-
Title
-
Measuring Interactions in Nature Play Activities at the Hands On Children’s Museum
-
Date
-
2022 June
-
Creator
-
Zita, Anastasia
-
Identifier
-
Thesis_MES_2022Sp_ZitaA
-
extracted text
-
Measuring Interactions in Nature Play Activities at the Hands On Children’s Museum
By
Anastatia Zita
A Thesis
Submitted in partial fulfillment
Of the requirements for the degree
Master of Environmental Studies
The Evergreen State College
June 2022
©2022 by Anastatia Zita. All rights reserved.
This Thesis for the Master of Environmental Studies Degree
By
Anastatia Zita
Has been approved for
The Evergreen State College
By
___________________________
Kathleen Saul
Member of Faculty
June 10, 2022
_____________________
Date
ABSTRACT
Measuring Interactions in Nature Play Activities at the Hands On Children’s Museum
Anastatia Zita
The purpose of a children’s museum is to engage and excite children into learning and exploring.
Many museums bring knowledge and experiences to children who would not have these
opportunities otherwise. At the Hands On Children’s Museum they strive to bring exciting
science, technology, engineering, art, and mathematics (STEAM) learning to children through
their Nature Play activities. Through experiential play there is hope to instill environmental
awareness and environmental stewardship in the next generation. This thesis shows evidence that
the Hands On Children’s Museum’s Nature Play activities have the potential to create a positive,
lasting effect on children later in life that could lead to environmental citizenship.
Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1
The Purpose of Children’s Museums .......................................................................................... 3
Impacts of Experiential Environmental Learning ..................................................................... 4
Developing Environmental Stewardship .................................................................................... 6
Methodology .................................................................................................................................. 9
Engagement Behaviors.......................................................................................................................... 10
Intention and Initiative Behaviors ........................................................................................................ 10
Development of Understanding Behaviors ........................................................................................... 10
Social Scaffolding Behaviors ................................................................................................................ 11
Results & Discussion ................................................................................................................... 14
Engagement Behavior Results .............................................................................................................. 17
Intention & Initiative Behaviors Results .............................................................................................. 18
Social Scaffolding Behaviors Results ................................................................................................... 19
Development of Understanding Behaviors Results .............................................................................. 20
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 22
Future Research .......................................................................................................................... 23
Bibliography ................................................................................................................................ 24
iv
List of Figures
Figure 1 Observational Form used in data collection ................................................................... 13
Figure 2 Visual percentage break down of Engagement Behaviors observed .............................. 17
Figure 3 Visual percentage break down of Intention & Initiative Behaviors observed ................ 18
Figure 4 Visual percentage break down of Social Scaffolding Behaviors observed .................... 19
Figure 5 Visual percentage break down of Development of Understanding Behaviors observed 20
v
List of Tables
Table 1 Final results from observation in the museum ................................................................. 14
Table 2 Nature of Caregiver Involvement .................................................................................... 15
Table 3 Who initiates child's involvement? .................................................................................. 15
Table 4 Age of Children Engaging in Activity ............................................................................. 15
vi
Acknowledgements
First, I would like to thank my thesis reader, Kathleen Saul, for her support and guidance through
the thesis process as well as throughout the two years in the MES program. Your kindness and
positive attitude made the entire process significantly less stressful.
I would also like to thank the Hands On Children’s Museum for allowing me to conduct my
observations and research at the museum. Thank you to my supervisor, coworkers, and friends
for allowing me time to collect my data as well as being understanding, flexible and most of all
supportive while getting this degree.
I’d like to thank all of the teachers and educators throughout my life Mrs. Robin Gorenc, Mr.
Brian Ducey, Professor David Gordon, and Chris Lanza. You have all inspired me and made me
want to give the wonderful gift of knowledge to the next generation. Mine is only one of the
many lives that you have touched and inspired.
Eliah – thank you for always believing in me, supporting me through every new adventure I
embark on and for reminding me to take a break from work and my thesis to play with Koga and
to just breathe once in a while. I appreciate everything you do for me on a daily basis.
A huge thank you to my family for all the love and support that they give me every day. Auntie
Goldie – my fellow hobbit, thank you for always making me laugh, taking me on adventures and
allowing me to play with your hounds to de-stress and unplug. Grandma Zenaida and Grumpy –
thank you for all your endless love and prayers and for always making sure my heart and
stomach are full.
To my younger brother, Tommy, you have always been my guiding light and my motivation to
be better, to be smarter, to be stronger and to be an older sister that you can look up to and be
proud of.
And last, but certainly not least, I’d like to thank my parents. My Mom, for instilling this love of
nature in me and making me appreciate all the Earth has to offer. Thank you for always leading
by example and giving me the confidence in myself to accomplish anything I put my mind to.
And my Dad, for always making me laugh and believing in me. You have always made me think
of the positives and have given me my sense of humor when times get rough. I love and
appreciate you both so much!
I certainly would not be the person I am without you all.
vii
Introduction
As a young child, I remember visiting different science and children’s museums for
school field trips or even just fun family trips. Many of those exhibits exposed me to new and
exciting science and technology that I would not have been exposed to on my own. From getting
my first glimpse of space at the Liberty Science Center’s planetarium in New Jersey, to being
able to touch and learn about horseshoe crabs at the Port Discovery Children’s Museum in
Maryland, two decades later I still have vivid, positive memories of the different museums I have
visited. At the time, I did not realize I was learning, I was simply exploring and playing within
the museum. After visiting, I would come away with new interests and more questions about
what I had seen and experienced at the museums. I would take out library books on the marine
animals I saw, or magazines on new stars that were being discovered in our galaxy. Much of
what I experienced and saw in those museums growing up has shaped what I am interested to
this day.
The purpose of this thesis is to explore how children interact with hands on exploratory
and experiential learning in science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics (STEAM)
activities in the Hands On Children’s Museum. These activities have been classified as “Nature
Play” activities by the museum. First, I will explain the differences between a children’s museum
and a traditional museum. Second, we will investigate the value of experiential and hands on
learning in children. Then finally we will look at how experiential and hands on learning can
affect future scientific literacy and create lasting relationships with the natural world.
In this thesis I will address the questions, ‘How are the children coming into the Hands
On Children’s Museum interacting and learning from the different Nature Play activities’? and
1
‘Will these experiences have the potential to have a positive, lasting effect on the children later
in life’?
2
The Purpose of Children’s Museums
Although there are many different definitions of what a ‘children’s museum’ is, most
experts agree that it is not a “traditional ‘hands-off, don’t touch’ museum” (Mayfield, 2005, p.
181). Mayfield defines children’s museums as “user friendly, interactive, hands-on, attractive,
non-threatening and stimulating places designed and developed for children” (Mayfield, 2005,
p.181). The types of hands-on learning that is offered at children’s museums makes this type of
learning unique and special. Rix and McSorley (1999) state, “researchers and educationists have
reported a strong correlation between not only hands-on activities but also science-based
presentations or museum exhibits and positive attitudes in students”. In a more traditional
museum, like the Museum of Natural History or the Louvre, it is common to find the paintings
and exhibits far from arms reach surrounded by plexiglass or roped off to detour visitors from
touching the collections. The atmosphere in these traditional museums is usually that of a library.
In contrast, a children’s museum decorates its exhibits in fun, enticing colors and textures that
excite and invite the visitors to touch and explore with excited squeals and giggles heard all
throughout.
3
Impacts of Experiential Environmental Learning
Dunkley (2016) explored how eco-attractions can help teach environmental education.
Dunkley (2016) examined three study cohorts where each cohort attended a two-day
environmental education program within a different eco-attraction. The first cohort attended a
program at a botanical garden. The second cohort attended a program at a country estate and the
third attended a program at a nature reserve. After the two-day program, the students were
interviewed about what they thought about the program as a whole and what they had learned
from the program. Dunkley noted that many students found that they had a new appreciation for
nature and its significance. Her study “support[ed] arguments that suggest gardens and nature
reserves offer intrinsically valuable opportunities to reconnect with the natural world” (p. 219).
In addition, Dunkley stated,
For some students who participated in the program, a novel appreciation of plant roles
was coupled with a sense of awe inspired by nature and greater respect for the nonhuman. For example, 14-year-old John from Sussex felt the course had “opened his
eyes” to the role of plants in sustaining human life: “I didn't realize that everything came
from plants that was really quite an amazing thing” (Dunkley, 2016, p. 217).
Dunkley explained that John was motivated to learn more about plants and even wanted
to share his newfound knowledge with his peers who were not in the program. She also quoted a
student, Helen, stating that she thought “her whole [school] year [group] should take part... [in
the program because] … when you get there [the nature reserve], you just get a complete change
of mind” (Dunkley, 2016). The program had a great impact on Helen’s daily life; she was noted
as having engaged her friends and family in conversations about the themes discussed during her
visit to the eco-attraction (Dunkley, 2016). Dunkley concluded that her findings provided an indepth insight into how young people from different backgrounds responded to various ecoattractions and environmental education programs. They enabled students to see and sense
4
ecological issues through experiences. She also argued that the study demonstrated how ecoattractions can cultivate ecological citizenship.
Liddicoat and Krasny (2014) collected data from the North Cascades Institute’s Mountain
School and the Teton Science Schools. The North Cascades School went on a three-day camping
experience within the North Cascades National Park with a goal to “foster an appreciation and
knowledge of the local flora and fauna... as well as to inspire stewardship of the rivers and
forests of the Pacific Northwest and a commitment to environmentally friendly behaviors”
(Liddicoat & Krasny, 2014, p. 183). The Teton Science School was two, three-day experiences
where the students visited the Grand Teton National Park and performed inquiry-based scientific
investigations while practicing environmentally friendly behaviors. These students also learned
field experiences and gained skills in low-impact outdoor recreation such as cross-country skiing
and snowshoeing (Liddicoat & Krasny, 2014). After these experiences concluded, the students
were interviewed about the time they spent on these excursions five years later in order to study
the impact these experiences had on the students. After the five-year period, the students had
retained positive memories about the excursion that had the students fondly looking back on the
experience, and some stated that they believe that they had a stronger connection to nature
because of it.
While these two studies are excellent representations of the correlation between
experiential environmental learning and ecological citizenship, they involve students who
already have a higher interest in biology and the sciences. In my thesis, I will be observing
children who have come to the Hands On Children’s Museum to play, therefore, observing a
wider range of children who might not have an prior interest in nature and/or the environment.
5
Developing Environmental Stewardship
While children need to be learning about the environment and nature through the types of
programs outlined above, it is just as beneficial for the children to be playing and experiencing
nature without being in a formal learning setting. Learning through play and exploration in an
outdoor nature setting has been documented as helping to develop a child’s relationship to the
natural world. In their study of eleven preschool students, McCain and Vandermaas-Peeler
(2016) have said their findings “indicated that while outdoors, children showed self-awareness
with regard to environmental features, generated complex scientific theories around discoveries,
and engaged in environmental stewardship” (p. 37). Since the children coming to the Hands On
Children’s Museum are typically younger than 13, it is more beneficial to observe their levels of
play as it relates to environmental stewardship as opposed to the more complex theory
generation.
It is through play that children begin to understand the world around them. Sobel (1995)
theorized that it is important for children to create lasting relationships with the natural world
before they begin to formally understand it and before they can take on stewardship roles
themselves. Play as a form of bonding with nature can then be the steppingstone by which a child
is able to form a more scientific foundation and even a certain level of care and empathy for the
environment around them.
In their research, McCain and Vandermaas-Peeler (2016) documented 131 acts of
stewardship during a 16-day stay at a river. These acts of stewardship were placed under six
different categories: Picking up trash, Leaving plants/animals alone, Verbally valuing nature,
Photo documentation, Mindful looking/listening, and Other. In their concluding thoughts they
stated,
6
The results of the present study indicated that children articulated a developing awareness
of their selves in relation to the natural world and exhibited stewardship verbally and
through actions. In addition, these complex interactions with nature occurred in a context
of consistent teacher guidance, interaction with mixed-age peers, and an appreciation for
the environment as third teacher (McCain & Vandermaas-Peeler, 2016, p. 51).
While it is evident that a child’s relationship to the natural world is greatly affected by
their earlier experiences in nature, it is difficult to determine precisely which particular
interactions will create a more mindful and environmentally conscious individual. With that
being said, there are forms of play and verbal acts that can be observed that have the potential to
create environmental stewardship within a child. For example, during my observations at the
museum, I had often heard children describing natural materials like flowers and leaves to be
“beautiful” or “pretty”. These thoughts and verbal announcements show a child’s appreciation
for the qualities of nature and natural materials.
When looking at how children learn through play, a common theory is through tinkering
and making. Tinkering encompasses a child’s act of playful and experimental engagement while
interacting with their surroundings. The maker aspect is focused on experimental learning,
creating goals, and exploring new ideas. I chose to use this theory as a way to assess how the
children are learning.
There are four types of learning indicators that showcase children developing
relationships with and understating the natural world:
1. Engagement behaviors - positive experiences in outdoor setting or with natural
materials,
2. Intention and Initiative Behaviors – expressing interest and finding inspiration from
nature,
3. Development of Understanding Behaviors - appreciation for the qualities of nature
and natural objects, and
4. Social Scaffolding Behaviors - being exposed to adults and peers reenforcing
exploration and play in nature (Bevan et al., 2017)(Loebach & Cox, 2020)(Roskos &
Christie, 2002).
7
In the next section, I will describe the four types of indicators that I used when observing
children developing relationships with and understanding the natural world.
8
Methodology
As indicated above, this thesis research relies on observation to collect data at the Hands On
Children’s Museum. In Observing Children: Ideas for Teachers, Phinney (1982) provided a list
of useful guidelines when using the observational technique. Phinney outlined the following:
1. Describe the setting, the behavior of the child (including how she or he does something),
and the behavior of others who interact with the child.
2. Report each event in a separate sentence and report all events in chronological order.
3. Describe what the child does, rather than what the child does not do.
4. Separate all interpretative comments or inferences from the recoded observations, for
example, by parenthesis or the use of a separate column.
(Phinney, 1982, p. 17-18)
I used Phinney’s list of guidelines when collecting my data. I made sure that the form I used for
recording the data had a section that allowed me to describe where in the museum the Nature
Play activity was being held, and other sections for describing what the child did instead of what
he/she did not do. I also included a section for general comments. I used a separate sheet for set
of observations.
Much of the framework used in this research to categorize the child’s behaviors stemmed
from the research created by educators from the Exploratorium Tinkering Studio and the
Lighthouse Community Carter School. These educators have been creating and studying Maker
and Tinkering programs that are being used and adapted by many after-school programs as well
as children’s museums. This framework is also used in creating many of the Hands On
Children’s Museum’s activities, as well as the Nature Play activities. Within their research,
Bevan et al. (2017) identified four learning dimensions which are included in the data collection
form. The four learning dimensions are as follows: Engagement, Initiative and Intentionality,
Conceptual Understanding, and Social Scaffolding (Bevan et al., 2017, p. 3). The
actions/behaviors observed during my research were categorized under these four learning
9
dimensions in order to identify how the observed child was interacting with the Nature Play
activity.
Engagement Behaviors
Under Engagement, Bevan et al. (2017) listed indicators for the ways students exhibit this
behavior: exploring materials, repetition and “re-mixing” of ideas/projects, concentration on
activity, and a show of emotion towards the activity (Bevan et al., 2017). Children would exhibit
these behaviors when exploring their natural surroundings as well as playing with the natural
materials provided at the Nature Play activity.
Intention and Initiative Behaviors
Bevan et al. (2017) stated,
[Initiative and Intentionality] refers to the ways in which [children] engage with the
activity, develop their own ideas or goals, and pursue them. As such, [children]
demonstrate self-directed learning, purpose, and persistence (p. 5).
This type of behavior would be expressing one’s goals, making predictions, seeking inspiration,
and taking intellectual risks. The child expressing intention and initiative would show an interest
in the Nature Play activity as well as curiosity throughout the activity.
Development of Understanding Behaviors
Bevan et al. (2017) defined this section as developing “conceptual understanding by
working with phenomena, concepts, and tools to achieve [the child’s] ideas and goals” (p. 6). In
the context of this research, these behaviors would include a child’s demonstrating appreciation
for the qualities of nature and natural objects. For example, utilizing natural materials as tools for
decorating or to further their activity goals. These behaviors also include using proper
vocabulary, connecting to prior knowledge, and expressing realization and understanding of the
activity.
10
Social Scaffolding Behaviors
Bevan et al. (2017) described social scaffolding as “[children] developing a sense of
belonging and building their identities as creative thinkers through active participation” (p. 7).
These behaviors include noticing others’ work, requesting help from adults/peers, and interactive
play with adults and/or peers.
11
Methods
I conducted observational research for this thesis. I observed four different Nature Play
activities over the course of five days, yielding a sample of 100 children observed, with 20
children observed for each day.
The first Nature Play activity was called Kitchen Tool Exploration. During this activity,
children used various kitchen tools to play and interact with different herbs, berries, and
vegetables that could be found in the museum’s garden. This activity had children recognizing
the foods they eat among the ones found in the garden, making the connection between
themselves and plants.
The second activity observed was called Flower and Fruit Dissections. Children used
scalpels and tweezers to look inside flowers and different fruits to identify seeds and different
parts of a plant.
The third activity was called Fern Crowns. Here, the children would use ferns and other
flowers to create wearable art and jewelry. The fourth activity, called “Plantable Paper”,
involved children using recycled, shredded paper to create new sheets of paper containing
wildflower seeds that could be subsequently planted in the ground.
During my observations, I documented insights on observational forms. Each observation
was done on a separate sheet in order to reduce confusion. I documented the actions of each child
under the four learning dimensions described above as well as noting the child’s approximate
age, estimated length of the activity, the location of the activity, who initiated the child’s
involvement in the activity, who the child interacted with during the activity, the caregiver’s
involvement with the child, and comments on the child and caregiver. Figure 1 below contains
the observation form that I used for data collection.
12
Figure 1 Observational Form used in data collection
13
Results & Discussion
The overall results of the data are shown in the table below.
Table 1 Final results from observation in the museum
14
Table 2 Nature of Caregiver Involvement
Table 3 Who initiates child's involvement?
Table 4 Age of Children Engaging in Activity
This table shows the number of children (out of 100) of each Nature Play activity exhibiting
those specific playing styles under each of the learning indicators. The children’s ages ranged
15
from three to thirteen with the majority of the children being below the age of ten as shown in
Table 4. Table 3 shows who initiates the child’s involvement with the activity. I chose to
document this behavior because it gave me an idea of how interested and curious the child was.
In my observations, I also recorded the nature of the caregiver’s involvement. This gave me an
idea of the caregiver’s relationship with the child as well as the child’s confidence and
independence levels.
The engagement behaviors section had the highest numbers with 96% of children
observed playing with and exploring the natural materials. In addition, 82% of the children
initiated those interactions. Seventy-four percent showed intense concentration on the activity.
The majority of the children observed were younger children who were still focused on
and engaged in exploring the natural materials. I also observed that the children themselves were
the first ones to engage and interact with the activity. When looking at caregiver’s involvement
in the activity, 44% of caregivers were not involved in the activity with their child at all.
Nineteen percent of the caregivers were supportive and stood close by watching and helped when
the child asked. This would suggest that the children engaging in these activities were actively
and independently participating on their own without the involvement of their caretaker.
This showcases the children participating in Engagement behaviors, Initiative &
Intentionality behaviors, and in behaviors showing development of understanding which have
been proven to be indicators of possible environmental stewardship. In the following sections I
will be breaking down the results for the individual learning behavior sections.
16
Engagement Behavior Results
Figure 2 Visual percentage break down of Engagement Behaviors observed
Figure 2 shows the percentage breakdown for the Engagement Behavior results.
At 38.7% and 29.8%, the highest percentages in this section occurred in the categories
covering children playing with and exploring the nature materials, focused, and concentrating
intensely on the activity. The lower percentages for this section arose in observing the child
staying after they finished the activity to try it again or to try another part of the activity. This
could be due to different variables, such as the parents wanting to leave the museum/activity, or
simply because the child was no longer interested and wanted to see other parts of the museum.
This section also includes observing the child showing emotion, which makes up 15.7% of this
section. This could include emotions such as frustration, happiness and/or excitement. The
purpose of this was to show that the child is invested enough in the activity to invoke emotions.
These numbers suggest that the children engaging in these activities are exhibiting high numbers
in engagement behaviors. With 96 out of 100 children observed playing with and exploring the
natural materials, based on the learning indicators above, this would suggest that there is a high
17
probability that these activities had a positive, lasting effect on these children that can lead to
environmental stewardship.
Intention & Initiative Behaviors Results
Figure 3 Visual percentage break down of Intention & Initiative Behaviors observed
In the Intention & Initiative Behavior results the highest percentage occurred in
recognizing the steps to the activity. Children showed confidence in completing and performing
the activity with minimal help from peers and/or adults. For example, the child might have been
shown what to do once and was then able to recreate what they had seen with relative ease. Next,
at 19.4%, was developing unique strategies and tools in the activity. This was observed most
often in the Kitchen Tool activity where the children might try to grate a rosemary branch or
squish a grape with the garlic press. These actions showed a level of understanding of not only
the tools used but also of the specific organic materials being used. This would also fall under an
appreciation for the qualities of a natural object. Based on these results, the children are showing
18
a level of understanding, independence, and creativity through their play. This, coupled with the
fact that, 82 of the 100 children observed were the ones that initiated this engagement show that
there is a high probability that these activities had a positive, lasting effect on these children that
can lead to environmental knowledge and environmental citizenship.
Social Scaffolding Behaviors Results
Figure 4 Visual percentage break down of Social Scaffolding Behaviors observed
The section related to Social Scaffolding Behaviors did not yield very high numbers
overall. While 30.7% of children were observed noticing other people’s work, they did not
engage or interact with them. Even requesting help from other adults reached only 23.3% in this
section. I would like to note that this might be a side effect of the Covid-19 pandemic and
quarantining. Since the majority of the children observed were under the age of 10, they would
most likely not have had much social interaction with other people outside of the household
because of Covid-19 and Covid-19 restrictions and two years of staying at home.
19
Development of Understanding Behaviors Results
Figure 5 Visual percentage break down of Development of Understanding Behaviors observed
Higher percentages were seen in Development of Understanding Behaviors presented in
the activities as well as having the children using familiar tool with new materials. Examples of
this included having a child express that they have used tweezers before but never having used
them on a flower. This was important to note since the child is linking something with which
they are familiar to something new, something found in nature. A child expressing realization
was at 17.8% in this section, an indicator of understanding and comprehension, but also a way of
expressing emotion, such as excitement, regarding the activity. An example of this would be a
child verbally saying, “ah hah!” or “Oh that’s how that works!” In this section, a high number of
children are exhibiting behaviors that would suggest that they are linking their current lives with
new things in nature, understanding natural concepts, and are even using appropriate vocabulary
when talking about nature. All of these behaviors point to these children being able to
20
comprehend environmental processes as well as gaining positive experience with the natural
world.
The Hands On Children’s Museums’ mission statement expresses that it “stimulates
curiosity, creativity and learning through fun, interactive exhibits and programs for children,
families and school groups” (About Us, 2021). Based on the results from this research, these
Nature Play activities are fulfilling the museums mission statement. With high percentages in
both the Development of Understanding and Engagement sections, this shows that the Nature
Play activities are stimulating curiosity through engagement as well as learning and
understanding new concepts through play. However, where there were lower percentages in the
Initiative & Intentionality and Social Scaffolding sections, I would suggest that the museum
looks to engage the children to work with others as well as have the children express themselves
and their intentions. This might look like having the children work on a collaborative terrarium
in order to build those social scaffolding skills as well as working together to complete a
common goal that allows them to explore and utilize natural materials. While it might be difficult
to observe Initiative & Intentionality behaviors in children, the museum might benefit from
seeking feedback from the caregivers and children on new exhibits and activities through a
survey in order to collect a more accurate representation of the child’s goals and/or intentions.
21
Conclusion
The enriched nature of high-quality outdoor play environments can afford a greater
diversity of opportunities for play than indoor settings. To more effectively design
outdoor play settings, we must better understand how the physical environment supports,
or hinders, the different types of play which suit children’s needs and interests (Loebach
& Cox, 2020, p.1).
Looking back on the literature, the indicators of children developing relationships with
and understanding the natural world includes positive experiences in outdoor setting or with
natural materials, expressing interest and finding inspiration from nature, learning and being
supported by adults/peers reenforcing exploration and play in nature, and appreciation for the
qualities of nature and natural objects. The most prominent finding would be the 96% of children
actively engaging with the natural materials, followed by 82% of children initiating that
engagement, during which 74% showed intense concentration and focus. Since only 13% of
caregivers connected to the child’s prior knowledge and experiences, it begs the question as to
whether or not these children are able to have these kinds of similar experiences at home and if
their caregivers support them in exploring nature. As mentioned above, the social scaffolding
section was relatively low, and it is possible that it is due to the children lacking social
interactions within the past two years due to the Covid-19 pandemic. I would like to recognize
that my research was simply through observation and that I chose to not interview the children or
the parents for this research.
In all, based on the data that I was able to collect and based on the literatures indicators of
children developing relationships with nature, it can be said that these Nature Play activities do
have the potential to have a positive, lasting effect on the children later in life that could lead to
environmental citizenship.
22
Future Research
Mayfield (2004) states, “another challenge for children’s museums is the need to
document what it is they do and the effects. There is relatively little research on children’s
museums and much of what is available is market research and user demographics” (p. 169). It is
my hope that future research is done in children’s museums in the hopes of filling in gaps that
the formal school system cannot. In furthering the research in cultivating environmental
citizenship in children, I would like to see a study that would be able to do a five to ten year
follow up for children who have experienced the museum and the Nature Play activities and their
views about the environment then verse now. In my research I chose to only observe the
children’s actions while they engage with the environment, future research might benefit from
interviewing the children and/or caregivers about their experiences with the Nature Play
activities to get a better understanding of what the children are retaining during their play. Other
future research could be addressing how the Covid-19 pandemic has either stunted or improved a
child’s connection to nature or how it has affected a child’s ability to socialize and learn with
others.
23
Bibliography
About Us. Hands on Children's Museum. (2021, June 24). Retrieved December 23, 2021, from
https://www.hocm.org/about-us/
Andre, L., Durksen, T., & Volman, M. L. (2017). Museums as avenues of learning for children:
A decade of research. Learning Environments Research, 20(1), 47–76.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-016-9222-9
Bevan, B., Ryoo, J. J., Vanderwerff, A., Wilkinson, K., & Petrich, M. (2017, July). Making
Deeper Learners: A Tinkering Learning Dimensions Framework v 2.0. Learning
Dimensions of Making and Tinkering: A professional development tool for educators.
from https://www.exploratorium.edu/tinkering/our-work/learning-dimensions-making-andtinkering
Çil, E., Maccario, N., & Yanmaz, D. (2016). Design, implementation and evaluation of
innovative science teaching strategies for non-formal learning in a natural history
museum. Research in Science & Technological Education, 34(3), 325–341. https://doiorg.evergreen.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/02635143.2016.1222360
Dale Tunnicliffe, S., & Gkouskou, E. (2020). Science in action in spontaneous preschool play –
an essential foundation for future understanding. Early Child Development and Care,
190(1), 54–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2019.1653552
Dunkley, R. A. (2016) Learning at eco-attractions: Exploring the bifurcation of nature and
culture through experiential environmental education, The Journal of Environmental
Education, 47:3, 213-221, DOI: 10.1080/00958964.2016.1164113
Gutwill, J. P., Hido, N., & Sindorf, L. (2015). Research to Practice: Observing Learning in
24
Tinkering Activities. Curator: The Museum Journal, 58(2), 151–168.
https://doi.org/10.1111/cura.12105
Henderson, T. Z., & Atencio, D. J. (2007). Integration of Play, Learning, and Experience: What
Museums Afford Young Visitors. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35(3), 245–251.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-007-0208-1
Loebach, J., & Cox, A. (2020). Tool for Observing Play Outdoors (TOPO): A New Typology for
Capturing Children’s Play Behaviors in Outdoor Environments. International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(15), 5611.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17155611
Mayfield *, M. I. (2005). Children’s museums: Purposes, practices and play? Early Child
Development and Care, 175(2), 179–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/0300443042000230348
McClain, C., & Vandermaas-Peeler, M. (2016). Outdoor explorations with preschoolers: An
observational study of young children’s developing relationship with the natural world.
17.
Paris, S. G. (Ed.). (2002). Objects of Learning, Objects of Talk: Changing Minds in Museums. In
Perspectives on Object-Centered Learning in Museums (0 ed., pp. 38–53). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410604132-10
Sobel, D. (1995). Beyond ecophobia: Reclaiming the heart in nature education. Great
Barrrington, Massachusetts: Orion.
Van Schijndel, T. J. P., Franse, R. K., & Raijmakers, M. E. J. (2010). The Exploratory Behavior
Scale: Assessing young visitors’ hands-on behavior in science museums: Exploratory
Behavior Scale. Science Education, 94(5), 794–809. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20394
25
