PARENT-CHILD INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE MUSEUMS
Designing Science Museums for Enriching Parent-Child Interactions
Helena Chern
Vanderbilt University
1
PARENT-CHILD INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE MUSEUMS
2
Abstract
Museums serve as a unique space for learning, as visitors are able to freely choose
and engage in displays; opportunistic moments are seemingly endless. In such spaces,
parents and children often share experiences through participating and interaction within
a museum exhibit or display. Parent-child interactions and conversations serve as a
means for increased, meaningful learning experiences, particularly for children with a
developing interest and sense of expertise. Many parent-child conversations, particularly
in science museums, involve limited sense-making practices. Through design and
collaboration with other domains (e.g. libraries), museums can create a space to enhance
parent-child dialogue, increasing collaborative learning and shared knowledge.
Keywords: Parent-child interactions, islands of expertise, museums, informal
learning, shared knowledge and interest, collaborative learning, sociocultural perspective
PARENT-CHILD INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE MUSEUMS
3
Introduction
Informal learning settings are challenging to study given the varied nature and
complexities of such category; the term informal implies any setting that is not formal,
ranging from an individual’s home to a museum. However, despite the difficulties in
studying informal spaces, such spaces generally hold a freedom unique to its informal
nature, often free from assessments and standardized testing found in formal settings. In
particular, museums serve as a unique space for learning, having the unique quality of
free-choice interaction with the museum displays as well as chance encounters with other
museum visitors (Leinhardt & Knutson, 2004). However, an individual’s ability to
engage with a museum exhibit will impact his or her received impact and learning
experience. How might a museum consider designing for more effective engagement,
particularly in regards to younger individuals (i.e. children)?
Previous research has identified parent-child interactions, specifically the
dialogical interactions, as a key component for enriched learning in museums (Crowley
& Jacobs, 2002). Museums serve as a space for parent and child to engage in
conversations and interactions that further both the parent and child’s shared knowledge
and interest. Given a limited scope, this capstone will focus primarily on how to best
design for such parent-child interactions, using science museums specifically as example
for design.
PARENT-CHILD INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE MUSEUMS
4
Theoretical Framework: Learning Ecology
Understanding systems of ecology, specifically the learning ecology framework,
establishes a foundation for promoting parent-child interactions in museums. From a
social ecological perspective, an individual is impacted by a number of ecological
systems, including the macrosystem, exosystem, mesosystem, and microsystem
(Bronfenbrenner, 1979). The microsystem, smallest of the systems, captures how family
(e.g. parents) most immediately impact a child’s development, and the macrosystem,
largest of the systems, describes how a cultural context (e.g. industrialized country)
affects the systems within. The complexity of these ecological systems suggests a
nonlinear development, a multi-layer context for the numerous impacts on an individual’s
growth and learning. Ecological perspectives “articulate the interdependencies between
child level and environmental variables in development and acknowledge the tight
intertwining of person and context in producing developmental change” (Barron, 2006).
From such perspectives, parent-child interactions are valuable not only within the context
of one setting (i.e. museum) but through multiple ecologies. Thus, the impact of
museum design is not limited to the immediate physical space, but is affected by larger
systems (e.g. macrosystem – cultural context) and affects smaller systems (e.g.
microsystem – family, home).
Learners/Learning Context: Children in Science Museums
Importance of Parent-Child Relationship
From an ecological perspective, family often impacts an individual most directly
and immediately. And, for many families living in the United States, parents are often
PARENT-CHILD INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE MUSEUMS
5
colloquially described as a child’s “first teacher.” Parent-training programs, such as
Parents as Teachers, believe “parents are their child’s first and most influential teacher”
(Zigler et al., 2008, p. 106). Developing from Attachment Theory and Social Learning
Theory, parent-training programs promote positive behavior and interpersonal
relationships between parent and child, believing a positive caregiver (e.g. parent) role as
crucial to a well-developed, socially and emotionally healthy child (Ainsworth & Bell,
1970; Bowlby 1988; Bandura, 1963). These programs demonstrate existing theory and
prevalent belief that parents serve as a child’s greatest influence and provider, holding a
responsibility as caregiver and teacher.
Additionally, children experience significant influence from surrounding context
and culture prior to reaching school age, later demonstrating wide variability in school
readiness and performance. Heath (1982) describes significant cultural differences
among one elementary school population with students from three communities; her
findings, though widely interpreted, reveal a number of ideas, including 1) the significant
impact of context and culture 2) the variation of parent-child interaction among differing
communities and 3) the differences and values related to learning. This research serves
as another example of the immense influence of culture, context, and parents on a child’s
development. While parenting methods can vary widely, related child development
literature (e.g. research cited by parent-training programs) describes parents’ caregiver
role as crucial and necessary for a child’s social and emotional well-being.
Parent-Child Interactions in Museums
PARENT-CHILD INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE MUSEUMS
6
Given parents’ strong roles as a child’s caregiver, the need for interactions carries
in multiple contexts outside the home, across the community – for example, in a
museum. Before entering grade school, children informally begin developing scientific
reasoning skills and ideas, learning and adding to their sense of identity as inquisitive
individuals (Crowley & Jacobs, 2002). Museums hold a unique quality of free-choice
interaction with the museum displays, providing curious children with seemingly
limitless opportunities for conversation and exploration (Leinhardt & Knutson, 2004).
Parents can help a child gain broader informal knowledge, particularly through serving as
a mediator in a child’s museum experience, thus enriching knowledge across home,
community, and eventually school (Crowley & Jacobs, 2002; Barron, 2006).
Understanding a framework for informal knowledge and related conversational practices
promotes continued learning in multiple contexts, particularly by way of parent-child
interactions.
Islands of expertise framework. Children who develop an island of expertise
have “a collection of knowledge, interest, and activity around a specific topic” from
collaboration with peers, parents, and family (Palmquist & Crowley, 2007). The island
of expertise framework considers family support as critical to developing information
processing skills that can help continue and further a child’s actively developing island of
expertise (Palmquist & Crowley, 2007). Family support can and does include parentchild activities, conversations, and other shared knowledge, particularly when parents can
continually engage with the child’s island of expertise through elaborate and meaningful
PARENT-CHILD INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE MUSEUMS
7
explanations (Crowley & Jacobs, 2002). The shared knowledge and dialogue contributes
to greater knowledge and dialogue related to the child’s interest (or, island of expertise).
The island of expertise framework encourages a unique learning experience often
facilitated by and through unique spaces such as museums. The learning is collaborative,
often spontaneous, and gradually accumulated (Crowley & Jacobs, 2002). For example,
a child interested in dinosaurs might engage in book reading with his or her parents,
collaboratively participating in the activity (e.g. reading the text aloud, pointing to
pictures, and asking questions). The interest might be further encouraged by a visit to a
museum featuring a dinosaur exhibit, where the child and parent(s) are able to talk about
dinosaurs prior to, during, and after the visit, perhaps relating the museum experience to
the previously read dinosaur books. In both instances, the learning is collaborative, as
parents and children engage in a given shared activity.
The learning is also spontaneous, driven by “opportunistic ‘noticing’ on the part
of the parent and the child” (Crowley & Jacobs, 2002, p. 336). Parents decide what is
worth noticing, taking into consideration their own interest and knowledge (as well as the
child’s interest and knowledge), and determine a goal for an interaction (Crowley &
Jacobs, 2002). The child is simultaneously making similar judgments. For example, at a
dinosaur fossil exhibit, the parent may initially focused on reading the display text, while
the child may be more interested in locating a hands-on activity. In a different visit, the
noticing may change, where both parent and child consider different aspects of the same
exhibit. Over time, the parent-child conversation shapes and develops, focusing on
PARENT-CHILD INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE MUSEUMS
8
different aspects – e.g. science, beauty, history, etc. The family conversation becomes
increasingly complex, extending through multiple activities in the home, school, and
community (Crowley & Jacobs, 2002).
Lastly, the island of expertise framework considers learning gradually
accumulated, from “many relatively unremarkable moments” (Crowley & Jacobs, 2002,
p. 337). While children may experience remarkable moments of discovery and insight,
most often they learn through small moments of practicing, exploring, and remembering
(Crowley & Jacobs, 2002). For example, a child might receive detailed information from
a parent regarding a profession in paleontology but will not truly grasp the meaning until
repeated exposure across books, television, and conversations with peers. A child’s
island of expertise reflects these repeated moments of encounter with resources or
individuals who share or desire to support the same interest (Crowley & Jacobs, 2002).
The island of expertise framework describes parent-child interaction and collaboration as
critical to a child’s learning, particularly related to free-choice spaces (e.g. museums)
where such spontaneous and chance encounter might further learning and expertise.
Interactions in science museums. Families often use a variety of interactional
ways to make meaning of exhibits encountered throughout science museums
(Zimmerman, Reeve, & Bell, 2009). Based on sociocultural theory of learning, the
Everyday Expertise framework describes these interactions, analyzing “individual, social,
and cultural influences on various learning processes through acknowledging and
including the effect of participation within culturally patterned activities on the
development of people’s ideas and concepts about the living world” (Zimmerman, Reeve,
PARENT-CHILD INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE MUSEUMS
9
& Bell, 2009, p. 480). The framework suggests a collective participation in using
cultural resources in other activities as sense-making resources for science museums,
evident through using two types of “scientific epistemic resources – biological facts and
perceptual descriptions” (Zimmerman, Reeve, & Bell, 2009, p. 478). For example, in a
parent-child interaction, the parent might provide a biological fact, remarking that an
animal has similar joints to a human. Or, the child might count or describe an object,
noticing the amount of insects or size of a reptile – an example of perceptual talk.
Zimmerman, Reeve, & Bell (2009) noticed these two sense-making activities occurring
among several families across multiple museum exhibits, suggesting the interactions and
learning as heavily impacted by social and cultural influences.
“Curriculum” Design
Curriculum in an informal setting, such as a museum, is not as easily identifiable
as formal education. Additionally, design varies greatly across museums; while sharing
similarities, there may not necessarily be a unified curriculum – say, a “Common Core”
for museums. However, museums historically have been designed to reflect relevant
social values and understandings (Leinhardt & Knutson, 2004).
As such, museum design appears heavily based in sociocultural and information
processing theory, believing the individual to be heavily impacted by social and cultural
influences. Leinhardt & Knutson (2004) describe museums as historically reflecting “the
social values and understandings that surround them, not merely in terms of the value of
specific ideas and objects but also in terms of how museums conceive of things like
learning” (p. 2). An individual’s knowledge and interest impacts his or her perception of
PARENT-CHILD INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE MUSEUMS
10
a museum exhibit, likely engaging in new information by utilizing resources or practices
from other social or cultural activities (e.g. analyzing or understanding through
observation). Learning takes place “as a system of participatory competencies and
activities” (Leinhardt & Knutson, 2004, p. 5). However, a museum experience depends
on how and by what means the individual engages with the exhibit. For example,
elaborative conversation techniques (regarding the observed exhibit) can further learned
associations, shared talk, and child-initiated questioning (Benjamin, Haden, & Wilkerson,
2010). Without such conversation taking place, a museum exhibit may be less
meaningful for both child and parent.
Museums designing for increasing parent-child dialogue and interaction should
include conversation suggestions or instruction. When given conversation instruction,
caregivers (e.g. parents) asked more questions and engaged in more caregiver-child joint
talk compared to those caregivers without instruction (Benjamin, Haden, Wilkerson,
2010). While providing “instruction” for parents in a sensitive, respectful, and
appropriate manner may be difficult, museums can provide suggested conversation
starters or questions for parents to ask children. Or, similar age-appropriate conversation
starters can be provided for children at a height-appropriate level to encourage children to
initiate questions, comments, or observations.
Science museums, in particular, can consider designing for encouraging sensemaking beyond the two most commonly observed practices – biological fact and
perceptual descriptions (Zimmerman, Reeve, & Bell, 2009). For example, encouraging
PARENT-CHILD INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE MUSEUMS
11
connections across other knowledge areas or experiences from home, books, vacations,
previous museum visits. A science museum partnered with a local bookstore, author, or
library could help relate a child’s experience with book-reading to a hands-on museum
exhibit; perhaps promoting available and related books often found in museum gift shops
may enhance the learning during the museum visit and continue following the visit (also
encouraging literacy skills). For example, at an exhibit featuring electricity, a museum
employee could facilitate reading a related book (available for purchase or for library
loan) at that exhibit. This provides another activity for parent-child interaction and
conversations, where both parent and child can connect the book reading activity across
home, school, and museum, and also engage in conversation about books (e.g. how text
provides information, where to purchase or borrow books, who writes books for science
topics, etc.). Increasing the tangible means to collaboratively encounter a subject or
interest across multiple domains helps develop a child’s island of expertise (Palmquist &
Crowley, 2007).
“Assessment” or Evaluation
Effectiveness or impact of museum design cannot be as easily determined as
curriculum found in formal education, where assessments often take place in the form of
standardized testing. However, research has and continues to be conducted in museums,
where researchers have the ability to unobtrusively observe parent-child interactions
(compared to entering a home or classroom, disrupting normal routine). Research on
family learning in museums often focuses on conversation and interaction within one
exhibit, rather than across an entire museum visit (Zimmerman, Reeve, & Bell, 2009).
PARENT-CHILD INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE MUSEUMS
12
Other limitations include a lack of informal science education literature connected with
cognitive development research in museums, limiting the understanding of “the expertise
and competencies that families develop in relation to museum going” (Callanan, 2012;
Zimmerman, Reeve, & Bell, 2009, p. 479). Perhaps the best means of examining the
effectiveness of museum design on promoting parent-child conversation is through
longitudinal study and research that seeks to fill the void in museum research literature.
Implications and Future Considerations
Connection to formal education
When facilitated with rich parent-child conversations, museum visits provide both
parent and child with a unique, shared learning experience. Yet, is learning in a museum
space necessary and crucial for all children, particularly when considering formal
schooling? How does free-choice exploration in a museum translate to a classroom
setting, when choice is often limited early on? Does formal education consider museum
trips as true opportunities for rich learning and experience? The islands of expertise
framework describes how children can experience significant knowledge and interest,
resulting from consistent exposure across multiple domains (e.g. home and school).
However, the scope of this capstone has not fully considered how informal education (i.e.
learning in a museum space) connects with formal education, thus the islands of expertise
framework does not effectively capture how museum learning functions in the grander
scheme of formal education. Perhaps additional research can better consider how these
two domains of education (i.e. formal and informal) can interact successfully, rather than
continually describing such separately (evident even in the aforementioned dichotomy).
PARENT-CHILD INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE MUSEUMS
13
Limitations related to access and poverty. While the benefits of a museum visit
are inarguably impacting, are children without museum experiences at disadvantage in
regards to developing an “island of expertise?” Do museums cater only to a specific
demographic or population? If so, does this negatively impact the potential effect
museum spaces could have on underprivileged children (or other populations
unaccustomed to a particular design)? Do museum designs consider language
differences? The museum research literature related to parent-child interactions lacks
demographic information of its observed participants. The findings of observed parentchild talk may likely be from one particular demographic - colloquially known as “uppermiddle class,” possibly Caucasian. Again, given the limited scope of this capstone, the
previous statement stands as a hypothesis. However, museum design should consider
encouraging rich experiences for all populations while acknowledging (and accounting
for) limitations resulting from differences in demographics. An extended and revised
capstone should also consider these issues, particularly as related to poverty and
intervention.
Social and cultural relevance
Learning theory and framework. Much of the standing research and literature
on museums lends to a rooted development from a sociocultural theory of learning and
perspective. Additionally, the learning frameworks described in this capstone developed
within the last decade or two, serving as relatively current understandings of learning.
However, as time passes and new trends develop, museum design and associated learning
frameworks will need to continually evolve and change, or at minimum, remain culturally
PARENT-CHILD INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE MUSEUMS
14
relevant. Similar to how learning theorists and psychologists typically consider
behaviorism outdated, perhaps socioculturalism will eventually prove obsolete. There
may be other ways to understand and consider learning, particularly as related to parentchild interactions.
Political and social definitions. Currently, popular societal opinion has redefined traditional family units by inclusion of same-sex parents. How do we consider
parent-child interactions as the traditional family unit is challenged and changed? The
movement for same-sex marriages and related privileges has been steadily growing
throughout the last decade. Are same-sex couples with children considered in museum
research literature? Does the research account for parent or parents as caregivers
regardless of the unit? Is the research still applicable for non-parent caregivers (e.g. legal
guardian, grandparent)? Does the change in traditional parenting make-up affect the
impact of the learning space and context? Future research should consider and observe
these changes in traditional parenting, acknowledging any potential limitations or other
challenges. And, as a new movement related to gender confusion/identification grows,
perhaps research should also consider these differences or changes in identity, remaining
socially and culturally relevant.
Conclusion
Museums provide visitors with multiple unique opportunities to engage in
exhibits, and chance encounters with other museum visitors. Parents, serving as
caregivers, can engage with children in museums to support children’s interest and
participate in collaborative learning and shared knowledge. Museums ought to consider
PARENT-CHILD INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE MUSEUMS
15
designs to facilitate parent-child conversations, particularly as such dialogical interactions
demonstrate significant impact for developing a child’s island of expertise. Exhibit
activities or designs that encourage conversations beyond the binary sense-making
resources (typical in science museums) can guide parents and children to enhance their
understanding and knowledge in a particular subject or interest. However, museums
must remain relevant – socially and culturally. In particular, as learning theory and
perspective continues to evolve, museums should adapt to development and changes.
Perhaps future learning experiences call for striking a dichotomy in describing formal and
informal settings of learning, and greater opportunities for considering such settings as a
continuum across context and domain.
PARENT-CHILD INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE MUSEUMS
References
Ainsworth, M. D. S., & Bell, S. M. (1970). Attachment, exploration, and separation:
Illustrated by the behavior of one-year-olds in a strange situation. Child
Development, 41, 49-67.
Bandura, A. (1963). Social learning and personality development. New York: Holt,
Rinehart, and Winston.
Barron, B. (2006). Interest and self-sustained learning as catalysts of development: A
learning ecology perspective. Human Development, 49, 193-224.
Benjamin, N., Haden, C. A., Wilkerson, E. (2010). Enhancing building, conversation,
and learning through caregiver-child interactions in a children’s museum.
Developmental Psychology, 46(2), 502-515.
Bowlby, J. (1988). Attachment, communication, and the therapeutic process. A secure
base: Parent-child attachment and healthy human development, 137-157.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Callanan, M. A. (2012). Conducting cognitive developmental research in museums:
theoretical issues and practical considerations. Journal of Cognition and
Development, 13(2), 137-151.
Crowley, K. & Jacobs, M. (2002). Building islands of expertise in everyday family
activity. In Leinhardt, G., Crowley, K., & Knutson, K. (Eds.), Learning
16
PARENT-CHILD INTERACTIONS IN SCIENCE MUSEUMS
17
conversations in museums (pp. 333-356). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc.
Heath, S. B. (1982). What no bedtime story means: Narrative skills at home and school.
Language in Society, 11(2), 49-76.
Leinhardt, G. & Knutson, A. (2004). Listening in on museum conversations. Lanham,
MD: AltaMira Press.
Nora, B., Haden, C. A., Wilkerson, E. (2010). Enhancing building, conversation, and
learning through caregiver-child interactions in a children’s museum.
Developmental Psychology, 46(2), 502-515.
Owen, M. T., & Mulvihill, B. A. (1994). Benefits of a parent education and support
program in the first three years. Family Relations, 43(2), 206-212.
Palmquist, S. & Crowley, K. (2007). From teachers to testers: How parents talk to novice
and expert children in a natural history museum. Science Education, 91(5), 783804.
Zigler, E., Pfannenstiel, J. C., & Seitz, V. (2008). The Parents as Teachers program and
school success: A replication and extension. The Journal of Primary Prevention,
29(2), 103-120.
Zimmerman, H. T., Reeve, S., & Bell, P. (2009). Family sense-making practices in
science center conversations. Science Education, 94, 475-505.