Abstract:

Science centers are institutions providing informal learning to the public through exhibitions of hands-on and playful exhibits. Informal learning is nondidactic and embedded in meaningful activity, voluntary and free from external assessment, and based on the visitors' interests and motivation only [1]. It complements formal education as a leisure activity aiming to spark curiosity, engagement, and interest in lifelong learning [2]. Understanding the opportunities and limitations of informal learning experiences can contribute to science education, professional training, and exhibit design.

In this study, we examine how visitors explore and make sense of visual research data in an OpenSpace exhibit at a science center in Sweden. The exhibit utilizes open-source software visualizing research data from space and allows visitors to interactively explore the space data. Exploratory and explanatory visual methods are combined to stimulate learning through inquiry and self-driven exploration [3]. Informal learning is inherently challenging to evaluate; most evaluation methods hamper the nature of an informal setting as voluntary, assessment-free, brief, and undisturbed experience calling for less intrusive evaluation methods [2]. We have conducted a field study of visitors’ embodied interaction with the OpenSpace exhibit, as a naturally occurring activity in an authentic setting recruiting participants from regular visitors.

The field test recruited 26 dyads aged 10 to 60+. Participants were asked to explore the exhibit freely as long as they wanted, while thinking-out-load and discussing with each other, followed by a short interview concerning their experiences. The dyads’ exploration discourses and interactions with the exhibit were video recorded, transcribed, and categorized as learning talk, system talk, or affective talk, inspired by a socio-cultural study from the Exploratorium in San Fransisco [4]. The learning talk was categorized as exploration activities (e.g., observation, comparison, recall or inquiry) and mapped to Kolb’s cycle of experiential learning [5] to show how the activity unfolded as a learning opportunity.

The discourses contained 72% of learning talk on average. The most frequent exploration categories were inquiry, interpretation of visuals, and recall of previous knowledge vital to sense-making. Visitors' inquiries were tightly coupled with the built-in guidance and the only exploration type completing an entire experiential learning cycle. Hence, the built-in guidance was important to spark productive explorations in the informal learning experiences.

References:
[1] 1Rogoff, B., Callanan, M., Gutiérrez, K. D., & Erickson, F. (2016). The organization of informal learning. Review of Research in Education, 40(1), 356-401.
[2] Allen, S., & Peterman, K. (2019). Evaluating informal STEM education: Issues and challenges in context. New Directions for Evaluation, 2019(161), 17-33.
[3] Ynnerman, A., Löwgren, J., & Tibell, L. (2018). Exploranation: A new science communication paradigm. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 38 (3), 13–20.
[4] Allen, S. (2002). Looking for learning in visitor talk: A methodological exploration. In Leinhardt, Crowley & Knutson (Eds.) Learning conversations in museums, 259–303. Taylor & Francis Group.
[5] Kolb, D. A. (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (2nd ed.). FT press.

Keywords:

Informal learning, science centre, data visualization, exploration, exhibit, evaluation, STEM, science communication.