MSCEd Dissertation Science Theatre Learning

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Science Theatre:
The Nature of Learning
An evaluation of visitor learning
from
Science Theatre shows at Techniquest, Cardiff,
June to September 2007
-1–
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Abstract
This research seeks to evaluate, in light of a perceived need to advance public

understanding of science, the visitor experience and learning from two different
science theatre presentations at Techniquest during the months June to
September 2007. The presentations were distinct in their subject, design and
style. Data collection was undertaken by both qualitative and quantitative
methods and samples were selected on the basis of convenience. Data about
presentation design and visitors’ reactions was gathered using unobtrusive
observation. Semi-structured interviews were used to explore audience
perceptions about gains derived. General indicators for the different dimensions
of learning were mapped to the Generic Learning Outcomes (GLO) framework
(Museums, Libraries and Archives Council).
The evaluation revealed the tremendous potential of theatre as a rich and

versatile medium with the “fun factor” needed for engagement, offering cognitive,
social and affective gains and fostering learning dispositions, interest and
curiosity. Science theatre also offers visitors a sense of community and the
experience of sharing learning with the family. An analysis of the design of the
two presentations suggests that gains from science theatre may be enhanced by
offering value based, application oriented science for reflection rather than
presenting impersonal, decontextualised, theory. A narrative, story based
presentation of real world applications of science facilitates greater connection
building and reflection, leading to more effective and insightful learning. Providing
a forum for informal dialogue after the presentation may also facilitate deeper
meaning making. Further research in this area may offer insights for pedagogy in
general, whether in the theatre, classroom, or in the virtual world.
-2–

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Science Theatre – The Nature of Learning
An evaluation of visitor learning from Science Theatre shows at Techniquest, Cardiff.
Chapter Table of Contents Page

1. Introduction and Outline 5
2. Literature Review
Why Communicate Science? 10
Science Centres 14
Goals of Learning: New Paradigm – Teaching Thinking 15
Multidimensional Nature of Learning 22
Generic Learning Outcomes 24
Museum Theatre 26
Research Questions 29
3. Research Design and Justification 31
4. Results 44
5. An Analysis 55
6. Conclusion: The Opportunities 64
Appendix A: Interview Questionnaire 69
Appendix B: Quantitative Data From Structured Interviews 72
Bibliography 74
-3–

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Introduction and Outline

There is a growing recognition of the need to advance public understanding of
science. The Jenkin Report (House of Lords, 2000) defines this as the
understanding of scientific matters by non-experts as represented by an
appreciation of the nature of scientific methods, and the need for experimental
testing of hypotheses as well as an awareness of current scientific advances and
their implications.
Scientific literacy today extends beyond knowledge of scientific concepts and

methods to include an understanding of the tenets of scientific inquiry and the
nature of science (American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1993;
National Research Council, 1996). In addition, forecasts of the increasing
requirement for skilled manpower in a knowledge intensive, high technology
world highlight the need to encourage future generations of UK schoolchildren to
pursue careers in science.
Today, there is an increasing awareness of the need to offer an education that

develops creativity and thinking skills. Science centres and museums must also
play their part as providers of this education for life and perhaps in this way,
justify their use of public funds. Today science centres and museums are
recognised as providers of informal and non-formal learning to the community,
promoting awareness of and widening access to science. Science theatre offers
a versatile medium for science communication, allowing visitors to step into the
world of imagination while offering cognitive, social and affective gains.
“Techniquest is an educational charity, established in 1986 and based in Cardiff,

Wales. Our mission is to engage people with science and to motivate them to
learn more and we also address science-related areas such as maths,
engineering and technology.”(Techniquest Website)
Techniquest was established in an old shop in the Cardiff City Centre in 1986 by
John Beetlestone, Professor of Science Education at the University of Cardiff
-4–

Nayana Karia
November 2007
(Stocklmayer et.al, 2001). In May 1995, the science centre was moved to its
current premises, in a refurbished ship repair warehouse at Cardiff Bay.
As part of its agenda of communicating science, Techniquest regularly presents

science shows in its 100 seat Science Theatre.
Different shows are presented for the general public and for schools. School
shows are aligned to the school curriculum for the different Key Stages (KS).
Some popular school shows include, among others Ourselves (KS1), Forces
(KS2), Materials Madness (KS 2), Under the Sea (Early Years), Maths Detective
(KS2) and Science in Sport (KS4).
Shows for the general public are presented on weekends and school holidays
and cater to a wide range of audience, mostly comprising multi-generational
family groups. These public shows are included in the price of the ticket. Three to
four shows are presented in a day, depending on attendance. Some regular
public shows include Bubbles and Blasts, The Musiquest Gameshow, Brain Drain
and the focus of this research, The Slime Show and Gran Designs.
The purpose of this research was to evaluate the visitor experience and learning
outcomes from two different science theatre presentations at Techniquest during
the months of June 2007 to September 2007. The shows were distinct in
subject, design and style of presentation. This facilitated an inquiry into whether
one presentation was discernibly more effective than the other and if so, what
were the elements of design that contributed to this relatively greater impact?
A review of the literature in Chapter 2 sets the context for the research questions,
with an insight into the various facets of learning and the elements of effective
and engaging learning experiences. There is a general acceptance among
educationists today (Hooper-Greenhill, 1999, 2002, Csikszentmihalyi and
Hermanson, 1999) that learning encompasses a range of cognitive, social and
affective gains. The unique elements of theatre, its’ versatility and universal
-5–

Nayana Karia
November 2007
appeal to hearts and minds make it an ideal medium for science communication.
This research seeks to evaluate the learning outcomes from two science theatre
presentations at Techniquest, namely, Gran Designs and The Slime Show. In
addition, it seeks to ascertain if one the two presentations was discernibly more
effective and if so, to identify the elements of design that made it so. Learning
outcomes were evaluated in the context of the Generic Learning Outcomes
framework developed by the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council. These
GLOs provide a conceptual framework for the gathering, analysis and
interpretation of the evidence of learning. These five general learning outcomes
are:
 Knowledge and understanding

 Skills
 Values and attitudes
 Enjoyment, inspiration, and creativity
 Activity, behaviour, and progression
Discussion about the research design and methodologies is taken up in Chapter

3. In order to compensate for the inherent weaknesses of any one research
design, data collection was undertaken by both qualitative and quantitative
methods. Qualitative data about presentation design and visitors’ reactions was
gathered using unobtrusive observation. Quantitative data was obtained from
semi-structured interviews exploring audience perceptions about gains derived.
Samples were selected on the basis of convenience.
Chapter 4 presents the results of the research. Data about visitors’ immediate
reactions during the theatre presentations was gathered using unobtrusive
observation. The observation was structured around three criteria, namely, levels
of engagement, levels of participation and emotional expression. Observation
also offered insights into the degree to which the design of each show was
congruent with evidence based best practices discussed in the literature, as well
as the relative efficacy of the two distinct styles of presentation.
-6–

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Semi-structured interviews were conducted on a sample of the theatre
audiences, selected on the basis of convenience and availability. A Likert scale
was used to measure outcomes in terms of general behavioural indicators
(mapped to the GLOs) and provided quantitative data about audience
perceptions of different learning gains from the theatre presentations.
“…learning is regarded both as a process and a product that encompasses

several dimensions, including socio-cultural, cognitive, aesthetic, motivational
and collaborative aspects of learning” (Anderson et.al 2002: 214).
Data clearly indicated that science theatre audiences at Techniquest perceived

gains in each of the dimensions of the GLOs and enjoyed the sense of
community and shared family learning. While the sample interviewed was too
small to permit more concrete inferences, data seems to indicate a stronger
perception of learning gains in visitors for one of the presentations (Gran
Designs). It is suggested that the presentation of Gran Designs, being embedded
in a narrative, seemed to appeal to audiences more and offered better
opportunities for connection forming and meaning making. This conforms to
research evidence that indicates that narrative or story based presentations
facilitate more effective and engaging learning.
Chapter 5 details a comparative analysis of the design of the two shows, based
on a list of best practices derived from the literature, supported by data from the
observation and interviews.
The analysis reveals that for science theatre presentations to promote reflective
thinking, there is a need to offer value based, application oriented science rather
than impersonal, decontextualised, theory. Analysis also suggests that narrative,
story based presentations can provide greater engagement and connection
building.
It is also suggested that two way dialogue facilitates better learning and that
visitors may derive benefits from the provision of a forum to ask questions and
informally share their thoughts after the presentation. Further, theatre presented
-7–

Nayana Karia
November 2007
in a framework of other supporting activities may result in higher levels of
assimilation and reflection in visitors. More affirmative insights may be afforded
by further research in this area, which has implications for pedagogy in general,
both in and outside school and in the virtual world.
Data reveals that science theatre promotes meaningful learning. Chapter 6

outlines the opportunities for further development of science theatre at
Techniquest. It is suggested that in order to effectively foster public engagement,
science communication exercises must be focused on visitor needs. The
analysis provides a glimpse into the opportunities to further meet these needs. It
is also suggested that the reach of science theatre be extended with offerings for
more mature audiences, as an avenue for lifelong learning.
-8–

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Chapter 2: Literature Review
Why Communicate Science?

“Science goes on getting harder every year. There are more professional
scientists at work now than have ever lived, and they produce more data, more
interpretation, more provocative hypotheses and a more profound but still
provisional understanding of the material world every year…(Radford, 2007, The
Guardian)
Sir Harry Kroto, joint winner of Nobel Prize in chemistry in 1996 raised a concern
in his foreword to Farmelo’s (1992), Here and Now, that the people of the first
world seem to be “oblivious to their total dependence on the fruits of science and
technology. “ In his recent article “The wrecking of British science”, Sir Harry
speaks more about the decline of science education in the United Kingdom:
“All of this matters because the need for a general population with a satisfactory
understanding of science and technology has never been greater. We live in a
world economically, socially and culturally dependent on science not only
functioning well, but being wisely applied.” (Kroto, H. May 22, 2007)
The term “science” is defined in the Jenkin Report (House of Lords, 2000) to
include the biological and physical sciences and their technological applications.
Public understanding of science is the understanding of scientific matters by non-
experts as represented by an appreciation of the nature of scientific methods,
and the need for experimental testing of hypotheses as well as an awareness of
current scientific advances and their implications.
The Jenkin Report (House of Lords, 2000), also discusses the tendency of the
public to take for granted many of the developments in medicine and engineering
technologies and that,
“…democratic citizenship in a modern society depends…on the ability of citizens

to comprehend, criticise and use scientific ideas and claims.” (1.11)
-9–

Nayana Karia
November 2007
The report discusses the “crisis of confidence” (1.10) that has damaged public
confidence in scientific advice to Government and stresses the need for “public
engagement with science” to win public support for policies involving a science
component.
“Public misunderstanding may lead to technology being rejected; it may also lead
to technology being abused.”(1.13)
Since the mid 1990s, there has been a shift in thinking about scientific literacy
away from the assumptions of the “deficit model” and the theory of a linear
dependence between knowledge of science and attitudes toward science. It is
now increasingly perceived that these assumptions are not entirely valid and
evidence seems to indicate that knowledge about modern science does not of
itself, generate greater enthusiasm for science-based technologies. Recent
literature highlights the need to build trust and respect (Dickson, 2005) with open
dialogue with the public on science policy decisions (Pardo and Calvo, 2002).
The Jenkin Report (House of Lords, 2000) further highlights the intricate
association between science and the “future wealth and welfare of society”
(1.10), which depends on the young people who opt for careers in science. While
the report makes many recommendations that challenge the assumptions of the
deficit model, it also recognises that public attitudes to science are influenced by
how it is taught in schools (6.1) and recommends greater adoption of live
demonstrations in science teaching (6.14) to “equip all students for "scientific
literacy" or "science for citizenship" (Summary, Para.24). The report also
recognises a role for science museums and science centres (3.33) in improving
relationships between science and society by promoting awareness of and
widening access to science. [Note: A science centre is distinguished from a
science museum as having exhibits and activities but no collections (3.39)]
“In particular, the museums and science centres alike are seized of the need to
respond more rapidly to newly emerging issues involving science” (3.45).
- 10 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
This is in line with Longbottom and Butler’s (1999, p. 474) argument that ‘the
primary justification for teaching science to all children is that it should make a
“significant contribution to the advancement of a more truly democratic society”
and that “children need to adopt many of the critical and creative attributes of
scientists (giving students the skills to collect, seek and evaluate evidence and to
take part in reasoned debate)” (p. 487)
Scientific literacy today extends beyond knowledge of scientific concepts and

methods to include an understanding of the tenets of scientific inquiry and the
nature of science (American Association for the Advancement of Science 1993;
National Research Council, 1996). It is suggested that scientific literacy involves
developing
“…an understanding of what science is, what science is not, what science can
and cannot do, and how science contributes to culture” (NRC, 1996, p. 21).
Sir Gareth Roberts (April 2002) in his report “SET for Success” highlighted a
decline in the number of students taking physics, mathematics, chemistry and
engineering qualifications and that this decline…
“…could undermine the Government’s attempts to improve the UK’s productivity

and competitiveness. Furthermore, these discipline related problems will have
negative implications for research in key areas such as the biological and
medical sciences, which are increasingly reliant on people who are highly
numerate and who have a background in physical sciences.”
Pursuant to this report, the government implemented a range of measures to

recruit and retain science and engineering teachers, as well as modernise school
and university science laboratories. The term “Roberts money” is today the
standard terminology for funds provided for research students and early career
researchers.
“…science is worth doing because it has brought enormous rewards. It will also
be the basis of almost all future wealth.” (Radford, 2007)
- 11 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
In his Statement dated 17 December 2003, Sir Alistair MacFarlane, Chair of the
Royal Society Education Committee highlights the need to encourage future
generations of UK schoolchildren to pursue careers in science.
"Future generations of UK schoolchildren need to be encouraged to realise their

full potential in science, engineering and technology. Science offers a uniquely
exciting and creative learning experience that enriches our lives. In addition, we
need a plentiful supply of talented individuals to fill the many jobs, especially
teaching, that require scientific skills and knowledge…Labour market projections
show a growth in the demand for employees with training in science, engineering
and technology over the next few decades (MacFarlane, 17 December 2003).
In the Report titled The Supply and Demand for Science, Technology,
Engineering and Mathematics Skills in the UK Economy (Dfes, 2006), it is
suggested that the projected demand for workers with professional level skills in
Science and Engineering is likely to increase over the next 10 years.
Braund and Reiss (2006) suggest an association between the teaching of

science in school with the progressive decline in the number of students opting
for the study of physical sciences at higher levels and as careers . They suggest
that secondary school science is too rooted in the science laboratory;
substantially greater use needs to be made of out-of-school sites for the teaching
of science. They suggest that only such endeavours can make science education
more valid and motivating.
“Our contention is that laboratory-based school science teaching needs to be

complemented by out-of-school science learning that draws on the actual world
(e.g. through field trips), the presented world (e.g. in science centres, botanic
gardens, zoos and science museums) and via the virtual worlds that are
increasingly available through information and communications technologies
(ICT).” (Braund and Reiss, 2006:213)
- 12 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
In their view, science communication outside schools (in science museums,
hands-on centres, zoos, botanical gardens, etc.) is perceived to be exciting,
challenging and uplifting. (p.217)
Science Centres
In contrast to the formal settings of the schools, science museums offer both
non-formal and informal learning. Non-formal learning is educational activity
outside and separate from the formal system that still offers learning outcomes.
In contrast, informal learning situations are those that occur in social interaction,
for example between family members and friends (James, 2005: 4).
“Education programmes represent the museum at its most proactive in its

relationship with the public. Education programmes are the most flexible and
effective way to extend access. Museums invest in them because they make a
difference. They are instruments of change. “(Anderson, 1999: 62)
Ecsite-UK, the UK Network of Science Centres and Museums, represents over

80 science centres, museums and discovery centres in the UK. The organization
seeks to “raise the profile of science centres, and establish their role as a forum
for dialogue between science specialists and the public and as an informal
learning resource for learners of all ages” (Ecsite-UK Website).
Though there is a general perception that science centres have much to offer in
the sphere of public engagement with science, the measurement and
quantification of those benefits remains a largely uncharted territory. This
becomes especially relevant in light of the reliance of such resources on public
funds.
“It seems likely that continuing government subsidy for these Centres will be
required if they are to survive the next 10 years. The overall aim should be a
clear agreed vision for science engagement, with measurable objectives being
delivered and findings communicated effectively… Science engagement
activities should be more coherent, with good practice being shared, networks
- 13 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
functioning well, with universities integrated into the process.” (The Royal
Society, 2004: 42: Box 10)
Science and Discovery Centres in the UK represent a £500 million capital

investment (Ecsite-UK, 2001b:1). Attracting over 11 million visitors each year
(Ecsite-UK November 2001a:3), such centres can have tremendous reach and
impact their community of interest. Garnett (2002) defines the community of
interest as the group of people and organizations that the science centre
considers to be its clients or potential clients. “If we can measure these impacts
and show that they have the desired effects, we are in a strong position to
provide evidence that justifies the value of the science center.”(p.2)
Goals of Learning: New Paradigm – Teaching Thinking
“Being world class is a moving target.” (Leitch, 2006).
Globalisation has caused substantial shifts in labour markets in the developed

world. The changing dynamics of the new information age mean that people
must continually upskill in order to participate effectively in a world constantly in
flux.
In 2002, a House of Commons report published a critique of the curriculum at the

GCSE level (14-16 year cohort) and called for “innovative, inspiring and relevant”
science education (The House of Commons, 2002: Appendix 1). The report
suggested that the curriculum was failing to inspire students to continue with
science and discouraging independent thought. It called for a more flexible
curriculum that includes contemporary science and makes practical work more
engaging (Akeroyd, 2007). In September 2006, a new national curriculum for
science was introduced for students aged 14-16 in England and Wales. This new
curriculum is designed to provide specialist training for students opting for
- 14 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
careers in science as well as well as offer a good general scientific education for
students with other career goals.
Carr and Claxton (2002: 106) suggest that “learning to learn” is critical in this day
and age, and that education must aim to develop self directed learners with,
“…attitudes and aptitudes that will equip young people to function well under
conditions of complexity, uncertainty and individual responsibility: to help them
become…good real-life learners.”
In similar vein, Radford (2007) writes that for citizens who must understand and
take decisions on controversial public issues, there is a need for a science
curriculum that fosters an interest in science that lays the foundations for lifelong
learning, and an appreciation of evidence based argument.
“Involving students in the process of doing science and talking with them
explicitly about its nature are thought to be central to cultivating these interests,
values and attitudes.”
Carr and Claxton (2002) further suggest that self directed learning requires both
capabilities (skills, strategies and abilities required for learning), as well as the
disposition to learn. Learners must not just be able; they must be ready and
willing to learn. It is generally perceived that the relationship between capability
and disposition is direct and linear – ability in a particular arena generates
success, which leads to a greater inclination toward the activity. Conversely, an
inclination to persevere in an activity leads to greater engagement and the
development of ability. The caveat to this is that,
“…the relationship is an uncertain one. Capability does not always produce

disposition, nor vice versa. Education for lifelong learning has, therefore, to
attend to the cultivation of positive learning dispositions, as well as of effective
learning skills.”
While numerous writers have offered different opinions about the dispositions
relevant for learning, Carr and Claxton (2002: 109) consider the three prime
- 15 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
learning dispositions to be resilience, playfulness and reciprocity. A discussion of
these key learning dispositions is required to establish their worth and
understand how they may be fostered.
Resilience is the desire to persist with learning despite setbacks. Playfulness is

a combination of mindfulness, imagination and experimentation. It is manifested
by an appreciation of the deeper potential of information, the ability to go beyond
the immediate information into fantasy to consider unlikely possibilities, and the
ability to engage in open minded exploration of latent possibilities. Carr and
Claxton (2002: 111) cite Lieberman (1977)’s description of this playfulness as “…
spontaneity, a sense of humour, and a kind of joyful, exuberant or even
mischievous attitude, a glint in the eye”. The third learning disposition they
discuss, reciprocity, has “both expressive and receptive and verbal and non-
verbal dimensions” (p.111). Effective learners seek a variety of channels to share
opinions and exchange ideas and,
“Learning to learn has been shown to flourish in the context of ‘reciprocal and
responsive relationships’ with others and this requires a willingness and an ability
on both sides, for ‘joint attention’, participation and taking account of the opinions
and needs of others.” (Carr and Claxton, 2002:111)
Carr and Claxton (2002: 127) further suggest that the learning dispositions are
“important building blocks for life-long learning” and that there is a need for
educational settings that “exemplify and encourage their development”.
Middleton and Edwards (1990: 254) also recognise that conversations provide an
environment for the formulation and justification of thoughts and conceptions.
“…the very notion of mind, of mental life, of memory and experience as objects of
reflective awareness is given shape and occasion by discursive practices in
which versions are being compared, conjoined and disputed….
Discussion and sharing of thoughts is also central to the Cognitive Acceleration

through Science Education (CASE) methodology developed by Adey and Shayer
(Adey 1999),
- 16 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
“The teaching methodology involves specific management of classes so that
every child participates in constructing ideas while working on task in small
groups; listening while these ideas are shared in whole-class discussion;
justifying and explaining the ideas, events and concepts met in the tasks. By
allowing for this to happen there are opportunities for the teacher to continually
challenge children’s' present ideas, concepts and events experienced.” (CASE
Website)
The CASE program was based on this concept of cognitive conflict or cognitive
challenge and bridging or providing cognitive links to other situations so that
learners see other contexts for application of the learning.
In Lipman’s (1991: 19) description of the Reflective paradigm, “…Ideally the

relationship between teacher and students has this character of face to face
dialogue…” Several other educationists highlight the role of dialogue and the
community of inquiry in facilitating self-evaluation and feedback. Lipman advises:
“…converting the classroom into a community of inquiry in which students listen

to one another with respect, build on one another’s ideas, challenge one another
to supply reasons for otherwise unsupported opinions, assist each other in
drawing inferences from what has been said, and seek to identify one another’s
assumptions…” Lipman (1991:15).
Falk and Dierking (2000: 93) have also recognized that conversation is “a
primary activity of knowledge construction” and discuss “conversational
elaboration” or talk that occurs during and after a museum visit and its role in
“distributed meaning making”.
The role of mediation and guidance was much earlier discussed by Vygotsky
(1978) who developed the concept of the Zone of Proximal Development, the
difference between what learners can achieve with and without mediation:
“…the distance between the actual development level as determined by

independent problem solving and the level of potential development as
determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with
more capable peers.” (Vygotsky 1978: 86)
From this concept Vygotsky (1978) developed the concept of scaffolding, where
the teacher or mediator provides optimally targeted assistance to learners as
they move along the Zone of Proximal Development. Feuerstein’s (1980) work in
- 17 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
mediated learning (as distinct from direct, unmediated learning) ascribes to the
mediator the role of selecting, changing, amplifying and interpreting experiences
for the learner (Kozulin and Presseisen, 1995). According the Feuerstein, the
mediator focuses the attention of the learner on specific areas, helps the learner
interpret and ascribe meaning to the learning and to transcend from concrete to
abstract or specific to general to enable the learning to be transferred and used
in other contexts. Feuerstein’s concept of the Mediated Learning Experience
(1980) is based on five mechanisms:
• Process questioning (asking how questions)

• Bridging (providing a cognitive links so that students work out broader
applications of the learning)
• Requiring justification (for both correct and incorrect answers and considering
alternatives)
• Teaching rules (generalisation)
• Emphasising order, predictability, system, sequence and strategies
This concept of mediating meaning-making was also discussed by Ausubel

(1963, Ausubel et.al. 1978) who developed the concept of “anchored instruction”
In order to facilitate assimilation, new information must be linked by specific and
relevant anchors (ideas) in the learners existing cognitive structure (or schema).
There is a general acceptance today that learning is influenced by prior
experiences and that meaningful learning involves forming connections with
earlier experiences. An analogy about how prior learning affects concept
formation is used in Fish Is Fish (Lionni, 1970) a children’s fable.
“A tadpole and a minnow are underwater friends, but the tadpole grows legs and
explores the world beyond the pond and then returns to tell his fish friend about
the new creatures he sees. The fish imagines these creatures as bird-fish and
people-fish and cow-fish and is eager to join them.”
- 18 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
In order to develop anchored instruction, it is necessary to understand the mental
models or schema that learners bring with them. Common strategies used to
derive learners’ existing mental models include, posing problems to learners,
asking them to make predictions, listening to their solutions and asking them to
explain and justify their thinking (Peterson, et.al, 1989: 568, Schoenfield, 1985).
Such strategies not only aid the instructor or mediator in offering meaningful
instruction, but also help learners monitor their own mental models.
Another method of anchoring instruction is through the use of stories. In studies

assessing the recall by young children of their museum experiences, (Anderson
et.al., 2002), it was found that while each child’s recollection of learning was
“diverse, highly individualistic and idiosyncratic”, children readily recalled and
described at length their live, facilitator-led, lecture theatre-based programmatic
experiences.
“Children frequently recalled and described in detail, museum experiences that

were embedded in the medium of story”. (Anderson et.al, 2002:222)
Stories are “a common, familiar and enjoyable part of a child’s everyday culture”
(p. 223) and hence an effective way to mediate learning. Stories offer a tool to
make links and connect museum experiences with experiences at home and in
school; hence such child based sociocultural strategies should be integrated into
museum programs. Hughes (1998) also discusses the human need for stories
which effectively mirror humanity and its development over time.
“Theatre and museums are storytellers, tapping into an elemental human

consciousness…holding the mirror up and showing us what we have done and
what we might do.” (Hughes, 1998:10)
Meaning is often ascribed based on context. McCormick and Paechter (1999,

2000:127) discuss the importance of establishing “salience” or relevance of skill
or knowledge. “In the science lesson it is in the stripped away situation; in the
real world it is embedded in the context.” Learning is influenced by the presenting
of cues to salience.
- 19 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Hein (1991) has also suggested that for effective learning, visitors must be able
to take something personal and meaningful from the experience.
There has been a distinct shift in education from emphasis on declarative to

practical knowledge (McCormick 1999, 2000: 112). Lipman (1991: 15, 16) urges
teaching directly for “higher order thinking”, where the focus is not on the
acquisition of information but on the grasp of relationships. For this, a “Reflective”
paradigm must be evolved, where education is the outcome of participation in a
teacher guided community of inquiry, whose goals are the achievement of
understanding and good judgement, rather than the acquisition of facts.
In its White Paper Excellence in Schools (Dfee, 1997), the Government

described education as a vital investment in human capital for the twenty-first
century. Subsequently, in All Our Futures (1998), the Dfee articulated the need to
enrich the traditional curriculum with an emphasis on creative and cultural
education.
Gardner (1991) recognised that science centres and museums, with their
informal, enjoyable, contextualised environments can play a complementary role
in children’s education.
While there is much written about the difficulties of measuring learning from
museum and science centre visits, there is a general consensus that museums:
“…allow us to learn through our senses…They develop our feelings as well as

our powers of perception, analysis, ethical awareness, imagination and creativity”
(Anderson, 1999: 9).
Anderson’s (1999) report establishes a series of targets for museums and

galleries in the United Kingdom, underlining the need to develop museums as
learning organisations, with education central to their purpose.
- 20 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
“As resource-rich learning environments, museums are well placed to act as
catalysts for informal and self-directed learning in a family and community
context “(Anderson, 1999: 2).
Blunkett and Smith (2000) also write about the role of museums in bringing the
curriculum to life, inspiring new ways of thinking and learning and expressing
imagination and creative talents. Beer (1992) states:
“…museums are well equipped to alleviate a painful narrowness in modern

educational experience” (Beer, 1992: 214)
Multidimensional Nature of Learning
Csikszentmihalyi and Hermanson, 1999: 147 write that learning extends beyond
the acquisition of factual knowledge. Tuckey (1992: 28) also urges that “the
educational value of interactive science centres should not be conceived in a
narrowly didactic sense but should include an assessment of the motivation
aroused and the benefits of social interaction as well as the learning taking place”
“The strength of galleries as places of learning lies in their ability to change

attitudes, evoke feelings, demonstrate processes, convey significant ideas
directly and simply and engage visitors personally and actively in ways that
ensure that the experience is remembered long afterwards. Galleries are not
effective at communicating detailed information or complex concepts (Anderson,
1999: 50)”
The Fort Worth Museum of Science and History, has prepared Stone Tablets
(Walter, 2002:278) articulating its core purpose of providing visitors with an
Extraordinary Learning Environment (ELE):
“…An ELE is a stimulating, multi-dimensional, immersive place where visitors

have opportunities to hear real stories, interact with cool stuff, construct their own
knowledge and because of their experience the visitors will never be the same.”
(Walter, 2002: 279: Figure 2)
- 21 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
In the long term, the goal is for visitors to develop a deeper relationship with their
world, gain confidence and experience personal growth.
“Learning is a process of active engagement with experience. It is what people

do to make sense of the world. It may involve an increase in skills, knowledge or
understanding, a deepening of values or the capacity to reflect. Effective learning
leads to change, development and a desire to learn more.” Campaign for
Learning, 1998 (cited in Anderson, 1999: 8).
Csikszentmihalyi and Hermanson (1999) discuss how curiosity and interest

influence intrinsic motivation to learn. It is only when an experience is intrinsically
rewarding that attention is focused long enough for positive intellectual or
emotional change to occur. The intrinsically motivated learning state is marked by
“unselfconsciousness, joy, serenity, involvement and happiness”
(Csikszentmihalyi and Hermanson, 1999:151). They describe the “flow
experience” as a state of mind that is,
“spontaneous, almost automatic, like the flow of a strong current…If a museum

visit can produce this experience, it is likely that the initial curiosity and interest
will grow into a more extensive learning interaction.”
It is suggested that “flow” fosters personal growth, is inherently enjoyable,

provides a sense of discovery, and is transformative. It is suggested that the
affective processes experienced in the flow state are as important in developing
broader conceptual understanding as cognitive processes.
Another feature of the flow state is the sense of connectedness it evokes.
“…people in flow tend to feel connected with other entities, such as nature, a
team, the family, or the broader community…The flow experience… is symbolic
because it brings together the psychic processes of the person and unites them
with a set of objective stimuli in the environment. This is opposite from the state
of alienation, in which one feels separated from oneself and from the elements of
one’s life… Motivational research has highlighted the importance of both
individual autonomy and connection for facilitating intrinsic learning.”
” Csikszentmihalyi and Hermanson (1999:152)
- 22 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
This feeling of connectedness develops both as a sense of togetherness as well
as a consciousness of one’s own individuality. The flow state is based on
meaningful experiences that foster both integration and differentiation, both of
which are necessary for personal growth.
Csikszentmihalyi and Hermanson (1999) urge that in order to be effective and

facilitate learning, museums must shift their focus from attracting the fleeting
attention and interest of visitors to providing opportunities for the deeper
absorption that fosters learning.
This is also brought out in the writings of Hooper-Greenhill (2002), who states
that that cognitive knowledge (information, facts) cannot be separated from
affective knowledge (emotions, values). Smith (1996) also writes about the
affective dimension of learning and how negative feelings distort perceptions and
undermine the will to persist. Positive feelings and emotions can greatly enhance
the learning process; they can keep the learner on the task and can provide a
stimulus for new learning. It is suggested that experiences that validate the worth
of individual learners and groups of learners provide an impetus for learning.
Generic Learning Outcomes
Learning outcomes are routinely used by providers of formal education to

prescribe and describe expectations of what the learner should have learned at
the end of an educational course, event or program. These outcomes may be
expressed either in very specific terms or may be more general and broadly
defined. Learning outcomes provide a measurable and achievable benchmark to
assess learner achievement as well as the effectiveness of a formal program of
instruction.
- 23 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
In the open, informal and flexible learning environments of museums, archives
and libraries, it is more difficult to assess the achievement of learning at any
particular moment in time (Hooper-Greenhill, 2002: 7). Visitors’ learning from
their experiences at the museum depends to a large extent on their own
agendas, prior knowledge and experience, personal, social and physical contexts
as also on their subsequent experiences (Falk and Dierking, 2000).
“It is not appropriate for organizations to be prescriptive about levels of learning

achievement, as users have their own criteria for what counts as successful. In
addition, unexpected outcomes may occur, and in fact, these surprises may
provide the most profound learning.”
The concept of generic learning outcomes was developed as a result of the

general consensus that while it is evident that learning is taking place in cultural
organizations, this learning tends to be very personal.
“These results of learning might be short-term or long-term; they might be intense

or shallow; they may be deeply experienced such that awareness increases,
attitudes and perceptions changed, or, and this is more frequent, they may
confirm learners in what they already know…these personal accounts are
susceptible to categorisation into generic learning outcomes.” (Hooper-Greenhill,
2002: 5.3).
Drawing on the learning research by Hooper-Greenhill, Moussouri and others

(2002) the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA Website) has outlined
a set of five broadly framed, "generic learning outcomes" for museums and
galleries that validate the affective and social dimensions of learning:
• Knowledge and understanding

• Skills
• Values and attitudes
• Enjoyment, inspiration, and creativity
• Activity, behaviour, and progression
- 24 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
It is recognized that learning is a complex phenomena and that there may be a
degree of overlap in some of these categories and also that they may influence
each other.
“The five generic outcome categories provide a basic framework which is not
intended to be prescriptive, merely to facilitate analysis, discussion and the
compilation of evidence…They provide the basis for a common conceptual
framework and a common language to discuss the outcomes of learning in
museums, archives and libraries” (Hooper-Greenhill, 2002: 8, 12).
Museum Theatre
“Without seeking to limit what it can be, Museum Theatre is the use of drama or
theatrical techniques within a museum setting or as part of a museum’s offerings
with the goal of provoking an emotive and cognitive response in visitors
concerning a museum’s discipline and/or exhibitions.” (Hughes, 1998: 1).
There is a general consensus that the medium of theatre is generally preferred to

the traditional classroom, and offers improvements in learners’ ability to reason
and draw connections with their own lives (Black & Goldowsky, 1999).
“…museum theatre is a useful medium capable of interpreting a complex and

multi-sided issue and of linking the human dimensions to a scientific issue”(Black
& Goldowsky, 1999).
Theatre presents a medium by which the traditional stereotypes and naïve

conceptions of the audience can be effectively countered (Hawkey, 2003).
“The audience sees that science is not a list of intimidating abstractions in a

textbook; it is the imaginative product of personalities who rarely conform to the
stereotype of an egghead in a white coat” (Farmelo, 1992).
In line with Howard Gardner’s discussion of Multiple Intelligences (Gardner,

1985), Hughes (1998) suggests that theatre also offers “narrational and
experiential entry points” (p. 116) for a broad spectrum of learners, to “amuse
surprise and impress…There is music, movement, spectacle, humour, pathos
and poetry…” (p.11)
- 25 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
The subtle, intangible, two way dialogue that ensues between the visitor and the
performer (Hughes, 1998: 31) makes the theatre experience stand apart from the
other experiences in the museum; “the element that theatre retains, which
technology cannot replace, is a real, live person.”
“Theatre is effective if it triggers processes of identification in the audience, when

it arouses empathy.” (Jeshajahu Weinberg, 1993, the first director of the United
States Holocaust Memorial Museum, quoted in Hughes, 1998:31)
In seeking to break down conventional barriers between the actor and spectator,
museum theatre “has moved away from the complacent, observational quality of
traditional theatre” and has a more participatory nature. Museum theatre offers a
rich medium for reflection, dialogue, “to question knowledge, to approach ethical
dilemmas and to explore ideas from different perspectives.” (Hughes, 1998: 11).
“If by the word educate, we mean there is a need to help others search, to draw
them out, to raise the level of consciousness and insight, to question and
probe…but it too is an artwork, a subtly rendered work, which operates through
the imagination, through a metaphor if you like, that permits contemplative and
reflective thought.” (Taylor, 2001)
Anthony and Rees (2005) share the findings of a nationally-funded project

researching the practice and impact of museum theatre. The aim of the
investigation was “to assess the effectiveness of theatre within the education
programmes of two museums, and to compare and contrast the different learning
outcomes of theatre and non-theatre sessions, monitored over a period of two
months.” They tracked eight groups of primary school children, half of whom
experienced a theatre event during their museum visits, while the other half were
offered alternative routes (such as a guided tour, object-handling, role-play, and
task-oriented workshops). The findings (though based on a small sample),
suggest that museum theatre facilitates “active learning and ownership” and
“empathy and the making of connections”. Well designed and integrated theatre
“created strong and memorable resonances still evident several months after the
visit” and can offer a significant enhancement to learning. “Science theatre
presents a rich forum for informal, free choice, self-motivated “learning in the
- 26 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
community” (Brookfield, (1983, cited in Smith, 1996) as distinct from learning in
school.
The efficacy of museum theatre is however, underpinned by the need to

delicately design and manage such productions to facilitate a two way dialogue
that accepts alternative views and projects science as a way of observing and
understanding our world, rather than as an absolute body of knowledge.
“Banging the visitor over the head with a message will only serve to concuss
their mind, not expand it….Theatre must not become another didactic tool for
museums. It can and should do more than that.” (Hughes, 1998: 25, 26)
(Hughes, 1998: 27) warns against trying to educate visitors with the empty vessel
teaching approach instead of providing visitors with the tools to think critically
about the world around them”
Lewenstein (2000) also recommends moving away from traditional efforts to

enhance public understanding that operate on a "deficit" model of instruction. He
urges that museums take into account the knowledge people bring with them
when they come to a museum and "continue to increase our inclination to act as
anthropologists, following people around and discovering how they make
meaning out of their world" (p. 246).
Csikszentmihalyi and Hermanson (1999:155) also recognise that information that

is presented without alternative perspectives discourages the motivation to
explore and learn more. Langer (1993: 45) urges the development of
“mindfulness” and avoiding premature cognitive commitment, denoted by rigid,
absolute beliefs mindlessly accepted as true. Langer suggests that intrinsically
motivated learning is an open process involving uncertainty and discovery of new
possibilities. Hooper-Greenhill (1999:155) also argues that rigid presentation of
material often limits further exploration.
Braund and Reiss (2006: 216) also discuss the need to develop critical thinking,
which is “rigorous, analytical, logical, open-minded and penetrating” with
- 27 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
elements of “reflective skepticism”. They cite Oulton et.al (2004: 420) that
science education needs both teachers and learners to reflect “critically on their
own stance and recognize the need to avoid the prejudice that comes from a lack
of critical reflection”.
Learning from theatre must also be placed in the continuum of learning,

influenced by earlier and subsequent events. Citing John Dewey, Hughes
(1998:52) suggests that theatre in isolation may not be effective as an
educational tool. “Continuity and interaction in their active union with each other
provide the measure of the educative significance and value of an experience.”
(Dewey, 1938:44-45). There can be no argument that the presence of
subsequent reinforcing experiences can offer gains in assimilation, and how
these can be offered this is one of the factors to be considered in the design of
theatre presentations. Another factor to be considered is whether the
presentation offers visitors opportunities for value based reflection within, as
opposed to a mere garnering of facts? If so, even a random, one time experience
may have the potential to be enlightening and transformative.
Research Questions
The literature offers insights into the elements of engaging and effective learning
experiences. In evaluating learning, apart from cognitive gains, also considered
relevant are social and affective gains, the development of learning dispositions
and intrinsic motivation. Theatre offers a dynamic medium for science
communication in that it is amenable to a wide range of presentation strategies.
Theatre makes it possible for complex discussions to be woven into a narrative
or story that allows its viewers to reflect on concepts and ideas without
intimidating them. Contemporary theatre is also more participatory, and can offer
visitors avenues for dialogue and exchange of ideas. In order to be truly effective
and transformative, theatre presentations must be designed to offer viewers
- 28 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
reflection and care must be taken to avoid theatre being used for didactic
instruction.
The purpose of this research was to answer the following questions:
1. What learning outcomes were achieved by two science theatre

presentations at Techniquest (The Slime Show and Gran Designs)?
2. Was one presentation design discernibly more effective than the other,
and if so, what elements made it more effective?
- 29 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Chapter 3
Research Design and Justification
This research involves a summative evaluation of short term outcomes and

effects of two science theatre presentations at Techniquest Cardiff, during the
months of June 2007 to September 2007. Whereas formative evaluations are
used to direct and improve a project during its development stages, summative
evaluations focus more on effectiveness and impact post implementation. Both
quantitative and qualitative data can be useful in a summative evaluation.
Since the evaluation involved an investigation into learning outcomes exemplified

by human behaviour and attitudes, a combination of qualitative and quantitative
methods was adopted, in order to minimize the weaknesses of any single
approach.
“Quantitative and qualitative techniques provide a tradeoff between breadth and

depth and between generalizability and targeting to specific (sometimes very
limited) populations.” (Frechtling & Sharp 1997: 1-3)
While quantitative research can be used to derive knowledge of general trends,

patterns and directions related to behaviours and attitudes, qualitative research
can offer illuminating insights into the meaning of such behaviours and attitudes
with reference to context, values and culture. There is today, a general
acknowledgement of the feasibility of multi-strategy research.
“A multimethod approach to evaluation can increase both the validity and

reliability of evaluation data.” (Frechtling & Sharp 1997: 1-8)
As far back as in the 1960s, Webb et.al (1966, cited in Bryman 2001:454) have
argued that confidence in the findings of quantitative research can be enhanced
using other methods.
“The greater richness and depth of participant observation findings, coupled with
the ethnographer’s greater proximity to the people studied, frequently inspire
greater confidence in such data” (Bryman, 2001: 456)
- 30 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Methods
The methods adopted for data collection were unobtrusive observation and semi
structured interviews.
Qualitative data about visitors’ perceptions and reactions to the theatre shows
was gathered using unobtrusive observation. Observation permitted the
gathering of “firsthand data” (Frechtling & Sharp 1997: 3-1) about the extent of
audience engagement during the theatre shows. General audience reactions,
their enthusiasm, interest, levels of participation, emotions and snippets of
comments and conversation were recorded in field notes.
Observation also offered insights into the degree to which the design of each
show was congruent with best practice evidence in the literature and the relative
efficacy of the different presentation strategies.
In keeping with the interpretivist/constructivist paradigm, the purpose of an

evaluation is to understand the holistic world views, belief systems, and complex
inner psychic and interpersonal states of those involved (Kellogs’ Evaluation
Handbook: 10). Semi-structured interviews were conducted on a sample of the
theatre audience in order to derive holistic accounts and understand contextual
factors.
“To ignore the complexity of the background is to impoverish the evaluation.
Similarly, when investigating human behavior and attitudes, it is most fruitful to
use a variety of data collection methods (Patton, 1990 cited in The User Friendly
Handbook, 1997:16).”
Therefore, after every show, a sample of adult members of the audience,

selected on the basis of convenience, was asked to share their perceptions
about their own and their children’s theatre experience. Quantitative data was
obtained using an evaluation framework mapped to the Generic Learning
Outcomes (GLOs). A Likert Scale of general attitudes and behaviours indicative
- 31 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
of the five GLOs (Hooper-Greenhill 2002) provided audience perceptions of gains
in the different dimensions of learning. The interviews also facilitated a dialogue
about visitor needs and expectations and opportunities for further development.
In total, 52 semi-structured interviews were conducted on weekends and during
holidays over a period of four months (June to September 2007).
The combination of unobtrusive observation followed by simple, informal, semi-

structured interviews was perceived to be appropriate in light of the goals and
constraints of the evaluation. While a longitudinal assessment was beyond the
scope of this research, there may be gains to be derived in exploring long term
gains and perhaps as to how such gains may be enhanced and reinforced.
Unobtrusive Observation
The Slime Show was held daily and on weekends during the period May to mid
July 2007. Gran Designs was presented subsequently from mid-July to
September 2007. Both presentations were distinct in their subject, styles, and
presentation strategies. The audience for both shows comprised a broad range
of members of the public, mainly multi-generational family groups.
Field notes recorded general audience reactions, their enthusiasm and

participation, emotions expressed and snippets of comments and conversation.
The observation also offered insights and made possible an analysis of the
degree to which the design of each show was congruent with best practice and
its’ relative efficacy.
Mertens (1998:175) believes that because, in qualitative research, the researcher

is the instrument for data collection, there is always the risk that the worldview
and perceptions of the observer may distort data. Nightingale and Cromby,
(1999: 228) write that:
“Reflexivity requires an awareness of the researcher's contribution to the

construction of meanings throughout the research process, and an
- 32 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
acknowledgment of the impossibility of remaining 'outside of' one's subject matter
while conducting research.”
The quality of the observation findings may be determined by the background

and qualifications of the researchers, who must continually reflect about how
their own values and belief systems may colour interpretations.
It must here be recorded that I had the benefit of several months experience
training for and presenting science theatre shows at Techniquest, both for the
public and for school visitors, as part of the coursework for one of my modules,
Presenting Science. The experience of presenting offered insights into the design
and production logistics for every show. During training, we were constantly
reminded to be aware of and engage directly with the audience in a two way
dialogue, ask questions and elicit responses and avoid didactic one-way
communication. We were told to always make eye contact, look around at every
person, avoid talking to the walls, smile, laugh, ask questions, wait for answers,
offer prompts and respect every opinion. This experience also gave me a deeper
understanding of cues from the audience and facilitated an insightful observation
that may perhaps have been lacking without it. This experience provided the
“prolonged engagement” that is considered necessary to reduce bias and
facilitating accurate and consistent recording of data.
The observation of visitors in the science theatre revolved around three criteria:
1. Levels of Engagement
2. Levels of Participation
3. Emotional Expression
Though the present research involved a one-person observation, in cases where

two or more observers are available, such criteria could form the basis for an
observation protocol to provide some degree of inter-observer consistency for
quality data.
- 33 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Guba and Lincoln (1985, in Bryman: 273) have also suggested that qualitative
research be weighed on attributes such as trustworthiness and authenticity. To
establish trustworthiness, they equate internal validity to credibility; external
validity to transferability; reliability to dependability and objectivity to
confirmability. (Guba and Lincoln 1989, in Mertens, 1998: 180).
Reliability or the degree to which the study can be replicated, “…is a difficult
criterion to meet in qualitative research” Bryman (2001:273). Most researchers
recognize the impossibility of freezing a social setting. Hence, an audit of findings
of any particular observation may be difficult, as no two shows and audiences
can ever be replicated. Guba and Lincoln (1989 in Mertens 1998: 180) have
equated reliability with dependability in qualitative research. “In the constructivist
paradigm, change is expected, but it should be tracked and publicly inspectable”
(Mertens, 1998: 184). It is suggested that the observation criteria identified
above, (Levels of Engagement, Levels of Participation and Emotional
Expression) may offer a degree of dependability or stability in research over time.
Internal validity is the attribution of the observed behaviour to the independent

variable. It addresses the question of whether the behaviour observed was
caused by the event being evaluated. In qualitative research, this is equated with
credibility; whether the respondents actually perceived the event in the manner
portrayed by researchers, or whether researchers are actually observing,
identifying or measuring what they say they are.
One means suggested by Mertens (1998:181) and others (Bryman 2001: 273) by
which credibility concerns may be addressed is by prolonged and substantial
engagement, reflected in the surfacing of repeating themes in the data collected,
and a diminishing likelihood of new information being obtained. Some
researchers (LeCompte and Goetz (1982 in Bryman, 2001: 273) have argued
that internal validity tends to be a strength of qualitative research because
prolonged participation over a long period of time ensures “a high level of
congruence between concepts and observation.” The observation in this case
- 34 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
involved actually sitting amidst the audience in the science theatre during the
presentations and observing their immediate responses and reactions. It is
submitted that this “real time” immersion imparted a degree of credibility to the
observation. Also, prolonged engagement with science theatre during the months
preceding the research had prepared me to look for and recognise pertinent
facets of audience response.
In order to further establish the credibility of observation data, semi-structured

interviews were conducted on a sample of the audience about their experience.
These interviews served to corroborate and validate the observation data. As
stated by Mertens (1998:181), “…the goal is to provide evidence from a
multiplicity of sources of the credibility of the research.”
Establishing external validity requires researchers to be able to “extend the

findings of a particular study beyond the specific individuals and setting in which
that study occurred” (Mertens 1998: 254). Guba and Lincoln (1989, in Mertens,
1998:183) equate this with transferability. They submit that in qualitative
research, the onus of assessing the transferability of a study to the receiving
context is on the reader. To enable this assessment, the researcher must
provide a “thick description” or sufficient detail and description about the time,
place, context and culture of the study. Therefore, an attempt has been made
toward transferability by providing a detailed description of the context, set up,
strategies, and sampled population.
Semi-Structured Interviews
This research may perhaps reflect the tenets of phenomenological research,

which is based on the perspectives and subjective experience of the participant.
Mertens (1998:169) draws upon the writings of a range of researchers who
describe phenomenology as the study of the interpretation of events by members
of a community in which the researcher makes no assumptions about an
objective reality that exists apart from the individual. In the words of Carspecken,
- 35 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
(1996:12) “All that we can be sure of is the experience of the perspective, which
is not an object but rather a phenomenon.”
In keeping with the phenomenological nature of this evaluation, one element of

the evidence relied upon in this study is the opinion of adult members of the
audience about the perceived impact of the show almost immediately after they
have seen it. There was no objective test administered to assess knowledge or
recall of facts or concepts learned from the show.
The evaluation explored visitors’ spontaneous, unpremeditated, personal,

subjective viewpoints about the perceived effects of the theatre experience.
These results may be said to reflect perception rather than reality; but in this
context, as in others, perception is an important reality in itself (The House of
Lords, 2000, 2.36)
It is acknowledged that these perceptions may be based on norms and standards

acquired by individuals from their participation in community and society, and
may not be entirely individual but perhaps shaped by community. These
perceptions nonetheless offer insights into contextual factors influencing learning
in a particular community (comprising parents and grandparents of school age
children) at a particular time and place.
As discussed by Hooper-Greenhill (2002, 2003) and others (Falk and Dierking,

2000) Csikszentmihalyi and Hermanson (1999), the process of learning and
meaning making is multifaceted, personal and subjective, shaped also by prior
and subsequent experience. It is submitted that an objective test of knowledge,
making prescriptions about how a non-formal learning experience ought to fit into
the learner’s unique schema or understanding would contradict this basic
premise and limit insights into the range of cognitive, affective or social gains
derived from the experience, and its short and long term potential to contribute to
or foster learning dispositions and intrinsic motivation also essential for learning.
- 36 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
The interview protocol included a five point Likert scale for respondents to
indicate their level of agreement or disagreement with a series of statements
about various general indicators of the five Generic Learning Outcomes. As
stated by Bryman (2001: 67)
“…sets of attitudes always need to be measured by batteries of indirect

indicators…usually based on common sense understandings of the forms the
concept takes.”
Some writers Bryman (2001: 127) have suggested that the structured interview is
prone to the operation of “response sets”, implying that when respondents are
asked a series of related questions, they tend to respond in a consistent pattern
of acquiescence or disagreement, based on the social desirability of such
responses. In order to avert the likelihood of response sets, and to break the
continuity in the sequence, after each question in the series, respondents were
asked to clarify and say a little more to illuminate their thinking. Respondents
were also at regular intervals, asked to think carefully before answering, and to
provide candid and frank opinions. At the end of the interview, their answers were
read out to them for validation.
The purpose of these interviews was to corroborate observation data as well as

to obtain insights pertaining to the unique contexts that influenced the individual
experience and learn more about the values, aspirations, needs and
expectations of the audience and the extent to which they had been fulfilled.
The public nature of the venue made it infeasible to accurately record numbers
for each show and attendance tended to vary from as few as 10 people
(including children) on occasion, to a full theatre of over a 100 people at times.
This was again dependent to a large extent on weather conditions. In general,
larger crowds were observed on rainy days than on sunny days.
The sampling strategy was determined almost entirely by logistics and

opportunity and could be termed convenience sampling, in that the persons
- 37 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
participating in the study were chosen because they were “readily available”
(Mertens 1998:265).
The main constraint was that it was difficult to track the audience which tended to
scatter in different directions immediately after the show, with many often leaving
the venue directly. This meant that only between three to six interviews could be
conducted after every show. After every presentation, a few visitor groups would
return to the exhibit floor, while others left the centre or proceeded to the
cafeteria. Of those on the exhibition floor, one by one, adults were approached
and asked if they could spare a few moments to share their thoughts about the
presentation. The interviews lasted for between five to fifteen minutes. By the
time three to four interviews were completed, the remaining visitors had scattered
and were difficult to track. It was also necessary to devise a short, simple, quick
interview protocol as most visitors were accompanied by one or more, often
young children and hence were distracted by their demands and the need to
keep an eye on them. The circumstances demanded a friendly, informal
approach to put the visitor at ease and elicit frank and spontaneous responses
and feedback. To facilitate this, the written consent form was dispensed with, and
verbal consent to participate was considered sufficient. Members of the public
were generally amicable and happy to oblige and there were no refusals as they
seemed aware that they were being asked for opinions and suggestions as
stakeholders rather than as statistics in a survey. They were not asked for any
personal details (except for age) and were reassured that there would be no
further impositions on their time, and that the data collected would remain
anonymous and confidential.
Non-probability based sampling has traditionally been criticised for its

vulnerability to sampling bias, as the procedure does not provide mechanisms to
extend sample results to the population. The interpretive / constructivist view
however goes as far as to suggest that there really is no particular sampling
strategy that can offer “generalizable” conclusions (Guba and Lincoln, 1989, in
- 38 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Mertens, 1998: 266). Research and evaluation are always constrained by context
and time and the method that provides the broadest scope of information to
achieve local understanding should be the method of choice.
It emerged subsequently that the adults who formed the sample were a fairly
homogenous group; typically parents or grandparents accompanied by a child or
children. There were only two instances of adults in the sample who had
attended the show without children – a group of two foreign students and on
another occasion, two science teachers. This was generally reflective of the
population under study, which typically comprised almost entirely of family groups
with children.
It must also be pointed out that while the population observed for both the shows
(and from which the sample was taken) did share certain characteristics (they
were generally parents or grandparents with children on a leisure outing), it was
not possible to form a comparison group. This was because it was not possible to
identify people who had watched the Slime Show and also watched Gran
Designs. Hence, this study was not designed to compare audience perceptions
about the relative worth of the two shows or offer statistical inferences about their
preference for one show over the other and their perceptions about the different
presentation strategies employed. Observation data, theory based evaluation of
the two shows in the light of research about good practice, and quantitative and
qualitative visitor responses could however be used to suggest that the strategies
used in Gran Designs may perhaps have been more successful in striking a
chord with the audience. This is discussed further in the Results Chapter, and it
is suggested that this line of thought may merit further research in order to
develop its scope for drawing wider inference. It could be suggested that such
research may have a bearing on the design of future science theatre shows as
well as on the pedagogies used in teaching science in general.
In considering whether the size of the sample was adequate to establish the
value of the science theatre presentations and provide general insights for the
- 39 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
future design of such shows, it may be possible to rely on the general the rule of
thumb for qualitative research discussed by Mertens (1998: 271). The sample
size may be considered adequate if it has made possible the identification of
salient issues and reached a point where “the themes and examples are
repeating instead of extending”. It may suffice here to state that towards the
completion of the 52 interviews, salient themes had surfaced sufficiently to satisfy
the purpose of this research.
It must also be acknowledged that the sample size precluded any analysis of
variations or heterogeneity in terms of the ages of the adults or children, to
discuss the unique needs of any particular age group or group with special
needs, though feedback was obtained from the parent of a child with ADHD as
well as a child using a hearing aid. Further research in this direction may be of
value. It was also beyond the scope of this study to look for trends based on
levels of education, profession, ethnicities or other classifications or to assess
whether there were more visitors from Cardiff than from other parts of Wales or
elsewhere, how many were tourists passing through, and what percentage of
visitors were regular visitors as opposed to random visitors and whether regular
visitors derived any greater benefits from the theatre shows than one time
visitors. All of these questions may offer avenues for further research to develop
strategies to enhance and reinforce learning.
It is to be expected that needs, expectations, normative judgments and

perceptions will vary over time. Reliability concerns involve establishing both
interobserver stability and stability over time. While stability over time may be
difficult to establish, it is submitted that the GLO framework of five learning
dimensions and the use of multiple indicators for each of these dimensions may
provide some elements of stability. The theoretical foundations and broad range
of research from which the Generic Learning Outcomes have been derived make
this framework a reliable tool for the evaluation of a variety of programmes in
museums, archives and libraries.
- 40 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
External validity or transferability will determine the extent to which findings may
be generalized across social settings. It is submitted that while the research is
concerned with the perceived benefits of two particular theatre shows presented
at Techniquest during the months of June to September 2007, it is nonetheless a
study of the responses of a community to a non-formal learning experience
involving a subject recognised to be of national import. It is suggested that there
may be fair scope for insights from this study to be applied in other settings
involving science, theatre and pedagogy.
Assuring the internal validity of quantitative data generated by the semi-

structured interviews, required an assessment of the degree to which theoretical
inferences were justified. Threats to internal validity (determining whether the
outcomes were indeed associated with the theatre show experience or other
extraneous factors) were sought to be controlled by conducting the interviews
almost immediately after the theatre shows. To further limit threats to internal
validity, triangulation was used to corroborate interview data with observation
data and evidence based research cited in the literature.
A pilot study was conducted in order to fine tune and develop a simple yet
focused interview protocol. The final protocol (at Appendix A) was developed
after a two day pilot with 8 participants. The Likert scale mapping indicators to
the Generic Learning Outcomes is depicted below for ease of reference.
Indicator Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Strongly Generic Learning

Agree Agree Disagree Outcome
nor
Disagree
Science Theatre shows are fun and Enjoyment,
Inspiration,
make Science more interesting.
Creativity
Science Theatre shows help me /my Knowledge and

Understanding
children learn things we didn’t know
Science Theatre shows help me / my Perceptions,

Attitudes and
children understand science and its
Values
everyday applications better.
After watching the Science Theatre, I Perceptions,
Attitudes and
/ my children feel that Science is
Values
important and I want to learn more
- 41 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
science.
Science Theatre improves confidence Perceptions,

Attitudes and
and self-esteem
Values
Science Theatre develops other skills Skills

in children, such as thinking, asking
questions, carrying out experiments at
home.
I / my children would like to watch Action,
Behaviour,
more Science Theatre shows.
Progression
Science Theatre shows encourage Action,

Behaviour,
children to take up careers in science.
Progression
I / my children will tell friends to see Action,

Behaviour,
the Science Theatre show.
Progression
- 42 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Chapter 4: Results
This Chapter will present qualitative data obtained from the unobtrusive
observation of science theatre audiences at Techniquest from June to September
2007. In addition, this Chapter will detail quantitative as well as qualitative data
from 52 semi-structured interviews conducted after the various shows during the
same time frame. The Slime Show was presented during the months May to July
2007 on weekends and public holidays and Gran Designs was presented
thereafter, from end July to September 2007. The research was launched on the
weekend of 16/17 June 2007 after a short pilot.
The audience for both shows almost entirely comprised multi-generational family
groups. There were also groups of children accompanied by teachers from the
Girls Brigade and Brownies, working toward their science badges and
occasionally some children’s birthday groups. Each presentation lasted for about
40 to 45 minutes. There were days when the theatre was practically full with
visitors, and there were days when there were barely a dozen, depending on the
weather. Occasionally, shows had to be cancelled on account of low visitor
numbers.
The Slime Show
As they entered the theatre to lively music, visitors were each given wireless
voters. This almost always generated excitement among the children. The first
slide on the screen with the title “The Slime Show” built up anticipation. Once
they were settled in their seats, two presenters welcomed them, introduced
themselves and launched the presentation with a question – “What is slime?“
Children generally answered spontaneously, “it’s squashy”, “gooey”, “disgusting”
“oozy” and “yucky”. These answers were accepted and the presenters moved on
to the properties of slime – showing them a ball of slime, bouncing it on the floor,
and stretching it and then asking them “Is slime a solid or a liquid?” The
subsequent demonstrations went on to establish that slime has both solid and
- 43 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
liquid properties. Volunteers were called down for The Bubble Race, in which
children were given tubes filled with different liquids, water, cooking oil, washing
up liquid, and golden syrup and the audience was asked to use their wireless
voters to predict how quickly the bubbles would rise in these different fluids. The
Poly-ox Demonstration involved pouring poly-ox from one beaker to another and
using a pair of scissors to cut the stream. This always generated surprise. The
Potty Putty demonstration showed visitors that hitting the putty with force has
little effect, but it changes shape easily if handled gently. Voters were used again
for The Marvelous Mucus Quiz with questions about “how much mucus does an
average healthy nose make in a day?” and “how fast does a sneeze leave your
nose?” The Cornflour Demonstration involved mixing cornflour and water to show
how the mixture displays both solid and liquid properties. Adult volunteers were
called down to pass this ball of slime quickly around in order to show how it
changes its behaviour depending on how it is handled.
The Slime Show: Audience Reactions
The observation of the visitors in the science theatre centred around three
criteria: engagement, participation and emotion.
These were considered pertinent indicators of whether the visitors were

experiencing the “flow” described by Csikszentmihalyi and Hermanson (1999). In
their view, sustained interest, curiosity and focused attention is necessary for
intrinsically motivated learning, reflected in positive intellectual or emotional
change. These three criteria could also suggest the development of the three key
learning dispositions (resilience, playfulness and reciprocity) described by Carr
and Claxton (2002).
In general, for most of the shows, the audience was fairly engaged. Adults paid
attention to the demonstrations, were quiet and listening, nodding, and
encouraging children to watch and listen. In several shows it was observed that
- 44 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
generally children became restless during the latter half of the show. Quizzes
generated some enthusiasm and discussions between parents and children.
Children were excited during the Cornflour Demonstration, in which a few parents
were called down for a game of “passing the slime”.
Enthusiasm levels seemed to vary with the audience numbers as with smaller
groups, and consequently lower levels of response, it was difficult to build up or
maintain a fast paced momentum. In general however, when audience numbers
were greater, there was a better sense of community with a lively and interested
audience enjoying themselves.
2. Audience participation
In general, children were very excited and eager to volunteer for the
demonstrations. Volunteers were called down for the Bubble Race, and the
audience was asked to use their wireless voters to predict how quickly the
bubbles would rise in the tubes containing liquids of different consistencies.
Some typical comments noted included:
Parent: “The voters were fun!”
Child: “I hope we get to use the voters again.”
Volunteers was also called down for the ”Potty Putty” and “Corn Flour”
demonstrations to explain the properties of slime.
However, it was observed that in the last activity involving parents in the Passing
the Slime Game, parents were often reluctant to participate and had to be
prompted by their children to oblige.
Children were eager and happy to answer the fairly simple questions. This also
helped identify naive conceptions, for example:
Presenter: “When you have a cold, why is mucus green?”
- 45 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Child: “Because we eat green vegetables”
Presenter: “’Do you eat lots of green vegetables? It’s important to eat lots of
greens. But the green colour in mucus actually comes from immune cells in the
mucus that fight the cold.”
During demonstrations and in the Marvelous Mucus Quiz the audience voted for
the right answers and these results were depicted on the screen. It was observed
generally, that the audience did not ask any questions during the show, though
whispered snippets indicated they did have questions.
Parent (whispers): “What’s Poly-ox? “What’s it made of?”
Child: “What’s that? “
On several occasions, after the shows, as they left the theatre, a few visitors
were observed asking the presenters about Poly-ox and what it is used for.
[Note: This point is discussed further in the Analysis Chapter]
3. Emotions
In general, the audience expressed interest and curiosity. Most children seemed
to enjoy the demonstrations, though younger ones (1 – 4 year olds) were often
restless. Children especially enjoyed using their voters for the quizzes.
The Marvelous Mucus Quiz generated enthusiasm and excitement and there
were many expressions of surprise and amusement at the facts revealed. On
several occasions, during or at the end of the show some children did express
disappointment in not being able to play with or touch slime.
Child: “When do get to play with the slime?”
- 46 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Gran Designs
As they approached the science theatre, visitors saw signs on the walls, “Beware
of Goat”. The presentation began by introducing the audience to two young
children, Sean and Jade (depicted as cartoon characters in a slide show
projected onto a large screen). The slides showed the two children getting ready
for school. As they brushed their teeth, the water was left running, the TV was left
on, and they were going by car when school was just two minutes away. The
message was clear and the audience was immediately able to derive the
underlying theme of the show from these slides. When the presenters asked the
children if they’d noticed anything “not right” in these pictures, they were
immediately able to identify the “wrong” behaviours.
The audience was then introduced to some famous inventors, with a slide
depicting cartoon caricatures of three inventors: Alexander Graham Bell, Thomas
Edison, and Granny Green, the protagonist in this light drama (thereby
establishing her credentials as a member of this famous club). The audience was
transported via the slide show, to the green mountains to visit Granny Green, an
inventor and an environmentalist who lived on her own and would be happy to
show them around her amazing garden and discuss her useful inventions. She
was happy for the company, very chatty and glad to share her stories.
Granny Green’s ramblings were interspersed with short quizzes (Compost /Non-
Post and Water Usage) requiring the audience to predict correct answers with
their voters. There was also a Rubbish Sorting Game which called for one adult
and one child volunteer. Volunteers were also called down for a demonstration of
Granny Green’s Wormery, Mechanical Doorbell, the Can Shooter, and Wind
Power. Her pet goat (Geraldine), a soft hand puppet also generated thrills and
children were eager to pet the goat.
Gran Designs: Audience Reactions:
- 47 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
The audience was highly engaged in all the shows. The children were
enthusiastic and the character Granny Green, generally played very obviously by
a male actor (sometimes with a faint beard visible) was an instant hit and
generated lots of laughter and giggles when she complained about the hair
sprouting on her face and how she collected water in “my big butt”.
2. Audience Participation
The character Granny Green, portrayed as a slightly eccentric and cheeky,

environmentally aware inventor, worked well to establish an instant rapport with
both the young and old. In some shows, the actor playing the role got many
laughs when he joked that “she was tired of living alone and still lookin’ for a
fella”. The tone was conversational and comic, and the character both absurd
and amusing. Children were eager to answer questions, and also enjoyed the
two short quizzes (Compost / Non-post and Water Usage) in which they used
their wireless voters. There were also opportunities to volunteer and come down
to the floor for the demonstrations of the mechanical Doorbell, the Trick Worm,
the Can Shooter, and Wind Power as well as a the Rubbish Sorter Challenge.
Geraldine the Goat also generated several laughs at her reactions to audience
answers about the products she helped produce. In some shows, Granny Green
went up the stairs to allow the audiences in different rows to touch and feel
Geraldine.
3. Emotions
The audience was very interested, and expressed enjoyment and amusement,
whispering, laughing and giggling at Granny Green’s jokes. They also expressed
surprise at some of the facts revealed in the quizzes. Children were excited and
enthusiastic and eager to pet Geraldine the Goat, whom some children thought
may be a real goat.
- 48 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Structured Interviews
Over the period June to September 2007, 52 adult visitors to the science theatre
at Techniquest were interviewed about their perceptions of learning gains from
the experience. While the sample size may limit broader generalisation,
emergent themes nonetheless offer interesting avenues for further research.
Data gathered from the structured interviews (rounded for convenience) was as
follows:
As discussed earlier, the sample formed a fairly homogenous group; of the 52

visitors interviewed, 96% were accompanied by a child or children. This was
suggestive of the perception among visitors that science theatre at Techniquest is
targeted to children. This demographic also seems to indicate that there may be
untapped opportunities to extend the reach of the science theatre at Techniquest
to the “missing audiences” (Reeve, 2000:199) that includes young adults as well
as older people without children.
Interviews also indicated that 65% of the sample had been to Techniquest before
and of this, 42 % had been to the Science Theatre before. When asked about
their interest in science, 13 % had a professional interest in science, 29 % had a
high level of interest in science, while 58 % had an average interest in science.
When asked about their children, 85% felt that their children enjoy learning
science in school.
Respondents were also asked to indicate their levels of agreement with a series
of statements on a five point Likert Scale. Numeric data for each presentation
has been tabulated at Appendix B. These results are graphically depicted below.
Perceived effects of Science Theatre: Statements about outcomes Generic Learning

Outcome
- 49 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
1. Science Theatre shows are fun and make Science more Enjoyment,
Inspiration,
interesting. Creativity
2. Science Theatre shows help me /my children learn things we Knowledge and
Understanding
didn’t know.
3. Science Theatre shows help me / my children understand science Perceptions,

Attitudes and Values
and its everyday applications better.
4. After watching the Science Theatre, I / my children feel that Perceptions,

Science is important and I want to learn more science.
5. Science Theatre improves confidence and self-esteem. Perceptions,

6. Science Theatre helps develop other skills in children, such as Skills

thinking, asking questions, carrying out experiments at home,
and the importance of collecting evidence
7. I / my children would like to watch more Science Theatre shows. Action, Behaviour,
Progression
8. Science Theatre shows encourage children to take up careers in Action, Behaviour,

Progression
science.
9. I / my children will tell friends to see the Science Theatre show. Action, Behaviour,
Progression
The Slime Show: Visitor Perception of Gains
70
Strongly Agree
Percentage of Visitors
60
50
Agree
40
30 Neither Agree Nor
20 Disagree
10 Disagree
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Strongly Disagree
Statement about Outcomes
- 50 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Gran Designs: Visitor Perceptions of Gains
100
Strongly Agree
Percentage of Visitors
80
Agree
60
40 Neither Agree Nor

Disagree
20
Disagree
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Strongly Disagree
Statement about Outcomes
Data reveals that both science theatre presentations (The Slime Show and Gran
Designs) were enjoyed and perceived by most visitors to offer cognitive, social
and affective gains in line with the five GLOs. In general, there were high levels
of agreement among the respondents that the science theatre presentations
offered gains in the various dimensions of the Generic Learning Outcomes.
It was discussed in Chapter 3 that none of the interview participants had seen
both the presentations so as to offer an insight into comparative gains from each
presentation. With this caveat, interview data nonetheless seems to indicate
higher levels of agreement with the statements from visitors to Gran Designs. For
example, for Statements 2, 3, 4 and 6, a higher percentage of visitors to Gran
Designs seems to “Strongly Agree” whereas for Slime Show, there is a larger
percentage that opts for “Agree”. While the small sample size precludes concrete
inferences being drawn from this, it may nonetheless be suggestive of visitors’
preference for the narrative, story based presentation of Gran Designs, which
may have had greater meaning and connection with their lives and therefore
generated greater enthusiasm and stronger perceptions of gain.
- 51 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
However, irrespective of the subject and design, some typical comments
recorded included:
Parent: “We enjoyed it!”
Parent: “It was interesting…and yes, we did learn a few things!”
Parent: “We are visiting from Turkey. My daughter…her English is not very
good…Still she liked it…especially the experiments”
Grandparent: “The presenters are friendly; it’s encouraging for the children.”
Visitors agreed that such presentations spark interest and curiosity as well as
encourage young children to ask questions and think about everyday science
and foster learning dispositions.
Foster Parent: “The children spend too much time watching TV and playing
Gameboy. This is live, and teaches them to think and ask questions.
Parent: “It’s science with fun and games.
Parent: “…they become more aware…they see things they’ve not noticed
before.”
A key factor contributing to enjoyment seemed to be social - sharing learning with

the family and in a multi-generational community.
Parent:” It’s something we can all enjoy…..my younger one’s only two, but the
elder two love it…I can take them all in together…”
Grandparent: “We get to spend time with our grandchildren and maybe they’ll
remember it afterwards.”
Gains from science theatre were also perceived by parents for children with
special needs.
- 52 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Parent: “My son has ADHD and he sat through this show. We’ve seen it three
times already and he still enjoys it…so we come again and again. “
Grandparent: “He wears a hearing aid and doesn’t usually respond. But he was
quiet, so I think he must have followed it.”
While many visitors were hesitant to assume that such experiences could
influence long term career choices as their children were very young and had
varied interests, such as art or sport, many believed that it could nonetheless
“plant the seeds” for the future, especially if appropriately supported, both in and
outside school. There may be some value in exploring how the half-life of such
gains can be sustained and enhanced in the long term.
Data also reveals that the visitors to the science theatre at Techniquest almost
entirely comprised family groups with children. While the presentations seek to
foster family learning and learning in the community, a common theme emerging
from interview responses was that science theatre at Techniquest is generally
perceived to be aimed at children rather than adults.
“We came along for the little one – we want him to have an interest in science. Most
of our friends won’t be interested in this kind of thing…unless they’ve got kids
maybe. “(Parent)
“I think it’s alright for younger children. But they should have something different for
teenagers.” (Parent)
“It’s wonderful for the children.” (Grandparent)
It may perhaps be derived from this that there may be a potential for the
development of science theatre targeting older children and more mature
audiences.
- 53 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Chapter 5: An Analysis
This chapter sets out an analysis of the design of the two presentations (The
Slime Show and Gran Designs) in order to determine whether one of these was
discernibly more effective than the other and if so, why? The analysis involved a
consideration of both observation and interview data against the benchmark of
best practices derived from the literature.
The elements of design promoting effective and engaging learning are set out
below, followed by a discussion about the extent to which each presentation
offered these elements.
a. Bridges (cues of salience) to connect the learning with real world

contexts and make the learning more meaningful, links with prior
knowledge and opportunities to address naiïve conceptions
Adey and Shayer (Adey 1999) recommend bridging or providing cognitive links to
other situations to help learners see contexts for application of the learning.
McCormick and Paechter (1999) have also suggested offering cues that signal
salience or relevance of the learning. Ausubel’s (1963) concept of “anchored
instruction”, suggests the need to link new information to ideas in the learners
existing schema. Similarly, Feuerstein (1980) writes that the mediator can amplify
and interpret experiences for the learner by asking questions and requiring
learners to justify their answers. This helps to reconcile new information with prior
knowledge and deconstruct naïve conceptions. Feuerstein also recommends that
mediation be sequenced from concrete to abstract or specific to general. For
retention and transfer of learning to other contexts, learners must first understand
concrete applications of science.
The Slime Show

There were several missed opportunities to provide connections to help the audience
assimilate the facts and principles presented and their relevance.
While most children were familiar with what slime is, there was limited linking and
- 54 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
bridging to connect the learning to everyday life. There were no explanations for what
slime is made of, where or how it is made, why slime is important or why it is
relevant to learn about the properties of slime. Also areas of everyday applications for
such materials and the connection of this subject with the underlying science of
polymers were not touched upon.
Several times after the show, visitors were observed asking presenters about the
material Poly-ox and how it was used. This is considered relevant because it indicated
that a critical link was not provided in the presentation to enable visitors to understand
the real world applications and relevance of this material.
In the words of a grandparent,
“We come here regularly, so we’ve seen this show before…Children don’t usually think
about these things too much…but if it’s more about things they come across every day
then it makes sense to them. Like when we went to the Kennedy Space Centre, they
explained how the outer casing of rockets is made from the same material as frying
pans! Now that’s something I still remember clearly. “
There was no narrative/story linking different parts of the presentation. There were
fewer elements of theatre and greater of instruction. While principles were amply
demonstrated, the context of application was not clearly established.
The Marvelous Mucus Quiz presented some surprising and interesting facts about the
role of slime in our bodies (mucus) addressed common misconceptions. However, there
seemed to be a missing link between this discussion and the discussions about potty
putty and poly ox.
Socratic questioning was used to introduce different facts (e.g. What is slime? Is slime
a solid or a liquid? If it’s a liquid, why does it bounce? If it’s a solid, why does it keep
flowing? How do we stop it flowing? ). Younger children were keen to answer these
simple questions. Their responses were put to the test with simple experiments and
demonstrations.
The demonstrations (Bubble Race, Potty Putty, Cornflour) were illuminating and
effective in addressing misconceptions and subtly delivered a message about the
importance of inquiry based learning.
Gran Designs
The underlying messages about the importance of reducing waste, recycling and
reusing were woven into a narrative with strong real world connections. As one
interview respondent commented:
“We’re from Cheltenham and we’ve had no water for days because of the flooding. This
show is important because it’s about the importance of conservation.”
The character Granny Green conveyed the messages in a light, informal and easy to
- 55 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
understand manner. She formed an instant rapport with the family groups, (as
grandmothers are apt to) with her feisty, independent nature and slightly cheeky jokes.
Light comic relief woven into the narrative that involved two young children and their
everyday experiences provided the bridges to connect the learning with their lives.
The Wormery, and the jumping worm joke provided an anchor for the discussion and
quiz about compost and what goes into it.
The Compost / Nonpost quiz discussed the compost potential of various every day
items (dog pooh, magazines, teabags etc.) and the Water Usage quiz also offered links
about water usage in daily life (how much water is used up when you flush the toilet,
take a shower, run the washing machine, etc.).
The Rubbish Sorting game offered concrete links to items in everyday life (such as
printer cartridges, discarded keyboards, rubber tyres, polystyrene cups) and their
potential for reuse or recycling.
There were a range of questions addressed to the audience, sparking whispered

discussions between parents and children. Young learners also warmed to the visual
and tactile experience provided by Geraldine the Goat and her bag of products made
from goat’s milk.
Quizzes and games also provided a means for the audience to test their own
knowledge in the safety of the anonymous voting system and addressed common
misconceptions about compost, recycling and water usage.
b. Opportunities for participation and two way dialogue (Volunteering /

Voting / Questions / Quizzes )
Discussion and sharing of thoughts is fundamental to the Cognitive Acceleration

through Science Education (CASE) methodology developed by Adey and Shayer
(Adey, 1999) as well as other constructivist writers (Lipman 1991, Piaget, 1973).
Middleton and Edwards (1990: 254) have shown how conversations provide an
environment for the formulation and justification of thoughts and conceptions.
The Slime Show

There were a variety of opportunities presented for children to volunteer (The Bubble
Race and the Potty Putty and Corn Flour experiments).
The Marvelous Mucus Quiz was enjoyed by young and old, and the children especially
enjoyed the wireless voters.
- 56 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
There were several opportunities for children to answer questions. There was however
little scope for the audience to touch/feel the material either during or after the show
and there was little scope for dialogue, or questions or inputs from the audience.
Several times after the show, visitors were observed asking presenters about Poly-ox.
This indicated that while they were interested, they may have been reticent during the
presentation and perhaps needed a safe and informal forum to ask their own questions.
Gran Designs
There were several opportunities for children to volunteer (Mechanical Doorbell, Can
Shooter, Rubbish Sorter Challenge and Wind Power).
In addition, the audience enjoyed using their wireless voters to vote in the short quizzes
(Compost / Nonpost and Water Usage).
The character of Granny Green gave the presentation an informal, conversational tone
and her questions, jokes and ramblings created an impression of informal dialogue.
There were several opportunities for the children to answer questions.
There was no scope for questions or inputs from the audience during the presentation,
and visitors were often interested in seeing Granny Green’s inventions close up after
the show but were required to leave the theatre immediately. This suggests that gains
may be derived if some time is allowed after the show for dialogue and for visitors to
ask their own questions as they explore the ideas and concepts more informally.
c. Multi-sensory presentation strategies
Howard Gardner’s concept of Multiple Intelligences (Gardner, 1985) stemmed

from the understanding people have different aptitudes, preferences and learning
styles and that there may be multiple pathways to learning. Today it is generally
accepted that multi modal presentation strategies facilitate effective learning in a
range of learners. Hughes (1998: 116) suggests that theatre provides the
“narrational and experiential entry points” for audiences with different learning
styles and preferences, with a blend of words, pictures, music, self-reflection,
physical and social experiences. Anderson (2000) and Hughes (1998) have
discussed the human need for stories and recommend presentation through the
use of narrative or stories and analogies.
The Slime Show
The presentation was based on a combination of activities, quizzes, demonstrations
and volunteer participation; however there was no narrative or story connecting these
- 57 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
elements.
The live demonstrations and quiz questions were projected onto the large screen had a
good impact, however the tactile element seemed to be missing in this show about
Slime and this was expressed by several children who were expecting to touch and
play with Slime.
Gran Designs
The presentation was based on a variety of presentation strategies woven into a
narrative about Granny Green. There was a combination of audio-visual presentation,
light drama, narrative, volunteer participation, games and quizzes and a range of
innovative props.
The presentation began with a slideshow projected onto a large screen which
introduced two young cartoon characters Sean and Jade.
There were several props on the floor, including items in Granny Green’s garden such
as a Wormery (from which a trick Worm was ejected as a joke), an elaborate
mechanical doorbell system, a Can Sorting Invention and a Windmill attached to a
clothes line on which hung Granny Green’s red polka dotted underwear. A hand puppet
was used as Geraldine the Goat.
d. Avenues for generalisation of learning, further discovery / exploration /

reinforcement of concepts?
Hughes (1998:52) highlights the need for continuity and interaction, suggesting
that theatre in isolation may not be effective as an educational tool. Falk and
Dierking (2000) have also argued that learning is influenced both by prior and
subsequent experiences. Gains can therefore be enhanced by providing a range
of related activities, supporting and reinforcing learning, to improve retention and
assimilation.
The Slime Show

While the properties of slime were clearly demonstrated and established, it was not
clear how these facts and principles could be generalized to other contexts.
Applications of these principles in everyday life were not indicated.
There was a missed opportunity to introduce the term “polymer” and discuss the role of
- 58 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
natural and man-made polymers and their relevance in today’s world.
The visitors were provided with a pamphlet that included a recipe for slime, a join the
dot activity and some links to websites targeted to young children.
Parent: “Well yes… the kids will definitely want to try the recipe at home…”
While in the early days of the show, most visitors received these pamphlets, the supply
of these was limited and in later shows these pamphlets were no longer offered.
While there is an exhibit on the floor related to the Bubble Race game conducted in this
show, (depicting how a bubble moves through liquids of different viscosity), the practical
applications of the principles of viscosity are not immediately obvious. There were no
other exhibits or related workshops to continue further exploration of this subject.
It could also be derived from some visitor comments that there may be something to be
gained in offering supporting and reinforcing activities and an opportunity for informal
dialogue and questions after the show for further exploration.
“Children enjoy it more if they get to volunteer. But my daughter’s very shy. Maybe there
should be an area where they can just touch and try out things after the show, without
having to volunteer.” (Parent)
“The children wanted to touch the slime… when they heard about “The Slime Show”; they
thought they’d get to play with slime.” (Grandparent)
“Not everyone gets to volunteer…they (the children) all wanted to feel the slime so maybe
there should have been more of that.” (Parent)
Visitors asking questions after the show also seems to indicate that while they may
have been reticent to ask questions during the presentation, they were nonetheless
interested enough to ask about it later. It is suggested that after the presentation it may
be worthwhile to offer visitors a safe forum to ask questions after the presentation and
sharing their own insights, thereby enhancing the process of meaning making.
Gran Designs
A multiplicity of examples and avenues for the application of the principles of reuse,
recycle and reduce waste were discussed.
The broad range of real world examples provided the visitors with multiple contexts for
the application and generalization of the learning.
During the same period, several other opportunities were provided for visitors to
encounter and reflect on the subject of the presentation.
This included a series of interactive exhibits displayed on the exhibit floor or (on some
- 59 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
days weather permitting) at the dock fingers just outside Techniquest. These included, a
Hamster Wheel, with a human-powered light bulb, Make and Take activities and a
series of environment friendly exhibits collectively called the Sustainability Hub. There
were a series of Solar Power Workshops at regular intervals, with displays of a variety
of solar powered gadgets, teaching visitors how to make their own solar ovens with
cardboard and foil. A large screen also provided a rolling presentation titled Exploration
of Antartica.
e. Reflective, application oriented, value based learning rather than only

acquisition of facts / principles
Lipman (1991:14, 15) recommends that teaching for “higher order thinking”
where the focus is not on the acquisition of information but on the grasp of
relationships. “Reflective” education is the outcome of participation in a teacher
guided community of inquiry, whose goals are the achievement of understanding
and good judgement. Hughes (1998: 27) also discusses the importance of
providing visitors with the “tools to think critically about the world around them”.
Similarly, Lewenstein (2000) recommends moving away from the traditional
"deficit" model of instruction to a more exploratory, reflective, guided discovery
model of learning.
The Slime Show
The presentation was based on the properties of slime, with little reference to contexts.
It was to a large extent, focused on facts and principles with little scope for reflection on
the applications of slime or ethical issues arising from such applications.
While the range of demonstrations did inherently have the potential to convey the
importance of evidence and testing scientific principles, it was not possible to gauge
whether this message was received by the audience focused on the more overt
instruction.
There was limited scope for the audience to reflect on these principles and their
applications in the real world.
- 60 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Gran Designs
Through the medium of a narrative about Granny Green and her inventions, several
value based issues were raised for the audience to reflect on, centering around the
need to change our lifestyles to reduce waste and preserve the environment.
Facts about what materials can and cannot be used for compost and for recycling and
water usage were embedded in games and quizzes and their relevance in our day to
day lives was amplified.
f. Opportunities for “flow” experiences and the development of learning

dispositions
Audience responses and interview data offered indicators of whether the visitors
were experiencing the “flow” described by Csikszentmihalyi and Hermanson
(1999). For intrinsically motivated learning, and positive intellectual or emotional
change, sustained interest and attention are needed. It is also relevant to
consider the extent to which the design of the show facilitated the development of
the three prime learning dispositions (resilience, playfulness and reciprocity)
described by Carr and Claxton (2002).
The Slime Show

The presentation involved a range of demonstrations about the properties of slime.
There were no major props, apart from a table on the floor of the science theatre with a
beaker and a small quantity of slime.
The demonstrations were simple but offered good insights into the solid and liquid
properties of slime.
The presenters regularly addressed questions to the audience and this served to retain
their attention and interest. Games and quizzes also provided involvement for visitors.
The Cornflour game involving parents in a game of “passing the slime” provided an
element of mischief and fun. In general audience response was indicative of “flow”.
While in general, the audience was fairly engaged during the presentation, it was
observed that enthusiasm and engagement levels fell sharply where audience numbers
were smaller. This could suggest that the sense of flow may perhaps be related to the
sense of community and the excitement of shared discovery and reciprocity rather than
on account of presentation strategies.
Gran Designs
- 61 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
This presentation was woven into a narrative with an actor dressed as Granny Green,
an environmentalist and inventor sharing her stories.
Observation indicated that most people in the audience identified with and warmed to
this slightly eccentric character with all the elements of comedy, and a fair amount
laughter and giggles in the audience.
There was also a variety of props (Granny Green’s garden and her inventions) and a
large screen for a slide show. All these details offered the audience an immersive
experience, facilitating “flow”. Granny Green’s character provided the audience with a
resilient and playful role model, exemplifying dynamism and innovation. The quizzes,
voters and games also offered challenge, excitement and a sense of community and
reciprocity among the audience.
Engagement levels were observed to be fairly high and largely unaffected even when
there were fewer numbers in the audience. This could perhaps suggest that the
presentation strategies offered immersion and involvement independent of the sense of
community and the numbers present.
- 62 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Chapter 6: Opportunities
The current research reveals that the medium of theatre appeals to “hearts and
minds” (Hughes, 1998: 115). Science theatre evokes the emotion, interest, and
curiosity required for intrinsically motivated learning and also fosters the learning
dispositions (resilience, playfulness, and reciprocity) needed for effective
learning.
Science theatre offers a versatile medium for public engagement with science.
Data clearly indicates that the public enjoyed the science theatre presentations at
Techniquest, with all its elements of music, drama, demonstrations, quizzes and
games. Data indicates that the visitors perceived cognitive, affective and social
gains for themselves and their children from the experience, in line with the
multiple dimensions of the GLOs. It was evident that science theatre offers
audiences a sense of connection, community and shared learning. It sparks their
imaginations, provides relief from the isolation of interacting with lifeless exhibits
and an opportunity to learn something new about the world in which they live.
“The Royal Society Michael Faraday Prize is the United Kingdom's premier
award for science communication and is awarded annually for excellence in
communicating science to UK audiences.” (The Royal Society Website)
The first recipient of this Prize was Charles Taylor (former Professor and Head of
the Department of Physics at the University College of Wales, Cardiff) who
presented some 150 lectures to schoolchildren and 8 Friday Evening Discourses,
at the Royal Institution.
…he could reach out to non-mathematically oriented scientists from sister

disciplines and explain to them by analogy - and usually by devastatingly
effective demonstrations - those seemingly arcane and quantitative areas of
physics (such as diffraction) that often trouble the biologist, the chemist or
medical expert. (Thomas, March 23, 2002)
That perhaps is the essence of science communication - the communication of

science to non-scientists without compromising scientific integrity. However in
- 63 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
science communication activities, there arises Radford’s (2007) question about
“…how much science does an ordinary mortal need to know?” This is perhaps
the crux of the problem and this is where science communication exercises
succeed or fail. Scientific literacy today implies an understanding of the principles
of scientific inquiry as also of the nature of science.
Without understanding the values and assumptions of the knowledge and the
processes by which the knowledge is created, the learner can do little more than
construct an image of science consisting of isolated “facts” void of context that
make the knowledge relevant and applicable (Schwarz, Lederman and Crawford,
2004: 611).
It is the question of understanding needs.

Despite the significant progress of the past decade in understanding and
describing learning from museums, we have yet to fully “enter the minds and
bodies” of our visitors. (Falk, 2004:1)
The current research provides some valuable insights into some of these visitor
needs. Analysis reveals that people need to understand the salience of the
communication or why it is relevant. Theatre being amenable to a host of
presentation strategies must not become a medium for disjointed instruction.
“Good theatre can be far more subtle and reveal many layers…visitors need not
understand every layer to appreciate the play“(Hughes, 1998:56).
“Constructing a science curriculum on the basis of what science members of the

public might need is likely to result in less emphasis being placed on content
knowledge and more on ways of accessing and evaluating scientific
knowledge...” (Braund and Reiss, 2006:215)
Good theatre offers visitors value based, application oriented science, with
avenues for critical reflection rather than facts or principles isolated from their
context of application. Its’ goal is to “motivate visitors to seek out the facts
themselves” (Hughes 1998:57).
There is also the human need for stories. It is accepted today that people can
mentally organise information better where it is embedded in a story. Stories
- 64 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
have been used to impart knowledge “across cultures and over time” (Falk and
Dierking 2000: 48-9). Research indicates that science embedded in stories
provides greater engagement, learning, retention, reflection and facilitates
sharing. The current research also indicates that of the visitors who viewed Gran
Designs, a higher percentage strongly agreed with statements about learning
gains than in the case of the Slime Show. This is suggestive of greater
enthusiasm and more positive perceptions of outcomes, and it may be suggested
that this was on account of the narrative, story based presentation of Gran
Designs. It is suggested that it was this element of presentation design and
consequently, the opportunities offered for bridging, building connections and
understanding the relevance and applications of the learning that made it more
effective and led to stronger perceptions of learning gains.
Also revealed in the current research is the human need for conversation.
Research recognises the role of discourse in knowledge construction. Data in
the current research also suggests that visitors need an informal forum for
discussion and dialogue after the presentation. In order to enhance exchange
and discussion, opportunities should be provided for visitors to engage with
presenters in a two-way dialogue, perhaps after the presentation (to balance
structure with flexibility). This may also allow members of the audience to share
and exchange their own learning and insights in a form of reciprocal learning.
Another need perceived from the analysis is the need for continuity. The literature
provides evidence that people do not learn things in one moment in time, but
over time (Falk and Dierking 2000) and that “learning is circular, developing over
time” (Hooper-Greenhill, 2002: 2.4)
Theatre presentations designed in a framework that includes other supporting

activities and opportunities for exploration, dialogue and guided discovery could
provide enhanced “flow” and facilitate better connection building and “anchoring”
of the experience. This is the basis of the spiral curriculum – that revisits basic
- 65 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
ideas repeatedly, as it develops, building upon them until the learner develops a
deep understanding (Bruner, 1960: 3).
“Situating learning from museums within an enlarged scope and scale are not
just abstract niceties; they are fundamental to validly determining what is or is not
learned from a museum experience” (Falk, 2004: 1)
A study of the sample also highlights the need for inclusion. A very large
proportion of the science theatre audiences at Techniquest were adults
accompanying children. The ‘missing audiences’ included young adults without
children, teenagers, and groups of the elderly. Inclusion involves studying visitor
demographics for information about gender, age, education and ethnicity and
identifying and reaching missing audiences by providing perhaps a different
brand of science theatre.
Offering visitors salient content in a manner designed to spark self exploration

means first identifying target audiences and then identifying the themes and
subjects that are relevant and of interest to them. In order to offer theatre with
universal appeal, research is needed into different visitor needs, interests,
learning styles and preferences. Interview respondents’ comments suggest that
there is potential for the development of science theatre at Techniquest in this
direction.
“…I’m fifty now, semi-retired, and have a lot more time on my hands. I’d like to
learn more about what’s happening in the world.” (Foster Parent)
“I went for the test-tube baby lecture in London. It was fascinating. There should
be more of that sort of thing here as well. “(Teacher)
“I’ve had two knee replacement surgeries and that’s also science. I’d love to
learn more about this kind of thing, and the new treatments available…”
(Grandparent)
- 66 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
The need to develop lifelong learning opportunities was highlighted in The
Learning Age, (DfEE, 1998) and identified as a priority target by Anderson, (1997,
and 1999).
“Museums can contribute to every stage of educational development. They

should support lifelong learning through both informal learning and formal
education, from early childhood, through families, at work and in the third age.
“(Anderson, 1999:14)
The DCSF/DCMS (2000) publication The Learning Power of Museums: A Vision

for Museum Education also sets out a vision of museums inspiring and
supporting a learning society and reaching out to the widest possible range of
audience (p.4). Science theatre at Techniquest reveals tremendous potential to
play a much greater role in supporting this learning society.
“I have noticed the older I get, the bigger my appetite for learning. I can't swear to
retain everything, but discovery, in itself, is a pleasure.” (Diana Rigg, Actor,
October 20, 2007)
- 67 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Appendix A
Interview Questionnaire
Date___________________
Time___________________
Interviewee Profile:
Gender: M/F
Age: _________
Accompanied by: ____________________
No. of children: ________________
Age of children: ________________
1. Is this your first visit to Techniquest?
Adult Children
o Yes Yes
o No No
If no, how often do you visit Techniquest?
o Very frequently
o Often
o Occasionally
o Rarely
2. Is this your first time in the Science Theatre?
o Yes
o No
If no, what other shows have you watched?
1. ______________________
2. ______________________
3. ______________________
- 68 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Perceptions, Attitudes and Values
3. When did you last study science?
Adult
o Less than a year ago
o One to three years ago
o Four to eight years ago
o More than ten years ago
4. What is your current level of interest in science?
Professional / Very interested / Average / Minimal
5. Did you / does your child enjoy learning science in school?

Adult Child
o Very much Very much
o Alright Alright
o Not much Not much
If not, why?
6. How do the following statements apply to you?
Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Strongly

Agree Agree Disagree
nor
Disagree
Science Theatre shows are fun and Enjoyment,
Inspiration,
make Science more interesting.
Creativity
Science Theatre shows help me /my Knowledge and

Understanding
children learn things we didn’t know
Science Theatre shows help me / my Perceptions,

Attitudes and
children understand science and its
Values
everyday applications better.
After watching the Science Theatre, I Enjoyment,
Inspiration,
- 69 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
/ my children feel that Science is Creativity
important and I want to learn more
Perceptions,
science. Attitudes and
Values
Science Theatre improves confidence Perceptions,

Attitudes and
and self-esteem.
Values
Science Theatre helps develop other Skills

skills in children, such as thinking,
asking questions, carrying out
experiments at home, and the
importance of collecting evidence
I / my children would like to watch Action,
Behaviour,
more Science Theatre shows.
Progression
Science Theatre shows encourage Action,

Behaviour,
children to take up careers in science.
Progression
I / my children will tell friends to see Action,

Behaviour,
the Science Theatre show.
Progression
Any Other Comments about the Science Theatre?
Thank You!
- 70 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Appendix B
Quantitative Data from Structured Interviews
The Table below indicates responses in terms of number of people and their level
of agreement with each statement. This is also depicted graphically below.
Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Strongly

Agree Agree Disagree
nor
Disagree
1. Science Theatre shows are Slime 17 9
Show
fun and make Science Gran 23 3
more interesting. Designs
Enjoyment, Inspiration, Creativity
2. Science Theatre shows Slime 10 16

Show
help me /my children
learn things we didn’t Gran 14 12
Designs
know
Knowledge and Understanding

3. Science Theatre shows Slime 12 12 2
Show
help me / my children Gran 17 9
understand science and its Designs
everyday applications
better.
4. After watching the Science Slime 11 15

Show
Theatre, I / my children
feel that Science is
important and I want to Gran 16 10
learn more science. Designs
5. Science Theatre improves Slime 2 15 5 4

Show
confidence and self-
Gran 9 12 4 1
esteem.
Designs
- 71 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
6. Science Theatre helps Slime 8 17 1
Show
develop other skills in
children, such as thinking, Gran 21 5
asking questions, carrying Designs
out experiments at home,
and the importance of
collecting evidence
Skills
7. I / my children would like Slime 15 11
Show
to watch more Science
Gran 23 3
Theatre shows. Designs
Action, Behaviour, Progression
8. Science Theatre shows Slime 2 8 8 8

Show
encourage children to take
up careers in science. Gran 3 12 2 9
Designs
9. I / my children will tell Slime 17 8 1

Show
friends to see the Science
Gran 22 4
Theatre show. Designs
- 72 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Bibliography
Adey, P. (1999). The Science of Thinking, And Science for Thinking: A Description of
Cognitive Acceleration through Science Education (CASE). UNESCO, International
Bureau of Education. Retrieved November 5, 2007 from:
http://www.ibe.unesco.org/publications/innodata/inno02.pdf
Adey P.S., & Shayer M. (1994) Really Raising Standards. London: Routledge.
Akeroyd, M. (2007). A Novel Whiteheadean Science Program for 14-16 Year Olds in
England and Wales. Interchange. Volume 38, Number 2, June 2007, pp. 167-173(7).
Springer.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for science
literacy: A Project 2061 report. New York: Oxford University Press. Cited at p. 611 in
Schwarz, R.S., Lederman N.G., Crawford, B.A. (2004) Developing Views of Nature of
Science in an Authentic Context: An Explicit Approach to Bridging the Gap between
Nature of Science and Scientific Inquiry. Science Teacher Education, 610-645. Wiley
InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com).
Anderson, David. (1997). A Common Wealth: Museums and learning in the United
Kingdom: a report to the Department of National Heritage. London: Department of
National Heritage
Anderson, D. (1999) A Common Wealth: Museums in the Learning Age. London:

Department of Culture, Media and Sport. Retrieved November 22nd 2007 from:
http://www.culture.gov.uk/Reference_library/Publications/archive_1999/Common_Wealth
.htm
Anderson, D., Piscitelli, B., Weier, K., Everett, M. and Tayler, C. (2002), Children’s
Museum Experiences: Identifying Powerful Mediators of Learning. In Curator, 45/3, p.
213 -231
- 73 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Angier, N. (2007). In Science Classrooms, a Blast of Fresh O2, in The New York Times
(October 30, 2007), retrieved November 5, 2007 from:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/30/science/30angi.html?em&ex=1193976000&en=f1fac
a3e352ab195&ei=5087%0A
Ashman, A. & Conway, R. (1997). An Introduction to Cognitive Education Theory and

Applications. Routledge.
Ausubel, D.P. (1963). Cognitive structure and the facilitation of meaningful verbal
learning. Journal of Teacher Education 14, 217-22, in Driscoll M.P. (1994, 2005: 117).
Psychology of Learning for Instruction. (3rd ed).Pearson Education Inc.
Ausubel, D.P., Novak, J.D., & Hanesian, H. (1978). Educational Psychology: A cognitive
view (2nd ed). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Barbacci, S. (2005). Science And Theatre: A Multifaceted Relationship Between

Pedagogical Purpose And Artistic Expression. The Pantaneto Forum Issue 19: July
2005. Retrieved November 5, 2007 from:
http://www.pantaneto.co.uk/issue19/barbacci.htm
Beer, V. (1992). Do Museums Have Curriculum? Journal of Museum Education 12, no.
3, Fall 1987, p. 10-13 in Patterns in Practice, Selections from the Journal of Museum
Education, Museum Education Roundtable, Washington D.C. Nichols, S. (Chair), p. 209
-214
Bitgood, S. (2002) Environmental Psychology in Museums, Zoos and other Exhibition

Centers in R. Bechtel & A. Churchman (eds.) (2002). Handbook of Environmental
Psychology (p. 461-480) John Wiley & Sons, retrieved November 5, 2007 from:
http://www.jsu.edu/depart/psychology/People/bitgood/5.1-Env_Psych_Chap.pdf
Black, G. (2005).The Engaging Museum: Developing Museums for Visitor Involvement.

Routledge
- 74 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Black, D.R. and Goldowsky, A. (1999). Science Theatre as an interpretive technique in
a science museum. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association
for Research in Science Teaching (Boston, MA, March 28-31, 1999). Full text retrieved
November 22nd 2007 from:
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1
6/59/f8.pdf
Blunkett, D. and Smith, C. (2000). Government Response to All Our Futures: Creativity,
Culture & Education. Retrieved November 22nd 2007 from:
http://www.culture.gov.uk/Reference_library/Consultations/2000_closed_consultations/all
_our_futures.htm
Bowker, R. (2002). Evaluating Teaching and Learning Strategies at the Eden Project. In
Evaluation and Research in Education, (Volume 16 - Issue 3 – Page 123), retrieved
http://www.multilingual-matters.net/erie/016/0123/erie0160123.pdf
Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., Cocking, R.R. (1999). How People Learn: Brain, Mind,
Experience and School. National Academies Press. Retrieved November 18, 2007, from:
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=6160
Braund, M. and Reiss, M. (2006). Validity and worth in the science curriculum: learning
school science outside the laboratory. The Curriculum Journal, Volume 17, Number 3,
September 2006. pp. 213-228(16). Routledge.
Bruner, J (1960). The Process of Education. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University

Press.
Bryman, A. (2004). Social Research Methods. (2nd Ed). Oxford University Press.
Brookfield, S. D. (1983) Adult Learners, Adult Education and the Community, Milton
Keynes: Open University Press. Cited in Smith, M.K. (1996) Learning in the community
and community learning, retrieved November 5, 2007 from:
http://www.infed.org/lifelonglearning/b-edcom.htm
Carr, M., & Claxton, G. (2002).Tracking the Development of Learning Dispositions, in

Assessment in Education, Vol. 9, No.1, 2002. In Daniels H., & Edwards A., eds. (2004)
- 75 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
The Routledge Farmer Reader in Psychology of Education (pp. 106 -131).
RoutledgeFalmer.
Chadwick, A. and Stannet.A (eds.) (2000). Museums and Adults Learning. Perspectives
from Europe. NIACE.
Chambers, M. (1989). Beyond Aha! Motivating Museum Visitors. Journal of Museum

Education 14, no. 3 (Fall 1989:14-15).
Cerini, R., Murray, I. & Reiss, M. (eds) (2003) Student review of the science curriculum:
Major findings. London: Institute of Education, Planet Science and Science Museum.
Retrieved November 18, 2007 from:
http://www.planet-science.com/sciteach/review/Findings.pdf
Csikszentmihalyi, M.& Hermanson, K. (1999). Intrinsic motivation in museums: why does

one want to learn, in Hooper-Greenhill, E. (Ed) (1999).The Educational Role of the
Museum. 2nd edition. Routledge.
Carspecken P.F. (1996). Critical Ethnography in Educational Research: A Theoretical

and Practical Guide. Routledge: New York and London
Carey, S. and Smith, C. (1993).On Understanding the Nature of Scientific Knowledge.

Educational Psychologist Vol. 28, No. 3, Pages 235-251 in McCormick R. and Paechter
C. (eds) (1999,2000), Learning and Knowledge (p170-184).The Open University.
The CASE Network Website. Retrieved November 22nd 2007 from:

http://www.case-network.org/case_history.html
And
http://www.edu.dudley.gov.uk/science/CASE2.html
Daniels, H. & Edwards A. (Eds) (2004).The RoutledgeFarmer Reader in Psychology of

Education. RoutledgeFarmer.
- 76 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
The Department for Culture, Media and Sport and DfEE (2000). The Learning Power of
Museums: A Vision for Museum Education. Retrieved November 22nd 2007 from:
http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/docbank/index.cfm?id=6172
DfEE (1997). Excellence in Schools. London, DfEE.
DfEE (February 1998) The Learning Age: a renaissance for a New Britain. Documents
Retrieved November 22nd 2007 from:
http://www.lifelonglearning.co.uk/greenpaper/summary.pdf
http://www.lifelonglearning.co.uk/greenpaper/index.htm
http://www.lifelonglearning.co.uk/greenpaper/
DfES (2006) The Supply and Demand for Science, Technology, Engineering and
Mathematics Skills in the UK Economy. Research Report RR775, (2006). Department
for Education and Skills. Retrieved November 18, 2007 from:
http://www.stemnet.org.uk/news_and_reports.cfm?faarea2=customWidgets.contentItem
_show_1&cit_id=2710
Dickson, D. (27 June 2005), The case for a 'deficit model' of science communication.
http://www.scidev.net/content/editorials/eng/the-case-for-a-deficit-model-of-science-
communication.cfm
Dierking, L.D. (1989) The Family Museum Experience: Implications from Research,
Journal of Museum Education 14/2 (Spring/Summer 1989: 9-11) in Nichols, S., (Editor,
1992) Patterns in Practice – Selections from the Journal of Museum Education, Museum
Education Roundtable, Washington D.C.
- 77 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Driver, R., Leach J., Millar R., and Scott, P., Perspectives on the Nature of Science, Can
we talk of understanding the nature of science? (1997). Cited at p. 36 in McCormick R.,
and Paechter, C. (Eds),(1999)Learning and Knowledge. The Open University.
Driscoll M.P. (1994, 2005). Psychology of Learning for Instruction. (3rd ed).Pearson
Education Inc.
ECSITE UK Website
http://www.ecsite-uk.net/index.php
ECSITE UK (2001a) Science Centres in the UK

Report produced at the request of the Interdepartmental Steering Group on Science
Centres. Retrieved November 18, 2007 from:
http://www.ecsite-uk.net/resources/reports/ecsite-uk_sdc_dcms_report_nov01.pdf
ECSITE UK ( 2001b) Science and Discovery Centres: The Way Forward

Briefing document from ECSITE-UK, the Science and Discovery Centre Network.
http://www.ecsite-uk.net/resources/reports/ecsite-uk_sdc_dcms_summary_dec01.pdf
Falk, J.H. and Dierking, L.D. (2000). Learning from Museums, Visitor Experiences and
the Making of Meaning. Alta Mira Press.
Falk, J. (2004). The Director’s Cut: Toward an Improved Understanding of Learning from
Museums. Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com).
Farmelo, G. (1992). Drama on the Galleries. In Museums and the Public Understanding
of Science, ed. J.Durant: 45-49. London: Science Museum. In Hawkey R. (2003), All the
(Natural) World’s a Stage: Museum Theater as an Educational Tool, Curator, 46/1, p. 42-
59 (43).
Farmelo, G. & Carding, J. Eds. (1997). Here and Now: Contemporary Science and
Technology in Museums and Science. London: Science Museum.
- 78 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Feuerstein, R, Rand, Y., & Hoffman, M., & Miller, R. (1980). Instrumental Enrichment: An
Intervention Program for Cognitive Modifiability. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press,
cited in Ashman, A. & Conway, R. (1997). An Introduction to Cognitive Education Theory
and Applications (p.138, 140). Routledge
Frechtling, J., Sharp. L, et al.(Eds) (August 1997) User Friendly Handbook for Mixed
Method Evaluations. Directorate for Education and Human Resources. Retrieved
http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/EHR/REC/pubs/NSF97-153/pdf/mm_eval.pdf
Gardner, H. (1991). The Unschooled Mind: How Children Think and How Schools
Should Teach. BasicBooks. Cited in Hughes, C (1998) Museum Theatre:
Communicating with visitors through dram., Heineman, Porthsmouth
Garnett, R. (2002). The Impact of Science Centers/Museums on their Surrounding

Communities: Summary Report, International Science Centre Steering Group, at
http://www.astc.org/resource/case/Impact_Study02.pdf, accessed November 18, 2007
via Association of Science Technology Centers Resource Centre at:
http://www.astc.org/resource/case/index.htm
Glaser, R. (1992). Expert Knowledge and Processes of Thinking, in Learning and

Knowledge, McCormick R., and Paechter, C. (Eds), 1999)(p.88-111). The Open
University
Guba, E.G., & Lincoln, Y.S (1989) Fourth Generation Evaluation, Newbury Park, CA:
Sage, cited at p. 266 in Mertens, D.M. (1998) Research Methods in Education and
Psychology: Integrating Diversity with Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Sage
Publications.
Haire, L. (December 8, 2006). Enhancing scientific literacy. The Guardian

A report by Lucy Haire on the Guardian conference for science teachers held at the
Guardian Newsroom, London, October 20 2006. Retrieved November 22nd 2007 from:
http://education.guardian.co.uk/conferences/story/0,,1967721,00.html
Hawkey R. (2003), All the (Natural) World’s a Stage: Museum Theater as an Educational
Tool. The Curator. 46/1, p. 42-59.
- 79 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Henry, G.T.(1990). Practical Sampling, Newbury Park, CA: Sage, cited at p. 265 in
Mertens, D.M. (1998). Research Methods in Education and Psychology: Integrating
Diversity with Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Sage Publications.
Hein G. ((1991) The Museum and the Needs of People, CECA (International Committee
of Museum Educators Conference), Jerusalem Israel, 15-22 October 1991 at
http://www.exploratorium.edu/ifi/resources/constructivistlearning.html
Hein, G.E. (1995). The constructivist museum. Journal of Education in Museums, (16),
21 - 23. In Hooper-Greenhill, E., Ed (1999).The Educational Role of the Museum.
Routledge 2nd Ed.
Hooper-Greenhill, E., Ed (1999) The Educational Role of the Museum. Routledge, 2nd
Ed.
Hooper-Greenhill, E., Dodd, J. Moussouri, T. et.al. (2002) Learning Impact Research

Project: Developing a scheme for finding evidence of the outcomes and impact of
learning in museums, archives and libraries: the conceptual framework. The Council for
Museums, Archives and Libraries, Resource. Retrieved November 22nd 2007 from:
University of Leicester Research Archive

https://lra.le.ac.uk/simple-search?query=hooper&start=10
The House of Commons (2002), The Select Comittee on Science and Technology
Science and Technology, Sixth Special Report, retrieved November 18, 2007 from:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmselect/cmsctech/1204/120402.ht
m
The House of Lords, (February 2000). Science and Society. Select Committee on
Science and Technology, Third Report. (Jenkin Report). Retrieved November 22, 2007
from:
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-
office.co.uk/pa/ld199900/ldselect/ldsctech/38/3802.htm
Hughes, C (1998). Museum Theatre: Communicating with visitors through drama.

Heineman, Porthsmouth.
- 80 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Hughes, C., Jackson, A. and Kidd, J. (2007). The Role of Theater in Museums and
Historic Sites: Visitors, Audiences, and Learners. International Handbook of Research in
Arts Education. Vol. 16. Section 6. Springer Netherlands.
Jackson, A., Leahy, H.R. (2005). Seeing it for real…?'—Authenticity, theatre and learning
in museums. Research in Drama Education.Volume 10, Number 3, November 2005 , pp.
303-325(23). Routledge, part of the Taylor & Francis Group.
James, E. (1998). Widening the appeal of science in schools. The OECD OBSERVER
No. 214 October/November 1998 OECD Directorate for Education, Employment, Labour
and Social Affairs. Retrieved November 18, 2007 from:
http://www1.oecd.org/publications/observer/214/Article3-eng.htm
James, N. (2005). Actup! Theatre as Education and its impact on Young People’s
Learning. Centre for Labour Market Studies, University of Leicester. CLMS Working
Paper No 46. Retrieved November 22nd 2007 from:
http://www.clms.le.ac.uk/publications/workingpapers/working_paper46.pdf
Johnson, Colin, 2006, Science Centers as Learning Environments. Retrieved November

22nd from: http://www.astc.org/resource/education/johnson_scicenters.htm
The Kellogs Foundation. (1998). The Kelloggs Evaluation Handbook. Retrieved

http://www.wkkf.org/Pubs/Tools/Evaluation/Pub770.pdf
Kok, W. (November 2004), Facing the Challenge, The Lisbon Strategy for Growth and
Employment Report from the High Level Group chaired by Wim Kok.
http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/pdf/kok_report_en.pdf
Kozulin, A.& Presseisen, B.Z. (1995). Mediated Learning Experience and Psychological
Tools: Vygotsky's and Feuerstein's Perspectives in a Study of Student Learning.
Educational Psychologies. 1995, 30(2), 67-75.
- 81 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Kroto, H. (May 22, 2007), The wrecking of British science. The Guardian. Retrieved
November 18, 2007 from:
http://education.guardian.co.uk/universitiesincrisis/story/0,,2084784,00.html
Langer, E.J. (1993). A Mindful Education. The Educational Psychologist. 1993, Vol. 28,
No. 1, Pages 43-50
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning – Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Cited in at p. 177 in Thomas, G.P.
(2002).Conceptualisation, Development And Validation Of An Instrument For
Investigating The Metacognitive Orientation Of Science Classroom Learning
Environments in Learning Environments Research, 2003 - 6 - 2 – 175, Springer VDI
Verlag GmbH & Co KG
Leitch, S., (December 5, 2006) Prosperity for all in the global economy- world class
skills. Retrieved November 19, 2007 from:
http://www.hm-
treasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/leitch_review/review_leitch_index.cfm
Lewenstein, B. (2000). Why the "public understanding of science" field is beginning to

listen to the audience. In J. Hirsch, & L. Silverman (Eds.), Transforming practice:
Selections from the Journal of Museum Education, 1992-1999. Washington, DC:
Museum Education Roundtable.
Lieberman, J. N. (1977). Playfulness. New York: Academic Press cited at p. 111 in Carr,
M., & Claxton, G. (2002).Tracking the Development of Learning Dispositions,
Assessment in Education, Vol. 9, No.1, 2002. In Daniels H., & Edwards A., eds. (2004)
The Routledge Farmer Reader in Psychology of Education (pp. 106 -131).
RoutledgeFalmer.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Cited
at p. 273 in Bryman, A. (2004), Social Research Methods, (2nd Ed), Oxford University
Press.
Lipman, M. (1991). Thinking in Education. Cambridge University Press.
- 82 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Longbottom, J. E. & Butler, P. H. (1999) Why teach science? Setting rational goals for
science education, Science Education, 83, 473–492. Cited at p. 215 in Braund and
Reiss (2006). Validity and worth in the science curriculum: learning school science
outside the laboratory. The Curriculum Journal, Volume 17, Number 3, September 2006 ,
pp. 213-228. Routledge.
Lionni, L. (1970). Fish Is Fish. New York: Scholastic Press cited at p. 11 in Bransford,
J.D., Brown, A.L., Cocking, R.R. (1999). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience
and School. National Academies Press. Retrieved November 18, 2007, from:
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=6160
MacFarlane, A. (2003). Urgent action needed to tackle crisis in science education.

http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/news.asp?id=1624
MacLeod, D. (October 5, 2007). Government invests to keep UK at the head of science.

EducationGuardian.co.uk. Retrieved November 22nd 2007 from:
http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/research/story/0,,2184609,00.html
McCormick, R., (1999). Practical Knowledge: A View from the Snooker Table, in
McCormick R., and Paechter, C. (Eds), 1999. Learning and Knowledge. (112-135).The
Open University.
McCormick R., and Paechter, C. (Eds) (1999). Learning and Knowledge. The Open
University.
Mertens, D.M. (1998). Research Methods in Education and Psychology: Integrating

Diversity with Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Sage Publications.
Middleton, D. and Edwards, D. (1990). Conversational Remembering, A social

psychological approach in Daniels, H. & Edwards A., (2004). The RoutledgeFarmer
Reader in Psychology of Education, RoutledgeFarmer.
- 83 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA) Website. Retrieved November 18, 2007
from:
http://www.inspiringlearningforall.gov.uk/
Museums, Libraries, Archives Council (MLA) Website: What are the Generic Learning
Outcomes. Retrieved November 18, 2007 from:
http://www.inspiringlearningforall.gov.uk/measuring_learning/learning_outcomes/why_do
_we_need_glos/_217/default.aspx?flash=true
The National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education (NACCCE) (May
1999). All Our Futures, Creativity, Culture and Education. Commissioned jointly by the
Secretaries of State for Education and Employment and Culture, Media and Sport to
feed in to the QCA review of the National Curriculum. Retrieved November 22nd 2007
from: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/naccce/naccce.pdf
Terms of reference retrieved from: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/naccce/002_016.pdf
National Research Council (NRC) (1996). National science education standards.

Washington, DC: National Academic Press. Cited in Schwarz, R.S., Lederman N.G.,
Crawford, B.A. (2004) Developing Views of Nature of Science in an Authentic Context:
An Explicit Approach to Bridging the Gap between Nature of Science and Scientific
Inquiry. Science Teacher Education, 610-645. Wiley InterScience
(www.interscience.wiley.com).
National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the national science education
standards.Washington, DC: National Academic Press. Cited in Schwarz, R.S., Lederman
N.G., Crawford, B.A. (2004) Developing Views of Nature of Science in an Authentic
Context: An Explicit Approach to Bridging the Gap between Nature of Science and
Scientific Inquiry. Science Teacher Education, 610-645. Wiley InterScience
(www.interscience.wiley.com).
Nightingale, D.J., Cromby, J., 1999, (Eds), Social constructionist psychology: A critical
analysis of theory and practice, Buckingham: Open University Press
O’Brien,H. (September 5, 2006). Brave new world: A new applied science GCSE aims to
create scientifically literate citizens - but is it at the cost of 'proper' science? The
Guardian. Retrieved November 22nd 2007 from:
http://education.guardian.co.uk/gcses/story/0,,1864710,00.html
- 84 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Oulton, C., Dillon, J. & Grace, M. (2004). Reconceptualizing the teaching of controversial
issues. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 411–423. Cited at p. 216 in
Braund, M. and Reiss, M. (2006). Validity and worth in the science curriculum: learning
school science outside the laboratory. The Curriculum Journal, Volume 17, Number 3,
September 2006. pp. 213-228(16). Routledge.
Pardo, R. and Calvo, F. (2002) Attitudes toward science among the European public: a
methodological analysis. Public Understand. Sci. 11 (2002) 155–195
Peterson, P.L., Carpenter, T., & Fennema, E. (1989). Teachers’ knowledge of students’
knowledge in mathematics problem solving: Corelational and case analyses. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 81, 558-569 in Driscoll M.P. (1994, 2005: 146). Psychology of
Learning for Instruction. Pearson Education Inc. (3rd ed).
Piaget, J. (1973). The Language and Thought of the Child. London: Routledge and
Kegan Paul.
Radford,T.(2007). It is rocket science. The Guardian. Retrieved November 18, 2007

from:
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/tim_radford/2007/08/it_is_rocket_science.html
Reeve, J. (2000). The United Kingdom. Museums, adults and lifelong learning. In
Chadwick, A. and Stannet.A (eds.) (2000). Museums and Adults Learning. Perspectives
from Europe.(197 – 209). NIACE
Research Councils, UK, and the Office of Science and Technology (March 2005)
Evaluation: Practical Guideline. Retrieved November 18, 2007 from:
http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/aboutrcuk/publications/corporate/evaluationguide.htm
Rigg, D. (October 20, 2007).Diana Rigg, Actor, One Week in September. The Guardian.
- 85 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,,2194110,00.html
Roberts, G. (2002). SET for Success. The supply of people with science, technology,
engineering and mathematics skills. The report of Sir Gareth Roberts’ Review. April
2002. Select Committee on Science and Technology Eighth Report. Retrieved
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/F/8/robertsreview_introch1.pdf
Link to HM Treasury Website:
http://www.hm-
treasury.gov.uk/documents/enterprise_and_productivity/research_and_enterprise/ent_re
s_roberts.cfm
The Royal Society (2004). Science in Society Report. Retrieved November 22nd 2007
from:
http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/downloaddoc.asp?id=556
The Royal Society Website. Retrieved November 22nd 2007 from:

http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/campaign/
The Royal Society Michael Faraday Prize (1986). Retrieved November 22nd 2007 from:
http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/page.asp?id=1783
Schoenfeld, A.H. (1985). Mathematical Problem Solving. New York: Academic Press in
Driscoll M.P. (1994, 2005: 146). Psychology of Learning for Instruction. Pearson
Education Inc. (3rd ed).
Schwarz, R.S., Lederman N.G., Crawford, B.A. (2004) Developing Views of Nature of
Science in an Authentic Context: An Explicit Approach to Bridging the Gap between
Nature of Science and Scientific Inquiry. Science Teacher Education, 610-645. Wiley
InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com).
Smith, M.K. (1996) Learning in the community and community learning, Retrieved
- 86 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
http://www.infed.org/lifelonglearning/b-edcom.htm
Stocklmayer, S., Gore, M. and Bryant, C. (Eds) (2001). Science Communication in

Theory and Practice. Kluwer, Dordrecht.
Sturgis, P. & Allum, N. (2004). Science in Society: Re-evaluating the Deficit Model of
Public Attitudes in Public Understanding of Science, 2004 Vol. 13 Part 1, p. 55-74.
Institute of Physics Publishing, USA. Abstract retrieved from:
http://staff.soc.surrey.ac.uk/psturgis/papers/PUS03.pdf
Taylor, P. (2000, 2001) The Drama Classroom, Action, Reflection, Transformation,

Routledge Farmer, London and New York
Thomas, G.P. (2002).Conceptualisation, Development And Validation Of An Instrument

For Investigating The Metacognitive Orientation Of Science Classroom Learning
Environments. In Learning Environments Research, 2003 - 6 - 2 – 175, Springer VDI
Verlag GmbH & Co KG.
Thomas, J.M. (March 23, 2002) Obituary: Prof. Charles Taylor. The Independent.
London. Retrieved November 22nd 2007 from:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20020323/ai_n12606582
Tuckey, C.J., (1992). Schoolchildren’s Reactions to an Interactive Science Centre. The

Curator. 35/1, 28-38.
Walker, K. (2006) Story Structures: Building Narrative Trails in Museums. In Dettori, G.

(Ed). Technology mediated narrative environments for learning. Sense Publications.
http://www.lkl.ac.uk/people/kevin/review-book_walker.pdf
Walter, C. (2002). Creating Extraordinary Learning Environments. Curator 45/4 October

2002.
- 87 –

Nayana Karia
November 2007
Vygotsky L.S. (1978). Mind in Society. (M.Cole et.al Eds) p. 86. Cited at p.284 in Slavin,
R.E. (1993). When and Why Does Cooperative Learning Increase Achievement?
Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives. In Routledge-Farmer Reader in Psychology of
Education, Daniels, H., Edwards, A., eds.). RoutledgeFalmer.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1994), The Vygotsky Reader, (edited by V. der Veer and J. Valsiner).
Cited in
Russel, D. (2002) Looking beyond the interface: activity theory and distributed learning.
In Daniels, H. & Edwards A., (2004). The RoutledgeFarmer Reader in Psychology of
Education, p.309 – 325). RoutledgeFarmer
- 88 –

MSCEd Dissertation Science Theatre Learning

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

MSCEd Dissertation Science Theatre Learning

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Nayana Karia

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

This research seeks to evaluate, in light of a perceived need to advance public

The evaluation revealed the tremendous potential of theatre as a rich and

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Chapter Table of Contents Page

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Introduction and Outline

Scientific literacy today extends beyond knowledge of scientific concepts and

Today, there is an increasing awareness of the need to offer an education that

“Techniquest is an educational charity, established in 1986 and based in Cardiff,

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

As part of its agenda of communicating science, Techniquest regularly presents

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

 Knowledge and understanding

Discussion about the research design and methodologies is taken up in Chapter

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

“…learning is regarded both as a process and a product that encompasses

Data clearly indicated that science theatre audiences at Techniquest perceived

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Data reveals that science theatre promotes meaningful learning. Chapter 6

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Why Communicate Science?

“…democratic citizenship in a modern society depends…on the ability of citizens

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Scientific literacy today extends beyond knowledge of scientific concepts and

“…could undermine the Government’s attempts to improve the UK’s productivity

Pursuant to this report, the government implemented a range of measures to

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

"Future generations of UK schoolchildren need to be encouraged to realise their

Braund and Reiss (2006) suggest an association between the teaching of

“Our contention is that laboratory-based school science teaching needs to be

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

“Education programmes represent the museum at its most proactive in its

Ecsite-UK, the UK Network of Science Centres and Museums, represents over

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Science and Discovery Centres in the UK represent a £500 million capital

Goals of Learning: New Paradigm – Teaching Thinking

“Being world class is a moving target.” (Leitch, 2006).

Globalisation has caused substantial shifts in labour markets in the developed

In 2002, a House of Commons report published a critique of the curriculum at the

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

“…the relationship is an uncertain one. Capability does not always produce

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Resilience is the desire to persist with learning despite setbacks. Playfulness is

Discussion and sharing of thoughts is also central to the Cognitive Acceleration

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

In Lipman’s (1991: 19) description of the Reflective paradigm, “…Ideally the

“…converting the classroom into a community of inquiry in which students listen

“…the distance between the actual development level as determined by

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

• Process questioning (asking how questions)

This concept of mediating meaning-making was also discussed by Ausubel

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Another method of anchoring instruction is through the use of stories. In studies

“Children frequently recalled and described in detail, museum experiences that

“Theatre and museums are storytellers, tapping into an elemental human

Meaning is often ascribed based on context. McCormick and Paechter (1999,

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

There has been a distinct shift in education from emphasis on declarative to

In its White Paper Excellence in Schools (Dfee, 1997), the Government

“…allow us to learn through our senses…They develop our feelings as well as