Measuring the benefits of museum experiences as preparation for future learning

这个项目研究博物馆参观者从亲身体验中学到了什么。评估这种学习可以帮助教育工作者设计更有效的非正式学习经验，同时也解决有关自我选择和自我导向学习的问题。使用由Bransford开发的学习准备（PFL）概念方法，该项目将解决几个具体问题：1。 是否有替代办法来衡量非正式科学学习，以使用管理测试或其他可能与非正式环境中发生的实际学习类型无关的方法？2. 在拟议的研究中，非正式学习经历是否能从随后的经验中准备/增加学习，从科学录像中学习？3. 在实践经验中做一些变化（即，自我导向与引导）影响学习迁移？4. 非正式的科学学习经历是否有助于某些类型的学生更有效地为正式学习做好准备（即，非正式的学习经历能否帮助传统上科学成绩较低的学生为课堂学习做好准备？该项目将着眼于学习的转移，当学生参加具体主题的动手活动，然后观看一段视频，内容信息有关的具体主题，他们有经验，最后进行后测试，评估有多少内容是了解的主题与学生有动手经验。一般的假设是，实践经验（没有具体的内容信息）为学生学习更多的主题做好准备。在开发和完善学习机会和后测的初始阶段之后，将进行第二阶段的概念实验证明，学生将被分配到两组。每个小组将参加一个开放式的活动（电路或风）在探索的修补工作室。参观一周后，学生们将观看一段视频，其中包含与这两个主题相关的信息。然后，他们将进行后测，以评估从视频中学到了多少。假设每个小组都将从视频中了解更多关于他们在修补工作室中探索的主题的信息。交叉设计作为一种比主效应设计更强的设计，因为没有晕轮效应。第三阶段的研究将考察一种设计的体验是否比另一种设计的体验更好，并将其与教师指导的实践站进行对比。一个对照组也将包括在学生没有经验的修补工作室。研究结果将发表在学术期刊上，但设计和结果也将广泛传播给教育工作者和非正式环境中学习的研究人员。

This project researches what museum visitors learn from hands-on experiences. Evaluating this kind of learning can help educators design more effective informal learning experiences while also addressing questions concerning self-selected and self-directed learning. Using the Preparation for Learning (PFL) conceptual approach developed by Bransford, the project will address several specific questions: 1. Are there alternatives to measuring informal science learning to using administered tests or other methods that may not be relevant to the actual types of learning that occurs in informal settings? 2. Can informal learning experiences prepare/increase learning from subsequent experiences in the case of the proposed research, learning from a science video? 3. Do variations in hands-on experiences (i.e., self-directed vs. guided) affect learning transfer? 4. Can informal science learning experiences help prepare some types of students more effectively for formal learning (i.e., can informal learning experiences help prepare students, who traditionally score lower on science achievement, for classroom learning)? The project will look at transfer of learning when students participate in hands-on activities on specific topics, then watch a video with content information about the specific topic they had experience with, concluding with a posttest assessing how much content was learned about the topic with which the students had a hands-on experience. The general hypothesis is that the hands-on experience (with no specific content information presented) prepares students for learning more about the topic. After an initial phase that develops and refines the learning opportunity and the posttest, the Phase 2 proof of concept experiment will be conducted where students will be assigned to two groups. Each group will participate in one open-ended activity (circuits or wind) in the Exploratorium's Tinkering Studio. A week after the visit, the students will watch a video that contains information relevant to both topics. They will then take a posttest that will assess how much was learned from the video. The hypothesis is that each group will learn more from the video regarding the topic they explored in the Tinkering Studio. The cross-over design was presented as a stronger design than a main effects design because there would be no halo effect. The Phase 3 study will examine whether one designed experience is better than another contrasting self-directed maker station) versus a teacher-guided hands-on station. A control group will also be included where students have no experience in the Tinkering Studio. The results of the study will be published in scholarly journals, but the design and results will also be widely disseminated to educators and researchers of learning in informal settings.