Campo de entrada para las anotaciones que se guardarán con el punto

who have not yet visited the MOD , I estimated using the following model for student i:

(Model 1)

Awesomei = α + β1Ti + β2Gradei + β3Minorityi + β4Totalvisitsi + β5FRLi + εi

where Awesome is the student’s standardized percentage score on the Awesome Science

assessment, which consisted of six questions. T is a binary variable equal to 1 if the student is in the treatment group and visited the Museum of Discovery during a school field trip and attened the Awesome Science program, 0 otherwise. Grade indicates student i’s grade (3rd-8th) and is a vector of dummy variables. Minorityis a dummy variable of 0 if student i’s race is white or 1 if student i’s race/ethnicity is Hispanic, black, Asian, American Indian, or other. Totalvisits is the total number of visits to science centers by student i prior to the study. FRLis the percent of students on Free or Reduced Lunch at student i’s school. Lastly, ε, is a stochastic error clustered by the school group that student i came with to visit the science center.

To determine the difference in knowledge between students who visited the science center and attended the Arkansas Animals program and students who have not yet visited the MOD , I estimated using the following model for student i:

(Model 2)

where Animals is the student’s standardized percentage score on the Arkansas Animals -

assessment, which consisted of six questions. T is a binary variable equal to 1 if the student is in the treatment group and visited the Museum of Discovery during a school field trip and attended the Arkansas Animals program, 0 otherwise. Minority is a dummy variable of 0 if student i’s race is white or 1 if student i’s race/ethnicity is Hispanic, black, Asian, American Indian, or other. Totalvisits is the total number of visits to science centers by student i prior to the study. FRLis the percent of students on Free or Reduced Lunch at student i’s school. Lastly, ε, is a stochastic error clustered by the school group that student i came with to visit the science center. Student grade level was not included in this model because only students in grades 4th-6th attended the Arkansas Animals program.

To determine the overall impacts on students’ science knowledge regardless of program attended during a science center visit compared to the knowledge of students who had not yet visited the science center, I estimated using the following model for student i:

(Model 3)

Cognitivei = α + β1Ti + β2Gradei + β3Minorityi + β4Totalvisitsi + β5FRLi + β6Programi + εi

where Cognitive is the student’s standardized percentage score either on the Awesome Science assessment or Arkansas Animals assessment. Both surveys consisted of six questions. T is a binary variable equal to 1 if the student is in the treatment group and visited the Museum of Discovery during a school field trip and either attended the Arkansas Animals or Awesome Science program, 0 otherwise. Grade indicates student i’s grade (3rd-8th) and is a vector of dummy variables. Minority is a dummy variable of 0 if student i’s race is white or 1 if student i’s race/ethnicity is Hispanic, black, Asian, American Indian, or other. Totalvisits is the total

on Free or Reduced Lunch at student i’s school. Programis a dummy variable where 1 is if the program was Arkansas Animals or 0 if the program was Awesome Science. Lastly, εi, is a

stochastic error clustered by the school group that student i came with to visit the science center. Question 3: Affective and cognitive impacts for several student populations. To determine the impacts on different groups of students’ attitudes and knowledge after visiting a science center and attending an educational program compared to students of the same

subpopulation who had not yet visited the science center, I estimated using the following two models for student i:

(Model 1)

Affectiveij= α + β1Tij + β2Gradeij + β3Minorityij+ β4Totalvisitsj + β5FRLij + εi

(Model 2)

Cognitive ij= α + β1Tij + β2Gradeij + β3Minorityij+ β4Totalvisitsij + β5FRLij +

β6Programi + εi

where Affective is student i in subpopulation j’s standardized score on the Overall Affective Instrument. Cognitive is student i in subpopulation j’ standardized score on either the Awesome Science Assessment or the Arkansas Animals Assessment. I ran separate estimations for each sup-population, j. The subpopulations estimated were white students, minority students, girls, boys, students who were a first time visitor to a science center, and students who had previously visited q science center prior to the study. These regressions compared the subpopulation of interest in the control group with the subpopulation of interest in the treatment group.

If the subpopulation of interest is also a predictor variable such as minority, I did not include the predictor variable in that particular regression. The modified models were for white students and minority students which did not have the vector dummy variable for minority, and

first time and multiple time visitors which did not have the variable Totalvisits. T is a binary variable equal to 1 if a student is in the treatment group, in the population of interest, and visited the Museum of Discovery during a school field, 0 if a student is in the control group and the population of interest. Grade indicates student i’s grade (3rd-8th). Minorityis a dummy variable of 0 if student i’s race is white or 1 if student i’s race/ethnicity is Hispanic, black, Asian,

American Indian, or other. Totalvisitsis the total number of visits to science centers by student i prior to the study. FRLis the percent of students on Free or Reduced Lunch at student i’s school. Programis a dummy variable where 1 is for students who completed the Arkansas Animals Assessment or 0 if otherwise. Lastly, ε, is a stochastic error clustered by the school group that student i came with to visit the science center.

Preview of Chapter Four

In Chapter 4, I estimate the treatment effect for all five scales using ordinary least

squares. I also estimate the treatment effect for the subpopulations of interest: minority students, white students, girls, boys, first-time visitors, and multiple-time visitors. I follow the models outlined above for each regression.

Chapter 4: Affective and Cognitive Impacts from Visiting a Science Discovery Center which Included a Model of Direct Instruction

The study reported here used ordinary least squares to determine if students who visited the Museum of Discovery compared to students who had not yet visited the Museum of

Discovery on a school field trip showed a difference in content knowledge or attitudes based on the field trip experience. I evaluated these outcomes for the overall group and for minority students, white students, girls, boys, students who are visiting a science center for the first time, and students who have previously visited a science center. As stated in the chapters above, the three research questions are:

1.) After visiting a children’s discovery science center during a school field-trip, how do student’s attitudes regarding science centers and studying science differ from students who had not yet made such a visit? (see Table 4.1 below)

2.) After visiting a children’s discovery science center during a school field-trip, how do students’ science knowledge differ from students who had not yet made such a visit? (see Table 4.2 below)

3.) What impacts in attitudes or knowledge does the science center visit offer on certain sub-groups of students? Such populations include: white students, minority students, girls, boys, students who were a first time visitor to a science center, and students who have visited a science center/science museum

previously. (see Table 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5 below) Question 1: Affective Impacts

Table 4.1 provides the effect size and standard error for students who visited the MOD during a school field trip on the Overall Affective Instrument, Interest in Visiting Science

Centers/Museums Subscale, and Interest in Studying Science Subscale compared to students who had yet to visit the MOD on a school field trip.

Table 4.1

Impact of Visiting a Science Center on the Affective Domain

Ordinary Least Squares Estimations Overall Affective Instrument Interest in Studying Science Subscale Interest in Science Center Subscale Treatment 0.19*** 0.10 0.26*** (0.07) (0.07) (0.07) Number of Visits 0.05*** 0.04*** 0.05*** to Science Museums (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) School FRL % 0.002 0.003** 0.00 (0.001) (0.001) (0.00) 4th grade -0.10 -0.06 -0.14 (0.08) (0.09) (0.11) 5th grade -0.49*** -0.39*** -0.49*** (0.07) (0.09) (0.10) 6th grade -0.63*** -0.55*** -0.57*** (0.09) (0.12) (0.10) 7th grade -0.65 -0.61* -0.54 (0.38) (0.35) (0.35) 8th grade -0.70 -0.51 -0.78 (0.44) (0.33) (0.50) Minority Students -0.08 -0.04 -0.12** (0.05) (0.06) (0.05) N 1830 1830 1830

Each column represents a single regression. Effect sizes are in standard deviation. Grade levels were compared to 3rd grade students. Standard errors in parenthesis and are clustered to the group level (G=32) and p<0.01=***, p<0.05=**, and p<0.1=*, two-tailed.

Students who visited the MOD on average scored 19% of a standard deviation higher on the Overall Affective Inventory (p<0.05) than students who had not yet visited the MOD during a school field trip. Also students who visited during a school field trip were 26% of a standard

deviation more interested in visiting science centers in the future than students who had yet to visit during a school field trip. Also as students advanced to a higher grade level regardless of if the student was in the treatment or control groups, students became less and less interested in studying science and visiting science centers.

Question 2: Cognitive Impacts

Table 4.2 compares the effect size on the Combined Program Assessment, the Awesome Science Program Assessment, and the Arkansas Animals Program Assessment for students who visited the Museum of Discovery on a school field tip and attended either of these formal programs compared to students who had yet to visit.

Table 4.2

Impact of Visiting a Science Center on the Cognitive Domain

Ordinary Least Squares Estimations Overall Knowledge Assessment Awesome Science Assessment Arkansas Animals Assessment Treatment 0.21 0.22 0.34** (0.15) (0.14) 0.12) Number of Visits to 0.03** 0.02 0.05*** Science Museums (0.01) (0.02) (0.01) School FRL % 0.00 -0.00 -0.00 (0.00) (0.01) (0.00) Minority Student -0.35*** -0.47*** -0.20 (0.08) (0.11) (0.13) 4th grade 0.36** 0.28 (0.15) (0.18) 5th grade 0.45*** 0.48*** (0.10) (0.11) 6th grade 0.68*** 0.81*** (0.13) (0.06) 7th grade 1.01*** 1.02*** (0.29) (0.30) 8th grade 0.41** 0.41*** (0.15) (0.15) Arkansas Animals 0.08 Program (0.13) N 1350 915 435

Each column represents a single regression. Effect sizes are in standard deviation. Standard errors are in parenthesis and clustered to the group level (G=23 combined, G=17 Awesome Program, G=6 Animals Program) and p<0.01=***, p<0.05=**, and p<0.1=*, two-tailed.

Only students who visited the MOD during a field trip and attended the Arkansas Animals Program scored significantly higher (34% of a standard deviation) than students who had yet to visit the MOD during a field trip (p<0.05). Similar to the affective domain, for each additional visit to a science center, students scored 3% of a standard deviation higher on the

Also, as expected, students scored higher on the knowledge assessment for each advance in grade level. Finally, minority students scored significantly lower on the knowledge assessments (40% of a standard deviation) regardless of if the students visited the MOD and attended either program or not (p<0.01).