Science engagement as insight into the science identity work nurtured in community‐based science clubs

Abstract

In this article, we explore how children of late elementary to middle school age, from low‐income communities in an East‐Central metropolitan area of Canada, described their interests in and attitudes toward science in an out‐of‐school science club program. We used the children's descriptions of emotional engagement to gain insights into the identity work being carried out in the science club. Our analysis was based on survey responses from 202 children enrolled for at least one academic year in the science club program at 21 different club sites and focus group commentary from a subset of 45 children attending 14 of the clubs. We added context to the children's perspectives by including commentary from semistructured interviews with nine science club staffers and insights from field notes made after club promotional events. Analysis revealed the enthusiasm of children and/or their families for science education prior to engaging with the clubs. The children's anticipation that club science would reflect their school‐based science experiences was quickly dispelled by the hands‐on nature of club activities and the positive relationships built with club staffers. Of concern was the finding that staff and children frequently reinforced a rigid dichotomy between school and club science. This distinction meant that, although children described themselves as improving their performance in school science, they often found it difficult to relate the fun enacted during club sessions to the learning that is required during school science classes. This finding is problematic given the club's focus on keeping children's options in formal and informal science education open for as long as possible. The paper concludes by using the insights provided by children and club staffers to propose ways of enhancing the club/school/home science connection to better support transfer of the positive outcomes of the club‐based science identity work.

Qualitatively recognizing the dimensions of student environmental identity development within the classroom context

“…The importance of shared learning experiences and social recognition for identity work is supported by other identity research focused on science learning (e.g., Avraamidou, 2021;Burke & Navas Iannini, 2021;Carlone & Johnson, 2007;Eames et al, 2018;Harris & Ballard, 2021;Riedinger & McGinnis, 2017;Stapleton, 2015). Kempton and Holland's (2003)…”

“…Three of the sEID dimensions we propose map indirectly to Kempton and Holland's (2003) work: self-recognition for environmental action, perceived agency, and changed behavior across social contexts. While self-recognition is not always recognized as distinct from social recognition in identity research (e.g., Burke & Navas Iannini, 2021), we argue that these processes require separate consideration if we are to acknowledge the structural barriers that may create conflict when students are authoring environmental identities. Science identity research centered on recognition and how one's identity work is accepted or rejected by others (Avraamidou, 2021), supports our interpretation that self-recognition and social recognition should be separate dimensions of sEID.…”

“…Specifically, we created a priori codes for the three‐dimensions identified by Kempton and Holland (2003) (salience, recognition as an actor, knowledge from doing) as well as constructs that were discussed within these dimensions (e.g., agency, empowerment). We also included social recognition as an a priori code, due to its established importance in the science identity research (Avraamidou, 2021; Burke & Navas Iannini, 2021; Carlone & Johnson, 2007; Riedinger & McGinnis, 2017) and its identification in the environmental identity literature emphasizing a social context (Eames et al, 2018; Stapleton, 2015; Zavestoski, 2003). Additional codes that emerged inductively captured student emotions, values, personal meaning, self‐recognition, and the reflection on big ideas such as collective action, consumption, or solutions as they related to sustainability.…”

Learning to Enhance Community-Responsiveness in an Out-of-School Club Program

“…In this article, we have illustrated the approach taken during a university-informal science education partnership aimed at exploring ways of enhancing community-responsiveness in a science club program serving low-income communities. Rather than describe the outcomes of this information-gathering process (explored in Burke & Navas Iannini, 2021 [study phase 1] and Burke et al, 2022 [study phase 2]), this article documents the mechanisms that supported the STEM Academy in developing an ongoing community-responsive research practice that would inform program development across their family of science clubs. We took inspiration from Dewey’s model of a Laboratory school to design a model club within which to explore various aspects of community-responsive science education as reported in the research literature, as requested by local community members, and as desired by the STEM Academy in their commitment to community service.…”

Transformative experience in an informal science learning program about climate change

“…These environments also provide opportunities to broaden participation in science, by sparking interest in science topics and helping learners to see the relevance of science in their own lives (National Research Council, 2009; National Science Teachers Association, 2012). Informal science learning experiences can facilitate lasting learning and science achievement; positively affect learners' attitudes and identity around science; increase interest in science and motivation to learn about science topics; and support development of a sense of environmental science agency (Burke & Navas Iannini, 2021; Dabney et al, 2012; Gerber et al, 2001; Goff et al, 2019; Harris & Ballard, 2021; Littrell et al, 2020a; Mulvey et al, 2020; Whitesell, 2016; Yildirim, 2020). However, research also suggests that informal science learning experiences can be strengthened by designing them to guide learners toward experiences that are transformative, inspiring further learning and engagement and shifting how the learner sees and understands the world through this new lens provided by their learning experience (Garner et al, 2016).…”