Marcos Memo 5

Afonso, Ana S.; Gilbert, John K. "Educational Value of Different Types
of Exhibits in an Interactive Science and Technology Center" in Science
Education, v91 n6 p967-987 Nov 2007

In the study of exhibitions in a science and technology centers, exhibits are often given typologies based on their function to the experience, instead of their educative effect. Stocklmayer and Gilbert have created a new typology that divides exhibits into: "exemplars of phenomena," and "analogy-based exhibits"

Exhibits which are "exemplars of phenomena" are divided into two sub categories: exhibits that allow visitors to use the senses to experience phenomena ("exemplars of phenomena discerned by the senses") and exhibits that require a tool to help interpret phenomenological data ("exemplars of phenomena disclosed by detecting instruments").   Analogy-based exhibits indicate similarities between entities (subjects) and relationships (structures), and may be divided into three different categories: "exhibits showing similarities between entities and relationships" "exhibits showing similarities between both entities and relationships," and "exhibits only showing similarities between relationships."  Entertainment is also linked to learning from exhibits.  If an exhibit is "enjoyable," then than the concepts or "target" of the exhibit may live in the "memory" of the visitor for a longer duration of time.

Using these factors, Afonso and Gilbert designed a study of five interactive exhibits at the Pavilhao do Conhecimento in Portugal. Each of the exhibits were related to the concept of sound, and provided different opportunities for visitor engagement based on the above sub-categories. None of the exhibit experiences were facilitated, and evaluation of the exhibits was completed through interviews after visitors completed the exhibit experience.

In exploring both phenomena and analogy-based exhibits, visitors missed the target provided by exhibit designers, and instead constructed their own meanings (this was not always the case with visitors who worked in scientific fields).  Many of the visitors evaluated the exhibits based on their entertainment value vs. their educational value.

The researchers concluded that an educational value could be reached if the exhibits showed a relation to "every-day life." Also, simplifying the in initial concept may be necessary to achieve a learning experience.

This study does not surprise me.  The educational "target" of the exhibit is often misinterpreted.  The museum must look to the exhibit as a platform for the visitor experience.  When facilitated, and used correctly, exhibits may reach the intended target. In this aspect, when exhibits are being developed, they should be examined with an eye for personal and dialogical interpretation through facilitation. 


--
Marcos A. Stafne
917.562.0613/ fax 718.699.1340
Let's Get Creative!- Check out my 365 day quest!
http://coscreative.blogspot.com/

Mitch's Memorandum #6 on Ercikan

Memorandum on…	Submitted by: Mitch Bleier
Ercikan, K. Limitations to sample-to-population generaliztations. In K. Ercikan & W.-M. Roth (Eds.), Generalization in educational research. Mahwah, NJ: Taylor & Francis.	U ED 70300 Prof. Tobin Spring 2008 March 19, 2008

Kadriye Ercikan addresses using research done on ostensibly representative sample populations to make claims about the larger population from which they were taken.

S/he presents three arguments for making generalizations and indicates the type of research associated with each (Table 1), then provides and describes examples of instances where sample-to-population generalization is inappropriate or misleading and explains how various, apparently justifiable generalizations may be erroneous. In each case, Ercikan discusses what researchers must consider in developing a research design, and interpreting and applying the results of their research to educational practice or policy.

Arguments for generalization	Associated research type
Sample-to-population extrapolation	quantitative methods using representative random samples and statistical analysis
analytic generalizations	experimental and quasi-experimental methods; claims are made in relation to a theory.
Case-to-case translation	qualitative methods employed; explicit arguments made to justify the application of findings to different groups.

Table 1: Generalizations and Associated Types of Research

Ercikan explains that

[s]ample-to-population generalizability is an indicator of the degree to which total sample findings generalize to the total population. This generalizability does not address whether the findings are meaningful for individuals or groups of individuals (p. 12).

and points out that assumptions about randomness and representativeness of samples, the effect of sample size on generalizability of findings, and the ability to identify and control the myriad factors that may render sub-groups incomparable on the particular areas addressed in a study, must be taken into account in research design and in interpretation and application of findings. Although this paper makes a strong case for alternatives to sample-to-population generalization, Ercikan concludes by addressing similar limitations for analytic and case-to-case generalizations.

Mitch Bleier's Proto-memorandum on Jardine

Hi all.

I’ve been struggling with Gadamer, Warnke, Jardine and others. I am having a difficult time getting a handle on hermeneutics. I think that part of my problem is that I need some concrete examples that speak to me. I have found some writing that I will read on the subway today that may be helpful, but I wanted to put up my partially-formed thoughts for comment. This may or may not become a memorandum.

--Mitch

Mitch Bleier’s Proto-memorandum on…

Jardine, D. (2006). On hermeneutics: “Over and above our wanting and doing.” In Tobin, K. & Kincheloe, J. (eds.). Doing educational research -- A handbook, 269 - 288. Rotterdam (NL): Sense Publishers.

Hermeneutics is, in part, a critique of the ways that the human sciences have methodologically, epistemologically and ontologically “aped” the natural sciences to terrible, damaging, effect…and how education has become spellbound by a weak and intellectually dull-minded version of the methodologies of the natural sciences (p. 274).

Hermeneutics is interpretive. The hermeneutist interprets the text (which is defined in the broadest sense) through her/his construal of the speaker/writer’s frame of mind, point of view. It requires empathy—it is empathy.

Jardine asserts that in an effort to ensure objectivity, we remove an incident from its context. We pretend that it exists with some meaning outside of the people whose story is being told, that we can sever all ties with the time, the place, the people. We, in effect treat experiences as “isolated incidents” rather than as a part of one’s experience -- having a context, a history a then, a now, a laden-ness. Perhaps we even can quantify it, look for it elsewhere and measure frequencies, calculate correlations, “identify” cause and effect. [pp. 274 – 275]

Jardine later (p. 278) writes that “the methodological attainment of such objectivity does not altogether prevent playful, risk-laden, unanticipated interchanges.” But that their “occurrence is divested of any claim of or access to truth.”

A hermeneutic approach seems to be what an involved teacher in her classroom employs both consciously and intuitively. She responds to her students’ (a) talk with other students and with herself, (b) her students writing, drawing, constructions and other “products” of classroom activity, and (c) facial expressions, gestures, body language, postures – anything from a poorly suppressed smile to eyes filling with tears.

Teachers, especially elementary teachers do not implement the plans that they write at home. (Although, even in writing the plan, teachers take their students in to account.) They bring their plan to the mix and, with the children, live (and reflect on) a dynamically-evolving day. The experienced teacher even on day one does not interact with the concept: CHILD, but interacts with twenty-five interacting, constantly changing children.

This raises questions for me:

• What does a hermeneutic approach look like?
• What does the hermeneutist do?
• What formal or informal structures does one use to do hermeneutic research?
• What would a published piece of hermeneutic research look like?

Marcos Memo 4

Marcos Stafne
Logics Memorandum 4
March 4, 2008


Gero J.S. and Kannengiesser U. (submitted to journal) “An ontology of Donald Schön's reflection in designing.”
mason.gmu.edu/~jgero/publications/Progress/07GeroKannegiesserReflection.pdf



Gero and Kannengiesser cite an example of Donald Schön's “reflection-in-action” by posing an example of a student Schon examined who was designing a set of classrooms. In this example, Schon illustrates that the original design was perceived, while still in the design process, to be misguided by the student, and changes were made. Schon refers to each step of the design process as a “move experiment.” These “moves” are made through reflection of the action of designing. Gero and Kannengiesser dissect this action into “functional (observable data)” and “mechanistic (reflection as cognitive process with set of distinct properties)” views of reflection in the design process.

A model is created placing situated design within three spheres of existence: the interpreted world (how a designer “sees” the world through the senses), the expected world (the perceived outcomes that the designer frames his or her thinking in), and the external world (how the designer communicates thoughts and actions with the world). Action is what moves a designer from one world to the next.

In the function (what an object is)- behavior (what the object does) - structure (what the structure consists of), Gero and Kannengiesser examine how design is reflected upon within the interpreted, external, and expected worlds. This system for examination is useful in that allows for the intense study of the reflection process, and how designer are able to re-imagine constructions while in process. A useful application for this type of examination would be to create a system of checks and balances within the design process that allows for the designer to reflect upon what the expected world is looking for, and keep the designer from becoming tangential.

Marcos Memo 4

Marcos Stafne
Logics Memorandum 4
March 4, 2008


Gero J.S. and Kannengiesser U. (submitted to journal) "An ontology of Donald Schön's reflection in designing."
mason.gmu.edu/~jgero/publications/Progress/07GeroKannegiesserReflection.pdf



Gero and Kannengiesser cite an example of Donald Schön's "reflection-in-action" by posing an example of a student Schon examined who was designing a set of classrooms.  In this example, Schon illustrates that the original design was perceived, while still in the design process, to be misguided by the student, and changes were made.  Schon refers to each step of the design process as a "move experiment." These "moves" are made through reflection of the action of designing.  Gero and Kannengiesser dissect this action into "functional (observable data)" and "mechanistic  (reflection as cognitive process with set of distinct properties)" views of reflection in the design process.

A model is created placing situated design within three spheres of existence: the interpreted world (how a designer "sees" the world through the senses), the expected world (the perceived outcomes that the designer frames his or her thinking in), and the external world (how the designer communicates thoughts and actions with the world).  Action is what moves a designer from one world to the next.

In the function (what an object is)- behavior (what the object does) - structure (what the structure consists of), Gero and Kannengiesser examine how design is reflected upon within the interpreted, external, and expected worlds.  This system for examination is useful in that allows for the intense study of the reflection process, and how designer are able to re-imagine constructions while in process.  A useful application for this type of examination would be to create a system of checks and balances within the design process that allows for the designer to reflect upon what the expected world is looking for, and keep the designer from becoming tangential.


--
Marcos A. Stafne
917.562.0613/ fax 718.699.1340
Let's Get Creative!- Check out my 365 day quest!
http://coscreative.blogspot.com/

Mitch's Memorandum #4 on A. Brown

Memorandum on	Mitch Bleier U ED 70300 Prof. K. Tobin Spring 2008 March 5, 2008
Brown, A. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141-178.

In this very readable paper, Ann Brown discuses the development of Design Experiments as an approach to engineering “innovative educational environments and simultaneously conduct[ing] experimental studies of those innovations.” The methodologies associated with design experiments, which she discusses in some detail, address the complexity and the real-worldliness of actual classrooms. All members of the classroom community are involved in the development and investigation of research questions. The dynamic research that results is informed by and informs learning theory and results in changes that address the environment in which the classroom exists including all of the benefits and limitations contributed by available resources and by the social and political structures within which the learning environment is embedded (e.g., school, district, NCLB).

With an adept teacher, and perhaps even more so with a highly skilled teacher, expertise, experience, practicality and instinct drive professional practice. Among the purposes of design experiments seems to be (a) formalization of some of the organization and activity that occurs in a well-functioning classroom, and (b) distribution of expertise among more participants (notably the students) in the learning and teaching that occurs there.

As with other writers on this topic, Brown sees as a strength of this approach the ability to answer frequent demands for proof of rigor with small, often very traditionally quantitative experiments (along with the study of less-easily measured qualitative outcomes). In addition, Brown insists that, in order for her work to effectively inform practice, “we must always operate under the constraint that an effective intervention should be able to migrate from our experimental classroom to average classrooms operated by and for average students and teachers, supported by realistic technological and personal support” (p. 143). This sounds oddly positivistic in someone advocating work that is so responsive to learners and teachers. I understand that the amount of resources brought to bear in this type of research might not be fostered if all participants interests are not addressed, but isn’t it possible that a study can be mounted whose results may be generalizable merely to similar classrooms?