amy M. Hightower,et al.  Science and Engineering Indicators , 1993 .

[10]  John H. Falk,et al.  Investigating the Role of Emotion in Science Center Visitor Learning , 2009 .

[11]  J. Vaske.  Survey Research and Analysis: Applications in Parks, Recreation and Human Dimensions , 2008 .

[12]  Lynn D. Dierking,et al.  The 95 Percent Solution , 2010 .

[13]  Kenneth Tobin,et al.  International handbook of science education , 1998 .

[14]  John H. Falk,et al.  Free-Choice Science Education: How We Learn Science outside of School. Ways of Knowing in Science and Mathematics Series. , 2001 .

[15]  G. Hein.  Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits , 2009 .

[16]  Steven Turner,et al.  School science and its controversies; or, whatever happened to scientific literacy? , 2008 .

[17]  Annemarie S. Palincsar,et al.  The Case of Carla: Dilemmas of Helping All Students to Understand Science , 2002 .

[18]  Okhee Lee,et al.  Science for All, Including Students From Non-English-Language Backgrounds , 1998 .

[19]  Ronald W. Marx,et al.  “Maestro, what is ‘quality’?”: Language, literacy, and discourse in project-based science , 2001 .

[20]  Anh Nguyen-Xuan,et al.  Adults' understanding of electricity , 1995 .

[21]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[22]  Jeffrey Bisanz,et al.  What did you learn outside of school today? Using structured interviews to document home and community activities related to science and technology , 1997 .

[23]  Luis C. Moll,et al.  Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms , 2005 .

[24]  E. Medrich,et al.  Young Adolescents and Discretionary Time Use: The Nature of Life Outside School. , 1991 .

[25]  John H. Falk,et al.  Science Learning in a Leisure Setting. , 2009 .

[26]  Graham Farmelo,et al.  Museum Visitor Studies in the 90s , 1993 .

[27]  Joe E. Heimlich,et al.  Free-choice learning and the environment , 2009 .

[28]  Wolfgang Wagner,et al.  Vernacular science knowledge: its role in everyday life communication , 2007 .

[29]  William W. Cobern,et al.  Cultural Aspects of Learning Science , 1997 .