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者设计更有效的非正式学习体验，同时也解决有关自我选择和自我导向学习的问题。使用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。除了使用管理测试或其他可能与非正式环境中实际学习类型无关的方法之外，是否还有其他方法来衡量非正式科学学习？2. 非正式的学习经历是否可以准备/增加从后续经验中学习的经验，在拟议的研究中，从科学视频中学习？3. 实践经验的变化（例如，自我指导和指导）是否影响学习迁移？4. 非正式的科学学习经历能否帮助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在科学成绩上得分较低的学生为课堂学习做好准备）？当学生参与特定主题的实践活动时，该项目将着眼于学习转移，然后观看一段视频，其中包含有关他们所经历的特定主题的内容信息，最后进行后测，评估学生在实践经验中学习了多少关于该主题的内容。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准备。在开发和完善学习机会的初始阶段和后期测试之后，将进行第二阶段的概念验证实验，学生将被分配到两组。每个小组将在探索博物馆的修补工作室参加一个开放式活动（电路或风）。访问一周后，学生将观看一个包含与这两个主题相关信息的视频。然后，他们将进行一个后期测试，以评估他们从视频中学到了多少。我们的假设是，每个小组都会从视频中学到更多关于他们在修补工作室探索的主题。交叉设计被认为是比主效果设计更强大的设计，因为它不存在光环效应。第三阶段的研究将检验一种设计体验是否比另一种设计体验更好，对比自我指导的创客站和教师指导的动手操作站。一个控制组也将包括没有在修补工作室的经验的学生。这项研究的结果将发表在学术期刊上，但其设计和结果也将广泛传播给非正式环境下学习的教育工作者和研究人员。

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.