Revision of Bibliography 1

Extended Bibliography One

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=4a5e9045-36b44a6a-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 while viewing an interesting science exhibit encourages visitors to promote their ideas, creating a classroom like environment where in-depth conversations occur.  Situations like these instill a substantial amount of understanding 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 conversation.

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 say “museums use labels to provide visitors with information as well as stimulate conversation about exhibit topics;” therefore, are arguing for increased thoughtfulness in the labels scientists assign to an exhibit and the continuation of discovering ways to do so (Hohenstein).  Their work is reputable due to the 464 conversations monitored, studied, and the conclusions they came to.  Other scientific research support Hohenstein’s argument, and in one specific case, investigators claim that “4–12 year olds who heard their parents explain fossils […] were more likely to remember the fossil’s name” (Crowley, 2002).  Using this perspective, should we not be paying more attention to the labels we assign?

Jill Hohenstein and Lynn Tran bring a concrete, 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.

While the research by Jill Hohenstein and Lynn Tran is valid and has a purposeful reason for being conducted, there are questions posed and ideas that need to be thought about when conducting similar experiments.  Firstly, how could different methods of stating an exhibit’s 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 people’s conversations without them knowing is spying, and if people knew you were recording them would they not alter their conversation to be appropriate?