2017
opening minds to science The Saint Louis Science Center’s Report to the Community
“We love that every time we visit the Science Center that there are new and exciting things to discover. The entire GROW exhibit was new for our family and it is amazing!” — s cience center visitor august 2017
from the president and chief executive officer,
bert vescolani Dear Friends, Partners, and Supporters, Welcome to the fifth edition of Opening Minds to Science – The Saint Louis Science Center’s Report to the Community, 2017, our yearly review of our ongoing efforts to understand the Science Center’s audiences and how effectively we serve the community both on-site and through off-site programs. 2017 marked the first year of work under our four-year strategic plan. This plan encompasses four focus areas: Understanding and Engaging our Audience, Providing a Unique Science Learning Experience, Building Talent and Organizational Effectiveness, and Sustaining Financial Strength. Collectively, these efforts support our mission: To ignite and sustain lifelong science and technology learning. Two of the strategic initiatives within Understanding and Engaging our Audience are to “continuously learn more about our audiences to inform how we engage them” and to “design and implement a community engagement strategy.” This report highlights some of the ways in which we are fulfilling the first initiative, including our involvement in the Collaboration for Ongoing Visitor Experience Studies (COVES). The Science Center is one of seven U.S. science museums leading COVES, a national effort to develop a system for collecting data about visitors that can be used by all participating museums to better serve their communities. The second initiative speaks to our desire to look beyond our current audience and visitors to understand our community more broadly. To that end, in 2017, we launched our Community Engagement Initiative. The goals of this initiative are: to better understand the needs of our region and determine how the Science Center can be most relevant; to create a sense of ownership of the Science Center by the community; and to have an ongoing commitment to put the community at the heart of our work. As you review this report and discover what we have learned from and about our guests in 2017, I invite you to consider how you see the Saint Louis Science Center in the community – we may be seeking your input soon! Sincerely,
contents our data
1
How do we learn about our visitors?
people served
2
How many people does the Saint Louis Science Center reach?
general public audience profile
3
Who are our visitors? Why do people visit the Science Center? What do guests do during their visit?
voice of the visitors
7
What do visitors say about their Science Center experiences?
science
+ education + experience
9
SEE our approach to exhibitions and programs!
front-end exhibit evaluation – infrastructures 10 How do we use evaluation to shape new exhibits?
summative exhibit evaluation – grow
11
What does evaluation tell us about the effectiveness of exhibits?
educational programs
13
How do we track engagement in Science Center programs?
Co-Authors: Elisa Israel Director of Research & Evaluation Saint Louis Science Center Sara Davis Research & Evaluation Manager Saint Louis Science Center Kelley Staab Research & Evaluation Associate Saint Louis Science Center
Contributing Authors: Taline A. Kuyumjian Lauren Wilson Kate Livingston ExposeYourMuseum, LLC Publication Design: Jake Walker Saint Louis Science Center
Copyright 2018 Saint Louis Science Center
our data How do we learn about our visitors?
Table of Contents
Our visitors and their experiences are central to everything we do at the Saint Louis Science Center. Therefore, we routinely conduct evaluation studies to better understand our visitors and their experiences with Science Center offerings. These evaluations are designed following best practices in the field of visitor studies. Data are systematically collected, analyzed, and communicated so they can inform decisions about exhibitions, programs, and operations. This is accomplished through methods such as surveys, comment cards, interviews, and observations.
data presented in this report were collected through a variety of methods, including:
seasonal exit interviews of adult, general public
visitors that provide key information, including visitor demographics, visitation patterns, and likelihood of recommending the Science Center.
comment cards that staff distribute each day
to a random sample of visitors throughout the facility with the invitation to “let us know how your visit goes today.�
exhibit evaluation studies, in which the feedback
visitors provide via interviews and surveys, along with observations of visitor movements, are used to inform the design and development of new exhibitions and to assess the overall effectiveness of current exhibitions.
the science center’s internally developed system for assessing mission impact (sami),
which collects and summarizes key performance indicators for educational programs.
1
people served How many people does the Saint Louis Science Center reach?
Table of Contents
The Saint Louis Science Center monitors daily attendance through the use of on-site door counters and by tracking attendance at off-site programs.
In 2017, the Science Center reached 1,106,644 people. The majority, 93% (1,028,059 people), were on-site visitors. The remaining 7% (78,585 people), experienced educational programs and community outreach activities at off-site locations such as schools, community centers, and the Challenger Learning Center-St. Louis.
general public 84% school groups 5% non-school groups 2% facility rentals 1%
1,106,644
other on-site 1%
people served
off-site 7%
2
general public audience profile Table of Contents
Who are our visitors?
Three times during the year, a randomized sample of our adult, general public visitors were invited to participate in an interview at the end of their visit. These exit interviews (occurring in the spring, summer, and fall/winter) provide key information on demographics and visitation patterns. In 2017, a statistically valid sample of 827 visitors were interviewed. first time vs. repeat visitors
st. louis county st. louis city metro area mo counties
29.6%
first time visitors 28%
metro area il counties tourists
repeat visitors 72%
37.0%
all local residents 63% local zoo-museum district residents 40%
10.7% 11.3% 11.4%
local non zoo-museum district residents 23%
Slightly less than three-quarters of general public visitors are repeat visitors. On average, these repeat visitors came to the Science Center 3.1 times during the previous 12 months.
how often do repeat visitors come to the science center?
calhoun 0% macoupin
43%
<1%
41%
jersey <1%
lincoln <1%
16%
bond 0% warren <1%
st. charles
6%
st. louis city 11%
madison 5%
st. louis county 30%
clinton <1%
1st visit in 12 months
2-4 visits in 12 months
5 or more visits in 12 months
st. clair 5%
franklin 1%
jefferson monroe
3%
washington
science center membership status
1%
tourists 37%
<1%
members
12% non-members
Visitors represented 32 states plus several countries. The majority of visitors (63%) reside in the Metro St. Louis area, including St. Louis City, St. Louis County, and the surrounding Metro area counties in Missouri and Illinois.
88%
Most general public visitors are not current Science Center Members. 3
Table of Contents
visiting group type
highest level of education completed
65% high school
35%
9% advanced degree
28%
family groups
some college / associate degree
adult groups
26%
The typical “family” group consisted of two adults and two children. Within the family groups, the median age of the oldest child was nine years and the median age of the youngest child was six years.
undergraduate degree
38%
Visitors in adult groups typically come in groups of two; however some visit in larger groups and others visit by themselves. Of those visiting in adultonly groups, 26% were under age 25 and another 21% were age 25-34.
The Science Center’s adult, general public visitors tend to be fairly well-educated, with two-thirds holding at least an undergraduate degree and just over one-quarter having completed some education beyond high school.
age ranges of adult, general public visitors 13%
27%
27%
11%
12%
10%
18–24
25–34
35–44
45–54
55–64
65+
1% 2%
visitors from the st. louis metro area The racial/ethnic distribution of Science Center visitors who reside in the St. Louis area (St. Louis City, St. Louis County, and the surrounding Metro area counties in Missouri and Illinois) is similar to the 2016 US Census Bureau data for the St. Louis Metro area (the most recent data available).
6% 3%
13% overall general public audience ethnicity
75% 75%
caucasian / white african-american / black asian
/ pacific
2016
2017
us census data for st. louis metro area
science center local visitors
caucasian / white
77%
72%
african-american / black
18%
17%
asian / pacific
2%
3%
hispanic / latino*
3%
1%
american indian / alaska native
0.2%
1%
multiracial
2%
7%
other
1%
0%
*The US Census tracks Hispanic data separately from race data; total exceeds 100% for the US Census data column.
hispanic / latino american indian / alaska native multiracial
4
general public audience profile Table of Contents
Why do people visit the Science Center?
Overall, the majority of visitors came for the free galleries and activities. The next most commonly cited primary destination was the special exhibition, The Discovery of King Tut, followed by the OMNIMAX® Theater.
19% 60%
free galleries and activities special exhibition – the discovery of king tut omnimax®
primary reason for visiting
planetarium show discovery room *
12%
other venues / activities
Due to rounding, percentages total to 101%.
5% 2% 3%
88%
5
*”Other venues/activities” includes: the Pulseworks/360° Flight Simulators, the Build-A-Dino store, paid educational programs, the cafes, and the ExploreStore gift shop.
percent of guests who went to the discovery of king tut who indicated that seeing the exhibition was the primary reason for their visit.
Table of Contents
What do guests do during their visit?
areas visited (Multiple responses possible. Total exceeds 100%) Free Galleries and Activities
87%
Special Exhibition The Discovery of King Tut*
33%
ExploreStore Gift Shop
26%
Food Court in Lobby
19%
OMNIMAX®
19%
The Loft (2nd floor snack area)
17%
Planetarium Gift Shop
16%
Build-A-Dino Gift Shop
14%
Pulseworks/360°/VR Flight Simulators
11%
Planetarium Show
11%
Discovery Room
free galleries and activity areas visited (Multiple responses possible. Total exceeds 100%)
7%
Most visitors spent time in the free galleries. The special exhibition, The Discovery of King Tut, and the ExploreStore gift shop were the most heavily visited revenue producing areas. *The Discovery of King Tut opened May 27, so was only available during the Summer and Fall/Winter surveys. Percentage shown is of respondents to those surveys only.
how long do visitors stay at the science center?
ecology & environment
83%
structures
66%
experience energy
65%
life science lab - atrium
62%
mission: mars - control
61%
math alive^
59%
mission: mars - base
57%
makerspace
52%
dig site
49%
math cart
48%
liftoff
46%
nano
44%
paleontology prep lab
38%
grow
32%
amazing science demonstrations
22%
take the controls
19%
life science lab activity benches
16%
life science lab classroom
15%
^ Math Alive was a free, special exhibition in Spring 2017. Percentage shown is of Spring survey respondents only.
Exit survey respondents identified which galleries they spent time in during their visit. Ecology & Environment, home to the Science Center’s iconic animatronic dinosaurs, was the most heavily visited, as it has been in previous years.
37% 30%
27%
6%
Less than 1 hour
1 hr to 1 hr, 59 min
2 hr to 2 hr, 59 min
3 hours or longer
In 2017, visitors stayed an average of 2 hours, 24 minutes.
6
voice of the visitors What do visitors say about their Science Center experiences?
Table of Contents
The Saint Louis Science Center uses two key measures to track overall guest satisfaction: ratings from our comment cards, which staff distribute every day to a random sampling of visitors, and the Net Promoter Score (NPS®), which is collected on our seasonal exit surveys.
comment card feedback In 2017, visitors completed 1,423 comment cards, on which they rated their visit from “Below Expectations” to “Above Expectations” using a fourpoint scale. The majority of the ratings (69%) were a ‘4,’ with a total of 95% of the comment cards having a rating of either ‘3’ or ‘4.’
95%
percent of comment cards with a positive rating (‘3’ or ‘4’ out of 4)
The comment cards also invite visitors to provide any feedback they choose to share. Visitors’ comments are coded into 23 different categories based on the topic addressed. The comments are further identified as either a “Positive/General” comment, which expresses satisfaction or no problem, or an “Opportunity for Improvement,” which expresses dissatisfaction or offers a suggestion. Of the 1,423 comment cards guests completed in 2017, 81% included one or more comments. A total of 1,784 individual comments were collected from all of the cards. Over three-quarters of these comments were positive in tone. Overall, the most commonly mentioned topics were: Special Exhibitions (primarily pertaining to The Discovery of King Tut), Galleries, Staff, and General Positive. tone of visitors’ comments
opportunities for improvement
24% positive / general
76%
“Loved the newer exhibits. We have not been here for over a year and it was great to see all the new upgrades.” “Enjoyed the rover controls and spend[ing] time at GROW and Makerspace! Dad with a 7 year old boy & 4 year old girl.” “I came to see IMAX - Mysteries of China. It was a wonderful, eye opening, informative show. Thanks.” “The King Tut Exhibit was fabulous! I saw many of the original in 1985 at the Cairo museum in Egypt. This was better!” “We went specifically for the eclipse show at the planetarium which was great!” “We renewed our membership because we love the museum and the reciprocal benefits!” “We had a fantastic time!! My 11 year old daughter really loved every exhibit! I really loved the Life Science Lab! So much education available for the curious minds!” “Employees are helpful, always smiling and able to answer all questions.” “We know it’s difficult to have regular patrons & school trips at the same time; however, in the future please advise schools to have their chaperones keep closer tabs on their kids. We had several just push their way to [the] front of kids already there.” “Would be nice if parking was closer to an entrance. Quite a hot hike.”
7
Table of Contents
net promoter score (nps®) The NPS®, which asks visitors how likely they would be to recommend visiting the Science Center, is a question used in a variety of service industries. On a scale of 0 – “Not at all likely” to recommend to 10 – “Extremely likely” to recommend, those who provide a rating of ‘9’ or ‘10’ are considered “Promoters,” those giving a rating of ‘7’ or ‘8’ are considered “Passives,” and those whose rating is ‘6’ or lower are considered “Detractors.” The NPS is calculated by subtracting the percentage of Detractors from the percentage of Promoters, therefore the possible scores range from -100 to 100. In 2017, the Science Center’s NPS was 76, indicating a high level of satisfaction. likelihood to recommend visiting the science center
NPS = % Promoters - % Detractors = 76 0 - Not at all likely
1%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 - Extremely likely
1% 4%
Detractors (3%)
15%
11%
Passives (19%)
67% Promoters (79%)
supporting collaborative efforts to learn about science museum visitors 7%
For 25 years, the Science Center has been collecting demographic and visitation data through seasonal exit surveys. Because of this experience, we are one of seven U.S. science museums leading a national effort to develop a cross-institutional system for collecting data about visitors. Funded through a grant from the Institute for Museum and Library Services, the Collaboration for Ongoing Visitor Experience Studies (COVES) is designed to systematically collect, analyze, and report on visitor experience data. In 2016-17, the project moved out of its pilot phase and there are now 20 participating institutions actively collecting visitor data that will inform both those individual institutions and the science museum field as a whole.
For example, as described above, the Science Center’s Net Promoter Score® from the 2017 seasonal exit surveys was 76; however the Science Center’s 2017 NPS through the COVES exit surveys was 69. Both scores indicate a positive experience; however, the difference may be due, in part, to the fact that COVES surveys are filled out by the visitors themselves, rather than the interview format we used on our seasonal surveys. In the future, being part of this national collaboration will provide the Science Center with new ways to understand our data.
COVES is changing the way we collect and reflect on general public audience data. One key change is that COVES will allow for comparisons across the field of science museums, but there are also smaller changes in how we look at our own data. 8
science
+ education + experience Table of Contents
SEE our approach to exhibitions and programs!
The Science Center’s SEE (Science + Education + Experience) Division carries out the Science Center’s mission: To ignite and sustain lifelong science and technology learning. SEE does this through an integrated effort across its teams, which develop and implement exhibitions and educational programs for the wide range of audiences who engage with the Science Center.
Each of the teams within SEE plays an important role in bringing STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) content to our audiences:
The following pages highlight just a few of the evaluations that: helped inform the exhibit development process, explored an exhibition’s effectiveness, and examined the impact of educational programs.
science education experience 9
ce en ri pe
ex
on
The SEE Operations Team cultivates a highly motivated team of “intraprenuers” who facilitate agile response and coordination of integrated, unique science learning experiences. This team includes staff who facilitate SEE’s Strategic Planning & New Initiatives, manage Collections, administer the Science Beyond the Boundaries network, and conduct institution-wide audience Research & Evaluation.
i at
The Experience Team establishes dynamic and evolving learning environments (on-site, off-site, and online) that serve as effective platforms for audience engagement. This team includes staff who work in Exhibit Production, Exhibit Electronics, Exhibit Design, and Media Production.
uc
The Education Team ignites and sustains audience interest, attitude, knowledge, and enjoyment in STEM through targeted programs that emphasize personal connections and promote lifelong learning. This team includes staff who work in the Galleries, in Public Programs, and in Community Science.
see operations
ed
The Science Team locates STEM professionals, connects them to the Science Center, and empowers them to share their interest and expertise with our audiences. This team includes staff who work with content advisors and who take the lead in STEM content development to ensure that our content is current, accurate, and relevant.
science
front-end exhibit evaluation How do we use evaluation to shape new exhibits?
Table of Contents
Before exhibits make it to the gallery floor, the Science Center explores possible content and design directions with visitors through front-end evaluation. This process helps to highlight differences between how our designers and our visitors think about a chosen topic. In preparation for eventual changes to Structures, Research & Evaluation investigated the topic of “infrastructures” with general public visitors and asked Members about their favorite exhibits in the current gallery. This section presents some of the key pieces of information the Science Center’s Experience Team will use to frame their planning.
roads, bridges, and buildings In December 2017, Research & Evaluation staff conducted 21 interviews during which 33 visitors provided input on how they thought of “infrastructure.” Over three-quarters (88%) were adults, spanning the ages of 18-64. The youngest child interviewed was nine years old. This group was comprised of 14% Members and 86% Non-Members, very similar to the make-up of our general public. In almost half the interviews, roads were top of mind when visitors described “infrastructure”; responses related to bridges and buildings were the next most common. When asked what type of job they associated with “infrastructure,” almost half of the groups said engineers (general and civil).
getting visitor ideas Front-end evaluation goes beyond understanding what visitors already know about a topic; it is also about seeking their input on what they would like to see and do in the new gallery. We learned that visitors wanted to know more about water quality, renewable energy, road and transit technology, and failures related to natural disasters. Others expressed how they expected to interact with the space: larger physical (climbing or crawling) activities; designing, building, and testing their own infrastructure concepts; and new technology experiences, including VR or computer modeling.
favorite structures exhibit? To inform any future decisions about changes to Structures, Members had the opportunity to vote for their current favorite exhibits in the gallery at the December Member Night. Each participant was given two tokens that were colorcoded based on their observed age. They dropped these tokens in bags that corresponded to their top two favorites. A total of 497 tokens were collected, from 124 children (ages 17 and under) and 125 adults (ages 18+).
The three most popular exhibits in Structures were the Large Catenary Arch, the Radar Guns, and the Excavator. Children nine & under, however, preferred the Small Arch to the Large Catenary Arch, and the Bridges and Barges exhibit over the Radar Guns.
10
summative exhibit evaluation – grow What does evaluation tell us about the effectiveness of exhibits?
Table of Contents
During the spring of 2017, the Science Center contracted with ExposeYourMuseum, LLC to conduct a summative evaluation of the GROW exhibit. The goal of a summative evaluation is to determine if the overarching goals for the exhibit are being met and to collect systematic data about how visitors are using the various exhibit elements. Data collection occurred in June and July, shortly after GROW’s first anniversary.
overall experience in grow On average, study participants spent just over 33 minutes in GROW, with stay times ranging from about six and a half minutes to a little over an hour.
33
During their time in GROW, visitors made an average of 12.5 stops at exhibit elements and spent an average of just over 10 minutes inside the Pavilion.
minutes
top 10 most commonly visited exhibits in grow 1 bi-state ag map (inside the pavilion) 2
case ih combine
3
homeGROWn
4
rain play
5
milking parlor
6
chicken coop
7
tummy textures
8
dig it (inside the pavilion)
7 2
5 1 8
3
9 great americans soils (inside the pavilion) 10 the hive (inside the pavilion)
11
10
9
4 6
Table of Contents
visitor experience, engagement, and learning in grow Observational and interview data revealed that GROW was an enjoyable space with a variety of opportunities for engagement. Visitors found that GROW was flexible enough to adapt and suit their various interests. Adults expressed a preference for observation and facilitation; youth expressed a preference for hands-on engagement. Questioning and curiosity happens all throughout GROW, but was observed most often at the Bi-State Agriculture Map, HomeGROWn, and Case IH Combine. Adults were more likely to pose questions and gather information, while youth expressed more curiosity about process and experience. Whether through formal facilitation, such as a demonstration, or in more informal encounters, interactions with staff resulted in longer stay times with deeper forms of engagement with the content and exhibits. Visitors were inspired by GROW and wanted to seek out related experiences in their personal lives. The most “I’ve wanted to frequently listed activity have a garden. Plant was maintaining a home tomatoes, greens, garden, often with stuff like that. a mention of specific Coming here gives produce or practices me inspiration.” seen in HomeGROWn. Visiting GROW also inspired many visitors to express a desire to practice behaviors demonstrated in the exhibit at home. This included activities such as composting and practicing water conservation.
connections to agriculture usually said that “all of it” reflected their personal lives. These people commented on the exhibit’s potential value for “city folk.” Visitors also used GROW to role-play and imagine themselves as participants in food production, through experiences such as “They covered a lot sitting in the Case IH of different stuff. I Combine or milking mean you know the cow in the it, but I can see Milking Parlor. somebody from the “That [corn is] what we see driving all the time. We see it on farms growing all over.”
city getting a good
Visitors had strong, understanding of positive emotional what goes on.” responses towards GROW. Research shows that positive emotional experiences are a strong indicator of whether a person will follow through with expressed intentions. In interviews, participants rated how much or how little they felt various emotions during their GROW visit, and the ones that topped the list were: pleased, happy, content, pleasantly surprised, and excited.
Visitors saw themselves “I never knew we were and their day-to-day the fourth largest rice lives reflected in producer, and I didn’t GROW. Local visitors know Illinois was second in cotton.” were usually surprised by some of their state’s exports. Others talked about knowing what was growing in the fields they drive by. Study participants who appeared to have deep 12
educational programs Table of Contents
How do we track engagement in Science Center programs?
Since 1997, the Saint Louis Science Center has collected information about the experiences of participants in our programs. We define programs as “staff-led interactions scheduled for a specific audience with written educational goals and objectives.” Our System for Assessing Mission Impact (SAMI) tracks what programs are delivered, the frequency with which programs occur, the number of participants, and the immediate impact of those programs.
The Science Center offers programs to a wide range of audiences, including: the general public, children, families, schools, and adults. The programs vary in frequency: There are recurring programs, such as STEM Excellence Pathway; programs delivered upon request, such as Icky Sticky Science; and programs offered daily, such as Maker Programs. In 2017, a total of 75 distinct programs were offered 6,290 times.
2017 science center programs by the numbers
17
average number of programs delivered by science center educators every day.
24%
percent of all participant interactions in early childhoodspecific programs
245,085 total number of participant interactions through programs. An “interaction” represents each time a visitor participated in a program. Interactions vary in length, from less than five minutes at one of the outreach Festival programs to a five-day Summer Science Blast summer camp.
what is the immediate impact of programs? The Impact Score is a numerical way to represent the impact that participation in a program has on an individual. In the short-term, impact is illustrated by a change in 1) knowledge/understanding, 2) attitude, 3) interest, or 4) enjoyment. Program participants answer questions about each of the four impact factors. The sum of these ratings, each on a four-point scale, is the Impact Score. The lowest possible Impact Score is four and the highest is 16. In 2017, the overall Impact Score across programs for all audiences was 13.77. In 2016, the Score was 13.88. 13
14.30 (out of 16.00)
2017 year-end impact score for programs serving general public audiences. in 2016, the score was 14.26.
Table of Contents
spotlight on preschool science series In January 2014, the Science Center debuted its Preschool Science Series (PSS). This series of programs is intended to serve the early childhood audience (specifically children ages 3-5 years) and their adults with three weeks per month of programming around a specific theme. Each session includes a story, presentation of content, and one or more hands-on activities. The topics each month vary, but relate to experiences offered through the Science Center’s exhibits. For example, the weather series has activities in GROW, the Science Center’s outdoor agricultural gallery, while the paleontology series connects participants to content found in the Ecology & Environment gallery.
The main audience, ages 3-5, are pre-literate and thus do not fill out feedback cards, but after each session, adults are asked to provide feedback on both their and their child’s experience in the program. This strategy is used for the other early childhood programs as well, where the adults participate in the program alongside their children. Most interactions in early childhood programs (94%) were attendees to the Discovery Room. PSS had the third most interactions of Science Center early childhood programs (720 out of 57,899). In 2017, each of the eight on-site PSS programs had Impact Scores of at least 14.22, with the highest score, a 15.67, from the participants in the Engineering module. These scores are on par with other early childhood programs that have collected a representative amount of data (14.90 from Discovery Room and 14.86 from Summer Science Blast camps). Adults commented most often on their child’s gains in content knowledge, “I liked the deconstruction of the flower. They are learning hard concepts, but with age appropriate activities,” on specific activities in which they participated, “He loved to act like a dinosaur,” and on the hands-on/sensory nature of the programs, “I personally loved the auditory component today. The majority of activities are visual or textile.” Other aspects adults mentioned frequently included enjoying how the program was formatted and that children were practicing life skills, such as creativity or sharing, as well as other technical or content-based skills, like reading a map. When asked for suggestions to improve the program, 60% of the respondents gave positive feedback or did not suggest an improvement. Following that, respondents expressed a desire for more programs and greater availability on weekends. Overall, Preschool Science Series has been very well received and has had a high short-term impact on its participants.
14.86 (out of 16.00)
2017 impact score for preschool science programs delivered on-site the average impact score for science center early childhood programs was 14.58.
14
Saint Louis Science Center, 5050 Oakland Avenue, St. Louis, MO 63110 slsc.org