Abstract
Parents have a strong influence on young children’s science learning. Factors such as parental education, interest, and child-directed speech influence how children perceive and engage with science. While the role of informal early learning settings in providing a space for parents and children to engage with science has been documented, the power of joint parent–child engagement in adult-oriented learning programs has been largely unexplored. This article explores a media-enhanced model designed to support family science within adult-oriented programs serving populations with low incomes. Families in these communities possess limited economic resources and social capital for engaging in traditional science settings. The model integrates promising features to improve science engagement for families with low incomes, such as staggered instruction, media modeling, and facilitated instruction. In this study, educators introduced science ideas to parents enrolled in adult education classes using “activity sets” that included animated videos, a digital game, and hands-on activities. Afterwards, parents used the activity sets to explore the same science ideas with their children, either in a facilitated family education setting, or at home on their own. Researchers collected qualitative data through event observations, parent interviews, parent focus groups, and educator interviews. They collected quantitative data through post-event parent surveys. Findings suggest that the model effectively promotes parents’ and children’s engagement with science and has the potential to increase adult comfort and confidence with family science.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
The authors declare that none of the data in this study is re-used in unpublished materials (i.e., journal submissions in press).
Code Availability
Not applicable.
Notes
We use the term “parent” in a way inclusive of all adult learners who participated in the study. Given trends in current research related to parent–child joint engagement with learning materials, the term also refers to adults who serve in other caregiving roles for children (e.g., grandparents, guardians, or stepparents). The authors acknowledge that a percentage of adult participants in this study are not currently parenting or caregiving young children.
Due to program-based differences in implementation, survey response rates varied across locations and sessions. Some programs established participant cutoffs based on room capacity. Others allowed early dismissals. A larger number of participants completed surveys after the adult sessions than after the family sessions. One study site did not offer facilitated family sessions, and survey data from such sessions are non-existent.
References
Aikenhead, G. S., & Michell, H. (2011). Bridging cultures: Indigenous and scientific ways of knowing nature. Pearson Education Canada.
Allen, S. (2002). Looking for Learning in Visitor Talk: A Methodological Exploration. In G. Leinhardt, K. Crowley, & K. Knutson (Eds.), Learning Conversations in Museums.Routledge.
Anderson, D. R., Bryant, J., Wilder, A., Santomero, A., Williams, M., & Crawley, A. M. (2000). Researching Blue’s Clues: viewing Behavior and Impact. Media Psychology, 2(2), 179–194. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532785XMEP0202_4
Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2012). Science aspirations, capital, and family habitus: how families shape children’s engagement and identification with science. American Educational Research Journal, 49(5), 881–908. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831211433290
Bradley, R. H., & Corwyn, R. F. (2002). Socioeconomic status and child development. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 371–399. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135233
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind. National Academy Press.
Calabrese Barton, A. C., Drake, C., Perez, J. G., Louis, K. S., & George, M. (2004). Ecologies of parental engagement in urban education. Educational Researcher, 33(4), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033004003
Collins, A., Brown, J., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive Apprenticeship: Teaching the Crafts of Reading, Writing, and Mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing Learning and Instruction.Essays in Honor of Robert Glaser Routledge.
Crawley, A. M., Anderson, D. R., Santomero, A., Wilder, A., Williams, M., Evans, M. K., & Bryant, J. (2002). Do children learn how to watch television? the impact of extensive experience with blue’s clues on preschool children’s television viewing behavior. Journal of Communication, 52(2), 264–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02544.x
DeWitt, J., Archer, L., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2011). High aspirations but low progression: the science aspirations-careers paradox amongst minority ethnic students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 243–271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9245-0
Doerschuk, P., Bahrim, C., Daniel, J., Kruger, J., Mann, J., & Martin, C. (2016). Closing the gaps and filling the stem pipeline: a multidisciplinary approach. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(4), 682–695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9622-8
Eberbach, C., & Crowley, K. (2005). From living to virtual: learning from museum objects. The Museum Journal, 48(3), 317–338. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2151-6952.2005.tb00175.x
Education Development Center Inc. (2018a). Ruff Family Science: Needs Assessment Summary Report. Education Development Center. https://www.informalscience.org/sites/default/files/Ruff%20Family%20Science%20Needs%20Assessment_COPYEDITED%205.14.18.pdf
Education Development Center Inc. (2018b). Ruff Family Science: Prototype Development and Formative Research Report. Education Development Center. https://www.informalscience.org/sites/default/files/Ruff%20Family%20Science%20Prototype%20Development%20and%20Formative%20Research%20Report.pdf
Ferry, T. R., Fouad, N. A., & Smith, P. L. (2000). The role of family context in a social cognitive model for career-related choice behavior: a math and science perspective. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 57(3), 348–364. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1999.1743
Flouri, E., Midouhas, E., & Joshi, H. (2014). The role of urban neighborhood green space in children’s emotional and behavioral resilience. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 40, 179–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.06.007
Gilmartin, S. K., Li, E., & Aschbacher, P. (2006). The relationship between interest in physical science/engineering, science class experiences, and family contexts: variations by gender and race/ethnicity among secondary students. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 12(2–3), 179–207. https://doi.org/10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.v12.i2-3.50
Goldstein, M., Famularo, L., & Kynn, J. (2018a). From puddles to pigeons: Learning about nature in cities. Young Children, 73(5), 42–51.
Goldstein, M., Pierson, E., Kynn, J., & Famularo, L. (2018b). Connecting urban families with environmental science. Connected Science Learning, 5. http://csl.nsta.org/2018/01/connecting-urban-families/
Habig, B., Gupta, P., Levine, B., & Adams, J. D. (2018). An informal science education program’s impact on stem major and stem career outcomes. Research in Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9722-y
Haden, C. A. (2010). Talking about science in museums. Child Development Perspectives, 4(1), 62–67.
Hsiung, P. (2010 Aug). Reflexivity: A Process of Reflection. http://www.utsc.utoronto.ca/~pchsiung/LAL/reflexivity
Kaya, S., & Lundeen, C. (2017). Capturing parents’ individual and institutional interest toward involvement in science education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(7), 825–841. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9173-4
Lareau, A. (2003). Unequal childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life. University of California Press.
Leadership Conference Education Fund. (2015). Advancing Equity Through More and Better STEM learning. http://civilrightsdocs.info/pdf/reports/2015/STEM-report-WEB.pdf.
Legare, C. H., Sobel, D. M., & Callanan, M. (2017). Causal learning is collaborative: examining explanation and exploration in social contexts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24, 1548–1554. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1351-3
Leibham, M. B., Alexander, J. M., & Johnson, K. E. (2013). Science interests in preschool boys and girls. Science Education, 97(4), 574–593.
Lieberman, D. A., Bates, C. H., & So, J. (2009). Young Children’s Learning With Digital Media. Computers in the Schools, 26, 271–283.
Mantzicopoulos, P. H., Samarapungavan, A., & French, B. F. (2008). Patterns of young children’s motivation for science and teacher-child relationships. The Journal of Experimental Education, 76(2), 121–144.
Morgan, P. L., Farkas, G., Hillemeier, M. M., & Maczuga, S. (2016). Science achievement gaps begin very early, persist, and are largely explained by modifiable factors. Educational Researcher, 45(1), 18–35. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X16633182
National Research Council & Institute of Medicine. (2003). Working Families and Growing Kids: Caring for Children and Adolescents. National Academies Press
National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. (2005). Rising Above the Gathering Storm, Revisited: Rapidly Approaching Category 5. National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2007). Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11625
National Research Council. (2009). Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12190
National Research Council. (2012). A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13165
National Research Council. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18290
National Science Board. (2010). Preparing the Next Generation of STEM Innovators: Identifying and Developing our Nation’s Human Capital. National Science Foundation. https://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2010/nsb1033.pdf
National Science Board. (2018). 2018 Science and Engineering Indicators. NSB-2018–1. National Science Foundation.
Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049–1079. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000032199
Reinhart, M., Bloomquist, D., Strickler-Eppard, L., Czerniak, C. M., Gilbert, A., Kaderavek, J., & Molitor, S. C. (2016). Taking science home: connecting schools and families through science activity packs for young children. School Science and Mathematics. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12152
Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Oxford University Press.
Shymansky, J. A. Yore L. D., & Hand B. M (2000). Empowering Families In Hands-On Science Programs. School Science and Mathematics 100 48–58. https://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2010/nsb1033.pdf
Silander M., Grindal T., Hupert N., Garcia E., Anderson K., Vahey P. & Pasnik S (2018) What Parents Talk About When They Talk About Learning: A National Survey About Young Children and Science. Education Development Center, Inc., & SRI International. https://www.edc.org/sites/default/files/uploads/EDC_SRI_What_Parents_Talk_About.pdf
Simon F. & Donohue C. (2011) Tools of Engagement: Status Report on Technology in Early Childhood Education. Exchange, 199, 16–21. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ965649
Strickler-Eppard, L., Czerniak, C. M., & Kaderavek, J. (2019). Families’ capacity to engage in science inquiry at home through structured activities. Early Childhood Education Journal, 47(6), 653–664. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-019-00958-0
Tate, W. F., Jones, B. D., Thorne-Wallington, E., & Hogrebe, M. C. (2012). Science and the city: thinking geospatially about opportunity to learn. Urban Education, 47(2), 399–433. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085911429974
Troseth, G. L., Saylor, M. M., & Archer, A. H. (2006). Young children’s use of video as a source of socially relevant information. Child Development, 77(3), 786–799. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00903.x
Webster, D. (2001). Take-home science activities for primary students. Primary Educator, 7(3), 17.
Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100.
Zimmerman, H. T., Reeve, S., & Bell, P. (2010). Family sense-making practices in science center conversations. Science Education, 94(3), 478–505. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20374
Acknowledgements
The research and development on the described project was created through a partnership between WGBH Educational Foundation and the Center for Children and Technology at EDC. The authors would like to extend special thanks to WGBH’s Principal Investigator Mary Haggerty and Jessica Andrews for their contributions throughout the duration of the research study. The authors would also like to thank partner institutions, including the National Center for Families Learning, Kentucky Educational Television, and Alabama Public Television, in addition to the program sites, educators, data collectors, and families that participated in the research.
Funding
This study was funded by the National Science Foundation’s program Advancing Informal STEM Learning (AISL), award number DRL#1713494. The program supports evidence-based investigations in the design and development of STEM learning opportunities in informal environments with the goal of broadening access and engagement, advancing innovative research, engaging the public in learning STEM in informal environments. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analyses were performed by Alexia Raynal, Heather Lavigne, Marion Goldstein, and Jaime Gutierrez. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Alexia Raynal and Heather Lavigne. All authors commented on draft versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
This study is exempted from ethical approval by ethics committee at the Education Development Center (EDC) on behalf of EDC and WGBH. Protocol 1670. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
Research Involving Human Participants and/or Animals
This study is exempted from ethical approval by ethics committee at the Education Development Center (EDC) on behalf of EDC and WGBH. Protocol 1670.
Informed Consent
This exempt status study was under no obligation to record informed consent by the Education Development Center’s (EDC) ethics committee. However, all research participants received information about their voluntary and anonymous participation, about the project’s economic incentives, and the contact information of EDC’s Human Protections Administrator prior to their engagement in the study. Participants received this information in the language of their choice (English or Spanish).
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Raynal, A., Lavigne, H., Goldstein, M. et al. Starting with Parents: Investigating a Multi-Generational, Media-Enhanced Approach to Support Informal Science Learning for Young Children. Early Childhood Educ J 50, 879–889 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-021-01209-x
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-021-01209-x