Tackling Tough Topics: Using Socio-Scientific Issues to Help Museum Visitors Participate in Democratic Dialogue and Increase Their Understandings of Current Science and Technology

Notes

• Troy Sadler, “Moral Sensitivity and Its Contribution to the Resolution of Socio-Scientific Issues,” Journal of Moral Education 33, no. 3 (2004): 339–358.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Academy of Engineering Committee on Technological Literacy, Technically Speaking: Why All Americans Need to Know More About Technology (Washington, DC.: National Academy Press, 2002); and Gregory J. Kelly, “Discourse in Science Classrooms,” in Handbook of Research on Science Education, ed. Sandra K. Abell and Norman G. Lederman (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2007), 443–469.
   Google Scholar
• John Dewey, Democracy and Education (New York: The Free Press, 1916), 87.
   Google Scholar
• George E. Hein et al., Investigate! 1996 Summative Evaluation Report (Cambridge, MA: Lesley College, 1996); Joan Karp and Judah Leblang, Making Models: Summative Evaluation Report (Cambridge, MA: Program Evaluation and Research Group at Lesley University, 2004); and Emily S. Shaw, Elissa Chin, and Christine Reich, Design Challenges Summative Evaluation (Boston, MA: Museum of Science, 2005).
   Google Scholar
• American Association for the Advancement of Science, “Science for All Americans Online,” http://www.project2061.org/publications/sfaa/online/sfaatoc.htm.
   Google Scholar
• National Academy of Engineering Committee on Technological Literacy, Technically Speaking; and National Research Council, Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2009).
   Google Scholar
• Thomas Brante, “Reasons for Studying Scientific and Science-Based Controversies,” in Controversial Science: From Content to Contention, ed. Thomas Brante, Steve Fuller, and Willian Lynch (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1993), 177–191; Ellen McCallie et al., “Learning to Generate Dialogue: Theory, Practice, and Evaluation,” Museums & Social Issues 2 (2007): 168–183.
   Google Scholar
• Sue Allen and Joshua P. Gutwill, “Creating a Program to Deepen Family Inquiry at Interactive Science Exhibits,” Curator 52, no. 3 (2009): 289–306; Sally Duensing and Andrea Lorenzet, Decide: Evaluation Report (London: King's College London, 2007), 55; George E. Hein et al., Investigate!; and Erminia Pedretti, “Challenging Convention and Communicating Controversy: Learning through Issues-Based Museum Exhibitions,” in In Principle, in Practice, ed. John H. Falk, Lynn D. Dierking, and Susan Foutz (Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press, 2007), 121–135.
   Google Scholar
• Stein D. Kolsto, “Patterns in Students' Argumentation Confronted with a Risk-Focused Socio-Scientific Issue,” International Journal of Science Education 28, no. 14 (2006): 1689–1716; Ellen McCallie et al., Many Experts, Many Audiences: Public Engagement with Science and Informal Science Education. A CAISE Inquiry Group Report (Washington, DC: Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education, 2009); and Troy Sadler, “Moral Sensitivity.”
   Google Scholar
• Sally Duensing and Andrea Lorenzet, Decide: Evaluation Report (London: King's College London, 2007), 55; Ellen McCallie et al., “Learning to Generate Dialogue”; Barbara Flagg and Valerie Knight-Williams, Summative Evaluation of NISE Network's Public Forum: Nanotechnology in Health Care (Bellport, NY: Multimedia Research, 2008), 33; and Glen S. Aikenhead, “Humanistic Perspectives in the Science Curriculum,” in Handbook of Research on Science Education, ed. Sandra K. Abell and Norman G. Lederman (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2007), 881–910.
   Google Scholar
• Fonden Teknologirådet, “The Consensus Conference,” Fonden Teknologirdet, http://www.tekno.dk/subpage.php3?article=468&toppic=kategoril2&language=uk; and National Issues Forums Institute, “National Issues Forums: The Forums,” National Issues Forums Institute, http://www.nifl.org/forums/about.aspx.
   Google Scholar
• Unless otherwise stated, the data presented in this section comes from Juli Goss and Elizabeth K. Kollmann, NISE Network Forum: “Energy Challenges, Nanotech Solutions?” Formative Evaluation (Boston, MA: NISE Network, 2011).
   Google Scholar
• Barbara Flagg and Valerie Knight-Williams, Summative Evaluation of NISE Network's Public Forum, Elizabeth K. Kollmann, “Engaging the Public with Societal and Ethical Implications Content through NISE Network Products,” in Review of NISE Network Evaluation Findings: Years 1–5, ed. Christine Reich et al., (Boston, MA: NISE Network, 2011), 83–117; Christine Reich et al., “Fostering Civic Dialogue: A New Role for Science Museums?,” Museums & Social Issues 2, no. 2 (2007): 207–220; and Christine Reich, Elissa Chin, and Elizabeth Kunz, “Museums as Forum: Engaging Science Center Visitors in Dialogues with Scientists and One Another,” The Informal Learning Review 79, (2006): 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Elizabeth K. Kollmann et al., “Using Provocative Questions to Address Societal Health Issues,” Museums & Social Issues 5, no. 2 (2010): 175–190.
   Google Scholar
• Elizabeth K. Kollmann et al., Provocative Questions: Supporting Effective Dialogue about Societal Issues Informed by Human Biology in a Changing World Exploratory Research Report (Boston, MA: Museum of Science, 2012).
   Google Scholar