The intellectual merit of this project is shown in the multiple significant outcomes from this study described below.
1) We have developed new tools for reaching and communicating with the leaders of informal physics education activities. These tools include a strategy for finding and contacting program leaders, survey, and interviews. These tools are flexible as the language and practices among informal physics programs can vary. Our final instruments allowed us to gather information from participants ranging from undergraduate student organization presidents who conduct performances of physics demonstrations at local schools; graduate students running summer camps for youth while conducting their own physics research; all the way to full-time education staff at national labs who facilitate numerous types of programs on behalf of the institution and its funding agencies.
2) We have determined new and important dimensions of informal physics educational programming. Our data collection included both a national sample that we used for developing tools, and also a sample that spanned the available programs across a single state. We found a varied and complex landscape within our test state of Michigan. Key features that can be used to categorize programs include audience size, program interactivity, program format (such as camp, presentation, afterschool), geographic reach (such as in the city/town, in rural areas surrounding the institution, or over the whole state), and type of physics content (e.g. forces/motion, electricity/magnetism, nuclear physics/other current research).
3) We have established that the physics students and physicists are central to how these programs function. Lead facilitators and volunteers in informal physics programs often have many different responsibilities both within the program and at their institution. Their differing roles, resources, and support can affect the decisions they make about the programs and subsequently their audiences’ experiences. Science activities and topics are typically determined by the backgrounds and interests of the volunteers.
4) We have documented the impact of COVID on informal physics programs, including challenges, adaptions, and future directions. We asked three major research questions: (1) What aspects of existing informal physics programs have been affected by COVID? (2) How have programs adapted to the limitations imposed by COVID? (3) How are programs looking toward the future? To answer these questions, we interviewed the lead facilitators for a subset of informal physics education programs in various parts of the US about their experiences. Looking at how programs adapted to the pandemic is relevant for understanding how to better support these programs and how to prepare for uncertainties in the future.
5) We created a framework of the key components for functional informal physics programs that is for program leaders. Different from the descriptive map of the landscape, this framework identifies key components of informal physics programs that are relevant to the success of informal physics programs and are elements that can be influenced by lead facilitators. We have identified and validated over 10 components. We anticipate that this framework would be able to be used to develop tools for assessment of programs either as self-assessment or by external evaluators.
Broader impacts: Our study reveals certain demographic groups may not have local access to informal physics programs and potential reasons for this issue. Now that key program features have been identified, researchers, administrators, and program leaders can make specific changes for inclusion and equity across these features. We find that training, as well as resources and support, for the physics students, staff and faculty who are running these informal physics programs are necessary for informal physics programs to operate using best practices in education – e.g. supporting program personnel is necessary to supporting the design and implementation of inclusive, equitable programming for diverse learners.