Developing an organizational framework for informal physics programs

Abstract

Characterizing the landscape of informal physics learning is a necessary and important endeavor that requires an in-depth study of the different types of existing programs. In this project we focus on informal programs sponsored by physics departments in academic institutes and physics national labs. We seek to understand the structural elements and cultural practices within the diverse array of informal physics spaces. Thus, we are developing a framework based on organizational theory that is contextualized for informal physics programs. We have collected data using survey and interview protocols for different informal physics activities. Here, we present an in-depth case study in which we have analyzed a "science cafe"-style event facilitated by volunteers from a physics and astronomy department. Applying organizational theory to the data set allows us to determine the fine-grained details of the program and the interconnections between the key elements of programming, personnel, resources, audience and institution. We further characterize and discuss the challenges the program faces from the facilitator's perspective. From these findings, we will be able to look at larger data sets in the national study.

Perspectives on informal programs: How site visits can help us learn more

“…Data analysis began with a single coder coding the fieldnotes and interview data in MAXQDA, using the thematic categories developed for the overarching landscape project: personnel, program, institution, resources, audience, and assessment [6]. In addition, the coder explored emergent subcodes and themes in just the field-note data, later discussing with the research team to consolidate into more concise labels.…”

“…To study some of these factors, we have already implemented and analyzed surveys and interviews with program facilitators. This study builds off our previous work that collected interviews/surveys about program logistics from the lead program facilitators [6]. From that work, broad organizational themes emerged as program, personnel, audience, resources, institution, and assessment, as well as finer sub-codes for each category.…”

“…First, two of the House Physics co-directors had participated in an earlier phase of the broader study and contributed interviews about House Physics. (In subsequent data collection, we split the single long-form interview into a combination of a survey and shorter interview) [6]. These interviews had been analyzed with a version of the organizational theory framework and a preliminary list of sub-codes were developed for each of the six main categories.…”

“…The landscape of informal physics learning environments is complex as programs can vary drastically in their structure, activities, contents, and engagement [6][7][8]. Due to the complexity and richness of the landscape, it is difficult to evaluate the functionality and effectiveness of the programs.…”

Challenges in study design for characterizing the informal physics landscape

“…The data collected are in the forms of surveys, interviews, and site visits, all of which will be used to create a taxonomy of informal program characteristics. In our complimentary proceedings paper, we present in depth analysis of one program, looking at the factors and challenges that are most salient to the program [1]. As our data set grows, our analysis will expand accordingly.…”