Lynn Uyen Tran

The Professionalization of Museum Educators: The Case in Science Museums

Abstract Museum educators have a longstanding presence and importance in museums, but there is limited recognition and understanding of their work, both in research and practice. Investigations into the pedagogical actions of educators in science museums suggest that educators do not share a common understanding of best practice, which may be due to the absence of professional preparation grounded in a recognized knowledge base. To ensure quality and credibility of museum education work, and for the occupation to complete its professionalization process, a knowledge base is needed. Thus, we offer a framework upon which the professional work of museum educators may be grounded. This knowledge framework comprises six components: context, choice and motivation, objects, content, theories of learning, and talk, which are organized into three domains of knowledge: museum content knowledge, museum pedagogical knowledge, and museum contextual knowledge.

Use of Questions in Exhibit Labels to Generate Explanatory Conversation among Science Museum Visitors

Research suggests that conversations at museums contribute to, as well as serve as evidence for, learning. Many museums use labels to provide visitors with information as well as stimulate conversation about exhibit topics. However, most studies on exhibit labels do not centre on conversations. This investigation uses a Vygotskian framework to examine the ways questions in exhibit labels can stimulate conversations in a science museum. We examined the questions and explanations that appeared in conversation occurring under three label conditions (Current Label, Added question “Why is this here?”, and Simplified Text plus Question) at three exhibits in a science museum. Each exhibit (a model of a Victorian workshop, a sectioned 1959 Austin Mini Cooper, and a bowl that survived the atomic bomb in Hiroshima, Japan) was videotaped for approximately 6 hr in each condition. Findings based on 464 conversations at these exhibits indicated that our guiding question affected visitors’ conversations; however, adding the question had different effects at different exhibits. For example, at the Mini‐Cooper exhibit, people asked more open‐ended questions with the question added than in the current label condition. At this exhibit there were also more open‐ended questions used in conjunction with explanatory responses when the question was present. In contrast, the guiding question at the Hiroshima bowl exhibit had no effect. These results imply that it is important to consider the nature of the exhibit when designing labels that will optimally facilitate learning conversations.

The work of science museum educators

Abstract This paper reports the findings from an interview study with 24 educators from 10 museums in England. The investigation looked at how educators characterise their work and how their work is organised. The analytical framework of this investigation draws on sociological discussions on professionalism. The findings show that there is shared conception of what museum educators do and that a technical language to talk about their work is emerging. However, further development may be effected by the diversity in educators’ educational backgrounds. Furthermore, the way work is divided in some (large) institutions directly challenges the integrity and expert knowledge of the practitioners, which may ultimately impede the occupation from truly becoming a profession. The findings have implications for researchers and practitioners interested in science teaching in museum environments, and to the professionalisation of museum education.

Teaching Science in Informal Environments: Pedagogical Knowledge for Informal Educators

Science educators in informal environments such as science centers and museums affect people’s learning experiences, as they create and implement the educational programs and exhibits to support science learning. The educators are the human interfaces between the institutions’ collections, the knowledge and culture that are represented, and the visiting public. Previous studies suggest that educators apply a range of strategies in their interactions with visitors that account for the learners’ levels of interest and understanding, and as such serve to scaffold the learning experience. However, it also appears that educators may not have an explicit understanding of how educational techniques may best be used. In addition, while educators have a diversity of knowledge and backgrounds resulting in arguably valuable varied expertise, such diversity may also be an impediment as staff do not share a common understanding and language for how they approach and talk about their work. We propose a common body of knowledge that can lead to a shared framework for practice, and provide the basis for pre-service and ongoing professional education among educators who teach science in informal environments. In this chapter, we discuss our six knowledge components underlying the pedagogical knowledge required for science education in informal environments that is shared with, but distinct from, teaching science in schools.

Facilitating Deep Conceptual Learning: The Role of Reflection and Learning Communities

In this chapter we discuss the nature and facilitation of deep conceptual learning in informal learning contexts. We explore the skills and components of knowledge that characterize informal educator practice and consider the ways in which such skills may be used to support deep conceptual learning. We draw attention to the need for ongoing professional development efforts, and with reference to one particular PD program developed by researchers at The Lawrence Hall—Reflecting On Practice—highlight the importance of reflection and discuss the need for informal educators to build learning communities to support and sustain effective practice.