Most free-choice science learning institutions, in particular science centers, zoos, aquariums, and natural history museums, define themselves as educational institutions. However, to what extent, and for which visitors, do these free-choice learning settings accomplish their educational mission? Answering this question has proven challenging, in large part because of the inherent variability of visitors to such settings. We hypothesize that the challenges of measuring free-choice science learning might be diminished if it were possible to pool populations during analysis in ways that reduced this variability. Specifically, we propose grouping learners according to their entering understanding and attitudes, using qualitative categories such as minimal, moderate, and extensive. In this article, we use data collected at the National Aquarium in Baltimore to determine whether grouping makes it possible to discern more readily the nature of changes in aquarium visitors' conservation knowledge and attitudes. Although analysis revealed that there were significant changes in both conservation knowledge and attitudes, entry to exit, for all 100 visitors studied, a more detailed analysis revealed that gains were not evenly distributed across all visitors. The results support the hypothesis that the grouping of learners into minimal, moderate, and extensive conservation knowledge and attitude categories enabled a more fine-grained and accurate understanding of changes in aquarium visitor's conservation learning. ß

This study at the National Aquarium in Baltimore (NAIB) was conducted to assess four key aspects of the visitor experience: (1) incoming conservation knowledge, attitudes, and behavior of NAIB visitors; (2) patterns of use and interaction with exhibition components throughout the NAIB; (3) exiting conservation knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of visitors; and (4) over time, how the NAIB experience altered or affected individuals' conservation knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors.Three hundred six visitors participated in the study, which was conducted from March through July, 1999. The study utilized four data‐collection techniques: (1) face‐to‐face interviews, (2) Personal Meaning Mapping (PMM), (3) tracking, and (4) follow‐up telephone interviews. Participants were a self‐selected population and were generally more knowledgeable about, more concerned about, and more involved in conservation‐related issues than the general public. However, they were far from conservationists. Visitors in this study clearly absorbed the fundamental conservation message at the NAIB. In fact, the NAIB visit appeared to focus visitors' conservation‐related thoughts, while also broadening their understanding of conservation.Changes in visitors' conservation knowledge, understanding, and interests by and large persisted over six to eight weeks after visiting NAIB. The NAIB experience also connected to visitors' lives in a variety of ways following their visit. However, these personal experiences rarely resulted in new conservation actions. In fact, their enthusiasm and emotional commitment to conservation (inspired during the NAIB visit) generally fell back to original levels, presumably in the absence of reinforcing experiences. The findings of this study are guiding subsequent investigations at the NAIB. More generally, the results suggest strategies to enhance current understanding of the impact free‐choice learning institutions have on their visiting public.

Over the last 10 to 15 years, zoos and aquariums have set out to influence visitors' conservation-related knowledge, attitudes, affect, and behavior. In 2000, the Institute for Learning Innovation collaborated with Disney's Animal Kingdom (DAK) on a comprehensive baseline study conducted to assess the outcomes of a DAK experience on visitors in four areas: knowledge, attitudes, affect, and behavior. This article describes one aspect of the comprehensive study: an investigation of the long-term (two-to-three-month) impact of a visit to Conservation Station at Disney's Animal Kingdom on visitors' intended conservation action. The study used a behavior change model from the health arena: the Prochaska Model of Behavioral Change. The model proved helpful but had some drawbacks, suggesting the need to develop a more sensitive change model. The implications of this study could assist institutions in thinking about what audiences or messages to emphasize in order to influence behavior.