Adult Learning Experiences from an Aquarium Visit: The role of Social Interactions in Family Groups
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract How and what adults learn in the context of a family visit to an aquarium is a valuable and important question to ask, given the significance of this demographic to institutions such as these. Based on a larger empirical work,1 this paper reports on the nature and character of adult learning within a family group context while visiting the Vancouver Aquarium Marine Science Centre (Canada), and the longitudinal effects of such experience in the weeks following the visit. In this study a multiple or collective instrumental case study approach was employed to examine the learning experiences of the adult members of 13 family groups; this approach demonstrates that adults visiting the aquarium as part of a family group are active social learners and not merely facilitators of the experience for younger visitors or caregivers. Our outcomes also indicate that the adult members of the participant family groups learned in a multiplicity of domains including the cognitive, the social, and the affective, as a result of their visit to the Vancouver Aquarium. In addition, we discuss the longitudinal impacts of the aquarium visit and provide valuable insights as to the relevance of these experiences in visitors' everyday lives.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".