Advertisement

Cultural Studies of Science Education

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 917–939 | Cite as

Disorientating, fun or meaningful? Disadvantaged families’ experiences of a science museum visit

  • Louise ArcherEmail author
  • Emily Dawson
  • Amy Seakins
  • Billy Wong
Original Paper

Abstract

It is widely agreed that there is a need to increase and widen science participation. Informal science learning environments (ISLEs), such as science museums, may provide valuable spaces within which to engage visitors—yet the visitor profile of science museums remains narrow. This paper seeks to understand the experiences of socially disadvantaged families within such spaces. Using a Bourdieusian analytic lens, we analyse qualitative data from a small study conducted with ten parents and ten children from an urban school who visited a large science museum. Data includes pre- and post-interviews, audio recordings and visit fieldnotes. We characterised families’ experiences as falling into three discourses, as ‘disorientating’, ‘fun’ or ‘meaningful’ visits. Analysis identifies how the families’ experiences, and the likelihood of deriving science learning from the visit, were shaped through interactions of habitus and capital. Implications for improving equity and inclusion within ISLEs are discussed.

Keywords

Diverse families Museums Inclusion Bourdieu 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The Enterprising Science project is funded by BP and conducted in partnership between King’s College London and the Science Museum. We extend our thanks to all the participating schools and students.

References

  1. AAUW. (2010). AAUW annual report. Washington: AAUW.Google Scholar
  2. Aikenhead, G. (2006). Science education for everyday life: Evidence based practice. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  3. Allen, S. (2004). Designs for learning: Studying science museum exhibits that do more than entertain. Science Education, 88, S17–S33. doi: 10.1002/sce.20016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anthias, F. (2001). New hybridities, old concepts: the limits of ‘culture’. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 24(4), 619–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2010). “Doing” science versus “being” a scientist: Examining 10/11-year-old schoolchildren’s constructions of science through the lens of identity. Science Education, 94(4), 617–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2012). Science aspirations, capital, and family habitus: How families shape children’s engagement and identification with science. American Educational Research Journal, 49(5), 881–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Archer, L., Dewitt, J., & Willis, B. (2013). Adolescent boys’ science aspirations: Masculinity, capital and power. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Archer, L., Hutchings, M., & Ross, A. (2003). Higher education and social class. London: RoutledgeFalmer.Google Scholar
  9. Ash, D. (2003). Dialogic inquiry in life science conversations of family groups in a museum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(2), 138–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ash, D. (2004). Reflective scientific sense-making dialogue in two languages: The science in the dialogue and the dialogue in the science. Science Education, 88(6), 855–884. doi: 10.1002/sce.20002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bamberger, Y., & Tal, T. (2008). An experience for the lifelong journey: The long-term effect of a class visit to a science center. Visitor Studies, 11(2), 198–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Barton, A. C., & Brickhouse, N. W. (2006). Engaging girls in science. In C. Skelton, B. Francis, & L. Smulyan (Eds.), Handbook of gender and education (pp. 221–235). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Barton, A. C., & Tan, E. (2009). Funds of knowledge and discourses and hybrid space. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 50–73. doi: 10.1002/tea.20269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A. W., & Feder, M. A. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  15. Borun, M. (1999). Gender roles in science museum learning. Visitor Studies Today!, 3(3), 11–14.Google Scholar
  16. Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power (G. Raymond & M. Adamson, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  17. Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical reason. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  18. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture (R. Nice, Trans. 2nd ed.). New Delhi: Sage.Google Scholar
  19. Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  20. Brickhouse, N., Lowery, O., & Schultz, K. (2000). What kind of girl does science? The construction of school science identities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(5), 441–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. British Science Association. (2006). Representations of science: Black and minority ethnic communities. London: British Science Association.Google Scholar
  22. Butler, J. (1990) Gender trouble. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Carlone, H. B., & Johnson, A. (2007). Understanding the science experiences of successful women of color: Science identity as an analytic lens. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(8), 1187–1218. doi: 10.1002/tea.20237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. CBI. (2012). Learning to grow: What employers need from education and skills. Education and skills survey 2012. London: Confederation for British Industry.Google Scholar
  25. Charlesworth, S. (2000). Bourdieu, social suffering and working-class life. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  26. Crowley, K., & Jacobs, M. (2002). Building islands of expertise in everyday family activity. In G. Leinhardt, K. Crowley, & K. Knutson (Eds.), Learning conversations in museums (pp. 333–356). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.Google Scholar
  27. Dawson, E. (2014). “Not Designed for Us”: How Science museums and science centers socially exclude low-income, minority ethnic groups. Science Education, 98(6), 981–1008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Department for Education and Skills. (2004). Report on the science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) mapping review. London: Department for Education and Skills.Google Scholar
  29. Elias, P., & Jones, P. (2006). Representation of ethnic groups in chemistry and physics. London: The Royal Society of Chemistry and the Institute of Physics.Google Scholar
  30. Falk, J. H. (2004). The director’s cut: Toward an improved understanding of learning from museums. Science Education, 88(S1), S83–S96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2010). The 95 percent solution. American Scientist, 98, 486–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Falk, J. H., Osborne, J., Dierking, L. D., Dawson, E., Wenger, M., & Wong, B. (2012). Analyzing the UK Science Education Community: The contribution of informal providers. London: Wellcome Trust.Google Scholar
  33. Gago, J. (2007). Taking European knowledge society seriously. Brussels: European Commission, Directorate-General for Research.Google Scholar
  34. Garibay, C. (2009). Latinos, leisure values, and decisions: Implications for informal science learning and engagement. The Informal Learning Review, 94, 10–13.Google Scholar
  35. Gutwill, J. P., & Allen, S. (2010). Facilitating family group inquiry at science museum exhibits. Science Education, 94(4), 710–742. doi: 10.1002/sce.20387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hall, S. (1990) Culture, identity and diaspora. In J. Rutherford (Ed.), Identity, community, culture, difference. London: Lawrence & Wishart.Google Scholar
  37. Harding, S. (1998). Is science multicultural? Postcolonialisms, feminisms and epistemologies (race, gender and science). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Heath, C., Lehn, D. V., & Osborne, J. (2005). Interaction and interactives: Collaboration and participation with computer-based exhibits. Public Understanding of Science, 14(1), 91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Irwin, A., & Michael, M. (2003). Science, social theory and public knowledge. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Lareau, A. (2003) Unequal childhoods. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  42. Leinhardt, G., Crowley, K., & Knutson, K. (2002). Learning conversations in museums. East Sussex: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  43. Levin, A. K. (Ed.). (2010). Gender, sexuality and museums. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Inc.Google Scholar
  45. OECD. (2012). Education at a glance 2012: OECD indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/eag-2012-en
  46. Packer, J., & Ballantyne, R. (2002). Motivational factors and the visitor experience: A comparison of three sites. Curator: The Museum Journal, 45(3), 183–198. doi: 10.1111/j.2151-6952.2002.tb00055.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Packer, J., & Ballantyne, R. (2004). Is educational leisure a contradiction in terms? Exploring the synergy of education and entertainment. Annals of Leisure Research, 7(1), 54–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rahm, J., & Ash, D. (2008). Learning environments at the margin: Case studies of disenfranchised youth doing science in an aquarium and an after-school program. Learning Environments Research, 11(1), 49–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ramey-Gassert, L. (1996). Same place, different experiences: Exploring the influence of gender on students’ science museum experiences. International Journal of Science Education, 18(8), 903–912. doi: 10.1080/0950069960180803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Reay, D. (1998). Class work. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  51. Reay, D. (2004). ‘It’s all becoming a habitus’: Beyond the habitual use of habitus in educational research. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 25(4), 431–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Reay, D., David, M., & Ball, S. (2001). Making a difference? Institutional habituses and higher education choice. Sociological Research Online, 5(4). http://www.socresonline.org.uk/5/4/reay.html.
  53. Sandell, R. (2007). Museums, prejudice and the reframing of difference. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  54. Sandell, R., Dodd, J., & Garland-Thomson, R. (2010). Preface. In R. Sandell, J. Dodd, & R. Garland-Thomson (Eds.), Re-presenting disability: Activism and agency in the museum. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  55. Smith, E. (2010). Do we need more scientists? A long-term view of patterns of participation in UK undergraduate science programmes. Cambridge Journal of Education, 40(3), 281–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Teixera, T. (2008). Launchpad: Summative evaluation report. London: Science Museum.Google Scholar
  57. Tunnicliffe, S. D., & Laterveer-de Beer, M. (2002). An interactive exhibition about animal skeletons: Did the visitors learn any zoology? Journal of Biological Education, 36(3), 130–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. UK Comission for Employment and Skills. (2010). Skills for jobs: Today and tomorrow (Vol. 2: The evidence report). London: UK Commission for Employment and Skills.Google Scholar
  59. Welsh, I., & Wynne, B. (2013). Science, scientism and imaginaries of publics in the UK: Passive objects, incipient threats. Science as Culture, 22(4), 540–566. doi: 10.1080/14636778.2013.764072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wilson, R. (2009). The demand for STEM graduates: Some benchmarking projections. London: Council for Industry and Higher Education.Google Scholar
  61. Zimmerman, H. T., Reeve, S., & Bell, P. (2010). Family sense-making practices in science center conversations. Science Education, 94(3), 478–505. doi: 10.1002/sce.20374.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Louise Archer
    • 1
    Email author
  • Emily Dawson
    • 1
  • Amy Seakins
    • 1
  • Billy Wong
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Education and Professional StudiesKing’s College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations