View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Meet Me at the Museum: Creative Methodologies for Understanding Young Children's Museum Experiences

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Meet Me at the Museum: Creative Methodologies for Understanding Young Children's Museum Experiences
Language: English
Authors: Nicola Wallis (ORCID 0000-0001-7801-7185), Tony Bertram (ORCID 0000-0001-6856-6180), Chris Pascal
Source: European Early Childhood Education Research Journal. 2025 33(5):804-819.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 16
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Museums, Participation, Preschool Children, Cultural Awareness, Creative Activities, Nonformal Education, Caring, Interpersonal Relationship, Art Products
DOI: 10.1080/1350293X.2025.2489043
ISSN: 1350-293X
1752-1807
Abstract: Young children are not just service-users or pupils, they are citizens with an active role in cultural life. The study discussed here used accompanied visits to explore how two- to four-year-old children engaged with a university art museum with the aims of demonstrating children's capacity for cultural participation and enabling adults to notice and support this. The qualitative exploratory case study used innovative approaches to generate data collaboratively. Participating families and a practitioner researcher visited the Museum together, creating fieldnotes, reflective observations, photographs, a project scrapbook and artwork. Visual and written data were subjected to systematic reflexive thematic analysis. Findings demonstrate that children's engagement with museums is complex and sophisticated, and takes places across personal, material, and social arenas. Attention to creative forms of expression including movement, sound, play, and artmaking enabled adults to notice and respond sensitively. The study demonstrated that creative research approaches are invaluable for documenting this engagement, particularly in non-formal learning environments.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1484143
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwE-kSj66E0reveILMAkMQR7AAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDHVeYl7JN5Bjw82lMQIBEICBmyysw9FGLV5AlrAG_6VaJXnWMOjW1jHxaFQ8juCWbmeD58pXxCxuIC8ekmcWi3WQuRRRDQ8cQoOvcGOiWhS5JXLdeXKvl3WhopGwF1ZP-0wcNSp1K4-6Mr1hMlV7iT9s0RXrQyEXAuTAJS3O-j8JsTLnHIzof5e-VfdRfLJkU4cR61gReanaRh40uyDkWegbo4NnZasCWGor4Jc0
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0188054140;h3h01oct.25;2025Sep22.06:13;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0188054140-1">Meet me at the museum: creative methodologies for understanding young children's museum experiences </title> <p>Young children are not just service-users or pupils, they are citizens with an active role in cultural life. The study discussed here used accompanied visits to explore how two- to four-year-old children engaged with a university art museum with the aims of demonstrating children's capacity for cultural participation and enabling adults to notice and support this. The qualitative exploratory case study used innovative approaches to generate data collaboratively. Participating families and a practitioner researcher visited the Museum together, creating fieldnotes, reflective observations, photographs, a project scrapbook and artwork. Visual and written data were subjected to systematic reflexive thematic analysis. Findings demonstrate that children's engagement with museums is complex and sophisticated, and takes places across personal, material, and social arenas. Attention to creative forms of expression including movement, sound, play, and artmaking enabled adults to notice and respond sensitively. The study demonstrated that creative research approaches are invaluable for documenting this engagement, particularly in non-formal learning environments.</p> <p>Keywords: Museums; cultural citizenship; participant observer; early childhood; creative methodologies</p> <hd id="AN0188054140-2">Introduction</hd> <p>This paper describes methodologies used in a doctoral study exploring young children's engagement with an art museum. Creative methods were used to enable young children's participation and collaboration in a space that often privileges adult perspectives. The authors comprise a doctoral triad: lead researcher and two project advisors. The study's purpose was understanding children's connection with museums beyond simply evaluating what they have learned. Bodily, affective, and relational engagement were valued alongside learning and verbal dialogue This article focuses on the creative methodological tools used to generate data, reflecting on the impact of sensitive, multimodal approaches to notice and amplify subtle forms of young children's engagement with museum objects and spaces.</p> <p>The research took place in the Fitzwilliam Museum: the University of Cambridge's art collection. Given this highly specific context, the decision was made to use the real name of the Museum, with permission from the Museum Ethics Committee. While focused on one setting, and a small number of research participants, the study makes an important contribution through its recognition of diverse ways in which young children's cultural engagement can be recognised and understood. This has implications for the civic responsibility of museums regarding how children are positioned as engaged citizens, actively contributing to cultural life.</p> <hd id="AN0188054140-3">Literature review</hd> <p>Museums offer a rich sensory and social environment that supports children's holistic development affording them opportunities to explore through hands-on experience, (Yates et al. [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref1">58</reflink>]) develop relationships (Massarani et al. [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref2">43</reflink>]), and feel a sense of community belonging (Wallis and Noble [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref3">56</reflink>]). Understanding young children's museum experiences is complex, and the methods used by researchers are shaped by underlying conceptions of what museums are for and why children visit them (Shaffer [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref4">51</reflink>]).</p> <p>When children are positioned as learners in museums, methodological tools measure a change in what children know or understand because of their visit. This could be vocabulary development (Lester, Theakston, and Twomey [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref5">37</reflink>]; Deetsch et al. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref6">22</reflink>]), or an ability to engage with abstract concepts (Letourneau et al. [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref7">38</reflink>]; Eberbach and Crowley [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref8">26</reflink>]). Researchers may listen to what children are saying in museum galleries (Aragon and Hirschwerk [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref9">2</reflink>]; McInnes and Elpidoforou [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref10">44</reflink>]; To, Tenenbaum, and Wormald [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref11">54</reflink>]; Callanan et al. [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref12">16</reflink>]), or carry out follow up interviews or assessment activities (Akamca, Gunseli Yildirim, and Murat Ellez [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref13">1</reflink>]; Carter [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref14">18</reflink>]).</p> <p>Alternatively, the museum can be viewed as an instrument encouraging interaction and relationship building between adults and children (Feliu-Torruella, Fernández-Santín, and Atenas [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref15">29</reflink>]; Benjamin, Haden, and Wilkerson [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref16">8</reflink>]). In this case, methods focusing on conversation and documenting interactions are employed (Massarani et al. [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref17">43</reflink>]; Willard et al. [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref18">57</reflink>]; Dooley and Welch [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref19">23</reflink>]), with minimal visibility from the researcher whose role is to observe, record and analyse what takes place rather than intervene actively. The perspectives of parents or educators have also been sought to gain further insights into these interactions (Della Croce, Puddu, and Smorti [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref20">21</reflink>]; Eadie et al. [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref21">24</reflink>]; Taylor and Kervin [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref22">52</reflink>]; Brown, Jeanneret, and Andersen [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref23">14</reflink>]; Letourneau et al. [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref24">39</reflink>])</p> <p>Another way of framing museum experience considers affordances for children's agency (Manyukhina et al. [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref25">41</reflink>]; Carr et al. [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref26">17</reflink>]). Falk, Dierking, and Adams ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref27">28</reflink>]) emphasise the 'free choice' nature of museum learning and see this as a key affordance of museum environments. Individuals can make decisions for themselves about how to engage, with the museum playing a role in building their sense of identity and choice. Suitable research methodologies for investigating museums from this starting point include visitor tracking (Yates et al. [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref28">58</reflink>]), visual methods such as photovoice (Kirk and Buckingham [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref29">36</reflink>]; Kalessopoulou [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref30">34</reflink>]) or wearable cameras to capture what children are <emph>doing</emph> in museums rather than just what they are <emph>learning</emph> (Burbank, McGregor, and Wild [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref31">15</reflink>]).</p> <p>Further, some researchers have explored the intra-action of children and museums as part of a broader inter-connected meshwork of human, more-than-human, sensory, affective and cognitive elements (Kelton et al. [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref32">35</reflink>]; Macrae et al. [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref33">40</reflink>]) through layered analyses of micro-vignettes. Creative methodologies can support response-ability (Barad [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref34">6</reflink>]), via attuned noticing for data generation. There is a gap within the current literature bringing understandings of young children's connectedness with museum environments into dialogue with educators' the day-to-day practice. Our project aimed to address this. Accompanied visits made it possible to bring together pedagogical tools and approaches from the researcher's experience as an educator and generative and ethical research methods.</p> <p>Creative methodologies were employed to answer the research question: <emph>how do 2–4 year olds engage with art museum objects and spaces?</emph> This was explored through four sub-questions:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> o<emph>What spaces and objects in an art museum do young children engage with?</emph></item> <p></p> <item> o<emph>What is the nature of children's engagement with these spaces and objects?</emph></item> <p></p> <item> o<emph>How might museums fulfil their civic obligations to young children within an ethic of care?</emph></item> <p></p> <item> o<emph>What are the implications for practice in museums and early years settings?</emph></item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0188054140-4">Creative materials and methods</hd> <p>The research design embraced the researcher's positionality as a Museum Educator using participant observation and engaging actively alongside families during their Museum visits. Positioned within a participatory paradigm (Cornwall and Jewkes [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref35">20</reflink>]; Pascal and Bertram [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref36">46</reflink>]), creative approaches were used to listen attentively to young children's voices across multiple modalities. The research methods centred on accompanied visits, which were documented in a variety of ways following the Mosaic Approach (Clark [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref37">19</reflink>]). These included observational fieldnotes, photographs, project scrapbook, and follow-up interviews. Eleven families with children aged between two and four years were recruited from Museum mailing lists, social media, and local community organisations to take part.</p> <p>Due to the timing of the fieldwork during the COVID-19 pandemic, when restrictions were in place regarding social mixing due to infection control, the researcher worked with one family at a time, accompanied by an Education Assistant taking photographs. Haywood ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref38">32</reflink>]) suggests a typology of accompanied museum visits from 'thinnest' consisting of single engagements in which researchers simply observe and ask predefined questions to 'thickest' which can produce in-depth insights and changes over time through long-term relationship building between researcher and participants.</p> <hd id="AN0188054140-5">Accompanied visits</hd> <p>The participants in Haywood's example studies were generally of school age or older – our focus on children aged two to four years is therefore unusual. Most studies were carried out by researchers who were independent of the museums. The perspective of a practitioner researcher within accompanied visits brings an additional layer of nuance to the relationship with families, who see a direct relationship between their involvement and future development of practice. Finally, these examples used traditional research methods such as interviews to generate data, so the creative tools in this study were innovative in this context.</p> <p>While accompanied visits built on the researcher's practice as an educator, they also presented new opportunities and challenges. Ordinarily she would work with a group of families, emphasising opportunities for social interactions. Working with one family per visit meant that it was not possible to consider these peer interactions, however, it did allow her to devote attention entirely to the needs of each family: a distinct advantage of this method in generating rich, high-quality data.</p> <p>Although she chose to carry a clipboard and make fieldnotes during the visits she did not simply want to observe the families, but to engage with them actively. To address the question: <emph>how do young children engage with an art museum?</emph> she needed to be engaged herself. This meant chatting with families, playing together, sitting alongside them on the floor, following, leading, making suggestions, and meeting requests. We listened, jumped, drew, laughed, nodded, and pointed – all very ordinary ways of being together in the Museum, but less commonly discussed in the research literature. While we had an intentional agenda of finding out about young children's museum engagement, this was not in tension with families' own agendas, which were very flexible, flowing around the moods, interests, and time children and adults brought with them.</p> <p>While the focus was children's engagement, the data was gathered within family contexts with adults playing a vital role in shaping children's experiences. The research framing meant that adults were generally very aware of their own impact. One parent asked, 'do you want me to interact with her, or just see what she does?'. It was explained that interactions with familiar adults are an important part of the museum experience for young children and so there was no need for the parent to stand back or engage with their child differently to normal. However, it was important to recognise that the museum environment is different to other places where families spend time together. In addition to being observed as research participants, the public setting of the Museum has the potential to make families feel that they are on show (Bennett [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref39">9</reflink>]). During the study, this manifested as parents wanting to demonstrate their identity as interested and engaged parents through asking lots of questions, and referencing other trips and experiences they had had together, particularly at the start of visits. The children tended to become quieter and less engaged at these moments, perhaps picking up on feelings of tension experienced by the parents. However, by spending an extended period together in the galleries, the accompanied visits offered a mechanism for relationships between researcher, parent and child to develop sufficiently that by the end of the visits, parents felt more relaxed and comfortable.</p> <hd id="AN0188054140-6">Researcher positionality</hd> <p>The researcher's positionality as an 'insider' (Greene [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref40">30</reflink>]) at the Museum gave a context for developing relationships with research participants. Her role and objectives were clear and made sense to them: someone working as an educator in a museum would likely want to learn more from families' experiences. This was important for collecting data as it allows participants to understand how their contribution fits into the research. While we had initial concerns that this association with the institution might have compromised the development of relationships on a human-to-human basis, in fact an insider positionality opened up new ways of participating for some families.</p> <p>Sometimes this simply meant introducing families to places and objects in the Museum they did not know about. In other situations, being with an employee of the Museum helped families feel that they could relax and support their child to explore because they felt their experiences were being endorsed. The participant observer approach was key to enabling trusting moments in which parents felt supported and could take on a different role than just steering the behaviour of their child towards expected norms.</p> <p>Ingold ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref41">33</reflink>]) asserts that researcher participation is not distinct from observation, and that all observation involves care and attention and engagement with others:</p> <p>'<emph>to observe is not to objectify; it is to attend to persons and things, to learn from them, and to follow in precept and practice. Indeed, there can be no observation without participation – that is, without an intimate coupling, in perception and action of observer and observed.'</emph> (Ingold [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref42">33</reflink>], 387/8)</p> <p>We would add that the roles of the observer and the observed are not fixed, so at different moments in the research, the child and adult participants were also adopting a stance of care, attention and engagement towards the researcher. They knew that this fieldwork was part of her PhD journey and expressed curiosity and care about this, wanting to know more about her studies.</p> <p>Equally, both children and adults engaged with and observed her as a way of understanding the Museum: by noticing her actions and ways of participating they were seeking reassurance and guidance, adjusting their ways of interacting just as she aimed to be responsive and flexible towards them. The role of participant observer, therefore, was in fact distributed between everybody.</p> <hd id="AN0188054140-7">Data collection methods</hd> <p>We (parents, children and research team) produced a wide variety of data types together, according to what was most relevant and helpful at different moments and for different families. We were inspired by the Mosaic Approach (Clark [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref43">19</reflink>]) to amplify children's voices and were struck by Rogers and Boyd's ([<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref44">50</reflink>]) findings that the Mosaic Approach can be used effectively to gather adult's perspectives, especially in contexts where they might otherwise feel marginalised or lack confidence. Museum galleries can feel overwhelming for many people, so finding ways to listen when voices are quiet was a key concern for us.</p> <p> <bold>Fieldnotes</bold> captured key moments: spoken utterances, routes taken through galleries, and interactions with museum objects and play materials offered to children in the galleries. Tension arose between wanting to be present for families and trying to document experiences in the moment. We did not resolve this tension but instead tried to embrace it in two different ways. Firstly, when writing and being were in conflict, the researcher focused on being with the families and taking part in what was happening. Notes were written up as quickly as possible after each visit, but details were inevitably lost. However, we were happy with this compromise. Not only did it feel like the right thing to do ethically in terms of being respectful to the families, but also, we trusted in practitioner knowledge. The researcher's experience working with families in the Museum, although including preconceptions to be mindful of, enabled her to sense significant moments, and hold on to them even when she was not able to make detailed notes.</p> <p>At other times she made note-writing part of the experience – she would jot down key words, enthusiastically explaining what she was doing as a way of encouraging and showing an interest in the families' responses. Some of the children recognised this and became engaged directly with the data generation, as this exchange shows:</p> <p> <emph>Saira took out the eye viewer ... </emph> </p> <p> <emph>She said, 'this is see-through. Can you write it down?' indicating that I should make a note, which I did. She then also asked Ali [Education Assistant], 'can you take another picture?' saying 'Cheeeeese!' to indicate that she was ready.</emph> </p> <p>[Family 6, Note H]</p> <p> <bold>Photographs</bold> were other tiles in our mosaic. It was not possible for the researcher to take the photographs herself while also making notes and engaging with families, so she asked Museum Education Assistants Alison Ayres and Nathan Huxtable (real names used at their request) to accompany us and document the visits. As experienced practitioners themselves, they were also part of the encounters, responding to families sensitively.</p> <p>Photographs offered another perspective on what was observed and documented, sometimes filling in gaps in the fieldnotes, and sometimes layering over the top of them. While fieldnotes focused on verbal exchanges, and 'large scale' actions, movements, and emotional responses, the assistants were asked to document more subtle aspects of children's engagement: facial expression, body language, and interactions with humans and the objects and spaces of the Museum. Their expertise as experienced partners in the delivery of our early education programmes was acknowledged. Nathan and Alison's photographs were not simply recording images as a static or wearable camera would have done, but interpreting the interactions they saw and highlighting what they viewed as significant moments. In this way, the assistants were active contributors to our data mosaic.</p> <p>The families curated and interpreted their photographs using a <bold>scrapbook,</bold> which was a further element of collaborative data generation. The researcher introduced the scrapbook to families at the start of their visit, showing them what others had documented. This was springboard for time in the gallery, but also offered a model for how to use the book at the end. As children and adults worked together to choose, cut, stick, draw, and write in the book, we all engaged in reflective discussions that served the dual purpose of debriefing for participants, and the beginnings of immersion in the data for analysis. Playful, creative interactions with the scrapbook enabled non-hierarchical dialogues between adults and children. They built on verbal and non-verbal contributions, with contents being created collaboratively rather than led by either the child or the adult (Blaisdell et al. [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref45">10</reflink>]).</p> <p>Through the different ways families used the scrapbook, we gained new insights into the research question around how children engage with museums. Some expressed memories of what they had experienced in the Museum: favourite objects and places, often accompanied by a key remark that had been made or something that had happened to cement this memory in place. Others used the scrapbook to revisit activities and emotional moments, choosing images showing children absorbed in what they were doing, or issues they remained curious about. One child, for example, found it hard to understand why a particularly appealing artwork could not be taken out of the glass case and chose an image of herself looking at this to include, while another child who was both wary and intrigued by a large ceramic owl jar decided that he wanted to include images of this encounter. Another feature of engagement with the scrapbook emphasised social aspects of the visit, wanting to make sure that all of us present were represented, for example. Some children used the scrapbook to integrate their wider social worlds with their Museum experience, through imaginative drawing referencing animals, television shows, and pirates!</p> <p>The scrapbook was a tool of pedagogical listening (Rinaldi [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref46">49</reflink>]). It became a mediated third space between family and Museum, and also between individual and group experiences (Thompson [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref47">53</reflink>]). It was a site of expression and communication, and reached across time and space: a comforting experience during a time of relative isolation due to COVID-19, and highly relevant in the context of a museum environment surrounded by other artefacts that represent something of the lives of people we will never meet.</p> <hd id="AN0188054140-8">Analysis</hd> <p>The study used Reflexive Thematic Analysis (Braun and Clarke [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref48">11</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref49">13</reflink>]) to build all these pieces into a finished mosaic. This allowed for a similar level of sensitivity, responsiveness, and interaction that we had sought in the sessions themselves. Rather than develop and apply a rigid coding framework, the analysis shuttled back and forth between the data and developing themes. The multimodal dataset required a layered, iterative approach to analysis. Scrapbook entries, photographs, and fieldnotes were revisited and summarised by key words and phrases. These were then clustered together to create themes, whose boundaries became clarified through shifting and recoding data points in order to develop a meaningful narrative. As Braun and Clarke ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref50">12</reflink>]) state, researchers <emph>'edit and evoke participant 'voices' but ultimately tell their story about the data'</emph> (p.335). While the researcher created the finished data mosaic by putting pieces together to make patterns, she felt the participants at her back, reminding her of what was important to them as she revisited and refined the interpretation of the data. From thirty initial codes, seven <emph>arenas of engagement</emph> were identified. These were subsequently categorised into three over-arching themes: material, personal, social engagement. The relationship between these is shown in Figure 1.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. Arenas of engagement.</p> <hd id="AN0188054140-9">Ethical considerations</hd> <p>Before carrying out the accompanied visits, there were several ethical considerations, specifically relevant to this methodology.</p> <hd id="AN0188054140-10">Recruitment</hd> <p>We know that certain groups (highly educated, non-disabled, financially secure families) are currently overrepresented in museum research (Eardley et al. [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref51">25</reflink>]; Hamer [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref52">31</reflink>]; Ásványi, Fehér, and Jászberényi [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref53">5</reflink>]; Erdman, Nguyen, and Middleton [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref54">27</reflink>]; Taylor and Kervin [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref55">52</reflink>]). We therefore took steps to to share invitations to participate as widely as possible, using inclusive and non-discriminatory recruitment methods.</p> <hd id="AN0188054140-11">Consent, assent and participation</hd> <p>All families received information in advance of the study, including a picture-led sheet for parents to share with children highlighting the voluntary nature of participation. All adults were asked to be alert to signs that children were withdrawing their assent and to respect this.</p> <p>Taking photographs was a key aspect of the methodological approach. Communication through the body is an important aspect of a child's voice, and so we were interested in using unpixellated, unedited, identifiable images in the project to honour this (Nutbrown [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref56">45</reflink>]). However, it was important to gain consent from both adults and children to do this.</p> <hd id="AN0188054140-12">Findings</hd> <p>The diverse data set created during the fieldwork was analysed through a Reflexive Thematic Analysis process (Braun and Clarke [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref57">13</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref58">12</reflink>]) which aligned well with the overall methodological choices emphasising subjective researcher expertise, interpretation and sensitivity. In the ongoing dialogue about the data generated through multimodal listening enabled by the Mosaic Approach, tiny moments from the accompanied visits gained significance as they appeared alongside other similar or contrasting events.</p> <hd id="AN0188054140-13">Arenas of engagement</hd> <p>Below is a summary of the findings focused primarily on the sub-questions:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> o<emph>What spaces and objects in an art museum do young children engage with?</emph></item> <p></p> <item> o<emph>What is the nature of children's engagement with these spaces and objects?</emph></item> </ulist> <p>and how these were facilitated by the creative methodological tools used.</p> <p>Because these different forms of engagement are complex and intertwined, they can be challenging to identify in isolation. The creative use of accompanied visits enabled a deep form of noticing (Mason [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref59">42</reflink>]) through which different kinds of engagement could not be observed and nurtured.</p> <p>One example of this is an observation of Kiefer. Prior to this moment, he had already shown an interest in the ambient sound of the galleries, commenting on clocks chiming and the sound of other visitors' footsteps. Sonic engagement is one aspect of Material Engagement as shown in Figure 1. Kiefer also enjoyed creating sounds himself using play resources provided by the researchers for use in the gallery. Banging toys together, tapping them on the floor, scraping one item over another to make a sound were repeated behaviours or schemas (Arnold and Pen Green Team [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref60">4</reflink>]) to support Kiefer in developing his thinking. This is characterised in Figure 1 as engagement through pattern – a form of Personal Engagement. Having taken the time to notice and appreciate these forms of engagement, the adults were able to support Kiefer through Social Engagement (relationships) to build connections works on display:</p> <p> <emph>Kiefer gazed at Escamilla's</emph> The Adoration of the Shepherds<emph>.</emph></p> <p>'<emph>There's a baby! he said, pointing ... </emph></p> <p> <emph>Kiefer glanced between me and the painting saying, 'they're wrapping the baby in a scarf.' He then noticed and pointed out the babies in Tintoretto's</emph> Adoration of the Shepherds <emph>and Piombo's</emph> Adoration of the Shepherds<emph> ... </emph></p> <p> <emph>Nathan [Education Assistant] placed the toy basket down and Kiefer took out two sensory blocks containing beads, shaking them both and banging them together loudly.</emph> </p> <p> <emph>'You've woken the babies up!' I said, and Kiefer pointed to the paintings opposite saying, 'and them!'</emph> </p> <p>[Family 9, Notes H-J]</p> <p> <emph>Kiefer found the block containing glittery liquid, which he shook. I wondered aloud whether it would make a very quiet sound.</emph> </p> <p> <emph>He said, 'it's water,' while shaking and looking at it. He appeared to concentrate hard on the block he was shaking, and it was possible to hear the water swishing inside it. I said that the water sound reminded me of boats on water and showed him the nearby paintings of Venice. Mum Mya said, 'can you see the boats, Kiefer?'</emph> </p> <p>[Family 9, Note K]</p> <p>By pointing and interacting with the adults and artworks around him, Kiefer signals his willingness to engage and create a shared experience. Connecting sounds with objects in the gallery also allows the adults to feel more comfortable in permitting Kiefer to create sounds. The catalyst and driving force of the encounters was Kiefer's sound making. As such he was able to exercise his agency and make his own contribution to the sonic environment of the gallery. By then weaving these sounds back into an exchange with the exhibited artworks, the adults were able not just to contain recognise Kiefer's engagement but to participate in it themselves too.</p> <p>Further, through intentional use of the Mosaic Approach (Clark [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref61">19</reflink>]) to introduce choice and responsive listening into each individual visit, it was possible to home in on subtle forms of engagement, such as children altering their gait in response to different floor coverings in different galleries, that might have been rendered invisible by traditional research approaches of observation and behaviour coding. The positionality of the practitioner researcher is crucial here. Mason notes that,</p> <p>'<emph>a teacher notices things happening in classrooms that non-teachers do not, which is itself a special case of the widely recognised phenomenon that professionals notice details to which the novice is oblivious.'</emph> (Mason [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref62">42</reflink>], 239)</p> <p>The novice/expert binary in the accompanied visits is not as fixed in the experience of a museum gallery than it might be in a classroom, however. This was especially the case in this study with its focus on understanding children's engagement rather than assessing learning against particular outcomes. Expertise (and the power associated with it) shifted between the practitioner who had knowledge of the Museum and its collection, and the visiting children and adults who brought a different kind of expertise about each other and their shared life experiences. The format of the accompanied visits meant that decisions such as routes to take around the Museum, where to stop and linger, and where to pass by quickly were shared between all the participants, with different individuals taking the lead at different moments.</p> <p>What is pertinent about Mason's point above, is that while we are all expert in some capacity, we are also all novices in some aspect too. By being alongside each other during an accompanied visit, we can notice what each other notices. In this way, we were not vying with each other to be on top of the expertise hierarchy, but rather celebrating noticing something new that we would perhaps have remained oblivious to had we not seen it from another's perspective.</p> <p>In the study, this manifested as parents expressing surprise at how deeply engaged and interested their own children were in the museum experience, children being delighted to be shown a tiny hidden object or artwork by the adults, or by the researcher looking in a new way at familiar features of the building thanks to the ways in which children explored them. This is key to advocating for children as cultural citizens. Careful attention to, and a willingness to learn from, children's engagement with museums demonstrates that not only do they have a right to participate in these spaces, but that they have something to contribute. Revealing the sophisticated, complex and sensitive ways that children connect with museums is a vital step towards institutions recognising their youngest visitors as competent participants in cultural dialogue.</p> <hd id="AN0188054140-14">Discussion</hd> <p>The study set out to explore children's engagement with an art museum using creative methodologies for collaborative data generation. So we focus on what the findings demonstrate regarding creative research methods that can enable children's voices to be heard in museums.</p> <p>Young children's museum engagement is complex, relational, and multimodal, highlighting the importance of research and pedagogical approaches that support holistic communication and connection building. In some research contexts, verbal engagement and interactions are prioritised, with a resulting diminution of alternative forms of knowledge and expression (Arculus and MacRae [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref63">3</reflink>]). In the multisensory environment of the museum, however, it feels appropriate to adopt creative methodologies that enable and value visual, material, and embodied forms of communication. By challenging hierarchies around forms of data: allocating equal status to children's drawings, researcher reflections, physical movement, and affective responses through data gathering and analysis methods, aspects of museum experiences that might otherwise be dismissed or unnoticed can be considered and explored.</p> <hd id="AN0188054140-15">Development of creative research methodologies for practitioners</hd> <p>Practitioner research in museums is a developing area with the potential to:</p> <p>'<emph>interrogate existing systems and structures, surface previously hidden yet vital narratives of our histories and centre more diverse interpretations</emph>.' (Pringle [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref64">48</reflink>], no pagination)</p> <p>By adapting approaches and methods that are already part of the museum educator's pedagogical tool belt, practitioner researchers are well placed to support and amplify the voices of their research participants. In this project, for example, the ability to rapidly build rapport with children and families in an unfamiliar setting, and the provision of a range of ways to enact and communicate connection with the Museum (physical movement, play with objects, drawing, and photography) were tools to generate rich research data, which have been 'piloted' over many years of professional experience.</p> <p>Wall ([<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref65">55</reflink>]) describes how acknowledging the contribution of 'pedagogic appropriateness' as an element of quality in practitioner research can support educators to engage with research, and leverage their unique positionality to enable the voices of those in their care to be heard. Acknowledging the expertise that practitioner researchers bring regarding collaboration and enabling multimodal dialogue is one way in which creative research methodologies will continue to develop, intertwining theoretical understanding with innovative practical tools.</p> <p>The use of creative research methodologies such as those described here are not simply about making data generation appear fun or appealing to children (Barker and Weller [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref66">7</reflink>]). Rather, the concern is taking children's voices and participation seriously as collaborators in the enquiry process. The responsive and careful approach required to carry out a successful accompanied visit is intricately bound up with beliefs and values that children have significant contributions to make to cultural dialogue, and that pre-existing power hierarchies and imbalances can make these harder to identify and document. The findings around the importance of care and noticing to allow subtle forms of engagement to surface, is a key implication for practice also.</p> <p>Collaborative and participatory data generation, through pedagogically appropriate creative methods such as the accompanied museum visits described here are important for increasing equitable cultural dialogue. Approaches that attend to and value seldom-heard voices and modes of communication facilitate the contribution of a wider range of perspectives, but also acknowledge the creative expertise of practitioners. By leveraging their unique positionality, research carried out by practitioners in museums can employ creative methodologies to amplify the voices of those they engage with in the galleries.</p> <hd id="AN0188054140-16">Limitations</hd> <p>As the study focused on a small number of families, and in one museum setting, it is sensible to be cautious about claims of transferability. Despite efforts to reach beyond the traditional museum visiting demographic in recruitment to the study, highly educated and culturally-engaged participants were still over-represented. However, there are important learnings relevant to educators, thinkers and practitioners in a range of contexts regarding how museums frame children's experiences, and what this means for our perception of children more broadly.</p> <p>The use of accompanied museum visits with an experienced educator described above highlights the dialogue between research and practice that Pascal and Bertram have articulated as praxeology ([<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref67">47</reflink>]). This paradigm supports the improvement of practice, highlighting the potential for rapid application of research findings that is at the heart of practitioner research, but crucially also understands this as embedded within a theoretical and ethical framework that considers beneficial impacts on all involved.</p> <hd id="AN0188054140-17">Conclusion</hd> <p>Our study shows the potential of applying praxeology, a paradigm theorised within Early Childhood Education and Care, to museum education, and demonstrates how the creative tools of the Mosaic Approach are also transferable to this context. The creative methodologies described here support researchers to make the case that cultural participation for our youngest citizens is possible and has the potential to bring new insights to our institutions, paving the way for future studies and innovations that are collaborative, inclusive, and equitable.</p> <hd id="AN0188054140-18">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).</p> <ref id="AN0188054140-19"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref13" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Akamca, Güzin Özyilmaz, R. Gunseli Yildirim, and A. Murat Ellez. 2017. " An Alternative Educational Method in Early Childhood: Museum Education." Educational Research and Reviews 12 (14): 688 – 694. https://ezp.lib.cam.ac.uk/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ1149758&site=ehost-live&scope=site.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref9" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Aragon, Katherine, and Rebecca Hirschwerk. 2018. " Drawn to Nature: A Developmentally Based Exploration of Art and Science." Journal of Museum Education 43 (4): 349 – 355. https://ezp.lib.cam.ac.uk/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ1194848&site=ehost-live&scope=site.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref63" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Arculus, C., and C. MacRae. 2020. " Complicité: Resisting the Tyranny of Talk in Early Childhood." Global Education Review 7 (2): 43 – 57.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref60" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Arnold, Cath, and Pen Green Team. 2010. Understanding Schemas and Emotion in Early Childhood. Los Angeles & London : Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref53" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Ásványi, K., Z. Fehér, and M. Jászberényi. 2021. " The Family-Friendly Museum: Museums Through the Eyes of Families." Muzeológia a Kultúrne Dedičstvo 9 (1): 21 – 40.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref34" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Barad, Karen. 2007. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham : Duke University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref66" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Barker, John, and Susie Weller. 2003. " "Is It Fun?" Developing Children Centred Research Methods." International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 23 (1/2): 33 – 58. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443330310790435.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref16" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Benjamin, Nora, Catherine A. Haden, and Erin Wilkerson. 2010. " Enhancing Building, Conversation, and Learning Through Caregiver–Child Interactions in a Children's Museum." Developmental Psychology 46 (2): 502 – 515. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017822.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref39" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Bennett, T. 1995. The Birth of the Museum. London : Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Blaisdell, Caralyn, Lorna Arnott, Kate Wall, and Carol Robinson. 2019. " Look Who's Talking: Using Creative, Playful Arts-Based Methods in Research with Young Children." Journal of Early Childhood Research 17 (1): 14 – 31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X18808816.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Braun, Virginia, and Victoria Clarke. 2021. " Can I Use TA? Should I Use TA? Should I Not Use TA? Comparing Reflexive Thematic Analysis and Other Pattern-Based Qualitative Analytic Approaches." Counselling and Psychotherapy Research 21 (1): 37 – 47. https://doi.org/10.1002/capr.12360.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Braun, Virginia, and Victoria Clarke. 2021. " One Size Fits All? What Counts as Quality Practice in (Reflexive) Thematic Analysis? " Qualitative Research in Psychology 18 (3): 328 – 352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Braun, Virginia, and Victoria Clarke. 2022. Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. London : Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brown, Robert, Neryl Jeanneret, and Jennifer Andersen. 2019. " Are We on the Same Page? Family and Museum Staff Perceptions of Engagement and Learning." Visitor Studies 22 (2): 213 – 232. https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2019.1668235.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Burbank, B., D. McGregor, and M. Wild. 2018. " "My Special, My Special Thing, and My Camera!" Using GoPro TM as a Complementary Research Tool to Investigate Young Children's Museum Experiences." Museum and Society 16 (3): 311 – 333.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Callanan, Maureen A., Claudia L. Castañeda, Megan R. Luce, and Jennifer L. Martin. 2017. " Family Science Talk in Museums: Predicting Children's Engagement from Variations in Talk and Activity." Child Development 88 (5): 1492 – 1504. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12886.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Carr, Margaret, Jeanette Clarkin-Phillips, Brenda Soutar, Leanne Clayton, Miria Wipaki, Rea Wipaki-Hawkins, Bronwen Cowie, and Shelley Gardner. 2018. " Young Children Visiting Museums: Exhibits, Children and Teachers Co-Author the Journey." Children's Geographies 16 (5): 558 – 570. https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2018.1480750.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Carter, Danielle. 2018. " Narrative Learning as Theory and Method in Arts and Museum Education." Studies in Art Education: A Journal of Issues and Research in Art Education 59 (2): 126–144.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Clark, A. 2017. Listening to Young Children: A Guide to Understanding and Using the Mosaic Approach. 3rd ed. London & Philadelphia : Jessica Kingsley Publishers.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cornwall, A., and R. Jewkes. 1995. " What Is Participatory Research? " Social Science and Medicine 41 (12): 1667 – 1676.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Croce, Roberta Della, Luisa Puddu, and Andrea Smorti. 2019. " A Qualitative Exploratory Study on Museum Educators' Perspective on Children's Guided Museum Visits." Museum Management and Curatorship 34 (4): 383 – 401. https://doi.org/10.1080/09647775.2019.1630849.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Deetsch, Mike, Rachel Glass, Regina Jankowski, Evelyn Mylander, Peggy Roth, and Elisabeth Wharton. 2018. " Visual Literacy and Its Impact on Pre-Literacy Development." Journal of Museum Education 43 (2): 148 – 158. https://doi.org/10.1080/10598650.2018.1426332.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dooley, Caitlin Mc Munn, and Meghan M. Welch. 2014. " Nature of Interactions Among Young Children and Adult Caregivers in a Children's Museum." Early Childhood Education Journal 42 (2): 125 – 132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-013-0601-x.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eadie, Patricia, Sarah Young, Liz Suda, and Amelia Church. 2021. " Facilitator and Teacher Perspectives on Museum Programs for Young Children." Journal of Museum Education (November): 103 – 112. https://doi.org/10.1080/10598650.2021.2000770.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eardley, Alison F, Claire Dobbin, Joselia Neves, and Peter Ride. 2018. " Hands-On, Shoes-Off: Multisensory Tools Enhance Family Engagement Within an Art Museum." Visitor Studies 21 (1): 79 – 97. https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2018.1503873.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eberbach, Catherine, and Kevin Crowley. 2017. " From Seeing to Observing: How Parents and Children Learn to See Science in a Botanical Garden." Journal of the Learning Sciences 26 (4): 608 – 642. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2017.1308867.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Erdman, Sarah, Nhi Nguyen, and Margaret Middleton. 2022. Welcoming Young Children Into the Museum: A Practical Guide. Abingdon & New York: Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Falk, John, Lynn Dierking, and Marianna Adams. 2006. " Living in a Learning Society: Museums and Free-Choice Learning." In A Companion to Museum Studies, edited by Sharon Macdonald, 323 – 339. Malden, Oxford & Victoria : Blackwell Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Feliu-Torruella, Maria, Mercè Fernández-Santín, and Javiera Atenas. 2021. " Building Relationships Between Museums and Schools: Reggio Emilia as a Bridge to Educate Children About Heritage." Sustainability 13 (7): 3713. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13073713.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Greene, Melanie. 2014. " On the Inside Looking In: Methodological Insights and Challenges in Conducting Qualitative Insider Research." The Qualitative Report 19 (29): 1 – 13.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hamer, Naomi. 2019. " The Hybrid Exhibits of the Story Museum: The Child as Creative Artist and the Limits to Hands-on Participation." Museum and Society 17 (3): 390 – 403. https://doi.org/10.29311/mas.v17i3.3256.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Haywood, Naomi. 2018a. " Accompanied Visits as a Tool to Understand Visitors' Experiences: A Critical Reflection and Proposed Typology." Visitor Studies 21 (1): 135 – 147. https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2018.1503876.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ingold, Tim. 2014. " That's Enough About Ethnography!' HAU." Journal of Ethnographic Theory 4 (1): 383 – 395. https://doi.org/10.14318/hau4.1.021.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kalessopoulou, Despina. 2017. " Capturing the Untold: Photography as a Tool for Empowering Children to Interpret Their Embodied Experiences in Museums." Journal of Visual Literacy 36 : 3 – 4. https://doi.org/10.1080/1051144X.2017.1408206.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kelton, Molly L., Jasmine Y. Ma, Cierra Rawlings, Bohdan Rhodehamel, Patti Saraniero, and Ricardo Nemirovsky. 2018. " Family Meshworks: Children's Geographies and Collective Ambulatory Sense-Making in an Immersive Mathematics Exhibition." Children's Geographies 16 (5): 543 – 557. https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2018.1495314.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kirk, E., and W. Buckingham. 2018. Snapshots of Museum Experience: Understanding Child Visitors through Photography.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lester, Nicola, Anna Theakston, and Katherine E. Twomey. 2023. " The Role of the Natural History Museum in Promoting Word Learning for Young Children." Infant and Child Development 32 (2): 1 – 17. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.2400.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Letourneau, Susan M., James Liu ChangChia, Kaitlin Donnelly, Delia Meza, Stephen Uzzo, and Katherine McMillan Culp. 2020. " Museum Makers: Family Explorations of Data Science Through Making and Exhibit Design." Curator: The Museum Journal 63 (1): 131 – 145. https://doi.org/10.1111/cura.12348.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Letourneau, Susan M., Robin Meisner, Jessica L. Neuwirth, and David M. Sobel. 2017. " What Do Caregivers Notice and Value About How Children Learn Through Play In a Children's Museum? " Journal of Museum Education 42 (1): 87 – 98. https://doi.org/10.1080/10598650.2016.1260436.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Macrae, Christina, Abigail Hackett, Rachel Holmes, and Liz Jones. 2018. " Vibrancy, Repetition and Movement: Posthuman Theories for Reconceptualising Young Children in Museums." Children's Geographies 16 (5): 503 – 515. https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2017.1409884.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Manyukhina, Yana, Naomi Haywood, Karen Davies, and Dominic Wyse. 2023. " Young Children's Agency in the Science Museum: Insights from the Use of Storytelling in Object-Rich Galleries." International Journal of Science Education, Part B 14 (2): 1 – 17. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2023.2244645.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mason, John. 2021. " Learning About Noticing, by, and Through, Noticing." ZDM – Mathematics Education 53 (1): 231 – 243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01192-4.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Massarani, Luisa, Jessica Norberto Rocha, Graziele Scalfi, Yan Silveira, Wailã Cruz, and Leandro Lage dos Santos Guedes. 2021. " Families Visit the Museum: A Study on Family Interactions and Conversations at the Museum of the Universe – Rio de Janeiro (Brazil)." Frontiers in Education 6 (May): 1 – 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.669467.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McInnes, Karen, and Marina Eleni Elpidoforou. 2018. " Investigating and Learning from Toddler Play in a Children's Museum." Early Child Development and Care 188 (3): 399 – 409. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2016.1223073.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nutbrown, Cathy. 2011. " Naked by the Pool? Blurring the Image? Ethical Issues in the Portrayal of Young Children in Arts-Based Educational Research." Qualitative Inquiry 17 (1): 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410389437.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pascal, Christine, and Tony Bertram. 2009. " Listening to Young Citizens: The Struggle to Make Real a Participatory Paradigm in Research with Young Children." European Early Childhood Education Research Journal 17 (2): 249 – 262. https://doi.org/10.1080/13502930902951486.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pascal, Chris, and Tony Bertram. 2012. " Praxis, Ethics and Power: Developing Praxeology as a Participatory Paradigm for Early Childhood Research." European Early Childhood Education Research Journal 20 (4): 477 – 492. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2012.737236.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pringle, Emily. 2022. Everything Must Change?' A*Desk, 24 January 2022.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rinaldi, C. 2004. " The Relationship Between Documentation and Assessment." The Quarterly Periodical of the North American Reggio Emilia Alliance 11 (1): 1 – 4.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rogers, Marg, and Wendy Boyd. 2020. " Meddling with Mosaic: Reflections and Adaptations." European Early Childhood Education Research Journal 28 (5): 642 – 658. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2020.1817236.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shaffer, Sharon. 2021. International Thinking on Children in Museums. London : Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429296697</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Taylor, Ellie K., and Lisa Kervin. 2022. " Parent/Caregiver Perspectives on Children's Play and Learning at a Children's Museum: A Qualitative Descriptive Study." Journal of Museum Education 47 (2): 275 – 285. https://doi.org/10.1080/10598650.2021.2023312.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thompson, C. 2009. " Mira! Looking, Listening and Lingering in Research with Children." Visual Arts Research 35 (1): 24 – 34.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> To, Cheryl, Harriet R Tenenbaum, and Daniel Wormald. 2016. " What Do Parents and Children Talk About at a Natural History Museum?' Curator." The Museum Journal 59 (4): 369 – 385. https://doi.org/10.1111/cura.12174.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wall, Kate. 2018. Building a Bridge between Pedagogy and Methodology: Emergent Thinking on Notions of Quality in Practitioner Enquiry'.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wallis, Nicola, and Kate Noble. 2022. " Leave Only Footprints: How Children Communicate a Sense of Ownership and Belonging in an Art Gallery." European Early Childhood Education Research Journal 30 (3): 344 – 359. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2022.2055100.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Willard, Aiyana K., Justin T.A. Busch, Katherine A. Cullum, Susan M. Letourneau, David M. Sobel, Maureen Callanan, and Cristine H. Legare. 2019. " Explain This, Explore That: A Study of Parent–Child Interaction in a Children's Museum." Child Development 90 (5): e598 – e617. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13232.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yates, Ellen, Judith Szenasi, Amanda Smedley, Kayla Glynn, and Michelle Hemmings. 2022. " Children as Experiencers: Increasing Engagement, Participation and Inclusion for Young Children in the Museum." Childhood (Copenhagen, Denmark) 29 (1): 58 – 74. https://doi.org/10.1177/09075682211064429.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Nicola Wallis; Tony Bertram and Chris Pascal</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref67"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1484143
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Meet Me at the Museum: Creative Methodologies for Understanding Young Children's Museum Experiences
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Nicola+Wallis%22">Nicola Wallis</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7801-7185">0000-0001-7801-7185</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Tony+Bertram%22">Tony Bertram</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6856-6180">0000-0001-6856-6180</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Chris+Pascal%22">Chris Pascal</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22European+Early+Childhood+Education+Research+Journal%22"><i>European Early Childhood Education Research Journal</i></searchLink>. 2025 33(5):804-819.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 16
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Museums%22">Museums</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Participation%22">Participation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Preschool+Children%22">Preschool Children</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cultural+Awareness%22">Cultural Awareness</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Creative+Activities%22">Creative Activities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Nonformal+Education%22">Nonformal Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Caring%22">Caring</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interpersonal+Relationship%22">Interpersonal Relationship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Art+Products%22">Art Products</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/1350293X.2025.2489043
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1350-293X<br />1752-1807
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Young children are not just service-users or pupils, they are citizens with an active role in cultural life. The study discussed here used accompanied visits to explore how two- to four-year-old children engaged with a university art museum with the aims of demonstrating children's capacity for cultural participation and enabling adults to notice and support this. The qualitative exploratory case study used innovative approaches to generate data collaboratively. Participating families and a practitioner researcher visited the Museum together, creating fieldnotes, reflective observations, photographs, a project scrapbook and artwork. Visual and written data were subjected to systematic reflexive thematic analysis. Findings demonstrate that children's engagement with museums is complex and sophisticated, and takes places across personal, material, and social arenas. Attention to creative forms of expression including movement, sound, play, and artmaking enabled adults to notice and respond sensitively. The study demonstrated that creative research approaches are invaluable for documenting this engagement, particularly in non-formal learning environments.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1484143
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1484143
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/1350293X.2025.2489043
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 16
        StartPage: 804
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Museums
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Participation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Preschool Children
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cultural Awareness
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Creative Activities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Nonformal Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Caring
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interpersonal Relationship
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Art Products
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Meet Me at the Museum: Creative Methodologies for Understanding Young Children's Museum Experiences
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Nicola Wallis
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Tony Bertram
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Chris Pascal
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1350-293X
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1752-1807
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 33
            – Type: issue
              Value: 5
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: European Early Childhood Education Research Journal
              Type: main
ResultId 1