Category: Uncategorized

  • In The Literature: Journal of Museum Education

    Findings from our first year of data collection at Monticello was published this summer in the Journal of Museum Education, which we’ve made available to you via open access. As a journal written for practitioners by practitioners, this is the perfect venue for sharing with our fellow museum educators. Take a look to see: How […]

  • In The Literature: Theory and Research in Social Education

    On the more academic side of the research, findings from our first year of data collection at Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello were published in Theory and Research in Social Education this summer. We’ve made the full article available via open access, accessible here. Take a look for Careful insights into who teachers are as learners and […]

  • Calling Museum Educators: Your Input Needed

    After three years of researching ‘how does teacher education provided by historic sites affect teachers’ professional growth?’ we have an enormous amount of data that the research team is still processing. Initial findings suggest implications for program evaluation, the individual programs, how teachers interact with difficult history, and more. However, it is our goal to […]

  • On the Road: Presentation from AAM Annual Meeting

    In May 2018, research team members attended the American Alliance of Museums Annual Meeting in Phoenix, Arizona. We hosted an interactive workshop on our evaluation methodology and shared initial findings from both Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello and Mystic Seaport Museum. The slides below will give you an overview of: Our evaluation methodology (and the realities of […]

  • Tacos & Next Steps: Staff Reactions to the Initial Findings

    As we, the Monticello Teacher Institute staff, read the factor descriptions and talked to the research team, we knew that some time and thought would be required to make actionable meaning of the initial findings. So, we ordered our favorite local tacos and called a lunch meeting to figure out “what’s next?” For the Monticello […]

  • Factor 4: A Focus on the Relevance of History

    Factor 4 can be described as having a Focus on Relevance, connecting the on-site experiences to their students’ lives and worlds. Of all the factors, Factor 4 has the greatest number of participants move on or off of the factor. There were three teachers from both the pre and post who loaded on this factor. […]

  • Factor 3: A Focus on Learning from Peers On-Site

    Factor 3 can be characterized as having a Monticello-Learning from Peers/Colleagues focus. This is the largest factor, consisting of nine participants prior to the Institute, and a total of eleven participants afterwards, with eight remaining constant, creating a fairly stable group. While it is not exclusive, one of the interesting aspects about the individuals who […]

  • Factor 2: A Focus on Learning from the Experts

    Factor 2 can be characterized as having a Monticello-Learning from Experts focus. This is the smallest and most stable grouping, comprised of three teachers at the beginning of the Institute, and three afterwards, with two teachers remaining on the factor throughout. These teachers were characterized by statements that emphasized the value of working with the […]

  • Initial Findings: Factor 1

    Once the Q-Sorts were completed, the sorts were correlated and factors were identified. A factor is a grouping of participants who rank the Q-sort item statements in a similar way. Each factor represents a different viewpoint, and when people load on, or fall into, a factor this indicates that they have a shared viewpoint. Some […]

  • What’s Up Next? Initial Findings

    After data collection and analysis this fall, we are thrilled to start sharing our initial findings next week. Unlike surveys, where the information you get is roughly how many people liked or did something, the results in Q are presented as profiles, called “factors.” These profiles illuminate how people clustered their answers in similar ways. […]