Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

In this paper I explore the phenomenological interview as a method of measuring learning outcomes in informal science environments, specifically with respect to the nature of the emotional experience and its impact on learning. The learning outcomes of informal science education include emotional components such as excitement and interest, which are not easily measured with traditional testing and surveys. The phenomenological interview involves open-ended questioning, and responses are analyzed by comparing the common threads between participants. This research method could be helpful in understanding the nature of the emotional experience and what aspects of the environment contributed. It could also be applied to research on other virtual and mixed-reality environments, especially where emotional impact is studied.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bell

Lewenstein

Shouse

A.W.

Feder

M.A.

(Eds.). (2009). Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Cleary

L.M.

(2008). The Imperative of Literacy Motivation When Native Children Are Being Left Behind. Journal of American Indian Education, 47, 96-117.

Cohen

Manion

Morrison

(2007). Research Methods in Education. New York: Routledge.

Cole

Gallagher

McNeill

(2002). Gesture following deafferentation: A phenomenologically informed experimental study. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 1, 49-67.

Dale

G. A.

(1996). Existential Phenomenology: Emphasizing the Experience of the Athlete in Sport Psychology Research. The Sport Psychologist, 10, 307-321.

Diamond

(1999). Practical Evaluation Guide: Tools for Museums and other Informal Educational Settings. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.

Friedman

A. J.

(2003). They’re Having Fun… but Are They Learning Anything? In Grinell

(Ed.), Starting a Science Center and Keeping It Running (pp. 24-29). Washington, DC: Association of Science-Technology Centers.

Gagné

R. M.

(1964). Some Psychological Factors in Science Curriculum Design. News and Views of NABT, 8, 6-9.

Gallagher

Sørensen

J.B.

(2005). Experimenting with phenomenology. Consciousness and Cognition, 15, 119-134.

10.

Hardiman

M. M.

(2003). Connecting Brain Research with Effective Teaching: The Brain-Targeted Teaching Model. Lanham, MD: The Scarecrow Press.

11.

Hein

G.E.

(1998). Learning in the Museum. New York: Routledge.

12.

Immordino-Yang

M. H.

Faeth

(2010). The Role of Emotion and Skilled Intuition in Learning. In D. A

Sousa

. (Ed.), Mind, Brain, and Education: Neuroscience Implications for the Classroom (pp. 68-83). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

13.

Kelly

(2007). Visitors and Learners: Adult Museum Visitor’s Learning Identities. Proceedings of the ICOM-CECA Conference, Vienna Austria.

14.

Petitmengin

(2006). Describing one’s subjective experience in the second person: An interview method for the science of consciousness. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 5, 229-269.

15.

Seidman

(1998). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. New York: Teachers College Press.

16.

Szpunar

K. K.

(2010). Evidence for an implicit influence of memory on future thinking. Memory and Cognition, 38, 531-540.

17.

Wiersma

Jurs

S.G.

(2005). Research Methods in Education: An Introduction. New York: Pearson.

A Phenomenological Interview Method for Informal Scienc Learning

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References