An Investigation into the QuaIifications Necessary for Science Hands-on Exhibit Guides from the Producer's Point of View

  • Kim, Eun-Sook (Jeonju University)
  • Published : 2007.11.30


Science hands-on exhibits are increasingly popular, especially during vacation time. These exhibits hire guides to help visitors to understand the contents. In this study, the qualifications of the guides are investigated through interviews with the producers who run the exhibit. There were two main questions the researcher was interested in during the interviews. One was the importance of the science background of the guides. The second was the characteristics of guides that the producers consider important for successful exhibits. The results show that a science background is not an important qualification in the view of most of the producers. Many factors other than science, such as accountability or social skills, were considered to be of greater importance than a background in science.




  1. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards, Washington, D. C.: U.S. Department of Education
  2. Wellington, J. (1991). Newspaper scienc, school science: friends or enemies? International Journal of Science Education, 13(4), 363-372
  3. Kwak, Y. (2006). Definition of pedagogical content knowledge and ways of raising teaching professionalism as examined by secondary school science teachers. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 26(4), 527-536
  4. Park, U. (1998). The effects of guided reciprocal questioning activities on middle school students' learning force-related unit in class. M.A. Seoul National University
  5. Driver. R., Asoko, R., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23, 5-17
  6. Kim, S. (2003). The characteristics of the exhibits in science centers and students' perceptions about the exhibits. M.A.. Seoul National University
  7. Falk, J. H., Moussouri, T., & Coulson, D. (1998). The effects of visitors agendas on learning. Curator, 41(2), 107-120. as sited in Renie and Willianms (2006)
  8. Farman, R. (2005). Science learning through scouting: an understudied context for informal science education. International Journal of Science Education, 27(4), 427-450
  9. Von Secker, C. E. & Lissitz, R. W. (1999). Estimating the impact of instructional practices of student achievement in science. Journal of research in science and teaching, 36(10), 1110-1126<1110::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-T
  10. Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64-74
  11. Tsai, C. (2005). Research and trends in science education from 1998 to 2002: a content analysis of publication in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 27(1), 3-14
  12. den Brok P., Fisher, D., and Scott, R. (2005). The importance of teacher interpersonal behaviour for student attitudes in Brunei primary science classes. International Journal of Science Education, 27(7), 765-779
  13. Rennie, L. J., Williams, G. F. (2006). Adults' learning about science in free-choice setting. International Journal of Science Education, 28(8), 871-893
  14. Schauble, L., Beane, D. B., Coates, G. D., Martin, L. M. W., & Sterling, P. V. (1996). Outside the classroom walls: Learning in informal environments. In L. Schauble & R. Glaser (Eds.), Innovations in learning: New environments for education (pp. 5-24). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. as sited in Renie and Willianms (2006)