Equitable Access to Informal Science Education Institutions
Science for all is a global educational pursuit; however, the realities in formal science education show that it is a goal still challenged by inequitable outcomes that are marked by gender, race/ethnicity, language, culture, and socioeconomic status. Whether these inequities persist in the informal settings still remained a question that is open for more investigation. This empirical study aims to examine the factors that relate to access to informal science education institutions. A representative sample of 1611 Taiwanese adults was asked if they have visited six popular informal science education institutions in the last 12 months. Nine factors related to travel distance, social demography, and scientific literacy, were included to explain the likelihood of visiting each institution. The findings showed that the travel distance, education, presence of children, interest in scientific issues, and attitudes toward these institutions were statistically significant predictors of visitation. The paper provides empirical and practical implications to help informal science educators and policy makers to ensure equitable access to these institutions for all.
KeywordsAccess Equity Informal science education Non-visitors Outreach Social inclusion
The work was supported by Taiwan’s Ministry of Science and Technology under Grant [NSC101-2511-S-110-008-MY3].
- Abell, S. K., Appleton, K., & Hanuscin, D. L. (2013). Science education and student diversity: Race/ethnicity, language, culture, and socioeconomic status. In Handbook of research on science education (pp. 185–212). Routledge.Google Scholar
- Analystcave. (2014). Excel: Calculate Google maps distance between two addresses. Retrieved from http://analystcave.com/excel-calculate-distances-between-addresses/.
- Atkinson, R., Siddall, K., & Mason, C. (2014). Experiments in Engagement: Engaging with young people from disadvantaged backgrounds. London: Wellcome Trust.Google Scholar
- Baker, D. R. (2016). Equity issues in science education. In Understanding Girls (pp. 127–160). Sense Publishers, Rotterdam.Google Scholar
- Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A. W., & Feder, M. A. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- Borun, M. (2008). Why family learning in museums? Exhibitionist, 27(1), 6–9.Google Scholar
- Borun, M., & Chambers, M. (1999). Gender roles in science museum learning. Visitor Studies Today, 3(3), 11–14.Google Scholar
- China Research Institute for Science Popularization (CRISP). (2008). Chinese public understanding of science and attitudes towards science and technology. Beijing: China Research Institute for Science Popularization.Google Scholar
- Dierking, L. D. (2014). Cascading influences: Long-term impacts of informal STEM experiences for girls. Paper presented at the 27th Annual Visitor Studies Association Conference, Albuquerque, New Mexico.Google Scholar
- Directorate-General of Budget, Association for Asian Studies, Executive Yuan, Taiwan. (2014). Overview of family income and expenditure. Retrieved from http://win.dgbas.gov.tw/fies/.
- European Commission. (2005). Special Eurobarometer 224: Europeans, Science and Technology. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
- Falk, M., & Katz-Gerro, T. (2015). Cultural participation in Europe: Can we identify common determinants? Journal of Cultural Economics, 40(2), 1–36.Google Scholar
- Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Garnett, R. (2002). The impact of science centers/museums on their surrounding communities: summary report. Retrieved from http://www.astc.org/resource/case/Impact_Study02.pdf.
- Google. (2016). The Google Maps geocoding API. Retrieved from https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/geocoding/intro#geocoding.
- Holland, D., Skinner, D., Lachiotte, W., Jr., & Cain, C. (2001). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Housen, A. (1987). Three methods for understanding museum audiences. Museum Studies Journal, 2(4), 41–49.Google Scholar
- Huang, T.-C. (2015). Technical report of the 2015 Taiwan public scientific literacy survey. Kaohsiung: Center for Promoting Civic Scientific Literacy.Google Scholar
- Ipsos MORI. (2014). Public attitudes to science 2014. London: Social Research Institute.Google Scholar
- Latham, K. F., & Simmons, J. E. (2014). Foundations of museum studies: Evolving systems of knowledge. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar
- Lawler, S. (2014). Identity: Sociological perspectives. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
- National Science Board. (2016). Science and engineering indicators 2016. Arlington, VA: National Science Board.Google Scholar
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2015). Education at a Glance 2015: OECD indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
- Pu, C.-C. (2013). The trend of the demographic characteristics of museum visitors: A case study of national science and technology museum. Technology Museum Review, 17(1), 27–59.Google Scholar
- Schuster, J. (1991). The audience for American art museums. Research Division Report# 23. Washington, DC: National Endowment for the Arts.Google Scholar
- The European Collaborative of Science, Industry and Technology Exhibitions. (2008). Inspiration, engagement and learning: The value of science and discovery centres in the UK, working towards a benchmarking framework. Retrieved from http://sciencecentres.org.uk/reports/downloads/inspiration-engagement-learning-the-value-of-science-discovery-centres-in-the-uk.pdf.
- Tourism Bureau Ministry of Transportation & Communition in Taiwan. (2014). Visitors to principal tourist spots in Taiwan by month. Retrieved December 29 2015 http://admin.taiwan.net.tw/statistics/year_en.aspx?no=15.