Development of knowledge about electricity and magnetism during a visit to a science museum and related post-visit activities

Abstract

This article reports on part of a larger study of how 11‐ and 12‐year‐old students construct knowledge about electricity and magnetism by drawing on aspects of their experiences during the course of a school visit to an interactive science museum and subsequent classroom activities linked to the science museum exhibits. The significance of this study is that it focuses on an aspect of school visits to informal learning centers that has been neglected by researchers in the past, namely the influence of post‐visit activities in the classroom on subsequent learning and knowledge construction. This study provides evidence that the integrated series of post‐visit activities resulted in students constructing and reconstructing their personal knowledge of science concepts and principles represented in the science museum exhibits, sometimes toward the accepted scientific understanding and sometimes in different and surprising ways. A descriptive interpretive approach was adopted, with principal data sources comprising student‐generated concept maps and semistructured interviews at three stages of the study. Findings demonstrate the interrelationships between learning that occurs at school, home, and in informal learning settings. The study also underscores for classroom teachers and staff of science museums and similar centers the importance of planning pre‐ and post‐visit activities. The importance of this planning is not only to support the development of scientific conceptions, but also to detect and respond to alternative conceptions that may be produced or strengthened during a visit to an informal learning center. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Sci Ed 84:658–679, 2000.

Learning on zoo field trips: The interaction of the agendas and practices of students, teachers, and zoo educators

“…This confirms previous research on the importance of classroom pre-and posttrip learning (see, e.g., Anderson, Lucas, Ginns, & Dierking, 2000;Falk & Dierking, 1992). The results from this study suggest, at least in these two cases, that classroom teachers have an important role in shaping their students' trip experiences, not only what students do, but how they view the trip, what they value and focus on, what they see as the purpose of the trip, and what they remember about it.…”

Upper Secondary Students’ Situational Interest: A case study of the role of a zoo visit in a biology class

“…promotes student motivation (S. Hidi, Weiss, Berndorff, & Nolan, 1998;Paris, Yambor, & Packard, 1998) and learning (Cox-Petersen, Marsh, Kisiel, & Melber, 2003;Mortensen & Smart, 2007;Tofield, et al, 2003). Educational impact is increased by post-visit activities (D. Anderson, et al, 2000;Davidson, et al, 2010;Griffin, 1994). In the present study, the students participated in pre-trip preparation activities supplied by their teacher and were engaged in field trip laboratory work.…”

“…advance content preparation, active participation in structured science activities, and follow-up activities (National Research Council, 2009). Recent research has shown that advance field trip preparation gives students a framework which guides what they should pay attention to during the visit and how they should interpret what they see (D. Anderson, Kisiel, & Storksdieck, 2006;D. Anderson, Lucas, Ginns, & Dierking, 2000;Griffin & Symington, 1997).…”

Guided school visits to natural history museums in Israel: Teachers' roles

“…Most of the studies that reported about meaningful preparation or follow-up activities described research settings, in which the researchers were involved in preparing the activity with the teachers or the museum staff (Anderson et al, 2000;Gilbert & Priest, 1997;Henriksen & Jorde, 2001). In a recent review of the research on school visits to museums, Griffin (2004) provides many possible reasons for this pattern.…”