Journal of Science Education and Technology

, Volume 25, Issue 6, pp 916–928 | Cite as

Students’ Perceptions of the Long-Term Impact of Attending a “CSI Science Camp”



A science summer camp is a popular type of informal science experience for youth. While there is no one model of a science camp, these experiences typically allow for more focused and in-depth exploration of different science domains and are usually hands-on and participatory. The goal of this research was to examine the impact of a short science camp program approximately 1 year after students attended the camp. Overall, the results revealed that attending a 2-day forensic science camp had a positive and continuing influence on the participants. Students’ science self-efficacy increased immediately after attending the camp and remained higher than pre-camp levels approximately 1 year later. Students were able to articulate why they believed the camp had a long-term impact on their lives. Furthermore, participants attributed a higher level of engaging in additional informal STEM-related activities during the academic year as a result of attending the camp.


Self-efficacy Engagement Informal science education 


  1. Ainley M, Ainley J (2011) Student engagement with science in early adolescence: the contribution of enjoyment to students’ continuing interest in learning about science. Contemp Educ Psychol 36:4–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexander JM, Johnson KE, Kelley K (2012) Longitudinal analysis of the relations between opportunities to learn about science and the development of interests related to science. Sci Educ 96:763–786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. American Academy of Forensic Science (2016). Types of forensic sciences. Retrieved May 9, 2016.
  4. Avery LM (2013) Rural science education: valuing local knowledge. Theory Into Pract 52:28–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bailey KD (1994) Typologies and taxonomies. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bandura A (1997) Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. W. H. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Bandura A, Barbaranelli C, Caprara GV, Pastorelli C (2001) Self-efficacy beliefs as shapers of children’s aspirations and career trajectories. Child Dev 72:187–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beals K, Willard C (2001) Environmental detectives, a teachers’ guide. LHS Gems, Berkeley, CAGoogle Scholar
  9. Bentley M, Ebert C, Ebert E (2000) The natural investigator: a constructivist approach to elementary and middle school science. Wadsworth/Thomson Learning, Belmont, CAGoogle Scholar
  10. Bernard HR (2000) Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp 443–450Google Scholar
  11. Bhattacharyya S, Nathaniel R, Mead TP (2011) The influence of science summer camp on African–American high school students’ career choices. Sch Sci Math 111:345–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Britner SL, Pajares F (2006) Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, race, and gender in middle school science. J Women Minor Sci Eng 7:271–285Google Scholar
  13. Bultitude K, McDonald D, Custead S (2009) The rise and rise of science festivals—an international review of organized events to celebrate science. Int J Sci Educ Part B 1(2):165–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Court TV (2006). Forensics in the classroom. Retrieved February 6, 2006.
  15. Crombie G, Walsh JP, Trinneer A (2003) Positive effects of science and technology summer camps on confidence, values, and future intentions. Can J Couns 37:256–269Google Scholar
  16. Falk JH, Storksdieck M, Dierking L (2007) Investigating public science interest and understanding: evidence for the importance of free choice learning. Pub Underst Sci 16:455–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fields DA (2009) What do students gain from a week at science camp? Youth perceptions and the design of an immersive, research-oriented astronomy camp. Int J Sci Educ 31:151–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Foster JS, Shiel-Rolle N (2011) Building scientific literacy through summer camps: a strategy for design, implementation and assessment. Sci Educ Int 22:85–98Google Scholar
  19. Fredricks JA, Blumenfeld PC, Paris A (2004) School engagement: potential of the concept: state of the evidence. Rev Educ Res 74(59–119):85–98Google Scholar
  20. Fredricks JA, Bohnert AM, Burdette K (2014) Moving beyond attendance: lessons learned from assessing engagement in afterschool contexts. New Dir Youth Dev 144:45–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gibson HL, Chase C (2002) Longitudinal impact of an inquiry-based science program on middle school students’ attitudes toward science. Sci Educ 86:693–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hayden K, Ouyang Y, Scinski L, Olszewski B, Bielefeldt T (2011) Increasing student interest and attitudes in STEM: professional development and activities to engage and inspire learners. Contemp Issues Technol Teach Educ 11:47–69Google Scholar
  23. Hidi S, Renninger KA (2006) The four-phase model of interest development. Educ Psychol 41:111–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hirschi A (2011) Career-choice readiness in adolescence: developmental trajectories and individual differences. J Vocat Behav 79:340–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hsiu-Fang H, Shannon SE (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res 15:1277–1288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hulleman C, Harackiewicz J (2009) Promoting interest and performance in high school science classes. Science 326:1410–1412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hussar K, Schwartz S, Boiselle E, Noam GG (2008) Toward a systematic evidence-base for science in out-of-school time: the role of assessment. A study prepared for the Noyce Foundation, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  28. Jacobs JE, Eccles JS (2000) Parents, task values, and real-life achievement. In: Sansone C, Harackiewicz JM (eds) Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: the search for optimal motivation and performance. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp 405–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Johnson J, Showalter D, Klein R, Lester C (2014). Why rural matters 2013–14: the condition of rural education in the 50 states. Retrieved June 14, 2015.
  30. Kondracki NL, Wellman NS (2002) Content analysis: review of methods and their applications in nutrition education. J Nutr Educ Behav 34:224–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Larson LM, Pesch KM, Surapaneni S, Bonitz VS, Wu TF, Werbel JD (2015) Predicting graduation: the role of mathematics/science self-efficacy. J Career Assess 23:399–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lent RW, Brown SD, Hackett G (2002) Social cognitive career theory. In: Brown D (ed) Career choice and development, 4th edn. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp 253–311Google Scholar
  33. Lindner M, Kubat C (2014) Science camps in Europe—collaboration with companies and school, Implications and Results on Scientific Literacy. Sci Educ Int 25:79–85Google Scholar
  34. Lombardi AR, Conley DT, Seburn MA, Downs AM (2013) College and career readiness assessment: validation of the key cognitive strategies framework. Assess Eff Interv 38:163–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Markowitz DG (2004) Evaluation of the long-term impact of a university high school summer science program on students’ interest and perceived abilities in science. J Sci Educ Technol 13:395–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Martin LMW (2004) An emerging research framework for studying informal learning and schools. Sci Educ 88(Suppl. 1):S71–S82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mayring P (2000) Qualitative content analysis. Forum Qual Soc Res, 1(2). Retrieved March 10, 2005.
  38. McHugh ML (2012) Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochemia Medica 22:276–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Muesum of Science Boston (2016). Crime lab Boston. Retrieved May 7, 2016.
  40. National Career Development Association (2011). Career development: a policy statement of the national career development association. Retrieved June 1, 2016.
  41. National Research Council (2009). Learning science in informal environments: people, places and pursuits. Committee on Learning Science in Informal Environments. In: Bell P, Lewenstein B, Shouse AW, Feder MA (eds) Board on Science Education, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. The National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  42. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. The National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  43. National Research Council. (2015). Identifying and supporting productive STEM programs in out-of-school settings. Committee on Successful Out-of-School STEM Learning. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. The National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  44. National Science Board (2014). Science and Engineering Indicators 2014 State Data Tool. Retrieved Jul 30, 2015.
  45. New York Hall of Science (n.d.). Forensic Frenzy-Workshops for middle and high school students. Retrieved May 9, 2016.
  46. Packer J (2006) Learning for fun: the unique contribution of educational leisure experiences. Curator 49:329–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Porfeli EJ, Lee B (2012) Career development during childhood and adolescence. New Dir Youth Dev 134:11–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (2010). Report to the president Prepare and inspire: K-12 education in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) for America’s future. Retrieved 5 Dec 2010.
  49. Renninger KA, Hidi S (2002) Student interest and achievement: developmental issues raised by a case study. In: Wigfield A, Eccles JS (eds) Development of achievement motivation. Academic Press, New York, NY, pp 173–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Renninger KA, Hidi S (2011) Revisiting the conceptualization, measurement, and generation of interest. Educ Psychol 46:168–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Schwan S, Grajal A, Lewalter D (2014) Understanding and engagement in places of science experience: science museums, science centers, zoos, and aquariums. Educ Psychol 49:70–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Stakes JE, Mares KR (2005) Evaluating the impact of science-enrichment programs on adolescents’ science motivation and confidence: the splashdown effect. J Res Sci Teach 42:359–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Stocklmayer SM, Rennie LJ, Gilbert JK (2010) The role of formal and informal sectors in the provision of effective science education. Stud Scie Educ 46:1–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Super DE (1980) A life-span, life-space approach to career development. J Vocat Behav 16:282–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Super DE, Savickas M, Super C (1996) The life-span, life-space approach to careers. In: Brown D, Brooks L, & Associates (Eds). Career choice and development (3rd Ed.), pp. 121–178). Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  56. Velayuthama S, Aldridge J, Fraser B (2011) Development and validation of an instrument to measure students’ motivation and self-regulation. Int J Sci Educ 33:2159–2179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Weber RP (1990) Basic Content Analysis, 2nd edn. Sage, Newbury Park, CACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wellington J (1990) Formal and informal learning in science: the role of interactive science centres. Phys Educ 25:247–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Psychology and CounselingArkansas State UniversityJonesboroUSA

Personalised recommendations