Participation in informal science learning experiences: the rich get richer?

ABSTRACT

Informal science learning (ISL) experiences have been found to provide valuable opportunities to engage with and learn about science and, as such, form a key part of the STEM learning ecosystem. However, concerns remain around issues of equity and access. The Enterprising Science study builds upon previous research in this area and uses the construct of ‘science capital’ to understand and support science engagement among young people, particularly those historically marginalised from science. Drawing on survey data from nearly 6000 children ages 11–16 in England, we investigate who participates in particular areas of informal STEM learning outside of the science classroom. Survey findings are illustrated by interview data from the same project. Analyses suggest that overall participation in different types of informal science learning experiences (‘informal’ learning experiences, ‘everyday’ learning experiences, and school-led enrichment) varies. Generally, students from more privileged social backgrounds participate more, but with further ethnic and gender patterns between different ISL activity types. These differential patterns of participation highlight how some areas of the ecosystem (e.g. ‘everyday’ learning experiences) are more accessible, while others (e.g. in designed spaces and school-led enrichment) could do more to address inequities in participation.

KEYWORDS:

• Science learning ecosystem
• learning outside the classroom
• equity
• participation

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

ORCID

Jennifer DeWitt http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8584-2888

Notes

1. The terms ‘ecology’ and ‘ecosystem’ are used interchangeably in this paper to refer to various contexts, experiences and spaces that provide opportunities for learning.

2. Cultural capital was a composite measure based on items related to parental education (especially university attendance), museum visitation and number of books in the home.

3. The other components were: Science identity and job affinity, Family attitudes and practices (including attitudes to science), Valuing museums, Valuing science, Negative science identification, Science teacher encouragement, Self-confidence in science.

4. Assumptions for multilevel modelling analysis (e.g. around numbers of respondents) were fulfilled.

5. We acknowledge that this trend is (surprisingly) reversed among Year 11 students, whose mean for reported participation in school-led science enrichment does not differ significantly from Year 7 students, but participation does decrease from Years 7 through 10.

6. The correlation coefficients for each pair of composite variables are:

• ‘Informal’ science activities and ‘Everyday’ science engagement: 0.523

• ‘Informal’ science activities and School-led science enrichment: 0.454

• ‘Everyday’ science engagement and School-led science enrichment: 0.417.

7. In this example, a student’s older brother appears to be referring to David Attenborough, who, at the time of this writing, is still very much alive.

8. http://www.britishscienceassociation.org/crest-awards.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by BP.