Amazing Science Search – A constructivist activity for science adventurers

I recently devised a science scavenger hunt, which was inspired by television’s Amazing Race, for the Science Adventurer Boys program at Science North. The boys were aged 8 to 11 and, as members of Science North, all had some prior exposure to the science centre. My aim was to use the existing science infrastructure at the centre in a way that was novel to the boys. Drawing from constructivist learning theory, I geared the activity to provide an experience that was both challenging and stimulating (Hein, 1998). I designed the science search to present the participants with tasks and questions pertaining to the content of the science centre. These tasks and questions had multiple conclusions and “correct” answers, in a sense, giving the activity multiple entry points and layers.

When I began writing the science search, I was admittedly uncertain of how to gauge the motives and interests of boys of the 8 to 11 age group. I had little prior experience with this type of audience other than time I’ve spent with my 10 year-old nephew. In an attempt to better understand my target audience, I combined my knowledge of my nephew’s behaviours with memories of my childhood. I also gathered some useful suggestions from my classmates. An important factor that they got me to consider was that boys of this age range tend to have short attention spans. This led me to realize that it was important to design the search so that it could be completed within an hour. I decided too that it was necessary to divide the search into several stages with each requiring no more than ten minutes to complete. When I finished designing the search, I was confident in having made an effort to understand my audience.

Implementation of the science search began by dividing the boys into two teams of three. I supervised one team and Alan Nursall, Science North's science director, supervised the other. We gave the boys the search instructions which directed them to various stops throughout the centre. At each stop, the instructions prompted the teams to complete a few tasks and answer questions about their findings. Alan had the idea of giving each team a digital camera so that they could document their discoveries, which turned out to be a novelty for most them because they had few if any previous opportunities to use cameras. Upon successful completion of the tasks at each stage, Alan and I would assign our respective teams a letter (e.g. “O”). Once all of the stages were completed, the teams each had six random letters that, when unscrambled, spelled the word FOSSIL. We then directed the boys to the Nature Exchange where they were each entitled to choose a small fossil for keeping.

After seeing the science search in use, and getting feedback from the boys and Alan, I was proud to discover that, for all intents and purposes, it was a success. The boys seemed to appreciate the challenging and competitive nature of the search, and the motive of finding a treasure. I achieved my attempt to have multiple entry and exit points as indicated by the varying findings of the two teams. For example, one of the tasks I gave the teams was to “find an animal that has protective armour.” I further asked them to identify the animal as being either warm blooded or cold blooded. Alan’s team found the porcupine and classified it appropriately as warm blooded. In contrast, my team opted to use the cold blooded snapping turtle in their findings.The main lesson that I gathered from this experience was that, before engaging an unfamiliar audience, it’s necessary to make a multi-pronged research effort in order to better understand their needs and motivations.

That's all for now!

Reference
Hein, G. E. (1998). Learning in the Museum. Routledge, New York, NY. pp. 25 – 40.