Maureen A. Callanan

Parents Explain More Often to Boys Than to Girls During Shared Scientific Thinking

Young childrens everyday scientific thinking often occurs in the context of parent-child interactions. In a study of naturally occurring family conversation, parents were three times more likely to explain science to boys than to girls while using interactive science exhibits in a museum. This difference in explanation occurred despite the fact that parents were equally likely to talk to their male and female children about how to use the exhibits and about the evidence generated by the exhibits. The findings suggest that parents engaged in informal science activities with their children may be unintentionally contributing to a gender gap in childrens scientific literacy well before children encounter formal science instruction in grade school.

Describing and Supporting Collaborative Scientific Thinking in Parent-Child Interactions

project between two developmental psychologists and the staff of Childrens Discovery Museum of San Jose. Under the broad agenda of studying the development of scientific literacy, we have been exploring the hypothesis that the guidance of parents is an important bridge between the intentions of the exhibit designer and the experience and knowledge of the child. Our research is guided by a framework inspired by a combination of sociocultural and infor-

Artifacts as Conventional Objects

What underlies childrens understanding of artifacts? Studies suggest that beginning around age 7, people reason about artifacts in terms of the inventors purpose—termed the design stance. Our two studies emphasize another component of artifact understanding—the cultural nature of artifacts—by demonstrating peoples sensitivity to an artifacts conventional use. In past studies participants were shown a novel artifact and told that someone invented it for a certain purpose and that later another person used it for a different purpose. Here we demonstrate that if participants are told that many people, as opposed to just one person, use an artifact differently, 5-year-olds, 7-year-olds, and adults do not strictly judge the artifact in terms of its invented purpose. We conclude that peoples conceptions of artifacts are more complex and dynamic than has been suggested.

Mother-Child Conversation and Children's Understanding of Biological and Nonbiological Changes in Size

This article explores the ways that mothers and children from primarily middle-income European American backgrounds reason about events in which biological and nonbiological objects change in size. In Study 1, mother-child conversations were examined to investigate the events mothers described as growth, as well as the ways mothers explained events occurring in different domains. Findings indicate that although mothers primarily discussed events in domain-specific ways, they exhibited some domain blurring in their talk to children. In Study 2, 3-year-old children (M = 3 years, 2 months) and 5-year-old children (M = 5 years) provided descriptions and explanations of the same events. Results suggest that preschool children have begun to develop domain-specific understandings. Results are discussed in light of the role that social interaction plays in childrens conceptual development.

Conversations about Science across Activities in Mexican-Descent Families.

Parent–child “everyday” conversations have been suggested as a source of children’s early science learning. If such conversations are important, then it would be pertinent to know whether children from different family backgrounds have different experiences talking about science in informal settings. We focus on the relation between parents’ schooling and both their explanatory talk in science‐related activities and the styles of interaction they use with their children. Families from different schooling backgrounds within one under‐represented group in science education—Mexican‐descent families—were included in this study. Forty families were observed in two science‐related activities. In the sink‐or‐float task, families were asked to predict which of a variety of objects would sink and which would float, and then to test their predictions in a tub of water. The second activity was an open‐ended visit to a local children’s museum. Results showed similar patterns in scientific talk on the sink‐or‐float task across the two groups. However, the interaction style varied with schooling across the two activities; parents with higher schooling were more directive than parents with basic schooling. Interaction style was also found to vary with task structure, with more open‐ended tasks affording more collaborative interactions. Such research into parent–child conversations in science‐related activities can help begin to guide us in bridging children’s learning environments—home, school, and museum—and potentially fostering children’s science learning, particularly in those groups under‐represented in the sciences.

Conducting Cognitive Developmental Research in Museums: Theoretical Issues and Practical Considerations

Increasingly, cognitive developmental researchers are forming partnerships with museums as a way to achieve both overlapping and distinctive goals. Such partnerships can further our understanding of cognitive development by providing opportunities to study childrens learning within social contexts. At the same time, these collaborations can support the design of effective informal learning experiences for children and families. This article presents three distinct models for doing research in museums; they are presented in the context of both theoretical and practical concerns. Examples of research–museum partnerships are described, practical problems and potential solutions are discussed, and suggestions are provided for developmental researchers with an interest in developing museum partnerships.

Informal learning: Informal learning

We consider research and theory relevant to the notion of informal learning. Beginning with historical and definitional issues, we argue that learning happens not just in schools or in school-aged children. Many theorists have contrasted informal learning with formal learning. Moving beyond this dichotomy, and away from a focus on where learning occurs, we discuss five dimensions of informal learning that are drawn from the literature: (1) non-didactive, (2) highly socially collaborative, (3) embedded in meaningful activity, (4) initiated by learners interest or choice, and (5) removed from external assessment. We consider these dimensions in the context of four sample domains: learning a first language, learning about the mind and emotions within families and communities, learning about science in family conversations and museum settings, and workplace learning. Finally, we conclude by considering convergences and divergences across the different literatures and suggesting areas for future research. WIREs Cogni Sci 2011 2 646-655 DOI: 10.1002/wcs.143 For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website.

Similarity Comparisons and Relational Analogies in Parent-Child Conversations About Science Topics

This article explores analogy as a communicative tool used by parents to relate childrens past experiences to unfamiliar concepts. Two studies explored how similarity comparisons and relational analogies were used in parent-child conversations about science topics. In Study 1, 98 family groups including 4- to 9-year-olds explored two science museum exhibits. Parents suggested comparisons and overtly mapped analogical relations. In Study 2, 48 parents helped first- and third-grade children understand a homework-like question about infections. Parents suggested relational analogies and overtly mapped analogical relations for children. Use of relational analogies was positively associated with scores on a post-task measure of understanding. These studies suggest that parents help children learn about unfamiliar science topics by suggesting personally relevant or culturally pervasive analogies and by elaborating unfamiliar and non-obvious analogical relations.

The role of educational background, activity, and past experiences in Mexican-descent families' science conversations

Debate exists regarding the extent to which Mexican-descent parent-child conversations are explanatory. Moreover, suggestions have been made that differences in the amount of explanatory conversation may be based on parents’educational background. This article reports on two studies investigating conversations between parents and children in two different contexts. Results of an observational study conducted at a children’s museum reveal that although parents with high levels of formal education used more explanations about science than did parents with lower levels of formal education, both groups engaged in causal conversations with their children. In a second study examining parents’ reports of science talk after attending family science workshops, results indicated no difference in the explanation frequency between two groups of families with different levels of formal education. Overall, the findings suggest that Mexican-descent parents across differing educational backgrounds encourage their children’s developing understanding of the scientific world.

Co-Constructing Conceptual Domains Through Family Conversations and Activities

Abstract Constructivist theories of cognitive development have considered children as active individuals, learning about the world through observations and interactions with others; development is seen as happening in the mind of the child. Sociocultural theories, in contrast, consider development as embedded in social context, where changing patterns of participation in activities signal change. In this chapter we take seriously the notion of integrating these two approaches, with the aim of moving toward a theory of cognitive development that involves both the active mind of the child and the social embeddedness of developmental change. We discuss findings from three types of studies of development in context—learning object names, understanding symbols, and learning causal explanations for events. We conclude with some potential mechanisms for change in a new integrated theory and propose some questions for future study.