Although an understanding of nature of science is a core element in scientific literacy, there is considerable evidence that school and university students hold naïve conceptions about it. It is argued that, whilst the failure to learn about nature of science arises from its neglect in formal science education, a major reason is the adherence to the precepts of pseudo‐science, a set of beliefs that have wide cultural currency in the general population. University science and non‐science students were interviewed about their beliefs in and explanations for “water dowsing”, a pseudo‐scientific approach to finding groundwater. The demarcation criteria between science and pseudo‐science and students’ research designs into “water dowsing” were also enquired into. The results show that many students believed in the working efficacy of water dowsing and stated pseudo‐scientific explanations for it. Furthermore, they were unaware of the demarcation criteria between science and pseudo‐science, and designed naïve research studies to enquire into “water dowsing”.

This study analyzes the short‐term consequences of visitors' use of different types of exhibits (i.e., “exemplars of phenomena” and “analogy based”) together with the factors affecting visitors' understanding of and their evaluation of the use of such exhibits. One hundred and twenty five visitors (either alone or in groups) were observed during their interaction and interviewed immediately afterwards. Findings suggest that the type of exhibit constrains the nature of the understanding achieved. The use of analogical reasoning may lead to an intended causal explanation of an exhibit that is an exemplar of a phenomenon, but visitors often express misconceptions as a consequence of using this type of exhibit. Analogy‐based exhibits are often not used as intended by the designer. This may be because visitors do not access the source domain intended; are unaware of the use of analogy per se (in particular, when the exhibit is of the subtype “only showing similarities between relationships”); only acquire fragmentary knowledge about the target; or fail to use analogical reasoning of which they were capable. Furthermore, exhibits related to everyday world situations are recognized to have an immediate educative value for visitors. Suggestions for enhancing the educative value of exhibits are proposed. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed 91:967–987, 2007

This study analyses if school science clubs may serve as a resource to facilitate the introduction of active methodologies into science classrooms. Focusing on science clubs in Portuguese schools, this study aims to determine whether the teachers who coordinate and direct these clubs promote activities that incorporate aspects of problem-based learning and project-based learning methodologies. In order to do so, a series of semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 teachers, and their responses were analysed using content analysis strategies. The results show that although they do not explicitly refer to the use of these methodologies, teachers do propose the implementation of projects within clubs, and they incorporate aspects of these strategies in the activities they conduct. In this sense, teachers appreciate the role of clubs in promoting these types of strategies (PBL y PjBL) and the facilities they offer for their implementation. Additionally, teachers believe that one can only learn how to do projects through practise, i.e., doing projects with their students, and they think that clubs offer an opportunity to develop PBL and PjBL methodologies in a context free from the responsibilities and constraints of the classroom.

Framed by a “personal constructivist” perspective, this study analyses visitors’ use of spontaneous memories in understanding different types of interactive exhibits, the nature and sources of the retrieved memories, and the way that visitors relate an exhibit analogically to memories of previous exhibits. One hundred and thirteen visitors (either alone or in groups) were observed during their interaction with exhibits and interviewed immediately afterwards. The majority of the retrieved memories were not used in understanding an exhibit; those memories used were mainly semantic and episodic in nature; and exhibits were mainly associated with memories by means of a superficial similarity between them. Suggestions for enhancing the formation of links between visitors’ memories and the understanding of an exhibit intended by the designer of it are made.