The new goals outlined for museums in recent reports are in line with the efforts to improve the public's civic and practical scientific literacy. We have made a preliminary exploration of the potential of museums to provide information and experiences that the audience finds relevant in the context of science-related issues they encounter in their private or civic lives. We found that for a group of parents faced with the issue of radon in their children's school, two museums in Oslo were not seen as having such a function; neither did the parents expect museums to have such a role. Professionals from the two museums expressed similar attitudes. If this skepticism toward the new goals is widespread, museums face a great challenge concerning how to relate to the new goals. Based on our findings, we suggest some pertinent issues for future research.

Teachers find the implementation of fieldwork challenging. Therefore, this study investigates two teachers' implementation of theoretical guidelines for studentcentered fieldwork activities, following their participation in a professional development course focusing on earth science fieldwork pedagogy. Video observation and instructional artifacts were collected and analyzed using various indicators, including the quality of the learning activities, the types of talk, teacher questions, the focus of student initiatives, and how the students engaged in the learning activities. The results revealed that the teachers implemented the guidelines through two totally different fieldwork designs. In one case, called the linear teacher-dominated fieldwork design, there were clear differences between indicators in the classroom and those in the field. In the field, teacher dominance was reduced, and students were more active and focused on the content. In the other case, the teacher developed an integrated inquiry-based fieldwork design that involved alternating between the classroom and the field as well as using inquiry-based learning activities. The teacher had a reduced role in terms of talk and questioning, and to a large extent, students showed deeper engagement. Notably, in both cases, the learning process and student engagement deteriorated during the follow-up phase. Finally, on the basis of these findings, recommendations for fieldwork designs are discussed.

This study investigates how teaching can support students' ability to apply rock identification by addressing scientific observation. In the context of geology education in Norway, we investigate two cases in which different approaches to teaching rock identification are carried out. Case A involves traditional teaching activities in one class of upper secondary school students, while Case B consists of teaching activities focusing on observation in a class of elementary school students. The study relies on analysis of video data using headcams from classroom activities and fieldwork. A year later, we asked the same students to apply rock identification to samples that were new to them. Results indicate that the teaching approach influenced the students' opportunities for developing an understanding of rock identification. The students in case A identified the samples by applying specific names of rocks and geological terminology, which led to errors and misconnections. Their application of rock identification can be characterized as name-dropping. By contrast, the students in case B identified rocks by noticing the patterns. They also explained theories of rock formation and geological terminology, thus demonstrating understanding. We discuss how the findings from case B can be translated into a tool for teaching rock identification.

This article discusses the potential of small head mounted camera (headcam) to collect video data indicating student learning processes in science across time and settings (classroom and field). Empirical examples from two Norwegian research projects; one on integrating science inquiry and literacy in elementary school and the other on learning geoscience through fieldwork in upper secondary school; are used to demonstrate the potential contribution of headcam to science education research. We propose that headcam videos provide opportunities for observing features of science teaching and learning from new angles: following students during movement, connecting students’ verbal interactions and interaction with physical objects, students’ written products in the making, and students’ development of understanding over time. However, we also experienced that headcam videos exposed some unwanted observations. The discussion of implications addresses the advantages and limitations of using headcams, including concerns arising from unwanted observations.

Students struggle with observing scientifically and connecting observations to scientific theory. This study investigates how students actually use observation in rock classificationa classical practical task in science education. To describe the level of students' use of observation, data was collected by videotaping 19 small student groups (55 students aged 16-18) in Norway while they were classifying rocks. A modified version of the observation framework proposed by [Eberbach, C., & Crowley, K. (2009). From everyday to scientific observation: How children learn to observe the biologist's world. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 39-68] is used to analyse how students' notice features of rocks (noticing) and interpret the geological processes forming those features (expectations) at different levels: everyday, transitional or scientific. The findings showed that none of the student groups used everyday observation. Three student groups used observation at a transitional level, whereas twelve groups performed observation that can be described as transtional/scientific level. Four student groups used scientific observation. Based on the findings, an observation framework for rock classification is proposed. The challenges encountered by the students are discussed, thus providing ideas for how teachers can support students to use scientific observation in rock classification.

The objective of the inquiry is to reveal to what extent school teachers and museum educators ensure that museums are a learning arena for school pupils. We interviewed a small selection of teachers and museum educators regarding their practical and curricular collaboration prior, during and after a museum visit by a group of pupils. Our findings are in line with other international results, which show that teachers seem to regard museums visits as important for the student understanding. The questions asked include “How does cooperation between school and museum work? What do they actually cooperate about? What are the museum educators’ intention(s) when they plan their programmes? What are the teachers’ objectives when they plan their museum visits?” We found that museum educators are normally familiar with the school curriculum and the school discourse. When they evaluate their programmes, they ask the teacher but rarely the students/pupils, who museum educators tend to forget about. School teachers seem to understand the learning potentials of a museum visit, but rarely used it. Museum visits end up being “just another nice day on a school trip”. It is time for a new museum pedagogical approach, based on collaboration between schools and museums.

Follow-up activities after fieldwork are recommended, yet little research has been conducted in this area. This study investigates six cases of follow-up work carried out by three teachers and their students in three upper secondary schools in Norway. The data comprises video observations of teachers and students, instructional artifacts, students' end products (e.g., oral presentations), and post-interviews with teachers. The data are analyzed according to: (1) recommendations for follow-up work and (2) the level of student performance (i.e., talk, actions, etc.) while undertaking the activities. The findings revealed that the teachers implemented follow-up work mostly in line with recommendations. However, the findings regarding students' learning processes revealed that low-level performance prevailed during follow-up activities. The two most promising cases are described in detail to enable a discussion of ways of improving recommendations of how student learning processes can be supported during follow-up work. Hence, we propose that students should be given learning tasks that require them to suggest a solution to a dilemma and use field data to justify their solution. The dilemma could profitably involve replication of an actual situation. In addition, follow-up work should be divided into two sub-phases: interpretation of field data and creation of an end product.

No abstract