NAVET's Boxes - an Evaluation of the Post-Visit Loan Service at a Science Centre in Borås

Many pedagogues believe science centres to be a good complement to the more formal school teaching. For a visit to a science centre to be as educational as possible, there is a need for pre-visit information of some sort, a guided visit, and post-visit work. Many science centres offer loan services of different kinds. At Navet, a science centre in Borås, teachers can borrow boxes with experiments connected to the different themes they provide. The experiments are supposed to be a continuation of the visit and help settle the knowledge gained during the visit. This thesis is an evaluation of how the boxes function in the schools, and what the teachers think of them. The study was conducted through questionnaires and interviews with both teachers and the staff at Navet. The results of the study are very positive. Many teachers have been involved with Navet from the very beginning and they see a visit to Navet as an integrated part of their teaching. Some boxes work better than others and some might need clearer information, but overall the teachers see the boxes as timesavers, as a way to vary their teaching more easily, and as a help for teachers not specialized in mathematics and science.

An Evaluation of”Middle Ages Dead or Live?”The first interactive exhibition at the National Museum of History

This is a study conducted at, and for, the National Museum of History in Stockholm. The aim of the study was to confirm or disconfirm the hypothesis that visitors in a traditional museum environment might not take part in interactivity in an interactive exhibition. And if they do the visitors might skip the texts and objects on display. To answer this and other questions a multiple method was used. Both non participant observations and exit interviews were conducted. After a description of the interactive exhibits, theory of knowledge and learning is presented before the gathered data is presented. All together 443 visitors were observed. In the observations the visitors were timed on how much time they spent in the room, the time spent on the interactivity, texts and objects. In the 40 interviews information about visitors’ participation in the interactivity was gathered. What interactivity the visitor found easiest, hardest, funniest and most boring.The result did not confirm the hypothesis. All kinds of visitors, children and adults, participated in the interactivities. The visitors took part in the texts and objects and the interactive exhibits.