Parents’ Questions and Children’s Responses: Links to Engineering Learning during and after Museum Tinkering Activities

• In Event: Novel Perspectives on the Role of Adult Questions for Children’s Learning and Cognition

Abstract

Tinkering, a form of hands-on, playful problem-solving, has gained popularity in museums in recent years as a way to promote children’s engineering learning (Bevan, 2017; Cunningham & Lachapelle, 2014). Sociocultural theory highlights the importance of parent-child conversations for children’s learning (Vygostky, 1978), and previous museum research indicates that parent-child conversations during museum activities may support science and engineering learning (Benjamin et al., 2010; Callanan et al., 2017; Sobel & Jipson, 2016). In particular, memory literature suggests that parents’ open-ended questions and children’s responses may challenge children to think critically, evaluate their experiences, and organize their memories for better recall (Fivush et al., 2006; Leichtman et al., 2017). The two studies presented examine how parents’ questions and children’s responses relate to children’s engineering learning, as well as how different tinkering program goals may relate to families’ conversations.

The first study examined the post-tinkering reflections of 248 families with 6-11 year-old children. Some families participated in a function-focused tinkering program, called Make It Roll (n = 68), and other families participated in an open-ended tinkering program, called Woodshop Plus (n = 180). After tinkering, families video-recorded reflections in a nearby exhibit called Story Hub: The Mini Movie Memory Maker. Families’ reflections were transcribed and coded for parents’ use of open-ended questions (i.e., who, what, where, when, why, how), children’s responses, and families’ talk about engineering (e.g., setting goals, brainstorming, planning, testing, redesigning, mathematics). We found that children who responded to more of their parents’ open-ended questions also tended to talk more about engineering, r = .28, p < .001. Children responded to a greater proportion of adults’ questions in the Make It Roll program (M = 1.87, SD = 1.59), compared to the Woodshop Plus program (M = 1.35, SD = 1.00), F(1, 180) = 6.91, p < .01. Finally, families talked more about engineering in Make It Roll (M = 2.06, SD = 2.36) than in Woodshop Plus (M = .91, SD = 1.43), F(1, 246) = 21.60, p < .001.

The second study expanded upon these findings by examining how families’ questions and responses during tinkering related to children’s engineering talk during post-tinkering reflections. We examined the tinkering conversations of 49 families with 6-8 year old children. Video-recordings of families’ tinkering activities were coded for parents’ use of open-ended questions and children’s responses. After tinkering, families recorded reflections in Story Hub, and these reflections were transcribed and coded for talk about engineering. We found that children’s responsiveness to parents’ open-ended questions during tinkering was associated with more statements, r = .30, p < .05, and more engineering talk, r = .32, p < .05, during reflection.

Overall, these results point to the importance of parents’ use of questions, as well as children’s responses to these questions, to support children’s engineering learning both during and after tinkering. Further, we see that tinkering programs with function-focused goals may foster increased use of questions and engineering talk in post-tinkering reflections. Implications for parent-child interactions and museum practice will be discussed.

Authors

• Lauren C Pagano, Northwestern University
  Presenting Author

• Krista Smith, Loyola University Chicago
  Non-Presenting Author

• Diana I Acosta, University of California - Santa Cruz
  Non-Presenting Author

• David H. Uttal, Northwestern University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Catherine A. Haden, Loyola University Chicago
  Non-Presenting Author