The Science Identity of Informal Educators in a Professional Development Program

In an increasingly globalized world, the ability to engage with science meaningfully to make decisions on small and large scales is essential to be an informed citizen and to create a more equitable world. To engage with science, people need to develop a science identity. In this study, science identity, or feeling like a science person, includes the development of science knowledge (competence), ways of talking about and doing science (performance), an interest or other motivation to engage with science (investment), and recognition of oneself and/or by others as being a science person (recognition). Informal science education institutions, like science museums, are places where learners can follow their curiosities and access science learning in distinctly different ways than they may have experienced in a classroom setting. Informal educators in such spaces play instrumental roles in facilitating these learning experiences and may impact the development of learners’ science identities. While informal educators may influence the way learners develop a science identity (or sense of being a “science person”), informal educators themselves are not frequently the subject of science identity research, researchers choosing instead to focus on young learners in the space, such as students on a field trip visit. However, science identity development of the informal educators is equally important to understand because how an informal educator’s sense of being a science person develops will have a direct impact on how they interact with and facilitate the identity development of museum visitors. Thus, the changes that institutions wish to see in the visitor experience must begin with changes in the informal educators themselves. I was interested to explore how informal educators developed a science identity while participating in a professional development program. I asked two major questions in this study: (1.) How did informal educators’ identities as science people change during participation in an informal science education professional development program? (2.) How did informal educators create or aim to create opportunities for learners to be a science person? In this qualitative study, I focused on four informal educators’ experiences throughout a year-long professional development program at the interactive science museum where they were employed. I conducted five interviews throughout the year with each of the participants and collected written artifacts in the form of blog posts. I found that participants’ science identities did change over the course of the program, and, likewise, their facilitation practice changed over time. Participants ended the program with a more expansive and inclusive definition of science identity than they began the program with, and, as their definitions of “a science person” broadened, participants facilitated experiences with learners that were more inclusive and that increasingly prioritized making sufficient space for learners to lead their own explorations and be recognized as capable of engaging in science. Participants did display discrepancies between their individual definitions of science identity and how they chose to incorporate science identity into facilitation; however, this was partially explained because participants largely drew a distinction between enacting a science identity as individuals and facilitating a learner’s development of a science identity. They interpreted their role as an educator as necessitating a different approach to science identity than they might in other contexts. These findings support the value of investing in informal educators and offering them professional learning opportunities, which are much rarer for informal educators than for formal educators. If institutions can more effectively and meaningfully train their staff by creating opportunities to engage in professional learning, they can more easily achieve their goals and better serve their visitors. This study contributed to the gap in the literature for research on the science identity of informal educators, showing that in fact science identity of the individual educator does affect their facilitation with learners