Multiple reasons shape how young people and families choose to participate in informal learning programs at museums and other settings. Youth interest is likely a factor, but so might be geographic proximity, institutional affiliation, household income, and race/ethnicity. We examined the relative impact of these factors through a comparative study of two art programs; one a small, neighborhood-based organization focused on art and STEM, and the other a program in a well-established art museum. The smaller program tended to draw youth from closer geographic proximity. Interest in art drove attendance at both programs, but institutional membership was also important. Demographic factors also were a factor, and race/ethnicity was more strongly associated with program placement than household income. We discuss the importance of better understanding of such factors as museums and other programs continue to grow as important sites for learning.

How is a child's successful participation in science learning shaped by their family's support? We focus on the critical time period of early adolescents, testing (i) whether the child's perception of family support is important for both choice preferences to participate in optional learning experiences and engagement during science learning, and (ii) whether the effects on choice preferences and engagement are mediated through effects on child interest and self-efficacy in science. Structural equation modeling is applied to data from two different contexts, one examining engagement during a science and technology center visit and the other examining engagement and learning during classroom instruction. Models from both datasets suggest that early adolescents' perceived family support for learning is associated with their choices for and engagement in science learning, and that these effects are mediated by effects on child interest and self-efficacy in science. Further, children's family physical resources (e.g., available learning spaces and materials) predicts their perceived family support, but is not separately connected to either interest or self-efficacy. (c) 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 53: 450-472, 2016

Scientific literacy has many meanings: it can be thought of as foundational knowledge, foundational critical thinking skills, or the application of these two foundations to everyday decision making. Here, we examine the far transfer scenario: do increases in science education lead to everyday decision-making becoming more consistent with consensus scientific knowledge? We report on a large sample of employees of a mixed urban/rural county representing a diverse range of careers, who completed an anonymous survey about their environmental conservation actions at home, as well as their general education level and their science coursework. Across broad and narrow measures of science education, we find little impact on action. Possible causes of this failure of transfer and the implications for changes in science instruction are discussed.

Overall interest in science has been argued to drive learner participation and engagement. However, there are other important aspects of interest such as breadth of interest within a science domain (e.g., biology, earth science). We demonstrate that intensity of science interest is separable from topic breadth using surveys from a sample of 600 middle school students. We also show that these two dimensions contribute differently to learning-relevant behavioral tendencies. Specially, regression analyses show: (1) that intensity of interest predicts both self-reported science classroom engagement and preferences to participate in optional science learning; and (2) that breadth of interest predicts science choice preference, but not science classroom engagement. These findings have implications for the conceptualization of interest, the measurement of interest, and practical applications for educators.

Learners encounter science in a wide variety of contexts beyond the science classroom which collectively could be quite influential on student attitudes and abilities. But relatively little is known about the relative influence of different forms of informal science experiences, especially for the kinds of experiences that students typically access. We conduct factor and regression analyses on data collected from a large number of diverse public-school attending 6th and 8th graders drawn from two regions in the USA. Students completed a science reasoning measure and surveys of attitudes, previously completed informal science learning experiences, and demographic factors. Factor analyses identify four dimensions of informal science learning participation (in home, semiformal, nature, and museums). Regression analyses find a relative specificity of effects, with particular outcomes associated with a subset of the forms of informal science participation, highlighting the importance of controlling for correlated factors. There were also a few differences by grade level, with different experiences influencing the development of competency beliefs in science in early vs. late middle schoolers.

Cumulatively, participation in optional science learning experiences in school, after school, at home, and in the community may have a large impact on student interest in and knowledge of science. Therefore, interventions can have large long-term effects if they change student choice preferences for such optional science learning experiences. To be able to track K-12 students' intentions to participate in optional science learning experiences, we developed a new measure of science choice preferences in early adolescence. The present study with 284 5th and 894 6th graders from diverse school contexts (i.e., from the Bay Area and the Pittsburgh area) illustrates the value of applying Item Response Theory analyses to develop a measurement instrument. These analyses established the overall reliability of the instrument and each item in the scale, as well as the generalizability of the scale and individual items across subgroups by gender, by ethnicity, and by achievement levels in science. Further, preferences to participate in science were shown to be separate from preferences to participate in mathematics, engineering, or medicine. Finally, the science choice preferences measure is validated through replicated positive correlations with levels of science interest, self-efficacy, and learning achievement. (c) 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 52: 686-709, 2015.