Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Preventing Youth Pregnancy: Dialogue and Deliberation in a Science Museum Exhibit

  • Published:
Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this article, we explore how visitors engage with a science museum exhibit that displays controversial topics. Through a case study methodology, we focus on the Brazilian exhibit Preventing Youth Pregnancy that delves into teen pregnancy, sexual practices, and sexually transmitted diseases. Using the lens of science communication (an emergent feld of research) we explore (a) communication patterns established between the exhibit and the public and (b) the dimensions of engagement that visitors experienced. Data were collected through observations and interviews with visitors, feld notes, exit comment cards, and interviews with stafers. Our findings revealed the potential of articulating different models of science communication and exposed a visitor experience in which informed decision making, sharing of personal stories, co-production of knowledge, and learning how to care (and act) were at play while negotiating the complexities of the issues raised by the displays.

Résumé

Dans cet article, nous nous penchons sur les façons dont les visiteurs abordent une exposition dans un musée scientifique lorsque les thèmes traités sont controversés. Grâce à un eméthodologie de type étude de cas, nous centrons notre attention sur l’exposition brésilienne intitulée «Prévenir la grossesse chez les jeunes», qui a pour thèmes la grossesse des adolescentes, les pratiques sexuelles et les maladies transmises sexuellement. Par le biais de la communication scientifique (un champ de recherche émergent), nous explorons d’abord les modèles de communication qui sont établis entre l’exposition et le public, et ensuite le niveau de participation engagée des visiteurs. Les données ont été recueillies au moyen de séances d’observation et d’entrevues des visiteurs, de notes sur le terrain, de fiches de commentaires remplies à la sortie de l’exposition et d’entrevues avec le personnel. Nos résultats révèlent le potentiel que représente l’articulation de différents modèles de communication scientifique, et racontent également comment l’expérience vécue par un visiteur, dans laquelle la prise de décision éclairée, le partage de récits personnels, la mise en commun de connaissances et l’apprentissage de stratégies de soins (et d’action) sont entrés en jeu lors de la navigation des questions complexes soulevées par l’exposition.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albe, V., & Pedretti, E. (2013). Introduction to the special issue on courting controversy: Socioscientific issues and school science and technology. Canadian Journal of Science Mathematics and Technology Education, 13, 303–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science. (2014). What is public engagement. Retrieved from https://doi.org/www.aaas.org

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, L. (2008). Engaging the public in technology policy: A new role for science museums? Science Communication, 29, 386–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodmer, W. (2010). Public understanding of science: The BA, the Royal Society and COPUS. Notes and Records of the Royal Society, 64, 151–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brasil. (1998). Parâmetros curriculares nacionais 5ª a 8ª Séries [National curricular parametres 5th to 8th grades]. Brasilia, Brazil: Author. Retrieved from https://doi.org/portal.mec.gov.br

    Google Scholar 

  • Brotman, J. S., Mensah, F. M., & Lesko, N. (2010). Urban high school students’ learning about HIV/AIDS in different contexts. Science Education, 95, 87–120. doi:10.1002/sce.20405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bubela, T., Nisbet, M. C., Borchelt, R., Brunger, F., Critchley, C., Einsiedel, E., & Jones, S. A. (2009). Commentary. Science Communication Reconsidered, 27, 514–518.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bucchi, M. (2008). Of deficits, deviations and dialogues: Theories of public communication of science. In M. Bucchi & B. Trench (Eds.), Handbook of public communication of science and technology (pp. 57–76). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, D. (2004). The museum, a temple or the forum. In G. Anderson (Ed.), Reinventing the museum (pp. 61–73). New York, NY: Altamira Press. (Original work published 1971)

    Google Scholar 

  • Chilvers, J. (2012). Reflexive engagement? Actors, learning, and reflexivity in public dialogue on science and technology. Science Communication, 35, 283–310. doi:10.1177/1075547012454598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chittenden, D. (2011). Commentary: Roles, opportunities, and challenges—Science museums engaging the public in emerging science and technology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 13, 1549–1556. doi:10.1007/s11051-011-0311-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, J., Luke, J. J., & Uttal, D. H. (2009). Practical evaluation guide: Tools for museums &other informal educational settings (2nd ed.). Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dinis, N. F. (2006). Educação, cidadania e as minorias sexuais e de gênero [Education, citizenship and sexual minorities]. In M. A. Schmidt & T. Stoltz (Eds.), Educação, cidadania e inclusão social [Education, citizenship and social inclusion] (pp. 130–135). Curitiba, Brazil: Aos Quatro Ventos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dinis, N. F., & Asinelli-Luz, A. (2007). Educação sexual na perspectiva histórico-cultural [Sexual education through an historical–cultural perspective]. Educar em Revista, 30, 77–87. doi:10.1590/S0104-40602007000200006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einsiedel, A. A., & Einsiedel, E. F. (2004). Museums as agora: Diversifying approaches to engaging publics in research. In D. Chittenden, G. Farmelo & B. V. Lewenstein (Eds.), Creating connections: Museums and the public understanding of current research (pp. 73–86). Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gascoigne, T., Cheng, D., Claessens, M., Metcalfe, J., Schiele, B., & Shi, S. (2010, September). Is science communication its own feld? Journal of Science Communication, 9, 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (2013). Don’t be nervous, don’t be flustered, don’t be scared. Be prepared. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 13, 313–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (2014). Be part of the solution learning about, from activism. In L. Bencze & S. Alsop (Eds.), Activist science and technology education (pp. 67–98). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-4360-1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • House of Lords. (2000). Science and technology. Third report. Retrieved from https://doi.org/www.publications.parliament.uk

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1277–1288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Instituto Kaplan. (n.d.). Instalação Prevenindo a Gravidez Juvenil [Installation Preventing Youth Pregnancy]. Retrieved from https://doi.org/www.kaplan.org.br

  • Lesko, N. (2010). Feeling abstinent? Feeling comprehensive? Touching the affects of sexuality curricula. Sex Education, 10, 281–297. doi:10.1080/14681811.2010.491633

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, R. (2010). Science education and democratic participation: An uneasy congruence?; Studies in Science Education, 46, 69–119. doi:10.1080/03057260903562433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lieberman, L. D., Berlin, C., Palen, L.-A., & Ashley, O. S. (2012). A theater-based approach to primary prevention of sexual behavior for early adolescents. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 32, 730–753.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Macedo Guastaferro, C. (2013). Adolescência, gravidez e doenças sexualmente transmissíveis (DST): Como os adolescentes enfrentam estas vulnerabilidades? [Teenage, pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases [STD]: How do teenagers face those vulnerabilities?] (Master’s thesis). Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macedo Guastaferro, C., & Cambauva, J. (2010). A experiência transgressiva no trabalho de prevenção com adolescentes [A transgressive experience in the work with prevention and teenagers]. Revista Brasileira de Psicodrama, 18, 43–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S. (2010). Deficit model. In S. H. Preist (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of science and technology communication (pp. 207–209). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moscheta, M. D. S., McNamee, S., & Dos Santos, J. C. (2011). Dialogue and transformation: Embracing sexual diversity in the educational context. Educar em Revista, 1, 103–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedretti, E., & Navas-Iannini, A. M. (2018). Pregnant pauses: Science museums, schools and a controversial exhibition. In R. Gunstone, D. Corrigan, & A. Jones (Eds.), Bridging informal and formal science education (pp. 26–40). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pouliot, C. (2009). Using the deficit model, public debate model and co-production of knowledge models to interpret points of view of students concerning citizens’ participation in socioscientific issues. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4, 49–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sfair, S.C., Bittar, M., & Lopes, R. E. (2015). Educação sexual para adolescentes e jovens: Mapeando proposições oficiais [Sexual education for teenagers and youth: Mapping oficial propositions]. Saude e Sociedade, 24, 620–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soren, B. J., & Armstrong, J. (2014). Qualitative and quantitative audience measures. In G. D. Lord & B. Lord (Eds.), The manual of museum exhibitions (pp. 58–66). London, England: The Stationery Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. E. (2000). Case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 435–454). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg, L., & Morris, A. S. (2001). Adolescent development. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 83–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sturgis, P., & Allum, N. (2004). Science in society: Re-evaluating the deficit model of public understanding. Public Understanding of Science, 13, 55–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trench, B., & Bucchi, M. (2010, September). Science communication, an emerging discipline. Journal of Science Communication, 9, 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trench, B., & Bucchi, M. (2015). Science communication research over 50 years. Patterns and trends. In B. Schiele, J. Le Marec, & P. Baranger (Eds.), Science communication today—2015: Current strategies and means of action (pp. 15–27). Nancy: PUN-Éditions Universitaires de Lorraine. Retrieved from https://doi.org/www.academia.edu

    Google Scholar 

  • Tushabomwe, A., & Nashon, S. M. (2016). Interpreting teachers’ perceptions of contextual influences on sexuality discourses within the school curriculum: Lessons from sex health education teachers in Kampala, Uganda. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 16, 331–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2010). Levers of success: Case studies of national sexuality education programmes. Paris, France: Author. Retrieved from https://doi.org/unesdoc.unesco.org

    Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, B. (1992). Public understanding of science research: New horizons or hall of mirrors? Public Understanding of Science, 1, 37–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2011). An inclusive view of scientific literacy: Core issues and future directions. In C. Linder, L. Östman, D. A. Roberts, P.-O. Wickman, G. Ericksen, & A. MacKinnon (Eds.), Exploring the landscape of scientific literacy (pp. 171–192). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89, 357–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ziman, J. (1991). Public understanding of science. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 16, 99–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Curriculum, Teaching and Learning, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, 252 Bloor Street West, Toronto, M5S 1V6, Ontario, Canada

    Ana Maria Navas-Iannini & Erminia Pedretti

Authors
  1. Ana Maria Navas-Iannini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Erminia Pedretti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ana Maria Navas-Iannini.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Navas-Iannini, A.M., Pedretti, E. Preventing Youth Pregnancy: Dialogue and Deliberation in a Science Museum Exhibit. Can. J. Sci. Math. Techn. Educ. 17, 271–287 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2017.1381285

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2017.1381285

Search

Navigation