El museo arqueológico y la enseñanza de la historia en la educación formaluna mirada desde el profesorado y los educadores de museo

Abstract

The main objective of the research is to deepen the conception around field trips to museums, the collaboration between museum and school and the didactic planning of field trips to museums from the perspective of the educators of museums and the teachers (of Preschool, Primary and Secondary Education). The study has eighteen activities organized into five subgroups. They aim to achieve the following goals: design questionnaires MUSELA DO and MUSELA EDU and analyze their psychometric characteristics (content validity, internal consistency and construct validity), estimate the vision presented by educational agents about museums and field trips, describe the collaboration that is established between the archaeological museum and the school according to the educational agents, and specify the planning of school visits to the archaeological museum from the perspective of educational agents. The research methodology is based on a quantitative research design based on an instrumental research method (analysis of the psychometric properties of the instruments) and an empirical research method through an ex post-facto study. The participants of the research are those teachers who have visited both an archeology museum with their school group located in Murcia (MM), and an archeology museum in Alicante (AM) and the museum educators of both museum educational spaces. The research involved 160 teachers participating in the MM and 272 AM teachers, as well as 18 museum educators. The instrument for collecting information are two structured questionnaires Museum and School. Relationship and use for the teaching of history (MUSELA), one for museum educators and the other for teachers. The analysis of the information for the validity of the instruments has used matching tests between external expert judges (W of Kendall), Alpha of Cronbach for the study of Internal Consistency and exploratory factor analysis of major components to determine the validity of construct. The main analysis techniques are descriptive statistics, including cross-tables or contingency tables. Association tests have been carried out, especially the Pearson Chi-square. To contrast the hypotheses, the nonparametric comparison tests of average ranges for two (Mann-Whitney U) and more independent samples (Kruskal-Wallis H) were used. The content of the questionnaires is coherent, pertinent and relevant from the point of view of the expert judges. The scales of the instruments have a good internal consistency. Both museum teachers and educators feel that they are more in agreement with the responsibility given to the museum educator to adapt to the interests of the group during the school visit to the museum. 66.1% of teachers do not collaborate with the museum as a whole. The most prevalent model of collaboration is the museum as an offer to the school. 68.8% of educators consider that communication with the school to inform about the school visit always takes place, while a third of the teachers (34.5%) estimate it takes place. According to the educational agents, around 40% of the teachers contact the museum to organize the visit beforehand and/or inform the museum of the didactic purpose proposed for the school visit to the archaeological museum. The main conclusions determine the need to improve communication and joint collaboration between museums and schools. It is proposed to design a Cultural Agency for Education and Museums with the aim of aligning the potential resources present in the three institutions (Museum, School and University); promoting efficient communication strategies; contributing to the development of collaborative Museum, School and University projects; and forming a Network of museum-friendly Schools that become partners for learning history.