Search for: All records

We are continuing a nationwide effort to develop a systemic understanding of the landscape of informal physics using an organizational theory perspective. We have collected surveys and interviews with informal physics program facilitators, but this information is only from the perspective of the faculty or physics student leaders and does not tell us about the social dynamics within each program. Thus, to complement these data, we need to observe informal physics events as they occur. In this paper, we will discuss our strategy for visits to program sites to observe social interactions between program participants as well as programmatic details in action. We report on an initial site visit to a physics open house event, where we took field-notes and conducted interviews with participating personnel members. Here, we compare the types of data we are able to collect from site visits and interviews/surveys with lead program facilitators. 

There has been an increase of funding agencies’ investment in informal science education in recent years, resulting in significant growth of the field. However, little research has been done in discipline-based education research to determine the impact of informal physics programs and what makes them successful. While struc- tures exist to assess the impact of informal learning, those are not yet robust enough to rigorously assess which programs work and, more critically, why they work. In this study, we used a non-profit organization framework as a lens to evaluate the ’success’ of three informal physics programs in achieving their objectives and overall vision. To determine the practices and structures that most influence the ’success’ of these programs, we con- ducted interviews with directors and coordinators of the programs, hosted at R1 institutions and identified initial indicators that can increase chances of informal physics programs to be ’successful’. 

There are many informal physics education programs across the country. However, the available information about these programs varies widely and can be difficult to find. Without this knowledge, it is difficult for individual informal physics efforts to be understood as part of a broader national landscape of physics learning outside of the classroom. In this paper, we describe the development of study design and implementation to map the complex landscape of informal physics in the United States. We seek to determine the best ways to collect meaningful and comprehensive data from the wide-ranging and diverse formats of informal physics programs facilitated by academic institutions. Data was obtained from initial web searches for programs, surveys and interviews of program facilitators, and site visits of program events and activities. This data was analyzed along with participants’ feedback to produce iterations of the survey and interview protocol. We report on challenges and outcomes from our attempts to collect information about programs in Michigan as a test case for the national landscape. These methods can also be used in other informal education studies to gather program information. 

Characterizing the landscape of informal physics learning is a necessary and important endeavor that requires an in-depth study of the different types of existing programs. In this project we focus on informal programs sponsored by physics departments in academic institutes and physics national labs. We seek to understand the structural elements and cultural practices within the diverse array of informal physics spaces. Thus, we are developing a framework based on organizational theory that is contextualized for informal physics programs. We have collected data using survey and interview protocols for different informal physics activities. Here, we present an in-depth case study in which we have analyzed a “science cafe”-style event facilitated by volunteers from a physics and astronomy department. Applying organizational theory to the data set allows us to determine the fine-grained details of the program and the interconnections between the key elements of programming, personnel, resources, audience and institution. We further characterize and discuss the challenges the program faces from the facilitator’s perspective. From these findings, we will be able to look at larger data sets in the national study.