Using Sociocultural Frameworks to Understand the Significance of Interactions at Science and Technology Centers and Museums

  • Anders Jakobsson
  • Anders Jakobsson
  • Eva Davidsson
  • Eva Davidsson


A possible approach in order to explore and increase the understanding of the role of interactions at Science and Technology Centres (STCs) and museums is to focus on and discuss what implications these interactions may have in relation to learning and human development. One explicit aim with such a focus is to take the rich flora of sociocultural or cultural-historical frameworks as a point of departure in order to begin to develop a theoretical model, which aims to describe and explain the significance of interactions in these contexts.


Mediate Action Cultural Tool Rich Flora High Mental Function Psychological Tool 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Allen, S. (2002). Looking for learning in visitor talk: a methodological exploration. In G. Leinhardt, K. Crowley, & K. Knutson (Eds.), Learning conversations in museums. (pp. 259–303). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, S., & Gutwill, J. (2004) Designing science museum exhibits with multiple interactive features: Five common pitfalls. Curator, 47 (2), 199–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ash, D. (2004). Reflective scientific sense-making dialogues in two languages: The science in the dialogue and the dialogue in science. Science Education, 88(6), 855–884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ash, D. (2004b).How families use questions at dioramas: Ideas for exhibit design. Curator 47(1), 84–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bakhtin, M. (1984). Problems of Dostoevsky´s poetics, Minneapolis:University of Minnesota PressGoogle Scholar
  7. Borun, M. (2002).Object-Based Learning and Family Groups.In S. G. Paris (Ed.) Perspectives on Object-Centered Learning in Museums (pp. 245–260). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  8. Chiozzi, G., & Andreotti, L. (2001). Behavior vs. time: Understanding how visitors utilize the Milan natural history museum. Curator, 44(2), 153–165.Google Scholar
  9. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology. A once and future discipline. Harward: Harward University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Cole, M. & Engeström, Y. (1993). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition, in G. Salomon (Ed). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and Educational Considerations 1–46, New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Crowley, K., Callanan, M. A., Jipson, J. L., Galco, J., Topping, K., & Shrager, J. (2001). Shared scientific thinking in everyday parent–child activity. Science Education 85, 712–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Crowley, K. Callanan, M, Terebaum, H., & Allen, E. (2001). Parents explain more often to boys and girls during shared scientific thinking. Psychological Science. 12 (3), 258–261.Google Scholar
  13. Crowley, K. & Jacobs, M. (2002).Building islands of expertice in everyday family activity.In G. Leinhardt, K. Crowley & K. Knutson (Eds.) Learning conversations in museums (pp. 333–356). New Jersey, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  14. Daniels, H. (2008). Vygotsky and research. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Davidsson, E. (2008). Different images of science – A study of how science is constituted in exhibitions. Phd thesis. Malmö, Sweden: Holmbergs.Google Scholar
  16. Davidsson, E., & Jakobsson, A. (2009). Staff members’ ideas about visitors’ learning at science and technology centres. International Journal of Science Education 31 (1), 129–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Davidsson, E & Sørensen. H. (2010). Sponsorship and exhibitions at Nordic science centers andGoogle Scholar
  18. museums. Museum management and curatorship. 25(4), 345–360.Google Scholar
  19. Dewey, J- (1981). The experimental theory of knowledge. In J. McDermot (Ed). The philosophy of John Dewey. 136–177. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Orginal work 1910)Google Scholar
  20. DeWitt, J., & Osborne, J. (2007). Supporting teachers on science-focused school trips: towards an integrated framework of theory and practice. International Journal of Science Education, 29 (6), 685–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ellenbogen, K., Luke, J., & Dierking, L. (2004).Family learning research in museums: An emerging disciplinary matrix? Science Education, 88 (S1), S48-S58.Google Scholar
  22. Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y Engeström, R. Miettinen and R-L. Punamäki (Eds). Perspectivies on activity theory.(pp. 19–38).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Fors, V. (2006). The missing link in learning in science centres. Luleå, Sweden: Luleå University of Technology. Google Scholar
  24. Griffin, J., Meehan, C. & Jay, D. (2003).The other side of evaluating student learning in museums: Separating the how from what. Paperpresented at the Museum Australia Conference, Perth.Google Scholar
  25. Halliday, M.A.K. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold. (Revised by Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen).Google Scholar
  26. Hohenstein, J., & Tran, L. (2007). Use of questions in exhibit labels to generate explanatory conversation among science museum visitors. International Journal of Science Education 29 (12), 1557–1580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hutschins, E. (1995). How a cockpit remember its speed. Cognitive science. 19, 265–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kozulin, A. (1998). Psychological tools, a sociocultural approach to education. Massachusets, US: Harvard.Google Scholar
  29. Kozulin, A. (2003). Psychological Tools and Mediated Learning. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. Ageyev & S. Miller. (Eds). Vygotsky’s Educational Theory in Cultural Context. (pp. 15–38). US: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Korn, R., & Jones, J. (2000). Visitor behavior and experiences in the four permanent galleries at the Tech museum of innovation. Curator, 43 (3), 261–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kress, G. & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: the grammar of visual design. London Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Lehn, wom D. (2006). Embodying experience: A video-based examination of visitors’ conduct and interaction in museums. European Journal of Marketing. 40 (11/12), 1340–1359.Google Scholar
  34. Lemke. J. (2004). The literacies of science. In E. Wendy Saul (Ed). Crossing boarders in literacy and science instructions (pp 33–47). VA: NSTA Press.Google Scholar
  35. Leinhardt G, Knutson K (2004) Listening in on museum conversations. AltaMira Press, LanhamGoogle Scholar
  36. Leontiev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality.Engelwood Cliffs, NJ, US: Prentice- Hall.Google Scholar
  37. Lindemann-Matthies, P., & Kamer, T. (2006). The influence of an interactive educational approach on visitors’ learning in a Swiss zoo. Science Education. 90 (2), 296–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Linell, P. (2001). Approaching dialogue. Amsterdam: J, Benjamins Pub.Google Scholar
  39. Mäkitalo, Å & Säljö, R. (2002). Talk in institutional context and institutional context in talk: Categories as situated practices. Text 22 (1), 57–82.Google Scholar
  40. Norman, D.A. (1993). Things that make us smart: defending human attributes in the age of the Google Scholar
  41. machine. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  42. Novey, L., & Hall, T. (2007). The effect of audio tours on learning and social interaction: An evaluation at Carlsbad caverns national park. Science Education, 91 (2), 260–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Quistgaard, N. (2006). 1.g elever på et science center: Engageres de? – Påvirkes de? [Upper secondary students at a science centre: Are they engaged? Are they influenced?] Ph.D.-dissertation. Denmark, University of Southern Denmark.Google Scholar
  44. Rahm, J. (2004). Multiple modes of meaning-making in a science center. Science Education 88 (2), 223–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in Thinking: Cognitive Development in Social Context New York: US: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Rogoff, B. (1998). Cognition as a collaborative process, in D. Kuhn and R.S. Siegler (Eds) Handbook of ChildPsychology: Vol. 2, Cognition, Perception, and Language, 5 thedn, 679–744, New York; Wiley.Google Scholar
  47. Rogoff, B. (2008). Observing sociocultural activity on three plans; Participatory appropriation, guided participation and apprenticeship. In K. Hall, P Merphy and J. Soler (eds). Pedagogy and practice; Culture and identities. London: Sage Publications Ldt.Google Scholar
  48. Siegel, D. R., Esterly, J., Callanan, M. A., Wright, R., & Navarro. (2007). Conversations about science across activities in Mexican-decent families. International Journal of Science education 29 (12), 1447–1466.Google Scholar
  49. Swanagan, J. S. (2000). Factors influencing zoo visitors’ conservation attitudes and behaviour. The Journal of Environmental Education 31 (4), 26–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Shweder, R.A. (1990). Cultural psychology – what is it?, In J, Stigler, R. Shweder and G, Herdt (Eds) Cultural Psychology: Essays on Comparative Human development. 1–43, New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Säljö, R. (2005). Lärande och kulturella verktyg: Om lärpocesser och det kollektiva minnet. [Learning and cultural tools: About learning processes and the collective memory] Falun, Sweden: Nordstedts Akademiska Förlag.Google Scholar
  52. Tenenbaum, H., Prior, J., Dowling, C., & Frost, R. (2010). Supporting parent–child conversations in a history museum. British journal on educational psychology. 80, 241–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wartofsky, M. (1979). Models. Representation and the scientific understanding. The Netherlands, Dordrecht: Riedel.Google Scholar
  54. Vygotsky,L.S. (1978). Mind in society. The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, and E. Souberman (Eds and trans), Cambridge, MA: HarwardGoogle Scholar
  55. University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Vygotsky, L. (1981). Instrumental method in psychology.In J. Wertsch (Ed.).The concept of activity in Soviet psychology. (pp. 134–143).NewYork, US: Shape.Google Scholar
  57. Vygotsky,L.S. (1986). Thought and language Cambridge, MA MIT Press. (Orginal, work 1934).Google Scholar
  58. Vygotsky,L.S. (1997). The collected work of L.S Vygotsky. Vol 3: Problems of the theory and history of psychology R. Rieber and Wollock (Eds). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  59. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Wertsch, J.V. (1991). Voices of the Mind: A Sociocultural Approach to Mediated Action Cambridge, MA: Harward University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Wertsch, J.V. (1994). The primacy of mediated action in sociocultural studies. Mind, Culture and Activity 1, 4:202–208.Google Scholar
  62. Wertsch, J.V. (1998). Mind as action. New York, US: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Wertsch, J. V. (2002). Voices of Collective Remembering. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Wertsch, J. V. (2007). Mediation. In H. Daniels, M. Coles and J. Wertsch (Eds) The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky. US: Canbridge Univesity Press.Google Scholar
  65. Wertsch, J. V. & Stone. C.A. (1985). The concept of internalization in Vygotsky’s account og the genesis of higher mental functions. In J. Wertsch (Ed) Culture, Communication and Cognition: Vygotskian Perspectivies. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Sense Publishers 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anders Jakobsson
    • 1
  • Anders Jakobsson
    • 2
  • Eva Davidsson
    • 3
  • Eva Davidsson
    • 4
  1. 1.Science EducationMalmö UniversitySweden
  2. 2.Skövde UniversitySweden
  3. 3.Danish school of educationAarhus UniversityDenmark
  4. 4.Malmö UniversitySweden

Personalised recommendations