Public Understanding of Science

Public Understanding of Science http://pus.sagepub.com

Attracting Teen Surfers to Science Web Sites

Michael F. Weigold and Debbie Treise

Public Understanding of Science 2004; 13; 229

DOI: 10.1177/0963662504045504

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://pus.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/13/3/229

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Public Understanding of Science can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://pus.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://pus.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Citations (this article cites 8 articles hosted on the

SAGE Journals Online and HighWire Press platforms): http://pus.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/13/3/229

Downloaded from http://pus.sagepub.com

at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 7, 2008

© 2004 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.

S

AGE

P

UBLICATIONS

(www.sagepublications.com)

Public Understand. Sci. 13 (2004) 229–248

P

UBLIC

U

NDERSTANDING OF

S

CIENCE

Attracting teen surfers to science Web sites

Michael F. Weigold and Debbie Treise

Attracting teens to science Web sites can be difficult because teens spend less time online than other groups and because teens most frequently use the

Internet for social and entertainment gratifications. Two studies sought to increase understanding about how to attract teens to science Web sites. The first study was a content analysis of state-of-the-art science Web sites and popular non-science teen Web sites. The second study used teen focus groups to gain insights about their Internet use and about how they use the Web to find science information. Implications from both studies for improving Webmediated science communication to a teenage audience are discussed.

1. Introduction

Why bring teenagers and science Web sites together? Science Web sites can offer important benefits for teens. Surveys suggest that science and other informational Web sites are a source of help for homework and school assignments (Ebersol, 2000). In addition, these sites may represent an important tool for combating the widespread scientific illiteracy of

American teens (Champagne, 1992; Halpern, 1992). The United States is currently “in dire need of more science and mathematics teachers” according to a recent Reuter’s report

(CNN, 2002). The news article notes that the National Research Council has continued to find that US students’ performance in mathematics and science ranks near the bottom of all industrialized nations. Among their recommendations is a fellowship program for improving science and mathematics education for kindergarten through 12th grade. The report also notes that many students are taught by teachers without formal backgrounds in mathematics and science.

Science Web sites also may be able to play a role in creating more positive attitudes toward science and even nurturing the development of future scientists. Young people often get their first serious exposure to basic science during the middle and high school years. To the extent science Web sites help to make that exposure a more positive one, they may influence a teen’s life-long interest in science or appreciation of the beauty and importance of science. The Center for Media Education (2000) stresses the importance of mass media generally and new media specifically in adolescent development. They argue that the teen years are crucial ones for identity formation as young people begin to plan adult identities and contemplate “hypothetical future selves.” In addition, because teens spend less time with their families, outside influences become more important. “Because teen engagement with media usually intensifies just as parental influence is waning, the media can play a

© SAGE Publications ISSN 0963-6625 DOI: 10.1177/0963662504045504




230 Public Understanding of Science 13 (3) strong role in shaping teen attitudes, as well as their sense of self and the world” (Center for

Media Education, 2000: 5).

The recognition that exposure to science outside of the classroom may be an important component of both learning about and positive feelings toward science has been noted by scholars interested in the concept of “informal learning” (Crane et al., 1994; Jeffs and Smith,

1990; Tressel, 1988). Tressel (1988) indicates that the educational system typically rewards students who are “eager, enthusiastic, and well-prepared by their parents outside of school”

(p. 21, emphases added) and argues that “a rich environment of informal learning can make our system truly one of education instead of selection” (p. 21, emphases added). For some this rich environment has traditionally included museums, planetariums, exhibits, and television programming (Crane et al., 1994). How can Web sites also play an important role in developing an interest in and understanding of science among teens? The possibilities are almost limitless, but at a minimum, the characteristics that help make commercial Web sites interesting and attractive to teens (interactivity, control, instant communication, collaboration, realistic modeling of real-world phenomena) may also be powerful tools for giving teens a first-hand experience with science. To take just one example, the popular Web site

Netfrog (Netfrog, 2002) provides the tools, graphics, and information for students to successfully perform an online dissection. But replicating a popular middle school laboratory experience is merely the tip of the iceberg for a medium that can model deep space, the inside of an atom, or life at the bottom of the oceans. By making the teen an active participant in science, science Web sites can transform the learning process from passive memorization to active engagement. This shift in goals can in turn be quite powerful in the self-concept development of a teen, according to research by Markus and colleagues

(Markus and Nurius, 1986; Markus and Ruvolo, 1989). They note that goals “occasion the construction of a ‘possible self’ in which one is different from the now self and in which one realizes the goal” (Markus and Ruvolo, 1989: 212).

Given the potential of Web sites to play a prominent role in informal science education it is dismaying that a survey of the teen Web landscape shows a distressingly low number of non-commercial Web sites available for teens (Center for Media Education, 2000). The

Center notes that the online teen landscape is “quickly becoming a highly commercialized environment, with advertising, shopping, ‘branding,’ and market research a dominant and pervasive presence” (p. 58). They argue for an “alternative Internet” that offers “a noncommercial and civic Web culture for teens,” but conclude that sites that meet this mandate are few and far between.

If the Web contains many benefits for teens, it is also true that teenagers hold great value for many Web sites. In fact, teens represent an attractive audience for almost all major mass media (Belch and Belch, 2001) and a great number of commercial Web sites are anxious to reach teens because of their spending power (an estimated $155 billion in 2000), attractiveness to sponsors (Belch and Belch, 2001; Center for Media Education, 2000; Neff,

2001; Shimp, 2003) and because teens are considered a window into what is fashionable and

“cool” (Pappas, 2002). Teens are also an important target for many non-commercial Web sites, especially those sites with an educational mission. Johnson (1996) used a content analysis to uncover three general types of science sites that target the public: (1) professional science sites expanded for use by the general public, (2) sites specifically designed for use by everyone (with at least a basic knowledge of science, i.e., adolescents and older), and (3) sites designed specifically for preteen children. All of these, but especially the first two, are of potential interest to teenagers seeking science information and all tend to have extensive links to other educational sites.

While attractive, teenagers are a challenging audience for Web site sponsors because




Weigold & Treise: Attracting teens to science Web sites 231 teens spend less time online than do other demographic groups, especially young adults

(ages 18–24). According to Media Metrix (2003) teens spend about 303 minutes online per month, an amount which pales next to time online among young adults 18–34 (656 minutes per month) or adults aged 35–49 (804 minutes). In fact, one recent study (AOL Digital

Marketing Services, 2002) finds that on average, mothers spend more time on the Internet than do their teens (almost 17 hours per week for mothers compared to about 12 hours per week for the teens).

But while teenagers spend less time with the Internet when compared with older persons, they still consider the Internet to be an important medium. Research suggests that teens spend less time with all mass media than do other age groups (Wells et al., 2003), although teen media use is skewed toward the Internet (Marketing to kids, tweens & teens,

2002). When teens are asked to name the mass medium they would keep if they could only keep one, a majority (65%) choose the Internet and a recent study of teens and the Web

(Cheskin Research, 1999) concludes that teens believe “the Web is better than watching

TV” (p. 3). Other research confirms that the Internet is considered satisfying by teens and young adults (Angleman, 2001).

A joint research study by Harris and Yahoo! involving 2,500 teens and young adults

(ages 13–24) examined overall media use among teens and discovered that in a typical week this group spends about 17 hours online (excluding e-mail), watches about 14 hours of TV, spends 12 hours listening to the radio, just under 8 hours talking on the phone, and about 6 hours reading books and magazines. The researchers concluded that teens favor the Web over other media because it allows them “control,” i.e., “the ability to personalize and manage the media experience and content.” Teens also appeared to relish having a large assortment of media choices and frequently engage in multi-tasking (simultaneously use more than one media vehicle at a time) (Yahoo!, 2003).

Teens are attracted to Internet technologies that help them to communicate and stay in touch with others, relish the interactive nature of the Web, and value privacy and freedom on the Web, according to Cheskin Research (1999). They note that teens fall into five distinct groups with different Web usage patterns, namely “Explorers” (about 10% of the teen population, are creative, highly independent, highly influential in teen culture because of their counterculture appearance), “Visibles” (30% of the teen population, comprised of popular kids at school, including “jocks”), “Status Quos” (38% of the teen population, a group generally accepted and liked by peers and adults), “Non-teens” (14% of the teen population, sometimes called “nerds,” who possess an indifference to teen culture and an intense interest in academics), and Isolators (5–10% of the teen population, a group that is somewhat alienated from peers and adults alike). New trends tend to start with Explorers, move to Visibles, and then become part of the mainstream when accepted by the Status

Quos. Cheskin considers Visibles to be an important target group for Internet sponsors because they are especially influential within the teen community.

2. Attracting teenagers to science sites

Mass communicators interested in explaining media consumption frequently cite a research tradition known as uses and gratifications research (Finn, 1997; Katz et al., 1974; McQuail,

1985; Palmgreen and Rayburn, 1982; Papacharissi and Rubin, 2000; Rubin, 1981). Uses and gratifications research seeks to uncover audience motives for media consumption and the gratifications that these audiences receive from that consumption. The approach is useful for content providers in that it illuminates the functions that are served by media consumption.




232 Public Understanding of Science 13 (3)

To the extent that newer media as compared to old (1) better gratify needs, (2) gratify more needs, or (3) gratify needs with fewer associated costs, then audiences are expected to spend greater time with the former and less time with the latter (Palmgreen and Rayburn, 1982).

Ebersol (2000), using a uses and gratifications approach, administered a survey asking teens why they used the Web. He uncovered eight dimensions: research and learning (to complete homework assignments, to get up-to-date facts and information), easy access to entertainment (because it’s so easy, because it’s fun), communication and social interaction (to chat with other people, to find people), something to do when bored (for entertainment, for browsing), access to material otherwise unavailable (to find things not in the library, to download software and other free stuff), product information and technical support, games and sexually explicit sites, and consumer transactions. This suggests that while many teen

Web gratifications are related to entertainment and interactions, learning is a prominent motive for Web use as well.

PriceWaterhouseCoopers E-Retail Intelligence (Pastore, 2000) examined the top reasons that teens go online and discovered that e-mailing, getting information, playing games, using chat rooms, downloading music and videos, and sending electronic greeting cards were listed most often. And Ferguson and Perse (2000) discovered that entertainment was the most prominent of five factors for going online (the others were passing time, relaxation/ escape and social information). The entertainment motive accounted for over 40% of the respondents’ answers, while none of the other motives exceeded 10%. In sum, teens usually go to the Web to have fun and interact with others, but occasionally use the Web to find information or learn.

Which sites are most popular with teenagers? There are two ways to think about this question: noting which sites have the greatest number of teens in their audience, and noting which sites have the greatest percentage of teens to total audience. To clarify the distinction a bit more, sites that are popular with all audiences (like AOL or Microsoft) are likely to be prominent in the first grouping, while sites that draw almost exclusively from the teen demographic will be represented in the second. A listing of the Web sites with the greatest numbers of teenagers by the research firm Media Metrix (2003) shows that teens frequent many of the large portal and Internet provider sites favored by older Internet users (i.e.,

AOL, Yahoo!, Microsoft). Only one of the sites in the top 15 represents a specific effort to target the teen audience (Angelfire.com). Conspicuously absent are sites related to science, technology, or even education.

The Center for Media Education (2000) reviews several dozen sites that are specifically designed for teens. Among the most popular sites that are currently still in operation (the

Internet “bust” has driven several of the teen sites mentioned in this recent report to consolidate or go out of business) are: MTV (a site affiliated with the popular teen cable network), Sonicnet (a music site affiliated with MTV and VH1), IGN (a site that focuses on computer games), Smartgirl (a teen lifestyle site for girls), Alloy (a lifestyle site for teenaged girls), Bolt (a lifestyle site for both boys and girls), Pogo (a board game rather than computer game site), Gurl (a lifestyle site for teen girls), Dr. Drew (a health advice site for teens), and Headbone (a lifestyle site for kids and teens).

The literature reviewed so far suggests that attracting teens to science Web sites is not an easy task. Teens like the Internet but use it less than other demographic groups. When they do use the Internet, it tends to be in service of either entertainment or social functions.

Educational Web sites are not well represented among the most popular teen sites, even though many of these sites are explicitly designed or intended to target a youth/teen audience.

To better understand ways of attracting teenagers to science Web sites, we devised a




Weigold & Treise: Attracting teens to science Web sites 233 two-pronged strategy. First, we conducted a content analysis of Web sites. To better understand how commercial Web sites target teenagers, we examined the non-science Web sites listed above that draw disproportionately from the teen demographic. To better understand “state-of-the-art” in the science Web area, we also analyzed both commercial and non-commercial sites with an educational/science focus. Second, we conducted focus groups with teenagers in an effort to understand their interactions with and perceptions of the Internet, their favorite Web sites, science-related Web sites, and NASA’s Web site.

3. Method

Content analysis

Ten popular non-science teen-targeted Web sites were content analyzed on both content and graphic dimensions (see Appendix B for content analysis coding sheet). The sites themselves were located by using suggested sites from the Center for Media Education’s (2000) recent study of teenage Web sites. The content analysis was extended to recommended sites from four of the top 10 teen science site lists located at the homepage of the Exploratorium

Museum (www.exploratorium.edu/learning). These lists included the top “cool” sites in the four areas of astronomy, chemistry, life sciences and general sciences. Six additional prominent science sites that were mentioned in sites from the Exploratorium lists were also examined (Scientific American, Discovery School, Schools Online Science, Suremath, Ask

Dr. Math, and Science Links (an American Association for the Advancement of Science

Web site), for a total of 46 science Web sites that were content analyzed (see Appendix A for a complete list of all the Web sites analyzed in the study).

Process

Using the coding sheet found in Appendix B, one of the project investigators conducted a thorough examination of each site. The purpose of the content analysis was both to look for specific structural elements that define the “best” or most effective Web sites (use of color, presence of graphics, use of fonts, layouts, links, functions, interactive elements; and for science-specific sites inclusion of subject areas, currency, age-specific stories, relevance, literacy level, use of contact persons and identification of intended audience)

(Mitretek Systems, 1999) and to develop a subjective “feel” for each site and to look for ideas for attracting teens rather than to calculate a quantitative summary of attributes. To examine reliability for the impressions of the first investigator, the second investigator examined a subset of the sites using the same coding sheet. Both investigators took notes, which were then compared. In virtually every case, overall impressions of the quality and attractiveness of the sites were the same (intercoder reliability of 96.3).

Focus groups

To explore how high school students use the Web to learn about science, naturalistic methods were selected. Naturalistic inquiry allows the researcher to engage in description and provide an insider perspective. Accordingly, we used focus groups to “gain access to the assumptions” according to which one group construes the world; in this case, the high school students that are frequent Web users. Focus groups were conducted by one of the researchers trained in qualitative methods, specifically focus groups.

Five focus groups were conducted with high school students enrolled in Advanced

Placement (AP) classes in three area high schools in Gainesville, Florida. These students were chosen because the researchers felt that they likely would be the most science literate students, and therefore those who would most likely read science Web site content. While our sample of AP students limits the generalizability of the research, the large scale study




234 Public Understanding of Science 13 (3) reported in Cheskin Research (1999) suggest that teens of this type, which they categorize as

“Explorers,” are influential in peer selections among general-content and science Web sites.

Because this was an exploratory study, AP students in only one town were recruited, which again may limit the generalizability of the results, yet were chosen to serve as a basis for further research.

The focus groups ranged in length from 70–120 minutes, and were conducted in common areas that would make students comfortable interacting. Redundancy occurred before all interviews were completed (that is, respondents began repeating what others had said before them).

A semi-structured interview guide (see Appendix C for focus group question guide) was used to collect descriptive data covering four basic areas: general Web use habits and patterns (i.e., time spent, general Web sites most frequently visited, areas on sites most often accessed, etc.), Web use for classroom activities and assignments (i.e., use of Web sites for help with assignments, preferences, etc.), science Web use habits and patterns on science

Web sites (science Web sites most often visited, areas of science interest, etc.), and preferences in Web site usage (i.e., uses such as shopping, e-mail, chat rooms, instant messaging). The question guide was followed loosely as all focus groups addressed the majority of the questions before participants were asked by the focus group moderator.

Background information, such as age, classes taken, computer use in general, etc., was gathered as well.

Data collection and analysis occurred simultaneously; each focus group was transcribed and analyzed before subsequent focus groups were undertaken. Data were grouped into descriptive categories that were refined and developed until all data had been analyzed.

To ensure trustworthiness of the data, four of the original focus group participants served as member checks for analytic categories, interpretations and conclusions. Participants agreed with all results but fleshed out some of the analyses to provide thicker description.

4. Findings

Content analysis

Overall, both the science and non-science genres of teen Web sites contained several common elements. Aspects that improved Web sites included having a clear and specific purpose (for example, “MTV,” “Bad Astronomy,” “SOHO,” “Ask Dr. Math”), a clear audience (“Gurl,” “Amateur Astronomy,” “NASA Kids”), interactivity (“A Visual Interpretation of the Table of Elements,” “The PH Factor,” “Chembalancer”), clean, attractive, and clear layouts (“Exploration,” “Nobel E-Museum,” “The Learning Matters of Chemistry”), cool graphics and multimedia (“MTV,” “SOHO,” “Way Cool Surgery,” “Multimedia Extravaganza,” “MicroAngela”), and made science fun and/or exciting (“Salmon:

Spirit of the Land and Sea,” “The Periodic Table of Comic Books”).

Aspects that detracted from Web sites included lack of interactivity (at “A Chemical

Jigsaw Puzzle,” the surfer is supposed to print the page and then cut it with scissors!), using the Web as an extension of the printed page (i.e., little graphics or interactivity, such as the teacher’s lesson plan site “Food and Science” or “Scientific American”), an absence of a clear audience (“Reactive Reports”), and unattractive layouts, color, or design (“‘Do-ityourself’ instructions for making a model of the Hubble Space Telescope,” “Reactive

Reports”). In the sections that follow, we focus on specific ways Web sites make use of Web design tools for enhancing or detracting from the site.




Weigold & Treise: Attracting teens to science Web sites 235

As might be expected, given the aims and likely budgets for the sites, the non-science sites tended to make greater use of multimedia and the latest in Web-design technologies.

Front pages for the science sites tend to have fewer links and graphics, whereas the front pages of the non-science sites are often filled with links and tabs to locations within the site.

In many ways the front pages of the non-science sites act as mini-portals, directing teen traffic throughout the site. Front pages of the science sites, by contrast, tended to allocate more space to copy. This likely reflects at least two differences across these categories: as compared to science sites, non-science sites tend to have a broader focus (music and entertainment, lifestyles, health) and to have more dynamic content. The broader focus of non-science sites means that users come to the site with a great variety of interests and needs. Because of the extensive use of links, graphics, and tabs, visitors to the non-science sites can easily and quickly use the front page to locate relevant site content. The dynamic content encourages repeated usage and allows users to monitor breaking news and events.

Many of the science sites (but not all) are relatively static. Because these sites have more limited ambitions, the front pages have fewer links and graphics, and use copy to offer explanations for the purpose of the site and/or to give directions on how to use the site.

The differences between the science and non-science Web sites listed above are broad generalizations, and some sites from each category show characteristics of sites from the other. The differences listed are also not entirely due to differences in function: the budgets and the number of visitors to sites such as MTV dwarf most of the science sites included in this review (Mariano, 2001). Commercial sites such as MTV and Sonic.com are advertiser supported and are used to enhance interest in other commercial ventures such as the cable channels MTV and VH1.

There is one critical difference we noted between science-related and non-science Web sites: the extent to which content is user-created. Almost all of the successful teen sites encourage users to submit content to the site, either in the form of chats, message boards, stories, poems, listings, or diaries. Very little user content is present at the science-related sites.

Content elements

The majority of the science sites were directed to a larger kindergarten through high school audience, few were directed to teachers or to a larger parent, student and teacher audience. Overall, the most engaging sites directed to students are resource rich, having many links and much interactive content. Most have message boards, chat rooms, contests and games, surveys, downloads, question and answer sections, user profiles, interactive clubs, newsletters, polls and jokes. A few of the sites require the user to publish a review or story on the site to become a “member,” while others allow users to create videos to submit, or to “choose your own ending” stories.

As specified by the criteria listed above, the most effective science sites are written with fun for learning in mind. They are written on a level that is challenging and educational but still entertaining—speaking “to” the teen readers. They provide links for students to do homework, the capability to ask questions about homework, to learn about top science news story content, and contain games, quizzes and puzzles. Some allow students to share data.

Understandably, few have the option of communicating with scientists.

Conversely, the least effective sites seem not to contain much useful information in terms of education or are unclear in their educational purpose. For example, the Detroit

Observatory site primarily was devoted to the museum itself. Similarly, while informative, the Scientific American site appeared to be more concerned with enticing users to subscribe to the publication or to buy books than to educate.





Graphic elements

The majority of the front pages of these Web sites use extensive graphics including photographs, illustrations and clip art-type pictures and few typefaces.

The most common layout is four columns, dense with various information and links. Those sites designed to reach teens directly (as opposed to teachers) use non-distracting, contrasting colors and plenty of movement and so appeal to a teenager’s sense of fun. For example, almost the entire MTV site contained active links, colorful photos and drop-down menus for major headings. The best designed sites appear high tech and dense, but, in fact, are easy to navigate.

Conversely, those sites that appear to be least effective are visually boring, noninvolving, long on text containing few graphics, are not interactive, appear confusing, difficult to navigate and, based on graphics elements, are not consistent with their purpose.

Focus groups

A total of 23 students participated in the focus groups (three groups of four participants, one group of five and one group of six), 12 students were male, 11 students were female. The average age of the participants was 16

1

⁄

2 years old. Students in these focus groups spent an average of 3

1

⁄

2 hours daily on the Web. Of the 23 participants, 21 mostly accessed the Web from home, and 18 of the students shared computers with others; only five of the students therefore had their own computers in their rooms. All but two of the participants had their own homepage. Analysis of data proceeded around general research questions asked.

General Web use

In order of importance, the participants spend the majority of their computer time on e-mail, instant messaging, downloading music, playing games or reading about sports, weather, current events or news. Overall, the students suggested that they “love to be entertained” by the Web, they go to laugh and to escape. They strongly believe they are not accessing Web sites for learning purposes—not even to learn through comparison shopping. One group discussed at length how Web sites are “a form of entertainment media.” For example, one participant said, “It’s better than the movies! In fact, I don’t like to go and fight the crowds anymore. I download everything I want to do, read, see and hear.

I can escape a lot easier at home.” Another said, “I can stay home to do it all now. I don’t have to get dressed, play the games with my ‘friends’ or spend any money.” Of interest is that although students said they did not go to the Web specifically to learn, all 23 students talked extensively about things they had learned on the Web by linking from news stories they read.

Assignment Web use

Interestingly, for the most part, teachers do not ask students to use the Web for class assignments or project research. It is the rare classroom teacher that requires or suggests to students to use the Web for assignments according to our participants. Instead, students usually use encyclopedia Web sites or search engines to find needed information if they go to the Web at all. In other words, they do not type in specific

Web addresses other than those mentioned. Time and time again, across all focus groups, the students said they go to the Web only if the teacher directs them to a specific site or a specific topic area for an assignment.

One focus group discussed their shared belief that teachers think the Web is a “form of cheating.” As one student put it:

They worry about the Web. They think it makes it too easy for us. They want us to sit in the library like they did, learning how to use it [the library] and seeing what’s there.





I guess I can see their point. I suppose all of the stuff that’s already in books wouldn’t be on the Web and we’ll miss a bunch of stuff.

One other student mentioned another possible reason teachers might not ask them to go to the Web for assignments:

They think that we’ll go to sites that aren’t credible—then how can they argue with what we wrote? I don’t think they want to spend the time checking out the references

[sites] to see if they are written by a credible source or if the information is correct. I think they assume that if it appears in print it’s okay, but not on the Web. I’ve actually had teachers that won’t let us use information I’ve found on the Web.

Science sites Web use

An interesting contrast emerged when participants discussed their use of the Web to gather science information. While only three of the participants said they had ever “intentionally” gone to a science Web site, in fact, they all go to science sites in search of specific information. For example, 17 participants said they use the Web regularly for weather information and to learn about the weather. Additionally, all of the participants mentioned that they regularly link from news stories to science sites while reading interesting science-related news stories. Indeed, in three groups, participants talked about looking at Hubble pictures, and reading and linking from breaking science news stories, such as meteor showers and solar flares. The distinction in their minds seems to be that they do not type in the names of science sites; instead they eventually get to them through links.

Finally, while these students believe they do not go to science sites, participants in three groups said that if they run into difficult information that they do not understand when studying for AP science tests, they go to the Web to tutor themselves on a specific topic.

Indeed, 12 of the participants said they had sent links to friends who were also studying, and admitted they must have unknowingly been sending science sites as study guides.

None of the students believed they had ever intentionally gone to a NASA Web site.

However, seven of the students said they had tried from time to time but could not get to the site. Perhaps it was because they all said they were using a NASA.com address. Unfortunately, for the most part, these students were not interested in obtaining information about NASA, shuttle launches or the international space station. As one student related:

I don’t think that I really care because I don’t know the why’s. I have no idea why we have so many launches. I have no idea why it’s important to be on the space station. I don’t know why we are doing anything in space. It gets boring because I don’t understand. (emphasis in original)

Web site preferences

What keeps these students coming back to certain Web sites? What qualities are they looking for? In general, they return to sites that “have information presented in a fun way.” As one participant said, “I guess I am learning a ton of stuff on the

Web about all kinds of things. But I like it best when it’s disguised, in jokes or games.”

Across all focus groups, students list (in order of frequency) the following elements that make a particular site a favorite, based on either content or graphics:

●

Fun/entertainment features

●

Usefulness/functionality

●

Frequent updates

●

Ease of navigation

●

More graphics and fewer words on the front page





●

Eye-catching graphics (especially important for females)

●

Interactivity

What would these students like on a science site? The participants were a bit less effusive on this topic; they clearly were not as sure what would keep them coming back to a science site. However, all 23 agreed that “help with homework would be incredibly helpful

. . . I’d definitely come back to that site!” (emphasis in original). Many suggested that science-related games, “Bill Nye-ish type of stuff,” also would entice them to return to a site. Half of the participants said that a question and answer component of a science site would be useful, as well as “links to cool stuff to look at and do.” Yet another participant said, “I think X-Files type of stuff would be sooo cool.”

It is important to note that these students are very involved with Web sites and almost view them as companions or objects of ownership. For example, many of the participants referred to a favorite site as “my site,” or “my baby,” and were very defensive if another participant was critical of a site. Indeed, 11 of the participants had created content for Web sites and subsequently felt it became more personal. Independently, these students had created videos for the MTV site.

Interestingly, the students were very vocal about what they would not include on a science site. Fourteen of the students felt chat rooms would be useless. As one student said,

“I have no use for chat rooms, but message boards would be great.” Twenty of the students across all focus groups concurred. Additionally, all agreed that they would not be interested in information about scientists’ lives, but instead would be greatly interested in what they do and why.

Finally, all of the students said they go to Web sites if they are directed by friends or, in rare cases, teachers. Not one of the students was aware of where to go, other than search engines, to get specific information. In other words, they do not know the names or Web addresses of science sites.

5. Discussion

Summary and recommendations for attracting teenagers to science Web sites

Taken together, what do these two studies imply for those interested in attracting teens to science Web sites? We believe several themes have emerged from this research: teens seek entertainment, not education, from the Internet; teachers are the critical gatekeepers for science sites; science sites can be fun and still teach; and science sites can do things that no one else can.

Teens seek entertainment, not education, from the Internet

The current generation of teenagers has grown up with the Internet and considers it an essential medium for being entertained, monitoring social trends, and staying in touch with social contacts. The Internet allows teens to combine the best of the telephone, television, radio, and cinema into a single medium that they can access from their bedrooms. Small wonder then, that marketers view the Internet as a window to the elusive teen consumer. But evidence to date suggests that capturing the “share of mind” of teen Internet users is a more difficult enterprise than many once thought. Teens are savvy Internet users who have strong opinions about how to structure their online experiences. For example, while children under 13 are the group most likely to click on Web advertisements, teens are the least likely of all Internet users to do so

(Gately, 2000). And despite the hype surrounding Internet marketing, research suggests that




Weigold & Treise: Attracting teens to science Web sites 239 teens generally do not purchase things on the Internet. Rather, they continue to spend their billions in discretionary income at traditional retail outlets (Enos, 2000).

The evidence to date, from other research and from the studies reported here, suggests that teenagers use the Internet for fun and entertainment. The Internet is also used occasionally as a tool for completing school assignments, in large part because it is easier and quicker than traditional libraries or print resources (at least in the minds of teenagers).

We believe that this makes it unlikely that most teenagers, left to their own devices, will choose to become regular consumers of science Web sites, unless such sites can help them with school-related projects. It is possible that a small number of science-interested teens will frequent science sites, but the vast majority, unless provided with an incentive to do so, will not. It is probably not realistic that science Web sites will attract a substantial teen audience based solely on capturing teen surfers who are online in search of entertainment.

Although this conclusion may seem grim, we do not believe it means that science sites cannot attract a teen audience. Quite the contrary, we believe that science sites can be effective in drawing large numbers of teenagers. But to do so will require a partnership with the critical gatekeepers of educational use of the Internet: teachers.

Teachers are the critical gatekeepers for educational Internet use

While we believe that it is unrealistic that science (or other educational) sites will be successful in capturing a significant share of casual teen surfers on their own, we do believe that teens can be brought to such sites if they are encouraged, required or allowed to do so as a part of fulfilling academic requirements. In this regard, we consider school teachers to be a key mediator of the teen audience for science sites. While students pointed to peers as opinion leaders about interesting Web sites, it would seem that most of these recommendations would relate to entertainment sites, and would leave the opportunity for teachers to broaden that base to point students to equally interesting science education Web sites. The students in our focus groups and those included in other studies (Ebersol, 2000; Pappas, 2002) report regularly accessing science and other education sites in order to find help with school assignments or to complete homework. Teens consider the Web to be helpful for increasing their understanding of science-related topics, but also believe that teachers are ambivalent about this use. It was somewhat disappointing to hear our focus group respondents report that they are rarely given school assignments that explicitly involve using the Internet, particularly since the United States has spent billions of dollars in recent years to wire every school for the Web. We believe that there are some excellent opportunities for science site sponsors to work with teachers and develop sites that can complement school science curricula and enrich science and mathematics education.

Recommendations

We believe that the key to building a teen audience for many science

Web sites is to work with middle and high school science teachers and their schools. This partnership has great potential for both parties, as well as for teens. For Web sites, science teachers can significantly increase teen traffic, making Internet use a part of the science curriculum. To paraphrase a famous movie quote, “If they require it, they will come.” While teens show little inclination to access science sites during casual surfing, they are happy and willing to use the Internet for research and academic uses when they are directed or required to do so.

For science teachers, curriculum-friendly Web sites offer a low-cost supplement to textbooks, library resources, and labs. Web sites can reinforce important lessons and provide background materials, movies, photographs, maps and charts that supplement texts and lectures. As we detail below, Web sites might even provide essential simulation tools that




240 Public Understanding of Science 13 (3) significantly enrich the learning of science and that motivate students to seek out science information on their own.

In fact this pairing seems so logical it raises the question of why it isn’t already happening. Our content analysis offers some insights. Many science sites are already student- and teacher-friendly. But for the typical high school science teacher, finding ways to incorporate the Web into a class can be daunting. Some sites have an extremely narrow focus, others are quite broad. Some offer teacher lesson plans, while others seem to ignore teachers and students altogether. It is clear that some of the sites we examined wish to see teachers reference the site in their classes, but almost none of the sites appear to have been designed from the ground-up to specifically complement a standardized science curriculum, either in general science or in a specialty area such as astronomy or chemistry. We believe that such an integration requires that a Web site developer work hand-in-hand with science teachers and school systems to build a site that complements a standard middle or high school science course. Such a site would “fill in the gaps” from the classroom or textbook and would offer students a way to experience science in a more immediate and realistic way.

We elaborate on strategies for building such a partnership in our recommendations for future research below.

Science sites can be fun and still teach

Our focus group respondents were unanimous in wanting Web sites to be fun, engaging, and interesting. However, our content analysis of science Web sites found quite a bit of diversity in such sites with respect to these dimensions. To be fair, not all of the science sites we reviewed were exclusively concerned with teens. Some included teens as only a part of their desired audience, while others seem relatively unconcerned with attracting teen visitors. In addition, many science Web site creators may believe that creating a “fun” site engenders the risk of dumbing-down content to an unacceptable degree.

Recommendations

There is much that can be done to enhance science Web sites for teens.

Some of our recommendations are relatively easy and inexpensive. Others require a substantially greater commitment of time, talent, and resources.

Making a Web site more attractive to teens includes matters of both style and structure.

Issues of style are actually quite challenging when applied to teens. Teens are “tweeners,” caught in the difficult years between childhood and adulthood. They are notoriously fickle, and the trends, styles, fashions, music, entertainment, and issues that are important to them today are almost guaranteed to be irrelevant in a few months. Marketers spend hundreds of millions of dollars searching for just the right way to address teens in their advertising efforts and inevitably face frustration when such efforts are ineffectual. Our content analysis suggests that popular teen Web sites have found a clever, low-cost way to provide teens with interesting, current, and relevant content: let teens create the content. A clear difference that emerged between the non-science and science sites was the extent to which the former made use of teen-created content and the latter did not. Teens enjoy reading the words of other teens, and especially love reading their own words. Science sites often seem to be created solely by “experts,” perhaps reflecting the educational mission of most of these sites.

However, allowing student “experts” to create content (with appropriate editing and factchecking by science experts) is an easy way to liven up the copy and content of a science site. At the very least, science sites that target teens may wish to bring together an editorial panel of teens to review articles posted at the Web site and to suggest topics for future articles. These teen editors might also run and regulate the discussions at message boards on the site.





Another style element favored by teens is making content relevant to what they can understand. Teens want to know how things fit together, how a science issue or project featured at a Web site fits into a broader problem. Our focus group participants remarked that they enjoy it when a site ties science to popular science fiction or to popular movies with a science or technology theme. This allows teens a frame of reference for understanding the purpose of science projects or experiments.

Yet another style issue follows from understanding the likely motives that teens might have for accessing a site. If the site is designed primarily for teen entertainment, then copy and tone should be fun, humorous, entertaining, short, and breezy. To the extent that a site is being accessed to complete homework assignments or school projects, it should be factual, complete, and extensively linked to related sites. Our respondents noted that they would like to see quizzes and surveys at science sites that would allow them to test their knowledge and offer their opinions.

Structurally, the less a Web site resembles a printed handout posted on a Web server, the better. Teens like to interact. Although our focus group participants believed that they were unlikely to use chat technologies at a science site, they do desire message boards where they can post thoughts, ask questions, offer opinions. They like navigation options that make it easy for them to locate interesting or fun content. If successful commercial sites are any guide, teens enjoy sites that are visually engaging, with graphics, movement, downloads, and extensive links. By and large the front pages of the commercial non-science sites were considerably denser and busier than those of the science sites. The commercial front pages appear to operate as mini-portals, allowing teens to quickly find content that interests them.

In addition, many of the non-science site front pages are customizable, allowing students to track artists, issues, or stories that they find particularly compelling. This enhances the value of the site to a teenager because it makes it “their site” and a reflection of their interests. In addition, the front pages of the non-science sites are updated regularly, even daily. Teens know that accessing a favorite site regularly will be rewarded with fresh, current, and interesting content.

Science sites can do things that no one else can

What about more ambitious (and expensive) strategies for increasing teen traffic? It has been remarked that new media tend to resemble their predecessors until content providers begin to fully understand the powers and capabilities that these new media provide. Thus, online newspapers look a great deal like the print versions and Web advertisements look a lot like print advertisements. We found this holds true for many science Web sites. A large number of them could easily be transferred to the printed page without losing any of their significance or appeal. This is not to diminish the content or quality of the sites, merely to argue that at present many have not harnessed the full powers of the Internet. We believe that science Web sites can be enriched and enlivened without compromising their educational benefits if they seek to take advantage of the unique possibilities that computer and Internet technologies afford.

Recommendations

Among the most popular computer/Internet applications are games/ simulations. Simulations permit users to participate in an artificial environment in which outcomes occur as a function of rules and requirements unique to the simulation. These simulations become games when a user can compete against a standard, either the scores of others, the previous scores of the user him/herself, or a computer opponent. Such simulations are immensely popular, experiencing double-digit growth rates and accounting for over $4 billion in annual sales across all gaming platforms (Veronis Suhler Stevenson,





2000). Games and simulations allow users to experience almost anything, including running large corporations or even nations, commanding armies both contemporary and historical, managing sports teams and professional athletes, etc. And while many of the most popular titles emphasize fun, there have been several successful simulations with considerable educational value, including the popular SimCity series.

SimCity is a simulation that puts the user in the position of urban planner. By modeling hundreds of real-world variables, the simulation allows users to experience the thrills and difficulties inherent in building a city from the ground up. A byproduct of the experience

(besides hours of fun game play) is a significant increase in understanding of the factors that hinder or facilitate a city’s growth and health. The simulation also allows users to understand the interactive nature of decisions (i.e., raising taxes can increase city coffers for projects but also alienates unhappy taxpayers!).

We believe that science organizations should consider making greater use of simulations at their Web sites. Appropriately constructed, documented, and targeted, simulations can provide teens with inexpensive yet sophisticated “laboratories,” in which to be participants in discovering the wonders of science. Rather than read about microgravity experiments, teens might visit NASA’s Web site to use a microgravity simulator in which they could design their own experiments to grow crystals or observe changes in life forms over a period of time. Or perhaps a simulation could be designed for launching a manned expedition to Mars, or for developing a manned site on the moon. Students could be encouraged to do background research in order to develop plausible hypotheses about their experiments. Making the outcomes of the simulations significant (i.e., allowing for teachers to rate student performance on the simulations) might motivate students to learn as much as they could about the simulated topic beforehand.

Putting the simulations on the Internet rather than delivering them as stand-alone computer programs would also provide important benefits. Almost all commercial software games and simulations, whatever the platform, are moving to the Internet. The excitement and enjoyment created by the simulations is significantly enhanced when the process is available to hundreds or even thousands of other real-life participants scattered across the country. Making science simulations available online could enhance collaboration among students of different schools, districts, or even countries. It might even foster friendly competition when simulations could be structured so that schools could compete in designing theory-based experiments.

Educators have already acknowledged the value of simulation as a classroom tool. For example, Mayer (1992) argues for “helping students to model the process by which an expert thinks about solving scientific, mathematical, or programming problems” and

Champagne (1992: 126) notes that “. . . active engagement by the learner in authentic or real-world tasks facilitates the development of thinking skills”. These have long been important reasons why schools have incorporated laboratory components into the teaching of science. Web-based simulations would allow schools to offer many of the same benefits offered by labs at a fraction of the cost (or for free). In addition, Web simulations could allow students to model processes that are not feasible in high school labs, such as those described above.

At present very few science sites make extensive use of simulations. And while some excellent ones exist, they fall far short of what we have proposed for allowing extensive teacher involvement and Web-based collaboration (cf. www.explorescience.com/activities for some elegant but modest simulations that take advantage of Macromedia’s Shockwave).





Future research: enhancing the value of science Web sites for teens

We believe that future research can most profitably be focused on building a collaboration between science organizations such as NASA and schools. As mentioned in the report, we believe that such a relationship holds great value for both partners. The logical next step in this research program is to conduct qualitative research with school teachers and with Web personnel at NASA.

As a first step, award-winning science teachers across the United States could be interviewed either in person or by telephone. Teachers would be notified well in advance of the interview that the purpose of the research is to identify ways that NASA can make its

Web site more useful for the teaching of middle and high school science. At a larger level, such research would serve as a feasibility study for a Web-based partnership between schools and NASA. Teachers would be encouraged to offer ideas and suggestions for how a portion of NASA’s site could evolve to serve their needs. The researchers would stress the value of “thinking big” rather than worrying about technological or budgetary restrictions.

All ideas ranging from small modifications to large and ambitious projects would be encouraged.

As a second step, we would present these ideas to Web developers at NASA in order to determine the feasibility and budgetary requirements necessary for fulfilling part or all of the teacher-inspired initiatives. Here the practical issues of time, energy, talent, and budget would be paramount. Web developers would be challenged to respond to the spirit of the teacher-inspired suggestions and to offer their own thoughts on meeting the spirit if not the letter of the recommendations.

The suggestions of the Web developers could then be summarized in a document that could be presented to the teachers for a final reaction. At this point, we would be interested in knowing whether teachers would actually use NASA’s site in a significant way if the proposed changes were implemented.

Acknowledgements

We wish to acknowledge Ron Koczor at NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center and his entire science communication operation.

Appendix A: Web site content analyzed for the study

Non-science Web sites

MTV (site affiliated with popular teen cable network): http://www.mtv.com/

Sonicnet (music site affiliated with MTV and VH1): http://www.sonicnet.com/home/ index.jhtml

IGN (focuses on computer games): http://www.ign.com/

Smartgirl (teen lifestyle site for girls): http://www.smartgirl.com/

Alloy (teen lifestyle site for girls): http://www.alloy.com/

Bolt (lifestyle site for both boys and girls): http://www.bolt.com/

Pogo (board game rather than computer game) site: http://www01.pogo.com/ index.jsp?sls = 2

Gurl (lifestyle site for teen girls): http://www.gurl.com

Dr. Drew (health advice for teens): http://www.drdrew.com/

Headbone (lifestyle site for kids and teens): http://www.headbone.com/





Science and education Web sites

Exploratorium: 10 cool sites for astronomy http://www.exploratorium.edu/learning_studio/ cool/astronomy.html

NASA Kids: http://kids.msfc.nasa.gov/

SOHO: Exploring the sun: http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/

Sun Gun: http://america.net/ ~ boo/html/sun_gun.html

Detroit Observatory: http://www.detroitobservatory.umich.edu/VirtualTour.html

Instructions for making a model of the Hubble Telescope: http://sol.stsci.edu/

%7Emutchler/HSTmodel.html

Amateur Astronomy: http://www.iolaks.com/softech/astro/astro.htm

Bad Astronomy: http://www.badastronomy.com/

Canadians in Space: http://merlin.bethune.yorku.ca/trek/csa/sts-97.html

Dr. Strous’ Answer Book: http://louis.lmsal.com/PR/answerbook.html

Exploring planets in the classroom: http://www.spacegrant.hawaii.edu/class_acts/ index.html

Exploratorium: Cool sites for chemistry http://www.exploratorium.edu/learning_studio/cool/ chemistry.html

A Chemical Jigsaw Puzzle: http://www.harmsy.freeuk.com/jig/index.html

Food and Science: http://www.uen.org/utahlink/lp_res/nutri375.html

The Periodic Table of Comic Books: http://www.uky.edu/Projects/Chemcomics/

The PH Factor: http://www.miamisci.org/ph/

Chembalancer: http://www.dun.org/sulan/chembalancer/

Reactive Reports: http://www.acdlabs.com/webzine/index.html

The Learning Matters of Chemistry: http://www.knowledgebydesign.com/tlmc/ tlmc.html

Simple, Common, and Interesting Molecules: http://www.recipnet.indiana.edu/ common/common.html

A Visual Interpretation of the Table of Elements: http://www.chemsoc.org/viselements/

Multimedia Extravaganza: http://www.molecules.com/movies.shtml

Exploratorium: Cool sites for general science http://www.exploratorium.edu/learning_ studio/cool/general.html

History of the Universe: http://www.historyoftheuniverse.com/

Nobel E-Museum: http://www.nobel.se/

Exploration: http://www.exploration.vanderbilt.edu/home.htm

Science Playwiths: http://members.ozemail.com.au/%7Emacinnis/scifun/index.htm

Fun Science Gallery: http://www.funsci.com/

The Reconstructors: http://reconstructors.rice.edu/

Scientific Explorations and Adventures with Paul Doherty: http://www.exo.net/

%7Epauld/index.html

Hunkin’s Experiments: http://www.hunkinsexperiments.com/

Tryscience Experiments: http://www.tryscience.org/experiments.html

Building Big: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/buildingbig/

Exploratorium: Cool sites for life sciences http://www.exploratorium.edu/learning_studio/ cool/life.html

Way Cool Surgery: http://www.waycoolsurgery.com/

BOS USA: http://www.orangutan.com/index.htm





Artificial Anatomy: papier-mache anatomical models: http://americanhistory.si.edu/ anatomy/

Salmon: Spirit of Land and Sea: http://www.oneworldjourneys.com/salmon/

MicroAngela’s Electron Microscope Image Gallery: http://www.pbrc.hawaii.edu/bemf/ microangela/index.html

The Horseshoe Crab: http://www.horseshoecrab.org/

Willo: The Dinosaur with a Heart: http://www.dinoheart.org/

DNA from the Beginning: http://www.dnaftb.org/dnaftb/

E-Zoo Videos: http://www.sandiegozoo.com/virtualzoo/videos/index.html

Madagascar: Biodiversity and Conservation: http://ridgwaydb.mobot.org/mobot/ madagascar/default.asp

Additional science sites

Discovery School: http://school.discovery.com/students/

Schools Online Science: http://www.shu.ac.uk/schools/sci/sol/contents.htm

Scientific American: http://www.sciam.com/

Suremath: http://www2.hawaii.edu/suremath/intro_algebra.html

Ask Dr. Math: http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/drmath.high.html

Science Links (AAAS): http://www.sciencenetlinks.com/

Appendix B: Content analysis protocol: coding sheet for Web site content analysis

Address of Web site:

Number of pages:

First impressions

What are your overall first impressions of the Web site as you open it? Describe the Web site:

List the authorship of the Web site.

What is the date of the last update of the Web site?

Front page—visual

1—Does the page use colors? Yes h

No h

2—How many colors?

3—Presence of photographs? Yes h

No h

How many?

Description:

4—Presence of graphics?

Yes h

No h

How many?

Description:

5—Number of fonts used?

6—Movement on site? (excluding advertising) Yes h

No h





Description:

7—Is the front page on one page? Yes h

No h

8—Describe the layout:

Front page—content

9—Are there links to other sites provided? Yes h

No h

How many?

Links to what?

10—How would you categorize the purpose of the content?

Entertainment h

Educational h

Shopping h

News h

Web page creation h

Other:

11—How would you categorize the content?

Fiction

Poetry

Chat

User content

12—Are there interactive activities on the Web site? Yes h

No h

Description:

Science Web sites only

13—What are the science subject areas on the Web site?

14—What types of stories are found on the Web site?

15—To what grade level does this Web site appear to be aimed?

16—What degree of science literacy is assumed on this Web site?

17—Is there a way to contact a person? Yes h

No h

18—Is there a way to contact a person for help with projects? Yes h

No h

19—Is there a way to contact a person for help with homework? Yes h

No h

20—Is there evidence on the site that creators work with schools? Yes h

No h

How?

21—Is there a mechanism for the viewer to create content? Yes h

No h

Description:

22—How accurate is the information?

References

AOL Digital Marketing Services (2002) “Moms Wired” [online]. Available: http://www.dmsdallas.com/ momwired0204.pdf





Angleman, S. D. (2001) “Uses and Gratifications and Internet Profiles: A Factor Analysis.” Paper presented at the

Annual Meeting of the Western Science Social Association, Reno, NV, April [online]. Available: http:/

/www.jrily.com/LiteraryIllusions/InternetGratificationStudyIndex.html£StudyIndex.

Belch, G. E. and Belch, M. A. (2001) Advertising and Promotion: An Integrated Marketing Communications

Perspective. Boston: McGraw-Hill Irwin.

Center for Media Education (2000) “TeenSites.com: A Field Guide to the New Digital Landscape” [online].

Available: http://www.cme.org/teenstudy/index.html

Champagne, A. B. (1992) “Cognitive Research on Thinking in Academic Science and Mathematics: Implications for Practice and Policy,” in D. F. Halpern (ed.) Enhancing Thinking Skills in the Sciences and Mathematics, pp. 117–33. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cheskin Research (1999) “Teens and the Future of the Internet” [online]. Available: http://www.cheskin.com/think/ studies/netteens.html

CNN (2002) “Wanted: Math and Science Teachers” [online]. Available: http://fyi.cnn.com/2002/fyi/ teachers.ednews/07/31/teachers.needed.reut/index.html

Crane, V., Nicholson, H., Chen, M. and Bitgood, S. (1994) Informal Science Learning, What the Research Says

about Television, Science Museums and Community-based Projects. Dedham, MA: Research Communications, Ltd.

Ebersol, S. (2000) “Uses and Gratifications of the Web among Students,” Journal of Computer-Mediated

Communication 6 [online]. Available: http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol6/issue1/ebersole.html

Enos, L. (2000) “Kids Surf Online, Spend Offline,” E-Commerce Times [online]. Available: http://www.

newsfactor.com/perl/story/4272.html

Ferguson, D. and Perse, E. (2000) “The World Wide Web as a Functional Alternative to Television,” Journal of

Broadcasting & Electronic Media 44: 155–74.

Finn, S. (1997) “Origins of Media Exposure,” Communication Research 24: 507–29.

Gately, G. (2000) “Kids Click Web Ads Most,” E-Commerce Times [online]. Available: http://www.

ecommercetimes.com/perl/story/4029.html

Halpern, D. F. (1992) “A Cognitive Approach to Improving Thinking Skills in the Sciences and Mathematics,” in

D. F. Halpern (ed.) Enhancing Thinking Skills in the Sciences and Mathematics, pp. 1–14. Hillsdale, NJ:

Erlbaum.

Jeffs, T. and Smith, M. (1990) “Using Informal Education,” in T. Jeffs and M. Smith (eds) Using Informal

Education: An Alternative to Casework, Teaching, and Control, pp. 1–24. Philadelphia: Open University

Press.

Johnson, C. C. (1996) “World-Wide Web Sites for the Dissemination of Science to the Public: A Classification into

Three Types,” Science Communication 18: 80–87.

Katz, E., Blumler, J. and Gurevitch, M. (1974) “Uses of Mass Communication by the Individual,” in W. P.

Davidson and F. Yu (eds) Mass Communication Research: Major Issues and Future Directions, pp. 11–35.

New York: Praeger.

Mariano, G. (2001) “MTV Brings Web Efforts Up-to-date” [online]. Available: http://news.com.com/

2100–1023–254847.html

Marketing to kids, tweens & teens (2002). Advertising Age 73(4 February): S1–6

Markus, H. and Nurius, P. (1986) “Possible Selves,” American Psychologist 41: 954–69.

Markus, H. and Ruvolo, A. (1989) “Possible Selves: Personalized Representations of Goals,” in L. A. Pervin (ed.)

Goal Concepts in Personality and Social Psychology, pp. 211–41. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Mayer, R. E. (1992) “Teaching of Thinking Skills in the Sciences and Mathematics,” in D. F. Halpern (ed.)

Enhancing Thinking Skills in the Sciences and Mathematics, pp. 95–116 . Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

McQuail, D. (1985) “Sociology of Mass Communication,” in R. H. Turner and J. F. Short (eds.) Annual Review of

Sociology, pp. 93–111. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews Inc.

Media Metrix (2003) “Superior Methodology Delivers Unparalleled Insight” [online]. Available: http:/

/www.comscore.com/metrix/xpc.asp

Mitretek Systems (1999) “Criteria for Assessing the Quality of Health Information on the Internet” [online].

Available: http://hitiweb.mitretek.org/docs/policy.html

Neff, J. (2001) “P&G Targets Teens via Tremor, Toejam Sites,” Advertising Age 72(5 March): 12.

Netfrog (2002) “Netfrog: The Digital Dissection” [online]. Available: http://curry.edschool.virginia.edu/go/frog/

Palmgreen, P. and Rayburn, J. D. (1982) “Gratifications Sought and Media Exposure: An Expectancy Value

Model,” Communication Research 9: 561–80.

Papacharissi, Z. and Rubin, A. (2000) “Predictors of Internet Use,” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media

44: 175–96.

Pappas, C. (2002) “How Wired Volunteers Track ‘Cool’ in America,” Advertising Age (May 20): 8.





Pastore, M. (2000) “Young Consumers Shy Away from E-commerce,” CyberAtlas [online]. Available: http:/

/www.cyberatlas.Internet.com/big_picture/demographics/print/0,,5901_386591,00.html

Rubin, A. M. (1981) “An Examination of Television Viewing Motivations,” Communication Research 5:

109–20.

Shimp, T. A. (2003) Advertising, Promotion, and Supplemental Aspects of Integrated Marketing Communications.

Mason, OH: Southwestern.

Tressel, G. (1988) “A Rationale,” in M. Druger (ed.) Science for the Fun of it: A Guide to Informal Science

Education, pp. 1–23. Washington: National Science Teachers Association.

Veronis Suhler Stevenson (2000) “Industry Segment Performance” [online]. Available: http://www.

veronissuhler.com/filmed/segment.html

Wells, W. D., Burnett, J. and Moriarty, S. (2003) Advertising. Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Yahoo! (2003) “Yahoo! and Carat Unveil Research Results Showing Teens are Truly ‘Born to Be Wired”’ [online].

Available: http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/030724/245198_1.html

Authors

Michael F. Weigold is an Associate Professor in the Department of Advertising, University of Florida. He teaches courses in persuasion and science policy and his research interests include health and science communication. Address: 2018 Weimer Hall, Box 118400,

College of Journalism and Communications, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL

32611-8400, USA. Tel: (1) 352 392 8199. E-mail: mweigold@jou.ufl.edu

Debbie Treise is a professor and Associate Dean of Graduate Studies in the College of

Journalism and Communications at the University of Florida. She teaches seminars in science communication and doctoral qualitative methods. Her research centers on science and health communication. Address: 2012 Weimer Hall, College of Journalism and

Communications, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-8400, USA. Tel: (1) 353 392

6557. E-mail: dtreise@jou.ufl.edu




Public Understanding of Science

Public Understanding of Science http://pus.sagepub.com

Attracting Teen Surfers to Science Web Sites

Michael F. Weigold and Debbie Treise

Public Understanding of Science 2004; 13; 229

DOI: 10.1177/0963662504045504

The online version of this article can be found at:

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

Attracting teen surfers to science Web sites

Process

Focus groups

Content elements

Graphic elements

General Web use

Assignment Web use

Science sites Web use

Web site preferences

Teens seek entertainment, not education, from the Internet

Teachers are the critical gatekeepers for educational Internet use

Recommendations

Science sites can be fun and still teach

Recommendations

Science sites can do things that no one else can

Recommendations

Related documents

Products

Support

Public Understanding of Science

Public Understanding of Science http://pus.sagepub.com

Attracting Teen Surfers to Science Web Sites

Michael F. Weigold and Debbie Treise

Public Understanding of Science 2004; 13; 229

DOI: 10.1177/0963662504045504

The online version of this article can be found at:

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

Attracting teen surfers to science Web sites

Process

Focus groups

Content elements

Graphic elements

General Web use

Assignment Web use

Science sites Web use

Web site preferences

Teens seek entertainment, not education, from the Internet

Teachers are the critical gatekeepers for educational Internet use

Recommendations

Science sites can be fun and still teach

Recommendations

Science sites can do things that no one else can

Recommendations

Related documents

Add this document to collection(s)

Add this document to saved

Suggest us how to improve StudyLib