Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education

How Do Visitors from Different Cultural Backgrounds Perceive the Messages Conveyed to Them by Their Local Zoo?
Chagit Tishler 1, Orit Ben Zvi Assaraf 2 * , Michael N Fried 1
More Detail
1 David Yellin College Jerusalem, ISRAEL
2 Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, ISRAEL
* Corresponding Author
Research Article

Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 2020 - Volume 16 Issue 3, Article No: e2216
https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/8335

Published Online: 13 Jun 2020

Views: 198 | Downloads: 161

How to cite this article
APA 6th edition
In-text citation: (Tishler et al., 2020)
Reference: Tishler, C., Ben Zvi Assaraf, O., & Fried, M. N. (2020). How Do Visitors from Different Cultural Backgrounds Perceive the Messages Conveyed to Them by Their Local Zoo?. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 16(3), e2216. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/8335
Vancouver
In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Tishler C, Ben Zvi Assaraf O, Fried MN. How Do Visitors from Different Cultural Backgrounds Perceive the Messages Conveyed to Them by Their Local Zoo?. Int J Env Sci Ed. 2020;16(3):e2216. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/8335
AMA 10th edition
In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Tishler C, Ben Zvi Assaraf O, Fried MN. How Do Visitors from Different Cultural Backgrounds Perceive the Messages Conveyed to Them by Their Local Zoo?. Int J Env Sci Ed. 2020;16(3), e2216. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/8335
Chicago
In-text citation: (Tishler et al., 2020)
Reference: Tishler, Chagit, Orit Ben Zvi Assaraf, and Michael N Fried. "How Do Visitors from Different Cultural Backgrounds Perceive the Messages Conveyed to Them by Their Local Zoo?". Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education 2020 16 no. 3 (2020): e2216. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/8335
Harvard
In-text citation: (Tishler et al., 2020)
Reference: Tishler, C., Ben Zvi Assaraf, O., and Fried, M. N. (2020). How Do Visitors from Different Cultural Backgrounds Perceive the Messages Conveyed to Them by Their Local Zoo?. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 16(3), e2216. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/8335
MLA
In-text citation: (Tishler et al., 2020)
Reference: Tishler, Chagit et al. "How Do Visitors from Different Cultural Backgrounds Perceive the Messages Conveyed to Them by Their Local Zoo?". Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, vol. 16, no. 3, 2020, e2216. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/8335
ABSTRACT
As educational institutions, zoos provide an informal, free-choice learning environment. To understand the complex processes of learning in the zoo we must therefore take into account the visiting family’s culture. The study presented here, conducted in the Tisch Family Zoological Gardens in Jerusalem, investigates how visitors from different cultural backgrounds experience the zoo and interpret its intended messages. We found that, ultimately, the zoo is perceived similarly by the Arab and Jewish visitors as an educational institution, although what they come there to learn is different.  Moreover, with regards to the message of conservation, neither population sees it as a major, prominent message. Despite the overall similarity in our participants’ response to the zoo as an enjoyable, cultural educational institute, there were some differences in the experiences of Jewish vs. the Arab visitors, reflected primarily in their animal preferences, and also in the types of messages that they suggest the zoo is conveying to them.
KEYWORDS
REFERENCES
  • Alkaher, I., & Tal, T. (2011). Environmental projects of Jewish and Arab youth in Israel: The adult leaders’ views. Environmental Education Research, 17(2), 235-259.
  • Ash, D. (2003). Dialogic inquiry in life science conversations of family groups in a museum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(2), 138-162.
  • Ash, D. (2004). Reflective scientific sense‐making dialogue in two languages: The science in the dialogue and the dialogue in the science. Science Education, 88(6), 855-884.
  • Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., Hughes, K., & Dierking, L. (2007). Conservation learning in wildlife tourism settings: Lessons from research in zoos and aquariums. Environmental Education Research, 13(3), 367-383.
  • Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., Hughes, K., & Chelsea, G. (2018) Post-visit reinforcement of zoo conservation messages: The design and testing of an action resource website, Visitor Studies, 21(1), 98-120
  • Bitgood, S., Patterson, D., & Benefield, A. (1988). Exhibit design and visitor behavior: Empirical relationships. Environment and Behavior, 20(4), 474-491.
  • Claussen, S., & Osborne, J. (2013). Bourdieu’s notion of cultural capital and its implications for the science curriculum. Science Education, 97(1), 58-79.
  • Clayton, S., Fraser, J., & Saunders, C. D. (2009). Zoo experiences: Conversations, connections, and concern for animals. Zoo Biology, 28(5), 377-397.
  • Clayton, S., & Myers, G. (2009). Conservation psychology: Understanding and promoting human care for nature. West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Collins, C., Corkery, I., McKeown, S., McSweeney, L., Flannery, K., Kennedy, D., & O’Riordan, R. (2020). An educational intervention maximizes children’s learning during a zoo or aquarium visit. The Journal of Environmental Education, 1-20.
  • Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 124-130.
  • Crowley, K., Callanan, M. A., Jipson, J. L., Galco, J., Topping, K., & Shrager, J. (2001). Shared scientific thinking in everyday parent‐child activity. Science Education, 85(6), 712-732.
  • Crowley, K., & Jacobs, M. (2002). Building islands of expertise in everyday family activity. In G. Leinhardt, K. Crowley & K. Knutson (Eds.), Learning conversations in museums (pp. 333-356). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Davidson, S. K., Passmore, C., & Anderson, D. (2010). Learning on zoo field trips: The interaction of the agendas and practices of students, teachers, and zoo educators. Science Education, 94(1), 122-141.
  • Dierking, L. D., Adelman, L. M., Ogden, J., Lehnhardt, K., Miller, L., Mellen, J. D., & Dierking, L. D. (2004). Using a behavior change model to document the impact of visits to Disney’s animal kingdom: A study investigating intended conservation action. Curator: The Museum Journal, 47(3), 322-343.
  • Falk, J. H., Moussouri, T., & Coulson, D. (1998). The effect of visitors ‘agendas on museum learning. Curator: The Museum Journal, 41(2), 107-120.
  • Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2000). Learning from museums: Visitor experiences and the making of meaning. Walnut Creek CA.: Alta Mira Press.
  • Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2012). Museum experience revisited. Walnut Creek, CA, USA: Left Coast Press.
  • Fenichel, M., & Schweingruber, H. A. (2010). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
  • Fraser, J., & Sickler, J. (2009). Measuring the cultural impact of zoos and aquariums. International Zoo Yearbook, 43(1), 103-112.
  • Garner, B., & Grazian, D. (2016). Naturalizing Gender through Childhood Socialization Messages in a Zoo. Social Psychology Quarterly, 79(3), 181-198.
  • Hancocks, D. (2001). A different nature: The paradoxical world of zoos and their uncertain future. Berkeley and Los Angeles CA: University of California Press.
  • Hanson, E. (2002). Animal attractions: Nature on display in American zoos. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
  • Haywood, N. (2018a). “Beauty in the foreground, science behind the scenes”: Families’ views of science learning in a botanic garden. Journal of Environmental Education Research, 10, 1–18.
  • Haywood, N. (2018b). Accompanied visits as a tool to understand visitors’ experiences: A critical reflection and proposed typology. Visitor Studies, 21(1), 135-147.
  • Jensen, E. (2014). Evaluating children’s conservation biology learning at the zoo. Conservation Biology, 28(4), 1004-1011.
  • Kalof, L. (2003). The human self and animal other: Exploring borderline identities. In S. Clayton, & Optow S. (Eds.), Identity and the natural environment: The psychology significance of nature (1st ed.), (pp. 161-178). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Luebke, J. F., Watters, J. V., Packer, J., Miller, L. J., & Powell, D. M. (2016). Zoo visitors’ affective responses to observing animal behaviors. Visitor Studies, 19(1), 60-76.
  • Markwell, K., Weiler, B., Skibins, J. C., & Saunders, R. (2019). Sympathy for the Devil? Uncovering inhibitors and enablers of emotional engagement between zoo visitors and the tasmanian devil, Sarcophilus harrisi. Visitor Studies, 22(1), 84-103.
  • Moss, A., & Esson, M. (2013). The educational claims of zoos: Where do we go from here? Zoo Biology, 32(1), 13-18.
  • Myers Jr, O. E., Saunders, C. D., & Birjulin, A. A. (2004a). Emotional dimensions of watching zoo animals: An experience sampling study building on insights from psychology. Curator: The Museum Journal, 47(3), 299-321.
  • Myers Jr., O. E., Saunders, C. D., & Garrett, E. (2004b). What do children think animals need? Developmental trends. Environmental Education Research, 10(4), 545-562.
  • Negev, M., Sagy, G., Garb, Y., Salzberg, A., & Tal, A. (2008). Evaluating the environmental literacy of Israeli elementary and high school students. Journal of Environmental Education, 39(2), 3-20.
  • Packer, J. (2006). Learning for fun: The unique contribution of educational leisure experiences. Curator: The Museum Journal, 49(3), 329-344.
  • Packer, J., Ballantyne, R., & Luebke, J. F. (2018) Exploring the factors that influence zoo visitors’ perceptions of the well-being of Gorillas: Implications for zoo exhibit interpretation. Visitor Studies, 21:1, 57-78,
  • Patrick, P. G., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2013). Zoo talk. Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.
  • Perdue, B. M., Stoinski, T. S., & Maple, T. L. (2012). Using technology to educate zoo visitors about conservation. Visitor Studies, 15(1), 16-27.
  • Ram, Y., Björk, P., & Weidenfeld, A. (2016). Authenticity and place attachment of major visitor attractions. Tourism Management, 52, 110-122.
  • Randler, C., Kummer, B., & Wilhelm, C. (2012). Adolescent learning in the zoo: Embedding a non-formal learning environment to teach formal aspects of vertebrate biology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(3), 384-391.
  • Reading, R. P., & Miller, B. J. M. (2007). Attitudes and attitude change among zoo visitors. In A. Zimmermann, M. Hatchwell, L. Dickie, & C. West (Eds.), Zoos in the 21st century: Catalysts for conservation? (pp. 63-91). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Rees, P. A. (2011). A short history of zoos. An Introduction to Zoo Biology and Management, First Edition, 31-47.
  • Rice, P., & Ezzy, D. (1999). Qualitative research methods: A health focus. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
  • Schultz, P. W. (2000). Empathizing with nature: The effects of perspective taking on concern for environmental issues. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 391-406.
  • Schultz, P. W., & Tabanico, J. (2007). Self, identity, and the natural environment: Exploring implicit connections with nature. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37(6), 1219-1247.
  • Shettel-Neuber, J. (1988). Second and third-generation zoo exhibits: A comparison of visitor, staff, and animal responses. Environment and Behavior, 20(4), 452-473.
  • Spannring, R. (2017) Animals in environmental education research, Environmental Education Research, 23(1), 63-74,
  • Sterling, E., Lee, J. M., & Wood, T. (2007). Conservation education in zoos: an emphasis on behavioral change. Catalysts for conservation: a direction for zoos in the 21st Century, London, UK, 19-20 February, 2004., 37-50.
  • Storksdieck, M., Ellenbogen, K., & Heimlich, J. (2005). Changing minds? Reassessing outcomes in free‐choice environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 11(3), 353-369.
  • Swanagan, J. S. (2000). Factors influencing zoo visitors’ conservation attitudes and behavior. The Journal of Environmental Education, 31(4), 26-31.
  • Szechter, L. E., & Carey, E. J. (2009). Gravitating toward science: Parent–child interactions at a gravitational‐wave observatory. Science Education, 93(5), 846-858.
  • Tan, E., & Barton, A. C. (2010). Transforming science learning and student participation in sixth grade science: A case study of a low-income, urban, racial minority classroom. Equity & Excellence in Education, 43(1), 38-55.
  • Tofield, S., Coll, R. K., Vyle, B., & Bolstad, R. (2003). Zoos as a source of free choice learning. Research in Science & Technological Education, 21(1), 67-99.
  • Tomažič, I., Hummel, E., Schrenk, M., Rupnik, T., & Randler, C. (2020). Cognitive and affective outcomes of teaching about poisonous and venomous animals. Journal of Biological Education, 54(1), 63-76.
  • Tribe, A., & Booth, R. (2003). Assessing the role of zoos in wildlife conservation. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 8(1), 65-74.
  • Ulrich, R. S. (1993). Biophilia, biophobia, and natural landscapes. The Biophilia Hypothesis, 7, 73-137.
  • Vedder-Weiss, D., (2018) “Won’t you give up your snack for science?” Emerging science identities in family everyday interaction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(8), 1211-1235.
  • Wilson, M., Kelling, A., Poline, L., Bloomsmith, M., & Maple, T. (2003). Post-occupancy evaluation of zoo Atlanta’s giant panda conservation center: Staff and visitor reactions. Zoo Biology, 22(4), 365-382.
  • Wijeratne, A. J., Van Dijk, P. A., Kirk-Brown, A., & Frost, L. (2014). Rules of engagement: The role of emotional display rules in delivering conservation interpretation in a zoo-based tourism context. Tourism Management, 42, 149-156
  • Zimmerman, H. T., Reeve, S., & Bell, P. (2010). Family sense-making practices in science center conversations. Science Education, 94(3), 478–505.
  • Zimmerman, H. T., McClain, L. R., & Crowl, M. (2013). Understanding how families use magnifiers during nature center walks. Research in Science Education, 43(5), 1917-1938.
LICENSE
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.