Studying Children's Informal STEM Learning in Times of Social Distancing

• In Event: Informal Learning Is Not Canceled: Research and Program Implementation During a Global Pandemic

Abstract

Objectives and Theoretical Framing
In 2020, as mentors and researchers lost direct access to informal learning environments, we faced the challenge of transforming not only our work with communities but where we look for evidence of learning. In this proposal, I describe the methodological changes that I have made to three existing ILE research projects designed for PreK- elementary-aged children - an after school, project-based Maker program; a family math learning project with diverse families; and an environmental stewardship program for preschoolers (Table 1). I adopt a sociocultural, situated, and ecological view of learning (Greeno, 1998; Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Rogoff, 1994) and emphasize the process, and not just the outcome of learning.

Methodology
I adopt an autoethnographic approach to record my experience of working with 72 children in three groups. Throughout the summer, I collected artifacts, recorded my observations, and conducted and recorded video interviews with participants as parts of gaining an in-depth understanding of informal learning at home as a specific culture (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2009). I analyzed these resources as the “other” (Genzuk, 2003) to study the contrast between the affordances of studying socially distanced ILE and my previous experiences of business-as-usual ILE. Overall, I address one key question, what are some ways in which social distancing has affected children’s informal STEM learning?

Findings
Resources used: Throughout these three studies, I found children to use resources that they were familiar with. In the after-school Maker workshop, children regularly used new technologies and tools to work on projects, but the absence of specialized tools did not stop children from expressing their ideas. They employed tools of inquiry that they had learned from their time at the workshop after school in craft-like projects. Family math participants relied on online video resources more while working on online homework and switched back and forth between school math and everyday math. Preschoolers continued to look for evidence of camouflaging and habitat in animals that we had not talked about in the program. Overall, children found ways to bring learning to their everyday lives.

Participation: Extended time at home with family was a unique opportunity for all participants. Children preferred to work with siblings and parents, often assuming the role of a teacher when describing ideas and concepts to an audience. Most of these children found ways to apply their learning to their lives taking on roles of facilitators and teachers.

Support: Most children sought support from within their family network. During interviews, children described in depth not just what they worked on, but also how they worked on their projects and who they worked with. Most children relied on YouTube as a resource for learning and in fact, learned how to conduct a better search for resources on YouTube and using assistive technologies. Parents’ participation in their children’s learning was varied as well.

Implications
These findings suggest that home as an informal learning environment has unique affordances for children’s identity, use of inquiry skills, and families as communities of learning practices.

Author

• Priyanka Parekh, Northern Arizona University