Looking specifically at ongoing and collaborative programs

Non-formal science education programs that are long term or ongoing are reported to have several benefits over short term programs. The time available and involvement of

school teachers in developing the learning experience allows for targeted programs that are more effectively implemented and connected across settings (Bouillion & Gomez, 2001; Kisiel, 2010; Luehmann & Markowitz, 2007; Robertson, 2007). In addition to facilitating familiarity and connections between the communities of school and non- formal education, long term collaborations could potentially have a more significant role in students’ science learning than short term efforts. There is some evidence in support of this, with a year-long collaborative partnership showing a substantial impact on students motivation to learn science (Luehmann, 2009b) while a program for a unit across several weeks resulted in temporary moderate increases in student motivation to learn science (Itzek-Greulich et al., 2016). There are also reports of increased student engagement and interest in science following involved and long term non-formal programs (Bouillion & Gomez, 2001; Garner & Eilks, 2015; Kisiel, 2014; Paris, Yambor, & Packard, 1998; Polman & Miller, 2010; Robertson, 2007). However these reports represent nearly all of the current known investigations into long term non-formal programs and there remains a lack of evidence illustrating the roles that ongoing and collaborative non-formal programs can fulfil in schools.

Kisiel (2010) highlights that while there are many examples of formal partnerships between schools and informal institutions, there is limited documentation of the outcomes of such partnerships. Bevan et al. (2010) agree with this, discussing the

challenges in finding sufficiently documented programs for their review and commenting that many such collaborative programs undergo limited evaluation. This is suggested to be a result of program orchestrators not being trained researchers and a lack of funding and time to invest in in-depth evaluation (Bevan, 2010). The challenge of collecting and analysing data systematically and comprehensively is made more difficult by the small scale and insecure position of many non-formal programs. Current understanding of collaborative non-formal learning experiences is further limited by restricted or biased samples which offer poor generalization (Itzek-Greulich et al., 2016). Consequently despite a long history of ongoing and collaborative non-formal science education programs used by schools there is a lack of consistent and comprehensive documentation of outcomes and impact on students when compared to the wealth of information on formal science education or even informal learning (Affeldt et al., 2017; Bevan et al., 2010).

The need for further research into ongoing non-formal science education programs used by schools is emphasized by the increasing number of large scale collaborations being implemented across the world. Kisiel (2010) once reported that formal partnerships

between informal institutions were more the exception than the rule but it is now becoming common for such partnerships to be initiated as a result of policy directives. Across the world in Europe (Affeldt et al., 2017), the US (Traphagen & Traill, 2014) and in Australia (Victorian Auditor General, 2012) there are large policy initiatives underway to support non-formal science education programs in schools. Further evidence of the incorporation of non-formal education into the formal sector comes from the emphasis placed on it in teacher training (Monteiro, Martins, de Souza Janerine, & de Carvalho, 2016). Altogether it is evident that non-formal science education is taking on increasingly more influential roles in the formal science education system. It is important then to ascertain whether such large scale programs are able to overcome the challenges faced by small scale and locally based non-formal programs, or whether there are new, unique challenges that require attention.

While there is much support for the potential of non-formal science education programs to address perceived problems in science education in schools (Affeldt et al., 2017; Stocklmayer, Rennie, & Gilbert, 2010) there has been little research into either their roles and the opportunities that they may offer or the challenges to realising those

opportunities (Bevan et al., 2010). Tytler, Symington, and Clark (2016) argue that in order to improve the effectiveness of connecting students’ learning experiences across settings a better understanding of collaborations between different educational organizations is needed. While the scale up of collaborative partnerships for non-formal science education is aimed to increase their effectiveness and impact there is currently no evidence

demonstrating this. A recent study in the UK found the reverse, suggesting that numerous non-formal programs or interventions run at schools had no significant effect on student post-compulsory STEM subject choices (Banerjee, 2017b) or maths attainment (Banerjee, 2017a). It is not possible to say whether these trends may be replicated in Australian science education given the differences between the two education systems and, to the best of the researcher’s knowledge, there has been no equivalent research conducted in Australia. The results of Banerjee (2017b) however emphasize the need for more research into non-formal science education programs in schools. As a quantitative examination of student datasets these reports do not explore potential reasons behind the trends observed nor do they examine what roles non-formal programs were trying, or failing, to fulfil in schools. Given the potential of non-formal science education programs to affect student trajectories into post-compulsory STEM education through various roles, it is crucial to understand what factors affect student experience of long term collaborative non-formal science education in the Australian context.