Hohenstein, Jill, and Lynn Uyen Tran. "Use of Questions in Exhibit Labels
to Generate Explanatory Conversation among Science Museum Visitors." International Journal of Science Education 29.12 (2007): 1557-580. Academic Search Premier. Web. 30 Jan. 2011. <http://http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?hid=122&sid=4a5e9045-36b4-4a6a-9946-e36ca4b65ade%40sessionmgr113&vid=1>.
Jill Hohenstein and Lynn Tran reason that science exhibits in museums trigger conversations that contribute to learning. Learning can take place in any environment, both formal and informal, due to critical thinking by the visitors. The questions people ask encourages visitors to promote their ideas, creating a classroom like environment where in-depth conversations occur. Only in these types of situations can a substantial amount of understanding be endowed to the individual when self-realizations take place due to the reflective nature of one’s mind. However researchers say learning through conversation is induced by the labels on the exhibit; researching this phenomenon will help scientists create better labels to promote educated conversations.
Jill Hohenstein and Lynn Tran, professors from King’s College in London, aim to benefit children in cognitive development by evoking open ended questions due to the labels promoted by scientific exhibits. They support the building and preservations of scientific museums and contribute their research to the value of involving children and young adults in science. The authors are arguing for increased thoughtfulness in the labels scientists assign to an exhibit, and the continuation of discovering ways to do so. Their work is reputable due to the 464 conversations monitored, studied, and the conclusions they came to.
Jill Hohenstein and Lynn Tran bring a solid, well supported argument, attributing the details of an exhibit as important as the questions it provokes. This makes me think back to the times I would visit the Seattle Science Center; viewing the exhibits wondering how they were constructed. Although I was too shy to ask many questions, its fascination never faltered, and may be the reason for my interest in the sciences. Even if the sole purpose of a scientific museum isn’t to force people into becoming mini-Einsteins, it still serves its role in our world in that it could give birth to a great scientist or researcher. A particularly striking exhibit could influence an observer to venture out and explore his/her interests which could lead to the greatest discovery of all time. What if Einstein had been forced to study literature, or Edison to work on a farm? Where would our world be? Showing the inventions of the past could lead to greater inventions of the future.
Although the research by Jill Hohenstein and Lynn Tran is valid and has a purposeful reason for being conducted, there are questions it poses and ideas they need to think about when conducting an experiment like the one they have. Firstly, how could different methods of stating exhibits details be tested effectively? Testing the same people twice, viewing the same exhibit only different details describing the exhibit could not be the most effective way. Also, how does one create thought provoking questions that target a broad range of visitors? In an attempt to research the above questions, how will you monitor people without their consent? Recording peoples conversations without them knowing is spying, and if people knew you were recording them would they not alter their conversation to be appropriate?
Paul: This is a really interesting, well-researched, article. Good job! I especially appreciate how you broke down the authors methodologies and conclusions. This made it easier for me to track which specific features of the articles you were responding to throughout your response.
ReplyDeleteThough it seems as though you found an interesting article, because it's so narrowly focused I was curious as to how it relates to your own research interests? Eg, are you particularly interested in researching science exhibit labeling throughout the semester? If not, you might want to find a less focused source-- say, on education, access, and learning-- that could help you frame interesting and relevant research questions that you would like to pursue throughout the course of the semester. During class today I described research as something like an inverted funnel: you're at the narrower end of this spectrum.
In any case, keep up the good work!
1)Check the MLA works-cited entry
ReplyDeletea)I honestly can not find a mistake on your works-cited.
b)You have all your punctuation correct.
c)You have the names written correctly.
d)Nice work you should give me some tips sometime looks much better then mine.
e)On a final note there is one thing. I am unable to look at the webpage that you wrote the response on, the web link is broken.
2)Compare the bibliography entry to the instructions
a)First paragraph
i)I read the paragraph over and over I cannot find anything wrong with it.
ii)Nice work if I do find something I will come back and comment on it.
b)Second paragraph
i)This paragraph looks good.
ii)I’m not entirely clear on what the argument is. I guess it would help if I were able to read the article.
iii)Good job. It’s easy to understand and follow.
c)Third paragraph
i)I like the use of talking about your own experiences at the Seattle Science Center. Definitely brings the reader in when you have your own experiences.
ii)It does make you think what the world would be like if Einstein was just a farmer. Would we ever be as far as we are now? That’s a good question.
iii)Excellent paragraph good work.
d)Fourth paragraph
i)Excellent questions.
ii)It’s very difficult to conduct an accurate study.
iii)I thought this paper was very well written it followed the guidelines very well. It was extremely difficult to find anything wrong.
3)Compare the extended bibliography to Chapter 14 of Writing Analytically
a)Good uses of Chapter 14 of Writing Analytically
i)Good uses of chapter 14 are your entire fourth paragraph.
ii)You did exactly what it asked. You let your sources do the talking. You just asked well written questions.
iii)The question you asked about what if Einstein was a farmer was good.
iv)Makes people wonder what the world would be like.
b)Places where you could have used Chapter 14 of Writing Analytically
i)I had a hard time finding places where you could have used it.
ii)You seemed to have used it in all of the needed places.
iii)I guess maybe you could ask a question like “what is the sole reason of a science museum. Is it to educate or to inspire people to invent?”
iv)I’m not entirely sure that would work but this is my attempt at finding something wrong with your piece.
4)Review
a)Overall you did a great job. Commenting on you was extremely difficult for me. You seemed like you had everything down perfectly. I tried my best to give as much feedback that might help you. If I think of something down the road I will let you know.