Next Article in Journal
Smart City-Ranking of Major Australian Cities to Achieve a Smarter Future
Previous Article in Journal
Research on the Knowledge Association Reasoning of Financial Reports Based on a Graph Network
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 12
Issue 7
10.3390/su12072796
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Impact of Student-Curated Exhibitions about Socio-Scientific Issues on Students’ Perceptions Regarding Their Competences and the Science Classes

by
Pedro Reis
1,*,
Luís Tinoca
1,
Mónica Baptista
1 and
Elisabete Linhares
2
1
Instituto de Educação, Universidade de Lisboa, 1649-013 Lisbon, Portugal
2
Escola Superior de Educação, Instituto Politécnico de Santarém; Unidade de Investigação e Desenvolvimento em Educação, Instituto de Educação, Universidade de Lisboa–UIDEF, 1649-013 Lisbon, Portugal
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2020, 12(7), 2796; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072796
Submission received: 9 March 2020 / Revised: 27 March 2020 / Accepted: 30 March 2020 / Published: 1 April 2020
(This article belongs to the Section Sustainable Education and Approaches)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The IRRESISTIBLE Project (FP7, Grant 612367) had the aim of involving teachers, students, and the public in the discussion on Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), promoting both the construction of knowledge on cutting-edge (and controversial) research topics and the discussion about the criteria that these research/innovation processes should respect in order to be considered as responsible. These criteria also represent a strong contribution to a more sustainable future for all. This quantitative research evaluates the impact of IRRESISTIBLE’s student-curated exhibitions–about the RRI dimensions of cutting-edge research topics (socio-scientific issues)–on students’ perceptions regarding their scientific competences and the science classes. A pre- and post-test questionnaire was developed, validated, and applied to students from 10 countries. The overall results of the statistical analysis indicate that students improved their perceptions regarding their competences in developing exhibitions in science classes as a way of creating awareness on topics relating to science, technology, and society. This activity reinforced students’ perceptions that in science classes they: (a) discuss current issues and how they impact their lives; (b) develop socially relevant projects; and (c) learn how to influence other citizens’ decisions about social issues related to science, technology, and the environment with the aim of assuring a more sustainable future.

1. Introduction

The IRRESISTIBLE Project (FP7-SCIENCE-IN-SOCIETY-2013-1, ACTIVITY 5.2.2; Grant agreement no. 612,367; more details at http://www.irresistible-project.eu/index.php/en/) had the aim of involving teachers, students, and the public in the process of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), promoting both the construction of knowledge on cutting-edge (and controversial) research topics and the discussion about the criteria that these research and innovation processes should respect in order to be considered as responsible [1]. Nowadays, humankind face many serious problems such as climate change, pollution caused by plastic waste, oceans’ acidification, and lack of food security, all of which can be dealt with using responsible manufacturing processes [2].
Each of the 12 partners (from 10 different countries) developed a Learning Community—including science teachers, teacher educators, research scientists in selected scientific areas, and specialists from science centres and museums—with the aim of supporting students and teachers through an Inquiry-Based Science Education (IBSE) strategy, centered on a cutting-edge socio-scientific issue. These IBSE strategies—organized according to the 5E teaching model [3]: Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate, and Evaluate—allowed students to identify the controversial dimensions of each research topic, to raise their awareness of RRI and to obtain the necessary knowledge for the development of an interactive scientific exposition on that topic (an extra E—Exchange—added by the IRRESISTIBLE project to the 5E model [4].
Reflection on the RRI dimensions of each cutting-edge research topic was guided by the aspects defined by Hilary Sutcliffe in her report on Responsible Research and Innovation [5]: (a) Engagement—the joint participation of researchers, industry and civil society in the research and innovation process; (b) gender equality—equal involvement of both men and women; (c) science education—creative education to foster the future needs of society; (d) ethics—the necessity of respecting fundamental rights and the highest ethical standards; (e) open access—assuring free online access to the results of publicly funded research; (f) governance—the responsibility of policy makers to develop harmonious models for RRI. Several of these aspects represent a strong contribution not only to RRI but also to a better and more sustainable future for all, addressing some of the sustainable development goals proposed by the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development [6,7]: Goal 4—quality education as a requirement to equip citizens with the tools required to develop and to discuss innovative solutions to the world’s greatest problems; Goal 5—gender equality as a fundamental human right assuring women and girls participation in all levels of society; Goal 9—technology and innovation, orientated by responsibility, are the foundation of development; Goal 13—climate action requires responsible research and innovation orientated towards renewable energy and a low-carbon economy.
According to the Science and Society Action Plan [8], joint and inclusive participation of all social actors is a fundamental condition to assure the compatibility between the processes and products of research and innovation, and the values, needs, and expectations of European society. Because of the public funding of many research programs, it is assumed that governments and other entities have the moral responsibility to allow (and promote) their citizens’ involvement in decision-making processes regarding the meaning and purpose of research and innovation.
Critical in this model, student-curated exhibitions took place in different contexts—schools, universities, science centres, museums, and public places—and were assumed as a strategy for activism. Through these exhibitions, students informed and alerted the community about the socio-scientific issues they had researched, and triggered discussion on the necessary conditions to assure responsible research and innovation practices in those areas. The exhibitions took place as collective actions of democratic problem-solving, enabling students as critics and producers of knowledge, instead of placing them in the simple role of knowledge consumers [9,10,11,12,13].
Socio-scientific issues can be defined as ‘hot science’, focused on the symmetry between various interests or perspectives related to controversial issues [14,15,16]. Exhibitions about socio-scientific issues are a consequence of the shift in scientific literacy meaning from (1) the understanding of the products and processes of science to (2) the understanding of the complex interactions between science, technology, and society that allows citizens’ critical analysis and engagement in socio-scientific issues and informed decision-making processes [17,18,19,20,21]. These exhibitions represent a challenge for those involved in their development [22]. Their emphasis in the understanding of complex issues and in decision-making competences require exhibitions questioning the social, economic, political, and ethical impacts of scientific and technological proposals in visitors’ daily lives and presenting the opinions of different social stakeholders regarding those issues [23]. Visitors are invited to engage actively in the development of their own critical perspectives and challenged to participate in collective action [16,22,24,25,26,27]. This type of exhibition doesn’t provide correct answers; it raises questions, in-depth discussion, and critical thinking [16,25,27,28]. It represents a context and a pretext for discussion between curators, visitors, and other social stakeholders, transforming all of them into learners [29].
Asking students to curate an exhibition on a socio-scientific issue can be particularly useful in terms of: (a) learning about the contents, the processes, and the nature of science and technology [30,31]; (b) highlighting a borderline science, that is controversial, preliminary, uncertain, and under debate [32]; (c) developing students’ skills of inquiry, questioning, discussion, collaboration, autonomy, creativity, communication, project management, and media production [33,34]; (d) promoting students‘ cognitive, social, political, moral, and ethical development [31,35,36]; (e) creating an opportunity for students to participate in (and to instigate) community action on socio-scientific issues [9]—a major dimension of scientific literacy [18,37]; (f) moving assessment from a product to a process [9,38].
During the last 20 years, several studies have focused on how to develop socio-scientific issue-based exhibitions, suggesting some design guidelines or principles such as raising curiosity, presenting an interesting narrative, challenging the visitors, and stimulating their participation [15,26,27,39,40]. Within the IRRESISTIBLE project, and having in mind the novelty of exhibition development for the majority of the partners, a guide was developed through a design-based research approach. This methodology, based on collaboration among researchers and practitioners—the project members—was used to develop a tool that could help improving educational practices in real-world settings [41]. Along this process, a sequence of several iterations—literature analysis; testing and evaluation of the different interactive scenarios, proposed in the guide’s prototype by science educators, science teachers and science museum experts from the different countries involved in the project; and testing and evaluation of the guide’s prototype by all the IRRESISTIBLE partners—led from a prototype to the final version of the guide [42]. Each iteration allowed for the gathering of feedback and suggestions for improvement. The final version—made available in several formats: pdf, electronic magazine, and e-book—was organized around the following sections: (1) the potential of student-curated exhibits about Responsible Research and Innovation; (2) different stages in developing an exhibition; (3) characteristics of an interactive exhibition and of an interactive object; (4) possible interactivity scenarios for exhibits; (5) general guidelines for all scenarios; (6) how to evaluate the impact of IRRESISTIBLE exhibitions on teachers, students, and visitors.
The concept of interactivity used in this project does not, necessarily, require the presence of technology, but, instead, does certainly require the interaction between the visitors within the exhibit and between them and the objects that are being exhibited [43,44,45]. This interaction does not require any physical movement; the interaction between the visitor and the object exists even if the visitor is only thinking and reflecting on the stimulus from the object [46,47].

2. Materials and Methods

This quantitative research was aimed at evaluating the impact of IRRESISTIBLE’s student-curated exhibitions—about the RRI dimensions of cutting-edge research topics (socio-scientific issues)—on students’ perceptions regarding their scientific competences and the science classes. A pre- and post-test questionnaire was developed, validated, and applied to the students participating in the project [48]. The questionnaire was answered by a total of 3368 students on the pre-test (applied before the development of the student-curated exhibitions) and 2433 on the post-test (applied after the entire process of student-curated exhibitions’ development) (see Table 1), from a total of 7340 students involved in IRRESISTIBLE. Turkey, Poland, and Greece were the most represented countries, but Italy and Portugal also had more than 500 respondents each.
Participants were distributed across all age groups as is illustrated by Table 2, with the majority being 15 or 16 years old, but also with very large numbers from ages 11–14 and 17.
The online pre- and post-test questionnaire comprised 16 items, to be evaluated by students through a five-point Likert scale (ranging from totally agree to totally disagree):
  • I’m capable of planning and constructing a science exhibit about a current and relevant scientific theme.
  • Planning and constructing a science exhibit is motivating.
  • The development of a science exhibit about a given subject allows me to learn more about that subject.
  • The construction of science exhibits improves the relationships amongst students.
  • The construction of science exhibits improves the relationship between students and the teacher.
  • Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs) are great tools to support the development of science exhibits.
  • I’m capable of creating science exhibits as a way to raise awareness in the community for current and relevant scientific issues.
  • Through the development of science exhibits I can influence the decisions and behaviors of other citizen’s related to social issues concerning science, technology and environment.
  • In my science classes I discuss current problems and how they affect my life.
  • In my science classes I develop competences that allow me to have a more active role in society.
  • In my science classes I’m encouraged to ask questions.
  • In my science classes I carry out projects that I consider important and socially relevant.
  • In my science classes I learn to act in a socially responsible way.
  • In my science classes I learn to respect my colleagues’ opinions.
  • In my science classes I learn about ways to influence other people’s decisions about social issues related to science, technology, and society.
  • In my science classes I’m responsible for initiatives that allow me to influence other people’s decisions about social issues related to science, technology, and society.
The questionnaire was organized in two sections, each one with eight questions: the first section about the student-curated exhibitions (items 1–8); the second section about the students’ science classes (items 9–16). In order to validate the developed sections, the Cronbach’s Alpha Index was calculated for both. The attained values for Cronbach’s Alpha on the sections was respectively 0.853 and 0.876, indicating that the internal consistency of both topics was high (Cronbach’s Alpha larger than 0.8) and illustrating the reliability of the proposed topics [48].
The overall improvement of the sample was calculated—using the ANOVA test—in order to detect significant statistical differences between the students’ perceptions before and after the participation in the project.

3. Results

3.1. Student-Curated Exhibitions

Within the three-year span of the IRRESISTIBLE project, a total of 218 exhibitions were developed by the partners, centered on different cutting-edge (and controversial) research topics: (a) nanotechnology (N = 131); (b) plastic pollution in oceans (N = 32); (c) carbohydrates in breast milk (N = 21); (d) climate change (N = 13); (e) oceanography (N = 7); (f) polar science (N = 7); (g) climate geoengineering (N = 6); (h) extension of the Portuguese continental shelf (N = 1). These exhibitions took place mainly in schools and science centres: (a) school (N = 139); (b) science center/museum (N = 70); (c) university (N = 3); (d) other (N = 5). A total of 7340 students were involved in the development of the exhibitions.
Regarding the type of exhibition, and taking into account also the interactivity scenarios presented in the IRRESISTIBLE Exhibition Development Guide that was used by all partners, a great variety of artefacts were produced. Some exhibitions were more homogeneous concerning the type of artefacts; others more eclectic. Table 3 presents the type of artefacts produced within the 218 developed exhibitions.
As we can see from Table 3, the prevalence of posters, games, multimedia presentations, models, and experiments/demonstrations/simulations as the main types of artefacts presented within the exhibitions is clear. The most frequent type of artefact produced within IRRESISTIBLE exhibitions was the poster (with physical formats of 2D and also 3D). When we think of a poster, what comes into our minds is something static, that does not imply manipulation by the reader, full of text, with some images—thinking of a poster as something interactive is, perhaps, a hard task. Nevertheless, with the help of the IRRESISTIBLE Exhibitions Development Guide in combination with students’ remarkable creativity, the posters developed within the IRRESISTIBLE exhibitions were, indeed, interactive, and fulfilled the goal of actively engaging the visitors. Indeed, these posters assumed several formats and required from the visitor different responses (e.g., write opinions/comments, organize pictures and sentences in groups).
The option for developing physical games was chosen by many students involved in the development of the interactive exhibitions. Indeed, games can be a very powerful strategy for stimulating the participation of visitors, allowing for their interaction and creating an atmosphere where discussion and reflection about important issues can be accomplished in a more playful manner.
Multimedia presentations, such as videos or other presentations were also chosen by many students involved in the project. Although this type of artefacts requires a dispositive (PC screen, tablet, or other) for their visualization (and that may not be a valid option for some schools), their development is normally felt by students as a very enjoyable task, contributing for their motivation towards the exhibition production.
The development of models was another popular option for some students, especially when their exhibitions focused on physical and chemical concepts and phenomena.

3.2. The Impact of the Exhibitions’ Development on Students’ Perceptions Regarding their Competences and the Science Classes

The impact of the exhibitions’ development on students’ perceptions regarding their competences and the science classes was calculated comparing students’ answers to the pre- and post-test questionnaires.
The overall progression of the sample was calculated. Table 4 shows the average mean score and standard deviation for each of the analyzed questions (both pre- and post-test), as well as the ANOVA results indicating whether there is a significant difference between pre- and post-test results. As can be illustrated by this table, almost all questions (with the exception of questions number 3 and 6) showed a significant rise in their scores favoring the post-test results (considering p < 0,05). The results of items 3 and 6 in the pre- and post-test were not statistically different, probably because the average mean score was very high in both tests, producing a ceiling effect. In reality, these two items attained the highest average mean scores from all items, showing a very high perception of students regarding: (a) the positive impact of the exhibitions’ development on their learning about scientific topics; and (b) the importance of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) tools in the development of exhibitions.
The overall results indicate that students improved their perceptions in the following ways:
  • Their competences for developing exhibitions in science classes as a way of creating awareness on topics relating to science, technology, society, and the environment: at the end of the project, they feel capable of attaining this goal;
  • The strong motivational impact of student-curated exhibitions;
  • The positive impact of student-curated exhibitions on the relationships among students and between them and the teachers;
  • Their competences of influencing other citizens’ decisions and behaviors about issues related to science, technology, and the environment, through the development of scientific exhibits.
Concerning their science classes, the project contributed to students’ improved perceptions that in that context:
  • They discuss current issues and how they impact their lives;
  • They develop important and socially relevant projects;
  • They are encouraged to ask questions and to respect their colleagues’ opinions;
  • They are empowered to have a more active and responsible role in society, developing initiatives that allow them to influence other citizens’ decisions about social issues related to science, technology, and the environment.
An analysis per country was also conducted in order to identify possible differences. Table 5 summarizes the ANOVA results for every country, identifying the questions where there was a significant difference between pre- and post-test results (p < 0,05).
It becomes clear from this analysis by country that participants from different contexts had diverse perceptions regarding the topics covered by the questionnaire. Romania, Israel, and Turkey were noticeably the ones where more significant differences were observed (16–14 out of possible 16). Greece, Portugal, Germany, and Poland also had several questions with significant differences (9–6). The Netherlands, Italy, and Finland were the countries with the least significant differences (1–4). These results indicate different reactions to the development of scientific exhibitions, suggesting that this kind of activity—in spite of the global positive evaluation by the students—didn’t constitute a complete innovation for the students from some countries. Possibly, the impact on students’ perceptions was low in those countries where this activity didn’t represent a novelty.
From the analysis of Table 5 it also becomes clear that questions 1, 7, and 9 were the ones with more significant statistical differences in this group of countries (9–8 out of possible 10). Questions 5, 12, 15, and 16 were also questions with an important number of countries with statistical differences (5–6 out of possible 10). Questions 6 and 11 were the ones with the least amount of differences (only two countries each). So, the highest impact shared by IRRESISTIBLE countries was perceived in: (a) the competence to plan and develop a scientific exhibit about a current and relevant science topic that can raise the community’s awareness regarding that issue; and (b) the students’ recognition that in science classes they discuss current issues and the ways they impact their lives.

4. Discussion

The development of student-curated exhibitions about socio-scientific issues represented both a challenge and a learning opportunity for many of the teachers and students involved in the IRRESISTIBLE Project, especially regarding time management, the novelty of the scientific topic and RRI, group work management, and exhibition planning and construction [48,49]. With the help of the IRRESISTIBLE Exhibitions Development Guide, students were quite competent in the development of interactive exhibitions that fulfilled the goal of actively engaging the visitors as proposed by literature [47,48]. The student-curated exhibitions developed within IRRESISTIBLE confirmed that interactivity doesn’t, necessarily, require the presence of technology. Several artefacts, like physical posters, table-games, and models, were quite effective in promoting the interaction between the visitors within the exhibit and between them and the objects that are being exposed [49]—all fundamental aspects of an interactive exhibition proposed by literature [44,45,46].
According to the students involved in IRRESISTIBLE, their participation in the curation of an exhibition on a socio-scientific issue was particularly useful in strengthening: (a) their knowledge about those issues and how they impact their lives; (b) their relationships with other students and the teachers; and (c) their perceptions about the social relevance of science classes, allowing the discussion of important current issues.
Student-curated exhibitions were assumed by students as a strategy of activism, allowing them to have a more active and responsible role in society, influencing other citizens’ decisions and behaviors about controversial issues related to science, technology, and the environment that are relevant to society. The attained results support the power of student-curated exhibitions on cutting-edge (and controversial) research topics as a context for students’ empowerment as decision-makers and activists regarding the process of Responsible Research and Innovation. Through these exhibitions, students felt more competent in (1) informing other citizens about the socio-scientific issue they have investigated, (2) engaging them in discussion on the necessary conditions to assure responsible research and innovation practices in those areas, and even (3) challenging them to participate in collective action aimed at promoting those responsible practices. In this way, the IRRESISTIBLE student-curated exhibitions constituted an opportunity for students to participate in (and to instigate) community action on socio-scientific issues—a major characteristic of exhibitions on controversial issues [16,22,24,25,26,27] and a major dimension of scientific literacy [11,12,18,37,50,51].
The student-curated exhibitions developed within the IRRESISTIBLE project represent an educational approach adequate for the promotion of sustainable development, enabling students to understand (and to cope with) the complexities and uncertainties of socio-scientific issues [52]. They also contribute to students’ reflections on their personal responsibilities regarding responsible research and innovation, capable of assuring a sustainable development and a sustainable future.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, P.R.; methodology, P.R., L.T. and M.B.; validation, P.R., L.T., M.B. and E.L.; investigation, P.R., L.T., M.B. and E.L.; writing—original draft preparation, P.R.; writing—review and editing, P.R., L.T., M.B. and E.L.; data curation, P.R. and L.T.; project administration, P.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The project IRRESISTIBLE was funded by the European Union as FP-7 project number 612367; more details can be found at http://www.irresistible-project.eu/index.php/en/

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank to all the partners, scientists, science education experts, teachers and students who participated in the development of the Irresistible EU project.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Apotheker, J.; Blonder, R.; Akaygun, S.; Reis, P.; Kampschulte, L.; Laherto, A. Responsible Research and Innovation in secondary school science classrooms: Experiences from the project Irresistible. Pure Appl. Chem. 2017, 89, 211–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Ratinen, I.; Kähkönen, A.-L.; Lindell, A. Pupils’ Understanding about Responsible Research and Innovation. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Educ. 2018, 13, 143–154. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bybee, R. Scientific Inquiry, Student Learning, and the Science Curriculum. In Learning Science and the Science of Learning; Bybee, R.W., Ed.; NSTA Press: Arlington, VA, USA, 2002; pp. 25–35. [Google Scholar]
  4. Blonder, R.; Rosenfeld, S.; Rap, S.; Apotheker, J.; Akaygun, S.; Reis, P.; Kampschulte, L.; Laherto, A. Introducing Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) into the Secondary School Chemistry Classroom: The Irresistible Project. Daruna 2017, 44, 36–43. [Google Scholar]
  5. Sutcliffe, H. A Report on Responsible Research and Innovation; Matter: Brussels, Belgium, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  6. Rieckmann, M. Education for Sustainable Development Goals: Learning Objectives; UNESCO: Paris, France, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  7. United Nations. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  8. European Commission. Science and Society Action Plan; Office for Official Publications of the European Communities: Luxembourg, 2002.
  9. Linhares, E.F.; Reis, P. Interactive exhibition on climate geoengineering: Empowering future teachers for sociopolitical action. Sisyphus J. Educ. 2017, 5, 85–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Marques, A.R.; Reis, P. Producción y difusión de vídeos digitales sobre contaminación ambiental. Estudio de caso: Activismo colectivo basado en la investigación. Revista Eureka Sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias 2017, 14, 215–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Reis, P. Promoting Students’ Collective Socio-Scientific Activism: Teacher’s Perspectives. In Activism in Science and Technology Education; Alsop, S., Bencze, L., Eds.; Springer: London, UK, 2014; pp. 547–574. [Google Scholar]
  12. Reis, P. Environmental Citizenship & Youth Activism. In Conceptualizing Environmental Citizenship for 21st Century Education; Hadjichambis, A.C., Reis, P., Paraskeva-Hadjichambi, D., Čincera, J., Boeve-de Pauw, J., Gericke, N., Knippels, M.-C., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 139–148. [Google Scholar]
  13. Reis, P.; Marques, A.R. As Exposições Como Estratégia de Ação Sociopolítica: Cenários do Projeto Irresistible; Instituto de Educação da Universidade de Lisboa: Lisboa, Portugal, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  14. Delicado, A. Scientific controversies in museums: Notes from a semi-peripheral country. Public Underst. Sci. 2009, 18, 759–767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Kelly, L. Engaging Museum Visitors in Difficult Topics through Socio-Cultural Learning and Narrative. In Hot Topics, Public Culture, Museums; Cameron, F., Kelly, L., Eds.; Cambridge Scholars Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2010; pp. 194–210. [Google Scholar]
  16. Meyer, M. From Cold Science to Hot Research: The Texture of Controversy. In Hot Topics, Public Culture, Museums; Cameron, F., Kelly, L., Eds.; Cambridge Scholars Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2010; pp. 129–149. [Google Scholar]
  17. Henriksen, E.; Froyland, M. The Contribution of Museums to Scientific Literacy: Views from Audience and Museum Professionals. Public Underst. Sci. 2000, 9, 393–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Hodson, D. Teaching and Learning Science: Towards a Personalized Approach; Open University Press: Buckingham, UK, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  19. Koster, E. Evolution of Purpose in Science Museums and Science Centers. In Hot Topics, Public Culture, Museums; Cameron, F., Kelly, L., Eds.; Cambridge Scholars Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2010; pp. 76–94. [Google Scholar]
  20. Rennie, L.; Stocklmayer, S. The communication of science and technology: Past, present and future agendas. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2003, 25, 759–773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Roberts, D. Scientific Literacy/Science Literacy. In Handbook of Research on Science Education; Abell, S.K., Lederman, N.G., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2007; pp. 729–780. [Google Scholar]
  22. Cameron, F. Climate change, agencies and the museum and science centre sector. Mus. Manag. Curatorship 2012, 27, 317–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Rodari, P.; Merzagora, M. The role of science centers and museums in the dialogue between science and society. J. Sci. Commun. 2007, 6, 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Bandelli, A.; Konijn, E. Public participation and scientific citizenship in the science museum in London: Visitors’ perceptions of the museum as a broker. Visit. Stud. 2015, 18, 131–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Christensen, J.; Bonnelycke, J.; Mygind, L.; Bentsen, P. Museums and science centers for health: From scientific literacy to health promotion. Mus. Manag. Curatorship 2016, 31, 17–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Pedretti, E.T. T. Kuhn meets T. Rex: Critical Conversations and New Directions in Science Centers and Science Museum. Stud. Sci. Educ. 2002, 37, 1–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Pedretti, E. Perspectives on Learning through Research on Critical Issues-Based Science Center Exhibition. Sci. Educ. 2004, 88, S34–S47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Quistgaard, N.; Kahr-Hojland, A. New and innovative exhibition concepts at science centres using communication technologies. Mus. Manag. Curatorship 2010, 25, 423–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Braund, M.; Reiss, M. Learning Science Outside the Classroom; Routledge Falmer: London, UK, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  30. Hammerich, P. Confronting Students’ Conceptions of the Nature of Science with Cooperative Controversy. In The Nature of Science in Science Education: Rationales and Strategies; McComas, W., Ed.; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2000; pp. 127–136. [Google Scholar]
  31. Kolstø, S. Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues. Sci. Educ. 2001, 85, 291–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Levinson, R. Towards a theoretical framework for teaching controversial socio-scientific issues. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2006, 28, 1201–1224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kampschulte, L.; Parchmann, I. The student-Curated Exhibition—A new approach to getting in touch with science. LUMAT 2015, 3, 462–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Sleeper, M.; Sterling, R. The in-class science exhibition. Sci. Scope 2004, 27, 49–52. [Google Scholar]
  35. Millar, R. Science Education for Democracy: What Can the School Curriculum Achieve? In Science Today: Problem or Crisis? Levinson, R., Thomas, J., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 1997; pp. 87–101. [Google Scholar]
  36. Sadler, T.D. Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2004, 41, 513–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Roth, W.-M. Scientific literacy as an emergent feature of collective human praxis. J. Curric. Stud. 2003, 35, 9–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Blonder, R. Student-Curated Exhibitions: Alternative Assessment in Chemistry Education in Israel. In International Perspectives on Chemistry Education Research and Practice; Cox, C., Schatzberg, W.E., Eds.; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, USA, 2018; pp. 39–55. [Google Scholar]
  39. Cooks, R. Is there a way to make controversial exhibits that work? J. Mus. Educ. 1998, 23, 18–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Skydsgaard, M.; Andersen, H.; King, H. Designing museum exhibits that facilitate visitor reflection and discussion. Mus. Manag. Curatorship 2016, 31, 48–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Wang, F.; Hannafin, M.J. Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2005, 53, 5–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Reis, P.; Marques, R. IRRESISTIBLE Exhibitions: A Development Guide; Instituto de Educação, Universidade de Lisboa: Lisboa, Portugal, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  43. Heath, C.; vom Lehm, D.; Osborne, J. Interaction and interactives: Collaboration and participation with computer-based exhibits. Public Underst. Sci. 2005, 14, 91–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Tsitoura, A. Socio-cultural visions of Interactivity within Museums. Cadernos de Sociomuseologia 2010, 38, 89–102. [Google Scholar]
  45. Wagensberg, J. Principios fundamentales de la museología científica moderna. Cuad. Cent. 2001, 55, 22–24. [Google Scholar]
  46. Bilda, Z.; Edmonds, E.; Candy, L. Design for Creative Engagement. Des. Stud. 2008, 29, 525–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Hindmarsh, J.; Heath, C.; vom Lehn, D.; Cleverly, J. Creating Assemblies in Public Environments: Social interaction, interactive exhibits and CSCW. J. Comput. Supported Collab. Work 2005, 14, 1–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. IRRESISTIBLE Portuguese Team. Case Studies About the Impact of the Project on Teachers’ Personal and Professional Development and on Students’ Skills; Technical Report for the European Commission: Lisboa, Portugal, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  49. Marques, R.; Reis, P. O Desenvolvimento de Exposições Científicas Como Estratégia de Ativismo em Contexto Escolar. In Questões Sócio-Científicas: Fundamentos, Propostas de Ensino e Perspectivas Para Ações Sociopolíticas; Conrado, D.M., Nunes-Neto, N., Eds.; EDUFBA: Salvador, Brazil, 2018; pp. 491–514. [Google Scholar]
  50. Alsop, S.; Bencze, L. Activism in Science and Technology Education; Springer: London, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  51. Conceição, T.; Baptista, M.; Reis, P. La contaminación de los recursos hídricos como punto de partida para el activismo socio-científico. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias 2019, 16, 1502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Tilbury, D.; Wortman, D. Engaging People in Sustainability. Commission on Education and Communication; IUCN: Gland, Switzerland, 2004. [Google Scholar]
Table
Table 1. Number of questionnaires answered from each participating country.
Table 1. Number of questionnaires answered from each participating country.
CountryPre-Test Post-Test Total Per Country
Finland27790367
Germany226206432
Greece6174831100
Israel15359212
Italy513185698
Netherlands3685121
Poland6075011108
Portugal269276545
Romania474390
Turkey6235051128
Total336824335801
Table
Table 2. Participants distribution per country/age group.
Table 2. Participants distribution per country/age group.
CountryAge
8−9101112131415161718+
Finland00201211733400024
Germany0000015675711010675
Greece00125617676952031561008
Israel0000010230118310
Italy00000019211120137196
Netherlands000000234714265
Poland0000788199183230234100
Portugal417301431048314293121
Romania00000003391628
Turkey008116310217132150124647
Total4175950766954462010261007728424
Table
Table 3. Occurrences of types of artefacts within the 218 exhibitions.
Table 3. Occurrences of types of artefacts within the 218 exhibitions.
Type of ArtefactNumber of Exhibitions with This Type of Artefact% of Exhibitions with This Type of Artefact
GamePhysical (e.g., table-game, soccer table)6638
Digital (e.g., quizzes)148
PosterPhysical6739
Physical but 3D (cubes, objects…)3722
Digital138
Multimedia presentations (e.g., video, audio)3722
Web-integrated exhibit /website/blog106
Cartoons (digital or printed)63
Models 3219
Experiments/demonstrations/simulations3219
Digital application 32
Newspaper11
Book63
Play11
Hologram11
Prototype11
IKEA bookshelf (EXPOneer system)3118
Table
Table 4. Pre- and post-test results for the whole sample with ANOVA.
Table 4. Pre- and post-test results for the whole sample with ANOVA.
QuestionsPre-TestPost-TestFSig.
NMeanStd. DeviationNMeanStd. Deviation
1. I can plan and develop a scientific exhibit about a current and relevant science topic31173.411.12822833.901.020269.2610.000*
2. To plan and develop a scientific exhibit is something that motivates me31283,8241.098022813.9521.076218.2080.000*
3. Developing a scientific exhibit about a given topic allows me to learn more about it31104.2250.971422704.2540.98061.1290.282
4. Developing a scientific exhibit improves the relationships among students31203.8741.069322724.0151.063123.1960.000*
5. Developing a scientific exhibit improves the relationship between students and the teacher31193.9161.042822724.0331.056016.4640.000*
6. ICT (Information and Communication Technologies) are a good tool to support the development of scientific exhibits31064.1010.958322684.1160.95080.3510.554
7. I am able to develop scientific exhibits that raise awareness in the community of current and relevant scientific issues31053.4551.114322683.7841.0510119.5160.000*
8. Through the development of scientific exhibits I am able to influence other citizens’ decisions and behaviors about issues related to science, technology, and the environment31123.5451.069722673.7321.046840.7320.000*
9. In my science classes I discuss current issues and how they impact my life31003.3451.185322593.5341.150434.3430.000*
10. In my science classes I develop competences that allow me to have a more active role in society31063.4961.128222643.6521.083025.7900.000*
11. In my science classes I am encouraged to ask questions30973.6281.160022643.7381.123812.0590.001*
12. In my science classes I develop important and socially relevant projects30973.2651.176822583.5611.128185.3680.000*
13. In my science classes I learn how to act in a socially responsible manner30893.6041.147022593.7961.075638.6390.000*
14. In my science classes I learn how to respect my colleagues’ opinions30973.9311.120122564.0151.04147.8770.005*
15. In my science classes I learn how to influence other citizens’ decisions about social issues related to science, technology, and the environment30933.4051.107322613.6321.071756.3540.000*
16. In my science classes I am responsible for initiatives that allow me to impact other citizens’ decisions about social issues related to science, technology, and the environment30893.3401.146222603.5651.085452.7980.000*
* Significant difference between pre- and post-test results.
Table
Table 5. ANOVA significant results for all participating countries (only statistically significant results are reported).
Table 5. ANOVA significant results for all participating countries (only statistically significant results are reported).
QuestionsFinlandGermanyGreeceIsraelItalyNetherlandsPolandPortugalRomaniaTurkeyTotal
1. I can plan and develop a scientific exhibit about a current and relevant science topic0.0010.0000.0000.0000.043 0.0000.0010.0000.0009
2. To plan and develop a scientific exhibit is something that motivates me 0.000 0.000 0.0000.0004
3. Developing a scientific exhibit about a given topic allows me to learn more about it0.002 0.0100.0000.000 4
4. Developing a scientific exhibit improves the relationships among students 0.0080.004 0.0000.0004
5. Developing a scientific exhibit improves the relationship between students and the teacher 0.0010.0000.001 0.0030.0125
6. ICT (Information and Communication Technologies) are a good tool to support the development of scientific exhibits 0.031 0.013 2
7. I am able to develop scientific exhibits that raise awareness in the community of current and relevant scientific issues 0.0000.0100.0020.003 0.0000.0380.0000.0008
8. Through the development of scientific exhibits I am able to influence other citizens’ decisions and behaviors about issues related to science, technology, and the environment 0.018 0.003 0.0000.0024
9. In my science classes I discuss current issues and how they impact my life0.0130.0330.0090.011 0.0210.0000.0000.0008
10. In my science classes I develop competences that allow me to have a more active role in society 0.017 0.000 0.0000.0004
11. In my science classes I am encouraged to ask questions 0.0000.0042
12. In my science classes I develop important and socially relevant projects 0.0020.002 0.0050.0020.0000.0006
13. In my science classes I learn how to act in a socially responsible manner 0.000 0.005 0.0000.0004
14. In my science classes I learn how to respect my colleagues’ opinions0.024 0.000 0.0000.0004
15. In my science classes I learn how to influence other citizens’ decisions about social issues related to science, technology, and the environment 0.0270.000 0.0010.0380.0000.0006
16. In my science classes I am responsible for initiatives that allow me to impact other citizens’ decisions about social issues related to science, technology, and the environment 0.0200.000 0.0000.0000.0005
Total4791421671614

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Reis, P.; Tinoca, L.; Baptista, M.; Linhares, E. The Impact of Student-Curated Exhibitions about Socio-Scientific Issues on Students’ Perceptions Regarding Their Competences and the Science Classes. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2796. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072796

AMA Style

Reis P, Tinoca L, Baptista M, Linhares E. The Impact of Student-Curated Exhibitions about Socio-Scientific Issues on Students’ Perceptions Regarding Their Competences and the Science Classes. Sustainability. 2020; 12(7):2796. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072796

Chicago/Turabian Style

Reis, Pedro, Luís Tinoca, Mónica Baptista, and Elisabete Linhares. 2020. "The Impact of Student-Curated Exhibitions about Socio-Scientific Issues on Students’ Perceptions Regarding Their Competences and the Science Classes" Sustainability 12, no. 7: 2796. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072796

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop