Studies on family learning in informal education environments usually adopt a qualitative approach and use multiple research methods. Most of them focus on exploring the family agenda with an emphasis on the agenda for learning, including intergenerational learning, family dynamics and the role of gender in promoting learning-related behaviour as well as learning as a result of social interaction between family members. This research has shown that the family museum experience is a social (as opposed to individual) activity and that it is strongly influenced by what family members bring to the visit (prior experience and knowledge, interests, expectations and motivation for visiting).

Crowley, K. & Callanan (1997) ‘Describing and Supporting Collaborative Scientific Thinking in Parent-Child Interactions’, Journal of Museum Education, vol 23, John Wiley & Sons Inc, New York, USA, 12-17.

This study highlights the importance of the interpretations offered by parents. Of particular importance are three types of explanations provided in relation to children’s activities: how the exhibit worked, associating the exhibit with everyday experiences or devices, and associating the exhibit with scientific principles. The study offers a combination of socio-cultural and information-processing perspectives on the role of parent-child interaction in promoting a shared scientific thinking and in facilitating children’s ability to co-ordinate scientific theory and evidence. Using video recordings of families at the Children’s Discovery Museum at San Jose, California, the researchers analysed parent-child interactions at specific exhibits. The findings of this study helped the Museum staff identify and redesign those exhibits that failed to encourage parents and children to adopt shared learning goals.

Copies of the Journal of Museum Education are available in many UK libraries or through an inter-library loan.

Borun, M., Cleghorn, A. & Garfield, C. (1995) ‘Family Learning in Museums: A Bibliographic Review’, Curator, 38/4, American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA, 262-270.

This paper concludes that most of the research on family learning has focused on how families behave in museums. Topics of particular interest include family interactions, gender roles and learning strategies. The paper is structured around five main issues that it addresses by using existing research on family learning. These issues are: What characterises a typical family? Why do families visit museums? How do families behave in museums? How do families learn in museums? How to measure learning? The paper also includes an annotated bibliography that highlights the different aspects of family learning mentioned above. This is the first of a series of four papers that build on existing research in order to study the family learning process (see also articles below). The hypothesis is whether we can ‘infer learning from observations of learning behaviours among family members’.

Copies of the Curator are available in many UK libraries or through an inter-library loan.

Borun, M., Chambers, M. & Cleghorn, A. (1996) ‘Families are Learning in Science Museums’, Curator, 39/2, American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA, 123-138.

This study identifies six types of behaviour associated with family learning. These are: asking a question, answering a question, commenting on or explaining an exhibit, and reading the text silently or aloud. Observed behaviours were compared with four learning levels: identifying, describing, interpreting and applying. Most of the families fell between the first two learning levels – identifying and describing. This is the second paper of a series presenting the results of phase one of a collaborative research project known as the Philadelphia/Camden Informal Science Education Collaborative (PISEC). The institutions involved in the project were: the Franklin Institute Science Museum, the New Jersey State Aquarium at Camden, the Academy of Natural Sciences and the Philadelphia Zoo. This phase involved looking at family behaviour at a test exhibit and identifying thirteen types of behaviour, six of which were chosen to serve as learning indicators. Each participating museum developed a set of goals for its exhibit, which were then related to three learning levels. Finally, a set of learning levels was developed based on learning goals related to the exhibits. These included identifying, describing, interpreting and applying. Learning levels and types of behaviour observed were compared to show which type of behaviour increased with which learning level.

Copies of the Curator are available in many UK libraries or through an inter-library loan.

Borun, M. & Dritsas, J. (1997) ‘Developing Family-Friendly Exhibits’, Curator, 40/3, American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA, 178-196.

Reporting on phase two of the project (see above for phase one) Borun and Dritsas concluded that family learning behaviours (as opposed to individual learning behaviours) can be enhanced by incorporating seven exhibit characteristics. Exhibits need to be multi-sided, multi-user, accessible, multi-outcome, multi-modal, readable and relevant. The project team identified these exhibit characteristics based on the findings from phase one and other existing research. They then assessed their test exhibits in order to plan how to introduce family learning components to the test exhibits. These components - or exhibit enhancements - aimed to foster family interaction and enhance their understanding of the exhibit goals. Family learning components were developed, tested and revised using different exhibit prototypes in the four museums. This study reports on the findings of this formative evaluation.

Copies of the Curator are available in many UK libraries or through an inter-library loan.

Borun, M., Chambers, M., Dritsas, J. & Johnson, J. (1997) ‘Enhancing Family Learning Through Exhibits’, Curator, 40/4, American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA, 279-295.

Research carried out at phase three of the PISEC (see above) project showed that the levels of family learning increased substantially after using those exhibits designed to enhance family learning. The study compared the families who used the enhanced test exhibits with control-group families who used only the test exhibits.

Copies of the Curator are available in many UK libraries or through an inter-library loan.

Diamond, J. (1986) ‘The Behaviour of Family Groups in Science Museums’, Curator, 29/2, 139-154.

Having studied family behaviour in science museums, Diamond suggests that the exchange of information between family members seems to be a reciprocal activity from which all parties benefit. These ‘spontaneous interactions’ between family members often result in teaching behaviour. Different family members tend to convey different types of information. For example, children shared more information about the operation and description of the exhibit and the phenomena being observed, while parents tended to convey more symbolic information, such as that gained from reading labels and exhibit graphics or from previous experience.

Both back and more recent copies of the Curator are available in many UK libraries or can be ordered through an inter-library loan.

Falk, J. & Dierking, L. (1992) The Museum Experience, Whalesback Books, Washington DC.

In an effort to account for the family museum experience as a whole, Falk and Dierking developed the ‘interactive experience model’. This takes into account the personal and the social contexts that visitors bring to the museum as well as the physical context (or characteristics) of the museum environment. Visitors are seen as being actively engaged in the construction and reconstruction of these contexts. The museum experience is seen as the interaction of the personal, social and physical contexts. This book is one of the most comprehensive works, bringing together findings from research and evaluation studies carried out by the authors themselves and by other researchers. The ‘interactive experience model’ has been further developed and presented as The Contextual Model of Learning in a new book by the same authors which will appear very shortly under the title ‘Learning in Museums: Experience and the Making of Meaning’.

The book can be purchased in all main bookshops in the UK and is also available in many libraries. More information on The Contextual Model of Learning and recent work by the same authors is available on-line at: http://www.ilinet.org.

Hilke, D.D. & Balling, J. (1985) The Family as a Learning System: An Observational Study of Families in Museums, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC, USA.

As Hilke and Balling reported, exhibits were the main focus of attention among families visiting a large metropolitan museum of natural history. Families were observed to pursue ‘an agenda to learn’. They employed both personal and co-operative information exchange strategies to facilitate learning. Personal strategies for learning were employed even when family members were with others. Families were also observed to ‘create a family interpretation of the exhibit’. The amount of information each family member was exposed to was very much influenced by other family members. Most family interactions seemed to be between parents and children. During those interactions parents subtly taught their children. The study was carried out in two galleries within the same museum: a traditional and a hands-on.

This study is available at the Smithsonian Institution Libraries. Copies can be ordered by writing to Smithsonian Institution Libraries, Museum Reference Center, A & I Building, Room 2235, Washington, DC 20560, USA. More information is available on line at: http://www.sil.si.edu/newstart.htm.

McManus, P. (1987) ‘It’s the Company you Keep… The Social Determination of Learning-Related Behaviour in a Science Museum’, The International Journal of Museum Management and Curatorship, vol 6, Butterworth & Co (Publishers) Ltd, 263-270.

McManus suggests that groups of different composition display different learning-related behaviours at exhibits. Among the four types of visitor groups studied, those containing children were likely to spend more time at the exhibits and talk about what they see and do. They were also much more likely to play with interactive exhibits and to spend more overall time as compared to other groups. Couples attended to the exhibits and also read the text while singletons read texts but did not spend as much time at the exhibits as other groups. Adults in peer groups tended to spend time at the exhibits but were not likely to read texts. Both couples and adult social groups were likely to converse but only for part of the time they spent at exhibits. This information, McManus suggests, could be used to design exhibits that would communicate with diverse visitor groups. The study was carried out at the Natural History Museum in London.

Copies of the International Journal of Museum Management and Curatorship are available in many UK libraries or can be ordered through an inter-library loan.

McManus, P. (1988) ‘Good Companions – More on the Social Determination of Learning-Related Behaviour in a Science Museum’, The International Journal of Museum Management and Curatorship, vol 7, Butterworth & Co (Publishers) Ltd, 37-44.

In addition to group composition (cf. arguments in the previous article) the amount and quality of information visitors take from exhibits is also affected by the quality of social interaction within different groups. The social aspect of the visit is at the core of the visitor museum experience and a key source of visitor satisfaction. Social intimacy observed among the four types of groups directly affected the duration of conversations and of the museum visit. The order observed was family groups followed by child peer groups and then teacher-pupil groups.

Copies of the International Journal of Museum Management and Curatorship are available in many UK libraries or can be ordered through an inter-library loan.

McManus, P. (1992) ‘Topics in Museums and Science Education’, Studies in Science Education, vol 20, 157-182.
Reporting on a study carried out at the Science Museum in London, McManus found that visitors to the Museum visited for many different reasons and that they all had learning-related expectations. Reasons for visiting included social relaxation, a general interest in science, having an enjoyable family outing and entertainment. Visitors’ expectations of their visit varied as well. They expected to gain information related to science, to satisfy a general interest in the subjects covered by the exhibitions, to see specific exhibits or exhibitions. Furthermore, this article gives an overview of the historical development of science museums and centres. It also presents research studies in science education carried out by the author (see studies summarised above) and other researchers.

Copies of Studies in Science Education are available in many UK libraries or through an inter-library loan.

Menninger, M. & McCarty-Procopio, C. (Eds), A Formative Evaluation Study of the Family Game Boxes at the J. Paul Getty Museum, J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles, California.

The study showed that family game boxes were used by groups where parents were regular museum-goers and had some art history experience. Both children and adults were engaged by the games and interacted with the material and with each other. One of the problems the evaluation showed was a lack of appropriate activities for children of different age groups – especially for the 3-5 years old. The family game boxes are self-guided materials designed to be used in the J. Paul Getty Museum, in Los Angeles. The box materials are targeted at families with children 6 to 12 years of age. The aim was to get all family members to look, think and talk about the works of art. A longitudinal element was built into the evaluation by conducting follow-up telephone interviews to assess the impact of the game box 3-4 months later.

Copies of this report can be acquired by contacting Margaret Menninger or Cathy McCarty-Procopio, J. Paul Getty Museum, 17985 Pacific Coast Highway, Malibu, CA 90265, USA.

Moussouri, T. (1998) ‘Family Agendas and the Museum Experience’, in Denford, G.T. (Ed), Museums for the 21st Century, The Museum Archaeologist, vol. 24, conference proceedings, Liverpool, England, 20-30.

This article is based on PhD research looking at the family-museum interface. It presents findings from one of the sites used, the Archaeological Resource Centre (ARC) in York. For further details on this study, see the following entry.

Copies of this article can be obtained by writing to Society of Museum Archaeologists, c/o G.T. Denford, Hon. Editor, SMA, Historic Resources Centre, 75 Hyde Park St., Winchester SO23 7DW, UK.

Moussouri, T. (1997) Family Agendas and Family Learning in Hands-On Museums, Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Leicester, Leicester, England.

The family agenda is constructed, negotiated and refined before, during and after the museum visit itself. Five factors were identified as determining the family museum agenda: the family profile, socio-cultural patterns, the personal and the social context of the visit and the museum exhibitions. The interaction of these factors creates the agenda for the visit and also influences the way the visit is perceived and reconstructed by family members. All the members of the family were actively involved in constructing the family agenda. The museum agenda also seemed to challenge the family agenda by introducing new exhibits (particularly hands-on exhibits) and by providing opportunities for different types of learning. The study was carried out in: The Xperiment! Gallery at the Museum of Science and Industry in Manchester, Eureka! The Museum for Children in Halifax, and the Archaeological Resource Centre (ARC) in York.

The thesis is available through an inter-library loan from the University of Leicester Library in Leicester, UK.

Pilcher, M., Smith N. & Amsel E. (1999) ‘Informal Learning in Children’s Museums: Questions Adults Pose to Children’, paper presented at the 1999 Rocky Mountain Psychological Association conference, USA.

This study suggests that adults accompanying children may be responding to the goals of the exhibits. The questions adults asked children were directly related to the context of the activity. The study, which was carried out at the Treehouse Children’s Museum in Oregon, looked at learning outcomes in relation to adults mediating children’s experience of exhibits.

For copies of this article contact Eric Amsel, Associate Professor of Psychology, Weber State University, USA, e-mail: eamsel@weber.edu.

Tunnicliff, S., Lucas, A.M. & Osborne, J. (1997) ‘School Visits to Zoos and Museums: A Missed Educational Opportunity?’, International Journal of Science Education, vol. 19, no. 9, 1039-1056.

This study compares the content of the spontaneous conversations of school children and families and was carried out at London Zoo and the Natural History Museum in London. School children and families visiting live animal exhibits gathered very similar information although school children visiting a zoo seemed to be more likely to make affective comments than families. Both school and family groups were less likely to try to categorise different specimens at the Zoo than at the Natural History Museum. Both types of groups used their prior knowledge and experience to interpret the animals. The authors noted that there was little ‘talking science’. In particular, schools seemed to miss opportunities to reinforce children’s science learning.

Copies of International Journal of Science Education are available in many UK libraries or can be ordered through an inter-library loan.

Tunnicliff, S. & Osborne, J. (1995) ‘What Do Zoos and Museums Have to Offer Young Children for Learning About Animals?’, Journal for Education in Museums, vol.16, Group for Education in Museums, 16-19.

Most of the spontaneous conversations of children in school groups and their accompanying adults focused on the exhibits and descriptive information on features of the exhibits. Children then used this information to define the position of an exhibit within its context. The study was carried out at London Zoo and the Natural History Museum in London. Children gathered information related to the body parts and the behaviour of the animals. The aim of this article was to help museum educators and exhibit designers to develop exhibits and support materials that build on children’s spontaneous conversations, in order to develop these ideas further into scientific understanding. A more detailed description of the study is offered in the previous article.

Copies of the Journal for Education in Museums are available in many UK libraries or can be ordered through an inter-library loan. To order copies of the Journal or find out more about the Group for Education in Museums (GEM) visit their web site: http://www.gem.org.uk.