Meaning Making « The Free-Choice Learning Laboratory at HMSC

So, since I never really talked much about what I was actually doing in grad school, while I was there, I decided to write this month’s blog post about my research. There is probably some irony here, but I can’t really explain it- just be excited that this post might actually show that I have done some real, academic work during the last five years.

What I want to talk about today, is one of the data collection tools I used, and why. During the time when I was still figuring out what I was going to do, beyond my grand scheme of “exploring a Maker experience with early adolescents”, I was lucky enough to get to spend hours in the car with my colleague and cohort member, Deb Bailey (now Dr. Deb Bailey!). Deb’s research interest has some parallels to mine- she explored how participation in gardening programs affected older adolescents, and we both work on the SYNERGIES project, so had time to talk about our ideas as we commuted up to the Portland area for conducting interviews and such. Deb was going to use Personal Meaning Maps with her youth, and the more we talked about it, the more I felt that they would be the perfect tool for my work too.

If you are unfamiliar with this tool, it was developed by John Falk and some of his colleagues and used in a number of studies based in museums. At first glance, it looks like a mind map or concept map. You have a piece of paper (although I guess this could all be done in iPads if you are tech savvy) with a prompt in the middle and have the participants write down words or phrases that refer to what they know, think, or believe about that topic. The next part is what was interesting to me- you interview the participant about what they have written, using their language. This appealed to me as a way to minimize my biases in the interviews.

You administer this activity twice, ideally as a pre-/post- experience, doing the interview twice too. In their second pass, they can add, remove, or change whatever they want about the initial artifact. And this was another important factor for me. The Personal Meaning Map would pretty accurately track the changes that each individual went through as a result of the experience they were participating in, rather than track them against some predetermined end point. As a former Montessorian, where the mantra is “follow the child”, this ability to see where each youth started and ended in such an individualized way fit perfectly with my beliefs about respecting each learner and where they might happen to be on their learning journey.

Then, this tool, which can look deceptively simple, can be analyzed along a number of dimensions- extent, breadth, depth, emotional intensity, and mastery. For someone vested in a mixed-methods study, this ability to have some measurable, quantitative data was a boon! Further, I supplemented these dimensions by examining changes in use of personal pronouns by the youth, and this tool was a perfect artifact to gather that data also.

You never know when inspiration will hit. As Deb and I passed the time during our car rides, really just filling the time, of course talk about our research ideas would come up- as it was consuming a lot of our lives. But, if I had not been “stuck” in the car for hours, talking to my intelligent and industrious friend, I might not have learned as much about this interesting tool, and my research would have been the weaker without it….. Serendipity comes in all sorts of interesting moments!

There’s nothing like a little guilt to set you on a new path. My adventures with writing these blog posts actually started because I felt guilty that some members of the Free Choice Learning Lab were doing a lot more to contribute to the group than I tend to do. Part of that is because I have historically been a bit of an interloper in the lab group anyway. Even though it is called the Free Choice Lab group, it has predominantly been comprised of the grad students working with Shawn Rowe, mostly out at the Hatfield Marine Science Center, and the few of us who work with other FCL faculty and projects have always been welcome to attend any of the group’s events (and I have felt welcome!), but we were outsiders. While this is currently changing and the other FCL groups are being more actively included in the webpage and such, this is how it has been for most of my time at Oregon State. This is compounded by the fact that I am a commuter student, driving up from Eugene, and I usually only attend meetings if I am on campus, of if the technology is not being totally frustrating for me to call or internet in, in some fashion. Needless to say, I let those who were regular members of the group shoulder most of the responsibilities for organizing meetings and retreats and writing for the blog and other such tasks.

However, this is a lovely group of people, and many of my favorite people that I have met in grad school, are part of this group, and I do care about them. So, when three active members, Laura Good, Katie Stofer, and Harrison Baker all graduated in the spring of 2013 and went on to jobs elsewhere, I could tell that if some other people didn’t step in and take on some of the work, my dear friends would be doing even more than their share! So, I tentatively agreed to write for the blog. At first, I was non-committal- “sure, I can be a guest blogger on occasion”, but as the topic kept coming up in meetings, I decided that once a month really was not that much to ask, so agreed to take on a regular stint.

And, to my surprise, this has been fun! This type of writing comes much more naturally to me than the academic style that is usually asked of me (sorry to anyone who helps edit my “real” papers!) and I even like thinking about what I will write my next post about, as I go about my month. I think I am funny, in a witty sort of way, and I appreciate the soap box from which to ponder and rant.

And, the best part is, that the universe is once again reminding me that when you do the “right thing” (i.e. helping out my friends) good things happen! Because of this blogging gig, I have been able to talk myself in to being a guest blogger for a pretty big technology in education conference later this month (ISTE), and a blog they asked me to write about Make as a lead up to the conference was posted through another on-line education website! On top of that, the fun FCL performance group Eepy Bird, posted a link to my post on their Facebook page. And, it keeps coming- this weekend I got an email from a couple of guys who are creating a more affordable CNC machine ( a Maker tool…) and someone sent them my piece and they want to talk too… who knows where it will all end!

So, moral of the story- do the right/nice thing when you can. Try something new. Keep trying- when I recently reread my earlier posts, I was not impressed, but I feel that with time and practice, I am finding my voice. Here’s to finding yours!

This past week I had a chance to attend NOAA’s Science on a Sphere workshop in St. Paul, Minnesota. The workshop was held at the Science Museum of Minnesota (SMM) which is located along the shores of the Mississippi River. It was great to see a new science museum and learn about data visualizations presented via 3-D spherical displays. The network of institutions meets annually to discuss use of (now) 100 installations of the sphere around the world and learn from each other. The setup for this display includes up to four projectors placed around a six-foot sphere at 90-degree angles. Images wrap around the sphere based on the alignment of the projectors and represent data on various Earth system processes, such as atmospheric storms, sea surface temperature, seafloor mapping, as well as processes occurring on other planets in the solar system. An app on the iPad helps to “drive” the exhibit, so facilitators can select a playlist of what they want to run on the sphere. I had never seen this display before so it is amazing to see all that has been created for public viewing. There are some videos online of it in action!

The theme of the workshop was “Welcome to the Anthropocene,” or the informal term used to designate the period on our planet where human activity can have a global impact on system functions. Approximately 95 participants were in attendance discussing methods of presenting datasets to different audiences, maximizing use of available content, and showcasing custom content used at their respective sites. NOAA staff also described new features that could be incorporated to the exhibit. The three-day experience was full of working groups, plenary sessions, and inspiring keynote speakers. FCL lab alum Katie Stofer was in attendance and presented some of her research and recommendations on the use of color related to data visualizations on the sphere. Celeste (Science Education PhD student) and I represented the Cyberlab, sharing information about current work in the lab and the potential for Cyber Scholars to collaborate and access the tools we are installing in an effort to study informal science learning. We showed the video produced for Oregon Sea Grant that explained the technology we are using and how that will connect to visitor research. I fielded several questions throughout the rest of the workshop with regards to the projects we are working on. Many participants expressed fascination with the setup and proposed use for research and some of them may pursue the opportunity to be a Cyber Scholar.

In addition to discussions about the sphere, there was a focus on communicating climate change to various audiences and what to keep in mind with regards to cognitive reception and emotion. We discussed the power of cultural models, framing, and connecting with values instead of a “doomsday” message that can so quickly turn people off. One strategy I found interesting was that instead of using the concept promoting individual action, was instead to discuss collective community action starting with people directly connected to you. What can family, friends, and neighbors do to promote change and choices that can have a more measureable impact? There was also the discussion on use of common symbols and metaphors to explain the abstract concepts of climate change. Julie Sweetland of the FrameWorks Institute showed research on use of a metaphor that described climate as a system, similar to the human circulation system. The ocean acted like the heart within the system, pumping or transferring heat around the world. Just like a human cannot live without a healthy heart, the Earth cannot live without a healthy ocean as it has an influence on the rest of the system. Julie showed footage of focus groups that had participants explaining the metaphor to other group members…meaning-making in action!

We did have some time to explore the museum on our own, which I was very excited about. SMM has several incredible exhibits, some permanent, and others that are on display for a limited period of time. The temporary exhibition is Ultimate Dinosaurs, and there were many reconstructions of the beasts on display. There is an interactive Cell Lab, where visitors don lab coats and goggles and can look at their own cheek cells under the microscope and explore the properties of blood. There was also space to tinker with electronics, build and create objects that would fly in a wind tunnel, and a “Collectors’ Corner” where naturalists can earn points to trade for artifacts like agates and small fossils. It seemed as if the museum was always busy with families and school groups. An outdoor exhibit known as the Big Back Yard was a combination of watershed education and a mini-golf putting course. Obstacles included river deltas, mountain ranges, and other natural elements to symbolize the many aspects of the watershed. Signage and information surrounded the holes describing the value of rain gardens and how impervious surfaces affect water runoff. I felt like a kid again as I moved about the museum — it was a lot of fun.

As I was traveling back to Oregon, I reflected on the concepts I keep encountering in the world of informal learning research. So often the topic of communication, cultural tools such as language, interpretation, and meaning-making come up again and again. There are challenges in conveying complex data on a sphere and trying to understand how it might be interpreted by the viewer. What impact does it have on a personal level as well as a social level? So many research questions can extend out of this. As researchers we are also trying to make meaning and interpret the data we collect, then we communicate or share that with others. Ah, the meta level…

In mid-July I will be representing the Cyberlab again at the National Marine Educators annual meeting. Hooray for field trips!

This post may trigger some readers as it discusses a sensitive topic.

These days, I notice myself getting more caught up in news stories. I think it might even be at the point where I annoy people- well, at least my partner who brought my, ahem, possibly obsessive, behavior to my attention. As usual, I blame it on grad school- I just can’t stop thinking about things! The story that happened most recently is a hot button topic or even a trigger for some people, but I want to talk around it, so bear with me. As mentioned before, I live in Eugene. Recently it has come out that there was an “alleged” sexual assault involving a young woman and three young men from the University of Oregon basketball team. The story has been a bit sensationalized in the news and most of us probably know more details than we should about the story, but suffice it to say, it is very complicated, with a number of conflicting bits of information and the police decided there was not enough evidence to charge the males with any crime. I do still read the local paper (yay for me! I live in a town that still has an independent daily paper!) and followed the story as it spun out. I have two college age daughters, I am female, I was involved in rape prevention programs when I was in college (and yes, we did just bluntly call it that in the early 90’s)- I am a human being who wants everyone to be treated with dignity and respect and for the world to be a safe place! Let’s just say- I care.

In my (maybe obsessive) thinking about this story, I had a couple of thoughts that I trace directly to my newer academic perspective. A photo from the paper, with a young woman holding up a sign stating “I live in a rape culture” really struck me and I started to think about what that really means. As I become more enmeshed in a socio-cultural perspective, I look at the world differently than I used to, and I wish there were spaces I had to really talk about things like “rape culture” in frank ways. There is so much going on here- the ways our culture talks about sex and sexuality and the ways it portrays it. The way bodies are displayed in advertising and how songs and television and movies show relationships seems to blur boundaries. What does personal responsibility look like for all parties (and how do we start that conversation without it sounding like victim blaming or slut shaming)? The way our culture glorifies sports figures and seems to have a separate code of behavior for them is tied in to this particular scenario too. And then there is the whole issue of rape and consensual sex. One of my insights from this latest story is that I believe we need a better, expanded vocabulary around these concepts. While most of us intellectually know that rape is not “just” a stranger forcing someone through violence or threat of violence to engage in sexual activity, I think that emotionally, that is how most of us think of it. When you add in underage drinking, previous sexual relations between the individuals, and a sense that “this is what college parties are like”, the waters are muddied. This does not excuse wrong behavior, but I think it lets people feel that they have not committed a wrongful act. The young men say they thought it was consensual- and the sad thing is, I believe them, they probably did think so. They do not see themselves as rapists. The messages they get from the culture they are surrounded by are confusing enough when you aren’t 19 and drunk. The story is just sad from start to finish, and 4 people’s lives (plus their families and friends too!) are forever changed by one night of lack of clear communication and awful choices.

So, the question becomes, how do we change this culture to one that is not a “rape culture”. How do we have visions of equality and safety for all that are brought in to reality? How do we change the ways we talk about sex and sexuality, in the moment and out of it? How do we change our beliefs that if someone isn’t saying “yes” it means “no”? If the dominant image we hold of a rapist is someone holding a knife to their victim, the individuals at a party who are pressuring someone won’t take on that label and recognize the consequences of their actions.

I am ready to help bring that world into being!

This summer my research will start on visitor use of the touchtable. I have been looking for content that is relevant and engaging beyond sorting or scanning through a collection of images. Many of the programs utilize these tasks and I am seeking something a bit more robust. Finding software that is coded in a way that will run on an oversized “tablet” and apply to a public informal learning environment seems to be a unique combination.

Being new to the world of communicating science via exhibits, there is a lot to learn about the integration of physical, personal, and sociocultural dimensions within an informal learning environment. If we are using technology as a medium for an exhibit, what can make it an engaging exhibit beyond the table itself? Research on visitor interaction with exhibits has advanced immensely in recent decades. One of the first papers I read in this area was Bitgood’s 1987 article on “Principles of Exhibit Design” in Visitor Behavior. Bitgood outlines aspects of exhibit design that influence viewing time. Some of these factors involve appealing to the senses or by using motion, where the object is placed, or how “real” it looks, and whether it facilitates personal meaning and social interaction between visitors. This last concept is particularly relevant to the touchtable as that it allows for multiple users at once, but if crowding occurs, that may influence the overall visitor experience. It is a fine balance!

So putting my software design cap on and thinking aloud for a moment… If I had access to a program I could install on the touchtable today, it would be formatted in a way that the public could interact with data to generate models or create visuals. For example, giving access to a dataset that can be manipulated and then transformed into something visually meaningful to the visitor. What might this look like? It might be a graph or some other creative means to represent their interpretation of the data. At OSU, there are so many different forms of data coming out of Hatfield alone, how might we allow a visitor the chance to make meaning from it? If there was a way for them to share this interpretation, how might it compare with what other visitors have created? Hmmm, I could be creating a future project for myself…I will continue to play detective as I search out what is useful for our environment at this time and for my project. Curious to hear what others might have to say about science “apps” or educational software for the museum setting. Feel free to share!

Seven months ago I joined Twitter. Now I want to reflect on that decision. In my post I claimed that Twitter has changed language use and what I meant by “language” at the time was what I would call grammar, or certain rules that we have in place for language. Today, seven months later, I still support that general claim. However, I don’t think Twitter has changed the wider use or rules of language; instead, what it has done is create a language and rules within Twitter that may or may not work outside of that interface. For instance, it would sound rather peculiar if we actually said “RT” or “MT” when we shared or modified someone’s ideas aloud.

What I mean is that content within Twitter is tied to a specific context, the Twitter interface, and is therefore contextualized. The content, however, is not tied just to the interface but is also tied to the person who originally posted the tweet. Any Twitter user knows what happens next. The tweet gets responses sent directly to the original publisher, it gets re-tweeted by a person to all of their followers and/or it gets marked as a favorite.

As soon as this process begins the content starts to become decontextualized. The idea or content embedded within the tweet also becomes a dialogue opposed to the monologue that it started as. The difference, of course, between monologue and dialogue is that there is one voice in the former and multiple voices in the latter. What I find interesting, though, is that tweets can move from a monologue to a dialogue back to a monologue if we think of a monologue not only as having one voice but also as internalizing an idea and making it our own.

What I am describing is a theoretical approach to an issue, the thoughts of which originated after reading a blog post by James Hayton. He wrote,

“…because everything is limited to 140 characters, conversations about complicated topics become reduced to soundbites devoid of any subtlety of meaning. I write a 1000-word blog post on skill development in writing, and I get a 140-character reply saying ‘get words down and worry later’. It makes me want to beat my head against the desk.”

How can I write about Twitter and linguistics and discourse analysis all in one blog post? Consider a tweet an utterance. Better yet, pretend you’re a linguist and refer to it as an utterance proper.

If we were to analyze tweets, what would we define as an utterance? As the picture shows, every utterance proper is responsive and anticipatory. It responds to a previous action or idea and anticipates an answer or justification. We can think of the entire diagram as one utterance so it’s not solely the original tweet, but also the ideas that came before and the responses to that tweet. The utterance changes only when the theme or topic changes.

My reflection after seven month comes down to this: As an academic I can overthink and evaluate the whole process. However, Twitter is a tool that has many benefits when properly used. It has a language of it’s own that one must learn and internalize but once that language is internalized you can gain meaningful connections and participate in meaningful conversations.

The Free-Choice Learning Laboratory at HMSC

Informal science education research

Category Archives: Meaning Making

Here’s Looking at You!

Cyberlab field trip to Minnesota

Only Shades of Gray

Envisioning an educational app for the FCL environment

It’s a bird! It’s a tweet! It’s an utterance!?!

Contact Info