The Educational Claims of Zoos: Where Do We Go from Here?

Abstract

Zoos exude a certain self-confidence regarding their roles as education providers. Indeed, the education outputs of zoos are, at face value, pretty impressive, with most investing in learning opportunities for leisure visitors, education groups and in some cases, as part of their in situ programs. However, these outputs are not necessarily reliable indicators of the educational achievements of zoos. Quantity does not necessarily equate to quality, just as outputs do not necessarily lead to outcomes. Zoo-accreditation organizations such as the AZA and EAZA offer us clear insight into the strategic vision underpinning the education goals for zoo visitors; a heightened appreciation of the value of biodiversity and a connectedness with the natural world. Unsurprisingly, most zoos have educational goals that ally neatly with the vision of their respective accreditation body. Consequently, we are left with fairly narrow, top-down educational goals. This does not necessarily sit well with what we know about the unpredictability of "free choice" learning in environments such as zoos and aquariums, or what is known about public science communication. Research that seeks to explore the impacts of zoo visits often focuses on evaluating performance based on educational goals and the findings are used as a means of providing evidence of institutional achievement. However, any visitor outcome that falls outside of this narrow range could well be missed by the research. In this article, we propose that research that takes unpredictable and unexpected outcomes into account is necessary and overdue.

Public Support for Biodiversity After a Zoo Visit: Environmental Concern, Conservation Knowledge, and Self‐Efficacy

“…The ability to define biodiversity was associated with both concern and behavior, as shown by the correlations, but this probably reflects a more general, preexisting, engagement with the issue. Moss and Esson (2013) argue that, when zoos express too much confidence in their impact on attitudes by increasing knowledge, they run the risk of affirming the discredited "deficit" model of conservation education. If the goal is really to influence visitors' attitudes and behavior with regard to wildlife conservation, zoos need to expand their definition of education in order to encompass the wide range of learning outcomes that are possible in a free-choice learning environment such as a zoo (Moss and Esson 2013).…”

Conservation education in zoos: A literature review

“…al. 2014;Moss & Esson 2013;Fennell 2012; New signs from the WAZA campaign "Biodiversity is us". Helsinki zoo, April 2016.…”

Are Mobile Live Animal Programs Educationally Beneficial? A Critical Assessment of the Human Learning Component Underlying Traveling Animal Exhibits

“…These goals are prioritized above positive learning goals and result in cognitive learning that, if it does occur, is based on characteristics of the animals that are irrelevant to their conservation. An example of this is how animals that typically get the most positive and enthusiastic reactions from participants are prioritized for display, so that furry, colourful, active and large animals are more frequently learned about, creating a bias in the cognitive learning component [33,34]. The display is driven by what is popular, rather than by a coherent educational purpose.…”

“…Behavioural change that results in real-world action is most likely to occur right after exposure to information [32]. The most prominent zoo accreditation organizations including the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums, the American Association of Zoos and Aquariums, the Canadian Association of Zoos and Aquariums, the Zoological Association of America and the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria all concur that education, rather than being merely inspirational or emotive, should have an 'action' component that allows for positive conservation action [33]. Furthermore, since MLAPs do not have a follow-up process to these one-time experiences for participants, affective learning is unlikely to translate into positive conservation action, or if it does, there is no current evidence for it.…”