BAYER YOUNG SCIENCE AMBASSADORS JUNE 2012 JUNE 2013 FINAL REPORT

CONTENTS

Executive Summary.............................................................................................................................................. 2 Project Summary .................................................................................................................................................. 4 Project Statistics ................................................................................................................................................... 6 Project Content ..................................................................................................................................................... 8 Project Activities .................................................................................................................................................. 9 Determination of TOG Volunteers .............................................................................................................14 Scientific Literacy Training .........................................................................................................................15 Local Dissemination Trainings ....................................................................................................................16 Project Training for Bayer Employees ........................................................................................................17 Science Workshop for Bayer Employees Children ......................................................................................18 Field Visits ...................................................................................................................................................19 Exchange Between Science Ambassadors ..................................................................................................20 Best Practices in Education Conference ....................................................................................................21 BYSA Workshop on BAYER 150th Anniversary Exhibition ..........................................................................22 BYSA on Media............................................................................................................................................23 Project Team ...............................................................................................................................................30 Links ........................................................................................................................................................... 31 Final Evaluation Report ..................................................................................................................................... 32

BAYER YOUNG SCIENCE AMBASSADORS FINAL REPORT

Project Name Project Partner

Bayer Young Science Ambassadors (BYSA) Bayer Turk & Toplum Gnllleri Vakf (Community Volunteers Foundation) -TOG

Financial Supporter Implementation Period Reporting Period

Bayer Turk 01.06.2012 30.06.2013

01.06.2012 30.06.2013

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Bayer Young Science Ambassadors, the social responsibility project on scientific literacy that is implemented through the partnership of BAYER Turk and Toplum Gnllleri Vakf (Community Volunteers Foundation) - TOG, fosters the creative and critical thinking of the primary school children and young university students in its second year. Because the Turkeys rank is at the lower mean performance in science in PISA researches, BYSA has an important and unique role to be a good example in education. TOG, as a youth NGO that gathers young people all over Turkey on the different subjects on the local, national and international level, creates participation areas for the empowerment of young people and use non formal education tools to spread the idea and vision. The pilot years evaluation report shows that BYSA project increases the scientific literacy amongst young people and supports the learning processes of children on natural science in primary schools. The project increases the curiosity of primary school children about science and technology. Young people are being role models for the children now and will be in the future.

The aims of the BYSA Project; By creating the scientific literacy amongst Young Community Volunteers (age between 17-25); 2

Supporting the science education Supporting the children and their learning process at primary schools (age between 10-12)

The main objectives of the BYSA Project; Accordingly, the main objective of the project is to improve the scientific literacy level of its target groups (4th, 5th and 6th grade primary school students and young community volunteers ) by providing space for them to; Get motivated to learn about and understand nature, Have curiosity about science and technology, Try to understand the interrelations among science, technology, society and environment, Get willing to question, reason and understand the happenings and facts in nature Question their prejudices about science and scientists Understand and appreciate the value of science and technology.

Through the partnership of Bayer Turkey and TOG, between June 2012 and June 2013,

Project Content and booklets for young science ambassadors and for children were revised by the project consultant with the recommendations of pilot years evaluation report. Tools for monitoring and evaluation of the project were revised by the external expert. 24 Young TOG volunteers participated in the Scientific Literacy Training that took place in Istanbul. Local Dissemination Trainings were held in each project implementing city in order to share the knowledge and experiences with the new volunteers in order to expand the project team and reach more primary school children.

In total, 175 young science ambassadors reached 1582 children until the end of June 2013. Training for Bayer employees was designed and carried out with a participation of 30 employees. A Science Workshop was carried out for Bayer employees children where approximately 36 children participated in. Field visits to local project groups were done by TOG, Bayer Turkey and media representatives. As a new tool, exchange between each local project teams supported young science ambassadors to share knowledge and have different experience in order to improve their ability. BYSA Project was presented in Best Practices Education Conference that is hold by Education Reform Initiative. A science workshop was made by the young science ambassadors to 155 children in the scope of Bayer 150th Anniversary Exhibition.

PROJECT SUMMARY

Pilot Period Perspective of the Project

Targeted TOG

Achieved organization 6 TOG organization

Number of matching TOG organization & school 6 on project Number of direct beneficiary children Number of indirect beneficiary children Total TOG volunteer participated to project TOTAL

6 primary schools 1350 2700 36 4086

13 primary schools 1582 3164 175 4934

Implementation Area stanbul, Bolu, Edirne, Ordu, Osmaniye and Kars

TOG Youth Organizations Implementing the Project stanbul University, Bolu Abant zzet Baysal University, Trakya University, Kafkas University, Ordu University and Osmaniye Korkut Ata University TOG Groups.

Project Implemented Primary Schools: Primary schools were determined with the assistance of the Directorates of Education.

stanbul: Dr. Sadk Ahmet Onay lkretim Okulu Bolu: Cumhuriyet lkretim Okulu Atatrk Ilkretim Okulu 4

Milli Egemenlik lkretim Okulu 50.Yl zzet Baysal lkretim Okulu Kars: Namk Kemal lkretim Okulu Mihrali Bey lkretim Okulu Edirne: 50.Yl lkretim Okulu Byk Gerdelli lkretim Okulu Ordu: Hamdullah Suphi lkretim Okulu Gzel Ordu lkretim Okulu Osmaniye: ehit Yasemin Tekin lkretim Okulu Dede Korkut lkretim Okulu

Edirne

Target Group The children in the project implemented primary schools (age between 10-12) The young people at the TOG Youth Organizations in the universities (age between 1725)

The Aims of the BYSA Project

By creating the scientific literacy amongst Young Community Volunteers (age between 17-25); Supporting the science education Supporting the children and their learning process at primary schools (age between 10-12)

The Main Objectives of the Projects 2nd Year As the first year, the main objective of the 2nd year of the project is to improve the scientific literacy level of its target groups (4th, 5th and 6th grade primary school students and young community volunteers ) by providing space for them to; Get motivated to learn about and understand nature, Have curiosity about science and technology, Try to understand the interrelations among science, technology, society and environment, Get willing to question, reason and understand the happenings and facts in nature Question their prejudices about science and scientists Understand and appreciate the value of science and technology.

Project Partners Bayer Turk TOG Vakf

Stakeholder

Ministry of Education

Expected Outcomes A revised non-formal training module on scientific literacy (SLT) 36 young community volunteers as the Science Ambassadors 1350 scientific literate children in 6 primary schools (workshop participants)

PROJECT STATISTICS 24 TOG Volunteers participated in Scientific Literacy Training to be young science ambassadors which was held in Istanbul between Oct 30th Nov 4th 2011. Gender Distribution of the participants:

Table 1:

City/Gender Bolu stanbul Kars Osmaniye Trakya Ordu Total

Male 2 1 2 2 0 1 8

Female 2 3 2 2 4 3 16 24

Gender equality and positive discrimination were two of the criteria of selection process. In total, 175 young science ambassadors and 1582 children joined the project in the second year in six cities. Getting the legal permissions from Directorates of Education took different durations in each city. Therefore, each project group started volunteering at different times as it was in the pilot year. In the second year of the Project, those activities were done by the end of June 2013: Getting Legal Permissions from Directorates of Education, Revisng the Training Module with the project consultant, Determining the Youth Organizations joining the Project, Training of Local Project Groups, Local Dissemination Trainings, Determination of the Project Implementation Schools, Determination of the Children in the Project, Exchange Between Young Science Ambassadors, Science Workshops, Training of Bayer Employees, Monitoring and Evaluation, Project Evaluation Meeting, Field Visits, Communication and Project Coordination. Table 2, below, shows the timetable of the activities. Table 2: Project Activities by the end of June 2013

Activities
Building up the Project Team Revising the Training Module Revising the Project Content

Months

10

11

12

Permissions from Directorates of Education

Determining the Youth Organizations joining the Project Traning of the Project Teams Determination of the Project Implementation Schools Determination of the Children in the Project Exchange betw een Sicence Ambassadors Monitoring & Evaluation Monitoring & Evaluation Reporting Communication Reporting Project Coordination

PROJECT CONTENT General Aim of the workshops Children have a natural curiosity about the things happening around them. Curiosity is the main trigger of learning. With this two days workshop, by the natural curiosity of children, the Project is aiming to get their attraction focused on science by experiencing enjoyable experiments. And with that experience, children see that in order to make science, people do not need any special materials or any special places. Science is everywhere and making science is not boring but fun! The whole Project content is designed with a children centered approach based on participation. The workshops provide children a learning environment for creativity, ability to discuss and research and a skill for observation about the understanding of nature of science which is a part of scientific literacy. Accordingly, the main objective of the project is to improve the scientific literacy level of its target groups (4th,5th and 6th grade primary school students and young community volunteers ) by providing space for them to; Get motivated to learn about and understand nature, Have curiosity about science and technology, Try to understand the interrelations among science, technology, society and environment, Get willing to question, reason and understand the happenings and facts in nature Question their prejudices about science and scientists Understand and appreciate the value of science and technology.

Principles of the workshops: There are some principles of workshops related with Project aims and objectives. All workshops will be done with a group size of 16-20 children. They will work in small groups of 45. A calm and relaxing environment will support the learning process of both children and young science ambassadors. The more they enjoy, the more they learn and share with each other. Each child should actively participate in workshops. Energizers are used to raise the level of attention and motivation. For the safety of the children, while using hot water or scissors, young volunteers need to support them. Young science ambassadors are responsible for time management of the activities.

PROJECT ACTIVITIES It takes 2 days to implement the whole program in the primary schools for each group of 16-20 children. Table 3: The 2 days program Duration Activity DAY 1 30 min 20 min 15 min 40 min 15 min 40 min 15 min 10 min 20 min 25 min DAY 2 15 min 5 min 40 min 15 min 15 min 40 min 15 min 30 min Continue to Exp 1: Do flowers drink water? Grouping Activity: Colorful Dots Exp 5: Is black really black? Break Energizer: Solar System Exp 6: Homemade Ice cream Break Exp 7: The chemical of red cabbage Getting to know each other Science Bingo Exp 1: Do flowers drink water? Break Exp 2: Let's make a thermometer! Break Exp 3: Colors dancing in the milk! Break Energizer: Molecules Exp 4: Screaming balloons Closing session: Groups poster

10

10 min

Crossword Puzzle Closing session: Writing a letter

30 min

What kind of a scientist would I like to be?

What children think and share:

11

AIMS AND OUTPUTS OF EXPERIMENTS Experiment 1: Do Flowers Drink Water?

Bolu

Children use 3 cups of water mixed with food coloring and 1 cup of plain water. Then they set the flowers in the cups and observe the change. With this experiment, children can discover for themselves how essential the functions of roots and stems are to plant growth. As the colored water is absorbed, students are able to see how the water is absorbed into the plant and amazed when the petals of the carnation change color. 1 The children observe how important water is for all living things. Human beings need to take precautions in order to use water in an efficient way such as through the reuse of wastewater or getting drinkable water out of oceans. Experiment 2: Lets Make a Thermometer! With this experiment, children are making a thermometer out of water. They can measure temperature with this homemade thermometer. Water, like all substances, is comprised of molecules. In water, an individual molecule has the chemical formula H2O, dihydrogen monoxide. When water molecules are heated, their bonds stretch out

http://www.stevespanglerscience.com/experiment/colorful-carnations

12

and expand and the opposite happens when water is cooled. So, the water level in the straw rises when the water is heated, it lowers when the water is cooled. 2 The children learn how the global climate change affects life on earth and why it is a problem if the earths temperature gets warmer. Then they also learn that they can fix climate change with some small changes in their own lives such as turning the lights off, eating home food, getting their parents to change their consuming habits and reusing, recycling and reducing buying something which they really do not need to. Experiment 3: Colors Dancing in the Milk! With this experiment children uncover the secrets of the soap which is a great demonstration of what happens when we combine dish soap and milk. They mix a little milk, food coloring, and a drop of liquid soap. Milk is mostly water but it also contains vitamins, minerals, proteins, and tiny droplets of fat suspended in solution. Fats and proteins are sensitive to changes in the surrounding solution (the milk). The soap
Scientific Literacy Training

weakens the chemical bonds that hold the proteins

and fats in solution. So the colors begin dancing in the milk. 3 Children learn the importance and effect of soap on cleaning and why we people wash our hands with soap. Experiment 4: Screaming Balloons Children put a hexagon nut in the balloon and hold it with both hands and make a swirling motion. Then they have the screaming voice. The unique shape of the hex nut vibrates the walls of the balloon to produce a wonderfully screaming sound. They try the same process with the circular pellet. This time they do not get the
2

http://www.stevespanglerscience.com/experiment/water-thermometer-sick-science

http://www.stevespanglerscience.com/experiment/milk-color-explosion

13

screaming sound as there is no vibration on the walls of the balloon. 4 With this experiment children observe both the sound and motion.

Experiment 5: Is Black Really Black? Using a technique called chromatography, children find out exactly what makes up the color in the black pen. Theres literally a rainbow of color hiding in just one black dot! Children put black dots on filter paper; put a toy brush in the very center of the filter paper. Then lay down the paper on a plastic glass full of water. The burst of color that you see on the filter paper proves that black is really a combination of colors. This
Istanbul

technique

of

color

separation

is

actually

called chromatography, which was originally used to separate different plant pigments. 5

Experiment 6: Homemade Ice-cream

http://www.stevespanglerscience.com/product/screaming-balloon-kit

http://www.stevespanglerscience.com/experiment/is-black-black

14

Children are making ice-cream with cream, sugar, crushed salt, vanilla and ice. The science in making ice-cream is to lower the freezing point of ice in order to freeze the cream. But how? Just like we use salt on icy roads in the winter, salt mixed with ice in this case also causes the ice to melt. When salt comes into contact with ice, the freezing point of the ice is lowered. The lowering of the freezing point depends on the amount of salt added. The more salt added, the lower the temperature will be before the salt- water solution freezes.6

Experiment 7: The Chemical of Red Cabbage Red Cabbage Jiffy Juice is an easy-to-use acid-base indicator that measures pH. Children use Jiffy Juice to make colorful solutions by adding common acids and bases. It's an experiment that is safe and carefully crafted from all food-grade material.

With this experiment children learn what is indicator, acid and bas and they are able to find out what really is the most acidic or basic product in our world.
7

DETERMINATION OF TOG VOLUNTEERS The project implementing cities were determined with the assistance of TOG Field Department and in coordination with Project Partner. An open call was made to TOG field and then field visits were realized by the Project Coordinator and Project Assistant together with the Field Coordinators to volunteer groups in Istanbul, Bolu, Edirne, Osmaniye, Kars and Ordu.

http://www.stevespanglerscience.com/experiment/homemade-ice-cream-sick-science

http://www.stevespanglerscience.com/product/1552

15

SCIENTIFIC LITERACY TRAINING

Scientific Literacy Training, the main training of the Project, took place in Silivri - Istanbul between Oct 30th and Nov 4th 2012. This is the training which the volunteers need to participate in order to gain knowledge and skills on scientific literacy and working with children before getting the Project started in their locality. 24 young TOG volunteers participated in the training from Istanbul, Bolu, Edirne, Ordu, Osmaniye and Kars. The content of the training was composed of scientific literacy, working and communicating with children, civil society in Turkey, volunteerism, meeting Project partner and the technical process of the Project. Trainers were experts on the topics of scientific literacy, working with children, youth work and volunteerism.

16

LOCAL DISSEMINATION TRAININGS

Kars

After the Scientific Literacy training, in order to expand the local project groups, the project team made local dissemination trainings in each city. The number of young volunteers participated in the trainings were as follow, Bolu: 23 Edirne: 13 stanbul: 11 Ordu: 22 Osmaniye: 25 Kars: 12

17

PROJECT TRAINING FOR BAYER EMPLOYEES

On the 12th of February, the scientific literacy training was organized for Bayer Employees in Bayer head office. The program of the training was developed by project consultant and facilitated by project coordinator, project assistant and project consultant. This training was a compressed version of the scientific literacy training in order to gain knowledge and skills to Bayer employees before volunteering in the Project. 30 Bayer employees from different cities participated in the training which took a whole day. Those 30 volunteers became Science Ambassadors and started to volunteer for the project in one of the primary school named ehit retmen Ahmet Onay lkretim Okulu. Bayer employees volunteered in the project by going the school and working with many children. They also became a project group of BYSA in the field. BAYER as a partner and BYSA as a social responsibility project is a very special and a good example for Corporate Social Responsibility Projects in Turkey not only by funding but also employees participating in.

18

SCIENCE WORKSHOP FOR BAYER EMPLOYEES CHILDREN

On April 27th, a science workshop was done with approximately 36 children. The workshop program was designed according to the age of children. The activities were done by the young science ambassadors with children throughout the day. The program content was designed by the project consultant. With the support of 5 young science ambassadors, the workshop was completed. As the pilot year of the project, this was not just a different and valuable experience for the children participated in the workshops, but also for the young science ambassadors volunteering in the project. Young science ambassadors came from different project implementing cities and this was a motivation also for them.

19

FIELD VISITS

Visits with project partner Field visits to different project groups were done with the project partner Bayer during the whole project period. Project groups were visited while implementing the project in primary school with the local and national media representatives. Visits with project experts Field visits to all project groups were done by the project team. These visits are very important and necessary to improve the impact of the project and support the young volunteers about the difficulties they have while facilitating the activities in the project. In every city, young science ambassadors were visited in primary schools and then local evaluation meetings were done in order to support them in the process.

20

EXCHANGE BETWEEN SCIENCE AMBASSADORS

The evaluation report of the pilot year recommended young science ambassadors visit to each other. In the second year, one science ambassador from each project group visited another one. They had the opportunity to experience what the other have been implementing as well as providing their expertise also. Those visits created a network in which young people are a part of greater thing than their localities and multiplied crucial experience and knowledge within the network as well as providing mobility opportunities for young people for intercultural learning

21

BEST PRACTICES IN EDUCATION CONFERENCE

Bayer Young Science Ambassadors Project was selected to be presented in Best Practices Education Conference that is hold by Education Reform Initiative. The conference is organized once in every year and hosts hundreds of teachers, directors of schools and representatives from Directorates and Ministry of Education in Turkey. For BYSA, after the pilot year, this presentation is an indicator of its success and impact in primary schools by young university students.

22

BYSA WORKSHOP ON BAYER 150TH ANNIVERSARY EXHIBITION

A science workshop was made by the young science ambassadors in the scope of Bayer 150th Anniversary Exhibition. The workshop was held for 3 days on 25th -26th and 27th June. 9 young science ambassadors attended the workshop from different local project groups. At the end of three days, these 9 young science ambassadors worked with 155 children and the workshop reached its goal. The interest of the visitors to the workshop was very intense during the exhibition.

23

BYSA on MEDIA

During the second year, BYSA Project took place on several national and local mass media resources including printed and online media. Below, links and some examples of news can be found about BYSA.

Links: http://www.antoloji.com/haber/haber.asp?haber=11678 http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/yazarlar/22312227.asp http://www.aksam.com.tr/bayerin-elcileri,-9-bin-ogrenciyi-bilimsel-okuryazar-yapacak--140334h.html http://www.orduajans.com/guncel/bayer-genc-bilim-elcileri-orduda-cocuklarla-bulusuyor-h1104.html http://www.edirneajans.com/genc-bilim-elcileri.html http://www.edirneajans.com/bayer-genc-bilim-elcileri-edirnede-cocuklarla-bulusuyor.html/2-8 http://www.orduyorum.com/guncel/haberdetay.php?id=4652 http://www.medical-tribune.com.tr/node/4007 http://www.hudutgazetesi.com/haber/11065/genc-bilimciler-50nci-yilda.html http://www.bolutakip.com/haber.asp?Kimlik=12077 http://www.osmaniye.edu.tr/detay.aspx?haber_id=1082

24

Sabah _2012.11.30

25

Mir Kuzey Ordu_ 2013.03.21

26

Edirne Ajans_2013.04.03

27

IHA_2013.04.03

28

Literatr Aktel_2013.03.01

29

Bolu Takip_2013.02.26

30

PROJECT TEAM Nisan Su Tablac, Project Assistant: Responsible for coordinating the local project groups and activities and managing the social media tools of the project. zge Snmez, Project Coordinator: Responsible for coordinating the whole Project team and Project activities such as budgeting, coordinating local groups, reporting and sustainability. Emel Uysal, Project Consultant: Responsible for the content of the Project. Erhan Okak, Project Monitoring and Evaluating Expert: Responsible for monitoring and evaluating the impact of the Project. Jlide Erdoan, Head of Project Department: Responsible for supervising the Project Coordinator and sustainability of the project.

31

LINKS

Bayer Young Science Ambassadors http://www.facebook.com/pages/Bayer-Gen%C3%A7-Bilim-El%C3%A7ileri/227630993982853

Bayer Turk http://www.bayer.com.tr Toplum Gnllleri Vakf (Community Volunteers Foundation) - TOG http://www.tog.org.tr

32

BAYER YOUNG SCIENCE AMBASSADORS

FINAL EVALUATION REPORT
JUNE 2012 JUNE 2013

Erhan Okak Monitoring&Evaluation Expert Psychologist, MA

Contents

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 34 Abbreviations............................................................................................................................................. 37 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 38 Aims and Scope of the Project................................................................................................................... 38 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan and Data Collection Instruments............................................... 38 Summative Evaluation....................................................................................................................................... 39 Scientific Literacy Training (SLT) ............................................................................................................ 39 Aims and Objectives .......................................................................................................................... 39 Setting and Demographics ................................................................................................................. 40 Methodology and Assessment Tools ................................................................................................. 41 Results ................................................................................................................................................ 42 Conclusions and Recommendations .................................................................................................. 46 Workshops ................................................................................................................................................. 49 Exchange of Experiences ................................................................................................................... 49 Field Visits ......................................................................................................................................... 52 Exchange Visits Among Science Ambassadors (Facilitators) ........................................................... 52 Letters and Posters ............................................................................................................................. 52 Conclusions and Recommendations .................................................................................................................. 56 ANNEX -1 ......................................................................................................................................................... 59 ANNEX - 2 ........................................................................................................................................................ 65 ANNEX 3 ....................................................................................................................................................... 69 ANNEX 4 ....................................................................................................................................................... 71 ANNEX 5 ....................................................................................................................................................... 73

33

Executive Summary
The main purposes of the evaluation process were to assess the effectiveness of the Bayer Young Science Ambassadors Project (BYSAP) in terms of its aims and objectives; and to provide relevant information to improve the implementation process of it. Both quantitative and qualitative research methods were employed in this evaluation. An additional purpose of this report was to present the evaluation plan and data collection instruments. The main objective of BYSAP is to improve the scientific literacy level of its target groups (4 th, 5th and 6th grade primary school students and young community volunteers ) by providing a learning environment for them to;

Get motivated to learn about and understand the nature, Have curiosity about science and technology, Try to understand the interrelations between science, technology, society and environment, Get willing to question, reason and understand the happenings and facts in nature, Question their prejudices about science and scientists, Understand and appreciate the value of science and technology.

Two major activities were developed and implemented to reach these objectives; Scientific Literacy Training (SLT) and Science Workshops for Children. As a result of their participation in SLT, young volunteers (young science ambassadors) became the facilitators and implemented the workshops in six pilot cities.

Between June 2012 and June 2013,

Project Content and booklets for young science ambassadors and for children were revised by the project consultant with the recommendations of pilot years evaluation report. Tools for monitoring and evaluation of the project were revised by the external expert. 24 Young TOG volunteers participated in the Scientific Literacy Training that took place in Istanbul. Local Dissemination Trainings were held in each project implementing city in order to share the knowledge and experiences with the new volunteers in order to expand the project team and reach more primary school children. In total, 175 young science ambassadors (target was 36) reached 1582 children (target was 1350), in 13 schools (target was 6), at the end of June 2013. Training for Bayer employees was designed and carried out with a participation of 30 employees. A Science Workshop was carried out for Bayer employees children where approximately 36 children participated in. Field visits to local project groups were done by TOG, Bayer Turkey and media representatives. As a new tool, exchange between each local project teams supported young science ambassadors to share knowledge and have see each others practices in order to improve their ability. BYSA Project was presented in Best Practices Education Conference that is hold by Education Reform Initiative. A science workshop was made by the young science ambassadors to 155 children in the scope of Bayer 150th Anniversary Exhibition.

A combination of different methods, including questionnaires and evaluation forms, direct field visits, observation, evaluation workshops and a two-day project evaluation meeting were used. The following is a summary of the findings and the main conclusions by the evaluator.

34

24 young science ambassadors (aged between 17 - 25);

Understood the developmental characteristics of children more, paying regard to individual differences; Did case studies on communication with children and improved their communication skills; such as giving effective instructions, using "positive expression", using reward and reinforcement techniques, using open and closed ended questions. Did case studies on classroom management and improved their knowledge on various methods for managing undesirable behavior of children during the workshops; Acquired basics of children centered approach, which promotes the right of the children to choose, make connections and communicate; and also allows freedom for the children to think, experience, explore, question and search for answers. Need time and practice to better improve newly acquired knowledge and skills on communicating with children and classroom management, especially in cases of conflicts. Had a greater understanding of what it requires to be a team and gained basic skills and attitude to form a team and maintain its functions. Learned the objectives and implementation phases of experiments sufficiently. Learned about the characteristics of scientific knowledge. Reflected on their prejudices on scientific knowledge and practice. Also, the opinions that changed with the effect of the training provided evidence for the improvement of participants view of science. Learned basic concepts of volunteerism and relations among them, and could debate on volunteerism being aware of what they meant. Got to know TOG, and its principles better than they did before.

Revision and restructuring of the sessions on Working with Children, adding sessions on Teamwork, Feedback and Case Studies strengthened the impact of the training. In addition, in order to expand the local project groups and provide opportunity for all the volunteers to receive training the project team 175 young science ambassadors and 1582 children joined the project between June 2012 June 2013 in six cities. Children (aged between 10 - 12) who participated in the workshops;

Had fun doing experiments and playing games. Got excited and motivated about doing experiments and becoming scientist. Got more curious. Had increased interest in science. Were able to express their creativity. Learned something new through the workshop (They recalled and depicted almost all of the experiments they did during the workshop on posters). And also, Their perception of science began to chance in the desired direction. They began to like science more and see the fun in it. Science became something accessible for them. They began to think everyone can be a scientist including themselves.

Trying to understand the interrelations between science, technology, society and environment, questioning their own prejudices about science and scientists, and understanding and appreciating the value of science and 35

technology were seemed as difficult-to-reach objectives for these workshops so far, considering their duration and context. Nevertheless, the results suggest that the childrens perception of science and scientists have begun to change obviously. According to the SLT and workshop results, it is clear that vast majority of project objectives were achieved in the second year of the project.. However, there are still opportunities to improve results. Key recommendations were as follows. For SLT (Scientific Literacy Training)

Creating an additional space in the program where the participants can experience what they have learned in the communication session. Not to allow single trainer to facilitate almost the whole day. Considering which trainings the participants had before SLT during admission period. Assigning another role for the participants who didnt participate in the SLT but volunteered the previous year, since they can get distracted and indifferent in the training.

For Workshops and Facilitation

Paying particular attention to the debriefing questions. Studying the Facilitators Booklet more carefully. Making preparation meetings before the workshops, sharing roles and tasks more accurately in order not to have problems about materials and team size. Making evaluation after the workshops and giving feedback to each other. Changing the major facilitator/instructor for each experiment. Preparing a little bit more material than the number of the children. If possible, doing the experiments yourself before the workshops. Creating improvised energizers or games with the children if they find it boring or uninteresting.

General Recommendations

Keeping up doing the exchange visits for young volunteers to interact and learn from each other. Organizing periodic meetings to support young volunteers specifically in terms of working with children and/or providing supervision. Organizing social events and activities which will enhance volunteer motivation. Providing a pool of experiments considering levels of different grade students. Providing more detailed information about the project on the letter of parental permission so that more children may participate in the workshops.

The evaluation results showed that BYSAP was planned and implemented in a way that led to (1) an increased curiosity and interest in science; scientific knowledge and practice, (2) significant change in perception of science, scientific practice and scientists in its target groups.

36

Abbreviations
BYSAP SLT EEF CVF - TOG EQ 1 EQ 2 PLL Bayer Young Science Ambassadors Project Scientific Literacy Training Exchange of Experiences Form Community Volunteers Foundation Evaluation Questionnaire 1 Evaluation Questionnaire 2 Perceived Levels of Learning

37

Introduction
There are two main objectives of this report. One is to present the evaluation plan in relation with the project, particularly its aims and scope .The other is to make a summative evaluation to determine the impact of the project so that future efforts may be improved or modified.

Aims and Scope of the Project

The overall aim of the Bayer Young Science Ambassadors-Scientific Literacy Project (BYSAP) is; Supporting the science education Supporting the children and their learning process at primary schools (aged between 10-12)

by creating the scientific literacy amongst Young Community Volunteers (aged between 17-25). Accordingly, the main objective of the project is to improve the scientific literacy level of its target groups (4th, 5th and 6th grade primary school students and young community volunteers ) by providing space for them to;

Get motivated to learn about and understand the nature, Have curiosity about science and technology, Try to understand the interrelations among science, technology, society and environment, Get willing to question, reason and understand the happenings and facts in nature Question their prejudices about science and scientists Understand and appreciate the value of science and technology.

For the purpose of reaching these objectives two major interrelated activities were developed for the project. First was the Scientific Literacy Training (SLT). This non-formal training course was designed for the young volunteers, who participated from 6 different TOG Youth Organizations, focusing on attitudes towards children, scientific literacy, voluntary work, team work and facilitation skills. Second were the Workshops developed to provide children a learning environment for expressing their creativity and curiosity, gaining ability to discuss and research by experiencing enjoyable experiments. The workshops were facilitated by the young volunteers; the participants of SLT. In addition, the expected outcomes of the project were as follows: A revised non-formal training module on scientific literacy (SLT) 36 young community volunteers as the Science Ambassadors 1350 scientific literate children in 6 primary schools (workshop participants)

Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan and Data Collection Instruments

The evaluation plan of the BYSAP was designed to assess the objectives and the project activities mentioned above. The activities and the process of the BYSAP were studied focusing on two major areas and the interception of both. 38

Evaluation of the Scientific Literacy Training and its effects on its participants (young community volunteers). Monitoring and Evaluation of the two-day workshops (basically consisted of experiments) facilitated by the SLT participants in the primary schools with children.

Observations by the evaluator during the training, preparation and evaluation meetings with the training team and two evaluation questionnaires developed specifically for the training were the data collection instruments for the SLT. Furthermore, two other instruments were designed in order to assess the effects of the SLT focusing on the implementation process of the workshops. These were the semi-structured evaluation meetings with the facilitators and Exchange of Experiences Form (EEF) (by which the facilitators share their experiences with each other, the project coordinator and the evaluator). Four basic instruments were designed for the assessment of the workshops and its effects on the primary school students (aged between 10-12).

A. Monthly Activity Reports: The technical reports, including information such as the number of the workshops organized, number of the children participated in these workshops, number of the facilitators, etc. and which were prepared monthly by the facilitator groups. These reports were being collected by the project coordinator and used for the technical report of the project. B. Exchange of Experiences Form for the Facilitators: The forms by which the facilitators share their own experience and reflections on the workshops; program, teamwork, children, technicalities, etc. and suggestions for further workshops. C. Posters: Posters designed by the children at the end of the first day of the workshops. D. Letters: The letters written by the children at the end of the second day of the workshops as an answer to the theme question What kind of a scientist do I want to be?; depicting their image of the scientist. 8

Summative Evaluation
In this section, results based on the data collected during the project will be presented; including the SLT evaluation, analysis of the EEFs, posters and letters.

Scientific Literacy Training (SLT)

Aims and Objectives The SLT basically aimed at enabling participants to reflect on their understanding of science, scientific knowledge, scientific practices and to develop curiosity about science; and also developing participants competencies necessary for facilitating the workshops they implemented during the project with children. In addition, considering the evaluation results of the previous years SLT, this year certain changes were made in the SLT program. Sessions on Communication with Children were reviewed and enriched by adding effective classroom management strategies and practices. Two sessions focusing on Teamwork, Feedback
8

All of the instruments are detailed in the relevant sections of this report.

39

and Case Examples were added to the program. By these revised and newly added sessions it was aimed to improve participants facilitation and communication skills they would need during the workshops. Therefore, the SLT was specifically designed to provide a learning environment for the participants,

To learn about the characteristics of scientific knowledge, To reflect on their prejudices on scientific knowledge and research, To enable them to reconstruct their mental representations of scientists and scientific studies, To get willing to question, reason and understand the happenings and facts in nature, To experience the activities (experiments) of the workshops that they would facilitate in the primary schools, To understand the objectives of the workshop activities, To gain knowledge about the implementation steps of the workshop activities, To get familiar with the Facilitators Booklet they would use during the project, To understand the developmental characteristics of children, To do case studies on communication with children, and improve their communication skills, To acquire children centered approach, which promotes the right of the children to choose, make connections and communicate; and also allows freedom for the children to think, experience, explore, question and search for answers.

In addition to the aforementioned objectives, there were two other major themes included in the training for enabling the participants to understand the conceptual framework, and the setting that the voluntary work needed during the project stands on. First was the concept of volunteerism. And the second was Community Volunteers Foundation (CVF) itself; its aims, principles, organizational structure, activities, projects and the opportunities it offers to young volunteers. The specific objectives related to these themes were included in the training evaluation as well. Setting and Demographics The Scientific Literacy Training took place on 30th October to 4th November 2012, in Istanbul with the participation of 24 young volunteers from 6 different CVF Youth Organizations, training team including project consultant, project coordinator and the evaluator. Representatives of Bayer Turkey visited the training to give information about Bayer, particularly its corporate social responsibility strategy and explain where the BYSAP stands in this strategy. They also shared their expectations from the project and the young volunteers. The training is developed and implemented by 5 trainers who are experienced in volunteering, civil society, human rights, cohabitation, scientific literacy, working with children, classroom management, nonformal training and experiential learning methodology. Two preparatory meetings were held prior to the training by the training team. The evaluator participated in the preparatory meetings to observe and work with the training team for the specific objectives of the training and the sessions. He also fully participated in the training to make observations, to apply the evaluation forms, to facilitate the Evaluation Session at the end of the program and to take part in the daily and final evaluation meetings with the training team. 24 young volunteers participated in the training of which 67% were women and 33% were men. The mean age of the participants was 20,38 1,43. The youngest participant was 18 years old, and the oldest was 23 years old.

40

None of the participants had a Scientific Literacy training before but 22,7% of them reported that they had a training with the theme Working with Children before this training. The participants reported 12 different fields of study as their majors and 57% of them were majored in physical sciences. Methodology and Assessment Tools The evaluator got involved at every stage of the training process, from the beginning (program design) to the end (post-training evaluation meeting), to make a multi-directional and meaningful assessment. A variety of data collection methods (quantitative and qualitative) were used in order to minimize the weakness of any single approach. With this intention, both the data gathered from the participants and feedback from the trainers had been used for assessment. The evaluation plan for the training involves the assessment of the significant changes in participants in terms of knowledge, skills and opinions specific to the training objectives; observation of the sessions and participant observations of the evaluation meetings the trainers held at the end of each day (see Figure 1).
Daily evaluation sessions (with participants) Daily evaluation meetings (with trainers)

Program Design

Pre-test

Post-test

Day 1

Day 2

Day 3

Day 4

Day 5

Day 6
Final Evaluation Meeting (with trainers, coordinator and consultant

Beginning of the training

End of the training

EVALUATION PLAN
Figure 1: Evaluation Plan for SLT

Evaluation Questionnaire 1: The SLT Evaluation Questionnaire 1 (EQ 1, see Annex -1) was revised to measure changes in knowledge, skills and opinions of the participants quantitatively, by the evaluator with the contribution of the training team. The EQ 1 had 69 items based on the specific objectives of the training sessions. The participants were required to respond to the items on a ten point Likert scale from Dont know at all/Cant do at all/Strongly disagree to Know completely/Can do completely/Strongly agree (see Anne x 1). The questionnaire was applied twice, once at the beginning and once at the end of the training as pretest and post-test. Participants were asked to fill in the column A during pre -test and columns B and C during post-test (representing pre-test, revised pre-test and post-test scores respectively). For the column C participants reassessed their pre-test scores after the training. Evaluation Questionnaire 2: The SLT Evaluation Questionnaire 2 (EQ 2, see Annex - 2) was basically a reactionnaire form which was developed to get feedback from the participants about overall structure and themes covered in the training, the trainers, technical conditions, etc. It also included open ended questions related with the aims of the training and some Likert scale items which could only be assessed after the training. Besides providing qualitative data for the evaluator EQ 2 served the team of trainers during the final evaluation meeting as a tool for evaluating the training.

41

Daily Evaluation Sessions (with participants): These were the sessions where the participants shared their experiences about the program, expressed their feelings, heard how others had experienced that same part of the program and came up with suggestions and ideas to improve the program. These sessions also provided the team of trainers an effective means for staying in touch with the way the group of participants developed and identifying any problems and challenges that needed intervention. Daily Evaluation Meetings (with trainers): The meetings trainers held at the end of each day where they evaluated the sessions, participants reactions, the training team and make modifications on the program if necessary. The evaluator participated in these meetings mostly as an observer and made suggestions if needed. Final Evaluation Meeting (with trainers, coordinator and consultant): Meeting held with the participation of trainers, coordinator, consultant and evaluator shortly after the training where overall structure and elements of the training program were evaluated and necessary future modifications were discussed. Results In this section, findings derived from the EQ -1 and EQ 2 will be presented, respectively (2 of the participants EQ-1 were excluded since they were not completed as needed). In Graphic 1 pre-test (A), revised pre-test (B) and post-test (C) scores of the participants were presented. One-way Repeated Measures ANOVA was conducted to compare the A, B, C scores. The results indicated that there was a statistically significant difference across these three scores. Wilks Lambda = .25, F (2,20), p < .001. The means and standard deviations were presented in Table 1. In other words, generally speaking, the training had the desired effect on the participants in terms of its objectives.
Graphic 1: EQ-1 mean scores for participants

In addition, in Graphic 2, mean scores for each item were demonstrated.

Graphic 2: Mean scores for EQ 1 items

42

Table 1: Descriptive Statistics for Pre-test, Revised Pre-test and Post-test Scores

Mean Pre-test Revised Pre-test Post-test

7,190 5,670 8,575

Std. Deviation
,177 ,326 ,148

N 22 22 22

Moreover, Bonferroni Post Hoc Test revealed that there was statistically significantly difference among pre-test, revised pre-test and post-test scores. The results were shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Descriptive Statistics for Pre-test, Revised Pre-test and Post-test Scores (I) factor1 Mean Std. Sig.b 95% Confidence Difference Error Interval for (I-J) Differenceb Lower Upper Bound Bound R. Pre-test 1,520* ,231 ,000 ,919 2,121 Pre-test Post-test R. Pre-test Post-test Pre-test Post-test Pre-test R. Pre-test Based on estimated marginal means *. The mean difference is significant at the ,05 level. b. Adjustment for multiple comparisons: Bonferroni. R.pre-test: Revised pre-test -1,385* -1,520* -2,905* 1,385* 2,905* ,206 ,231 ,368 ,206 ,368 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 -1,920 -2,121 -3,862 ,850 1,949 -,850 -,919 -1,949 1,920 3,862

Given that there was significant difference between pre-test and revised pre-test scores, in the following phase of analysis Wilcoxon Matched Pairs Signed Ranks Test was conducted to assess the difference between revised pre-test and post-test scores, for each item of EQ-1. The results were shown in Table 3, on the next page.

43

Table 3: Mean scores for revised pre-test and post-test, and p values for Wilcoxon tests, EQ-1
No *1 *2 *3 *4 *5 *6 *7 8 *9 *10 *11 *12 *13 *14 *15 *16 *17 *18 *19 *20 *21 *22 *23 *24 *25 *26 *27 *28 29 *30 *31 *32 33 *34 *35 *36 *37 *38 *39 *40 41 *42 *43 *44 *45 *46 *47 *48 *49 *50 51 *52 *53 *54 *55 56 *57 58 *59 *60 *61 *62 *63 *64 *65 *66 *67 *68 *69

Items
I know what the children may expect form me as a facilitator. I know the aims of TOG. I know the required factors to be a team. Volunteerism has diverse definitions. I can solve a presenting problem while working with children. I know the function of feedback. I know how "open-ended" and "closed-ended" questions may affect children's self expressions. Scientific methods provide absolute proofs. I know the mechanisms for participating in decision making processes in TOG. Each member has a role both in the success and failure of e team. Volunteerism is a way of civic participation. I know the developmental characteristics of children aged between 11-14. I know how to use reward and reinforcement as I work with children. I can receive feedback from my team mates. I know hot to give effective instructions during the workshops. Only highly educated scientists understand science. I can work with people with any kind of character in a team. I can focus children's attention to a specific issue during the workshops. I know how TOG functions. I know the difference among volunteerism, helpfulness and charity. It can be fun to work in a science lab. I can manage an approach appropriate to the children's developmental characteristics. I can give effective instructions during the workshops. I know the principles of TOG. Becoming a team requires endurance (persistence, effort, consistancy) I may not make big discoveries but studying science can be fun. I can specify the source of a problem during the workshops. I can change my mind for the sake of team's success. There is no imagination in science. I can inform people about TOG's aims. I know what active participation means. Every child is different than the other. Scientific methods can answer all the questions. I know various methods for managing undesirable behavior of children during the workshops. I can empathize with children during the workshops. I can give feedback to my team mates. I know what "positive expression" in communication refers to. I know what kind of opportunities TOG provides for young people (e.g. scholarships, counseling, internship, EVS, etc.). I can debate on volunteerism being aware of what I mean. Every single child develops with his/her distinctive developmental phase . Electronic devices are indeed the examples of valuable products of science I can notice the negative expressions I make as I am communicating with children. Most people can understand science . I know about the activities of TOG. I can create a learning environment which suits the needs of children I work with. I know how to give feedback. I can differentiate between open and closed ended questions. Scientists do not have enough time for their families or for fun. I can inform people about how TOG functions. I can differentiate the expressions of "I" languge and "You" language. Scientific knowledge includes subjectivity. I know the risks of appreciation, honoring, reinforcement methods. I can inform people about the principles of TOG. I know the impact of active participation. I know what "Disapproval Expression" refers to. Scientific study is boring. Disagreements within the team provides the team with opportunities for success. There is no cultural diversity in scientific knowledge. Each child has different abilities and aptitudes. I know how to get feedback. I can use the "I language" effectively in conversation. It might be very difficult for me to do scientific studies. I can inform people about TOG's activities. I can create an environment in which the children can easily share their thoughts and feelings. Imagination and creativity are important in the formation of scientific knowledge. I know how to act if any problems occurs during the workshops with children. Scientists have to work very hard. I can decide when to use appreciation, honoring, reinforcement methods during the workshops. I have the skills necessary for facilitating the workshops .

revised post-test pre-test p deerleri ,000 4,68 9,00 ,000 5,64 9,32 ,000 5,95 9,18 ,001 6,59 8,95 ,000 5,95 8,86 ,000 5,18 9,27
,000

4,86 4,24 4,95 7,50 7,59 5,91 5,27 5,91 4,45 6,91 6,73 5,77 5,41 5,27 6,18 5,64 4,59 4,91 7,23 7,18 5,64 6,05 6,59 5,23 6,14 8,59 5,45 4,55 6,09 5,36 5,27 5,68 5,50 8,00 4,05 5,32 6,27 5,55 5,27 4,59 4,77 5,64 5,27 5,41 4,45 4,82 5,09 5,82 5,09 6,36 5,57 5,48 8,64 5,14 4,73 5,82 4,95 5,41 7,09 5,23 5,32 4,77 4,86

9,59 4,57 8,64 9,27 9,23 9,05 8,64 9,32 8,68 8,00 8,36 8,77 8,91 8,91 8,32 9,05 8,95 9,00 9,27 8,73 8,73 8,41 7,14 9,05 9,14 9,41 6,14 8,82 8,77 9,09 9,14 9,23 9,05 9,55 3,45 8,95 8,45 9,00 9,05 9,05 9,59 8,41 9,18 9,41 4,77 9,00 8,86 9,23 9,05 7,59 6,91 5,81 9,59 8,95 8,91 7,55 9,05 9,05 9,00 8,95 7,36 8,55 9,05

,979 ,000 ,003 ,001 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,021 ,003 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,001 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,001 ,001 ,000 ,001 ,392 ,000 ,000 ,041 ,379 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,001 ,000 ,000 ,002 ,263 ,000 ,001 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,001 ,000 ,000 ,743 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,120 ,012 ,439 ,007 ,000 ,000 ,011 ,000 ,000 ,001 ,000 ,003 ,000 ,000

*The mean difference is significant at the 0,05 level Items 8, 16, 29, 33, 41, 48, 56, 58, 62, 67 were reverse-coded

44

The Wilcoxon Test revealed statistically significant increase in post-test scores except items 8, 29, 33, 41, 51, 56 and 58. These results will be discussed in the next section. In Graphics 3 and 4 participants Perceived Levels of Learning (PLL) were presented. In the EQ -2, the participants were required to asses to what extent they thought they had learned from each session of the training course on a five point Likert scale from 1: Learned nothing to 5: Learned a lot. Perceived Levels of Learning refers to the mean scores of these self-assessments.
Graphic 3: Participants Perceived Levels of Learning

The overall PLL mean score was 4,53 out of 5. Minimum score was 2,63 and maximum score was 5,00. These results clearly indicated that the participants thought that they had learned a lot in the training.
Graphic - 4: Perceived Levels of Learning for Sessions

Minimum PLL mean for sessions was 4,04 (Child and Child Development) and maximum mean was 4,96 (Colors Dancing in the Milk experiment). Mean scores for the technical conditions of the training according to the participants were as follows
Graphic - 5: Technical Conditions

45

Participants overall mean score for technical conditions is 4,08. This score indicated that the technical conditions were well enough according to the participants. In Graphic 6, the mean scores for the items that could not be assessed prior to the training were presented. These items were used additionally to assess to what extent the participants thought they could facilitate the workshops with children.
Graphic - 6: Mean Scores for the Post-Training Items

Conclusions and Recommendations There were three main objectives of the Scientific Literacy Training. First was enabling participants to reflect on their understanding of science, scientific knowledge, scientific practices and to develop curiosity about science. The other two, both acquisition of children centered approach and experiencing the experiments and their implementation procedures, were about developing participants competencies necessary for facilitating the workshops they would implement with children during the project. The results presented in the previous section indicated that the training had reached its overall objectives. In addition, evaluating the specific learning objectives of training in detail provided opportunities both to understand the extent to which the training created a change in participants in terms of its expected outcomes and make suggestions for the following SLTs. In line with the objectives, the training had three main themes, namely Scientific Literacy, Working with Children and Experiments. In this years SLT, sessions associated with Working with Children were revised and improved in line with previous years suggestions. Communication with Children, In the Eyes of the Children? and Classroom Management were the sub-themes of Working with Children. Volunteerism, CVF and its principles were additional training themes. Discussions of the objectives were categorized under these headings. All the items under Communication with Children, In the Eyes of the Children? and Classroom Management showed statistically significant difference (see Table 3 above). These results suggested that participants had gained knowledge about; acquired skills and attitudes necessary for working with children. In other words, participants;

understood the developmental characteristics of children more, paying regard to individual differences; did case studies on communication with children and improved their communication skills; such as giving effective instructions, using "positive expression", using reward and reinforcement techniques, using open and closed ended questions. did case studies on classroom management and improved their knowledge on various methods for managing undesirable behavior of children during the workshops; acquired basics of children centered approach, which promotes the right of the children to choose, make connections and communicate; and also allows freedom for the children to think, experience, explore, question and search for answers.
46

Also, our observations on the field and the outputs of EEFs suggested that facilitators needed time and practice to better improve these newly acquired knowledge and skills on communicating with children and classroom management, especially in cases of conflicts. Since facilitators need for knowledge and skills on teamwork and communication with each other were identified in the last years evaluation sessions on Teamwork and Feedback were designed and included in this years SLT. All the items on these topics indicated statistically significant differences. The participants had a greater understanding of what it requires to be a team and gained basic skills and attitude to form a team and maintain its functions. Again, all three items under Workshop Activities (Experiments) were found statistically significant. Moreover, items in the EQ 2 related with the experiments and facilitation of them (see Graphic 6, page 8) were scored quite high. This indicated that participants learned the objectives and implementation phases of experiments sufficiently. Notwithstanding, field observations revealed that participants needed to further read and study the Facilitators Book. Also, experienced facilitators played a key ro le in supporting the new facilitators that joined in the project this year. 50% of Scientific Literacy items showed statistically significant differences. Participants began to think that science could be understood by most people not just by scientists. They began to see science as more enjoyable and fun than they did before training. They no longer think that scientific study is difficult to do. Participants perception of scientists has changed as well. Their opinions such as Scientific methods provid e absolute proofs," Scientific methods can answer all the questions," There is no cultural diversity in scientific knowledge," Scientific methods can answer all the questions," Electronic devices are indeed the examples of valuable products of science remained the same after the training. Furthermore, their ideas about the place and function of imagination in science were controversial. On one hand, they began to think that imagination and creativity were important in the formation of scientific knowledge and on the other hand no significant change was observed on the idea that there was no place for imagination in science. Extra data regarding participants skills and opinions were gathered via the EQ-2. Participants were asked to share the skills they acquired and opinions that changed during the training in the EQ - 2. Their responses were presented below, from most frequent to least. Skills How to approach to children Communication with children Self-expression Using positive communication methods Working as a team Thinking as a child Moderating experiments Opinions and attitudes I have understood the difference between interpretation and fact. Scientific knowledge is subjective. Scientific knowledge has cultural diversity. Science is everywhere. From now on I do like doing experiments. You dont have to be in a lab to do experiments. Teamwork increases efficiency. There is nothing to be afraid of science. My perspective on science has changed. I can work with children now. Scientific knowledge is not absolute and can change.

Opinions that changed with the effect of the training provided evidence for the improvement of participants view of science. All items under Volunteerism, CVF and its principles were found statistically significantly different. This suggested that participants knew CVF and its principles better than they did before, learned basic concepts of volunteerism and relations among them, and could debate on volunteerism being aware of what they meant. 47

We looked at the answers of the participants to the open-ended questions in the EQ -2 and outputs of the evaluation meeting held with trainers, project coordinator and consultant at the end of the training to evaluate the training process. Participants were satisfied with the technical conditions (Graphic 5). The participants reported that the structure of the training was well-prepared and also flexible to the needs of the participants and their learning process. Participants reported that not only they didnt get bored but had fun during the training. At the same time, they thought that it was an intensive program, and they got tired occasionally. They stated that since it was a well planned program despite its intensiveness they couldnt realize how the whole week passed by. Very good, well informed, well-prepared, sincere, energetic, supportive, cheerful, understanding and attentive were the adjectives and expressions that participants used as they evaluated the trainers. They also added that with their behaviors the trainers had the participants feel as the members of a big team. Participants were asked whether they felt like being a facilitator in the project at the end of the training. 22 of 24 participants responded as Yes. 2 of them responded Yes, but I need support. This indicated that they were confident enough to facilitate the workshops. In the evaluation meetings with the training team following topics and recommendations came to the fore. These outcomes would be meaningful to consider when designing the next SLT.

Creating an additional space in the program where the participants can experience what they have learned in the communication session. Not to allow single trainer to facilitate almost the whole day. Considering which trainings the participants had before SLT during admission period. The participants who didnt participate in the SLT but volunteered the previous year may get distracted and indifferent in the training. Another role might be assigned for those participants.
Conclusively, the participants;

understood the developmental characteristics of children more, paying regard to individual differences; did case studies on communication with children and improved their communication skills; such as giving effective instructions, using "positive expression", using reward and reinforcement techniques, using open and closed ended questions. did case studies on classroom management and improved their knowledge on various methods for managing undesirable behavior of children during the workshops; acquired basics of children centered approach, which promotes the right of the children to choose, make connections and communicate; and also allows freedom for the children to think, experience, explore, question and search for answers. need time and practice to better improve newly acquired knowledge and skills on communicating with children and classroom management, especially in cases of conflicts. had a greater understanding of what it requires to be a team and gained basic skills and attitude to form a team and maintain its functions. learned the objectives and implementation phases of experiments sufficiently. and 50% of Scientific Literacy items showed statistically significant differences. Opinions that changed with the effect of the training provided evidence for the improvement of participants view of science.
48

In conclusion, results of both EQ 1 and EQ - 2 confirmed that the training served its purposes. Revision and restructuring the sessions on Working with Children, adding sessions on Teamwork, Feedback and Case Studies strengthened the impact of the training. In addition, allowing all of the volunteers who would take part in the project to participate in the SLT was suggested in the previous years evaluation report. It was not possible to achieve th is due to the budget planning. So, in order to expand the local project groups and provide opportunity for all the volunteers to receive training the project team made local dissemination trainings in each city. The number of young volunteers participated in the trainings were as follows: Bolu: 23, Edirne: 13, stanbul: 11, Ordu: 22, Osmaniye: 25, Kars: 12

Workshops
Between October 2012 and June 2012, 175 young volunteers and 1582 children joined the project in 6 cities; Istanbul, Edirne, Ordu, Osmaniye, Bolu and Kars, at 13 primary schools. (see BYSAP Final Report for further information). Two data collection instruments were developed to evaluate the workshop process. Exchange of Experiences Form (EEF), Posters children made and Letters children wrote. EEFs also provided additional qualitative data for the assessment of Scientific Literacy Training (SLT). Exchange of Experiences As the project was implemented by six different youth organizations (project teams) in six cities it was important for the facilitators to be in contact and share their experiences. This was also the facilitators expectation at the end of SLT. Apart from the e-mail and Facebook groups, where the facilitators exchanged information, pictures, and videos of ongoing activities and related material, Exchange of Experiences Form (EEF) was developed as a more structured way of exchanging information among the project groups and facilitators (see Annex 3). The other equally important function of EEFs was to provide qualitative data for process evaluation from the facilitators point of view. By filling out these forms, the facilitators shared their own experience and reflections on the workshops, concentrating on their personal experience, program, teamwork, children, school officials, technical conditions, workshop objectives and suggestions for further workshops. Randomly selected 62 EEFs were reviewed and the summary of data is presented below.

Personal Experience Personal experience refers to how the facilitators see and assess themselves during the workshop implementation. Being a facilitator in these workshops evokes facilitators certain feelings which they reflect in their responses. Facilitators usually felt anxious, particularly about communicating with children before their initial workshops. Their level of this kind of performance anxiety was quite natural and tended to decrease as they participated in more than one workshop. Active team mate support also decreased this kind of anxiety. On the other hand, most of them reported positive feelings such as joy, excitement and happiness and these feelings were crucial in the effectiveness of the workshops. As long as the facilitators felt joyful, excited and happy about what they are doing in the workshops the children felt more comfortable, excited and happy; and in 49

return they participated more in the experiments. Also, being able to motivate children and observing their increasing curiosity made the facilitators feel satisfied with the workshops and the project itself. Considerable amount of facilitators reported that they also learned from the children and began to see science as more fun than they did before. Teamwork Facilitators reported an overall satisfaction about the teamwork during the project. The most compelling evidence was the task-sharing. In most of the workshops they shared their roles and tasks by taking personal choices into consideration. Frequently, they assisted each other and felt as a team as a consequence during the workshops. As suggested in the SLT, they formed pre-defined teams; assigning separate pre-defined roles for preparation of materials, moderation of experiments, assistants, photography. They also cared about having enough number of team members ( at least 6) as much as possible. In some few cases, especially when there were only one member who participated in the SLT and no preparation meeting was held, facilitators had difficulty in working as a team. For most of the teams selecting the roles/tasks were up to personal choices. Some teams used drawing lots method to share the tasks. Program In the SLT the facilitators were advised to decide the optimal number of experiments they would do in order to increase the quality of the workshops. It was up to the facilitators to determine the experiments they would do considering the time they had, number of team members, number of children, physical conditions, materials, etc. According to the EEFs, the facilitators took this advice and this allowed them to concentrate on the context of the experiments, debriefing questions and group dynamics, energizer games and classroom management more. Homemade Ice Cream and Colors Dancing in the Milk were the experiments that the facilitators reported as most favorite ones. Some of the facilitators suggested that it would be better to increase the number of the experiments for two reasons . First, some of the experiments which were well received by the 4th grades seemed simple and dull for the 6th grades. Second, some children already knew most of the experiments before since they had seen them in a TV show, and gathering their attention became so difficult. Technical Conditions Overall assessment of facilitators feedback on technical conditions suggested that the places they used and the materials provided by the project team were satisfactory. Most of the workshops took place in the labs of the schools and the physical condition of these labs were found adequate enough to do the experiments. When classrooms were used some facilitators complained about the size of the classrooms. It is also seen that the facilitators utilized some practical solutions when there were lack of materials. This indicated the facilitators flexibility to unexpected conditions. Children (their contribution, motivation, interest, group dynamic, observed improvements) First of all, facilitators stated that in most of the workshops children were quite exited and curious. They actively participated in doing experiments. They tried to answer all of the questions facilitators asked during the debriefings. They were eager to learn. They liked the experiments and enjoyed the workshops. Secondly, facilitators observed that children were really appreciative of their efforts. Sometimes they got amazed by childrens curiosity and prior knowledge of the experiments. Moreover, if the facilitators had fun and enjoyed what they did children had fun and showed willingness as well. 50

On the other hand, some facilitators felt helpless when children who had previous experience with some particular experiments got bored and distracted against all their efforts. Also, in some of the schools, when children brought their previous problems with each other into the workshops facilitators had difficulty in maintaining the workshop. According to the facilitators reports, they needed additional knowledge and strategies in dealing with 6th grade students. School Officials Facilitators described the principles and/or teachers as very helpful and supportive. They felt really welcomed. Majority of the facilitators had no unpleasant interactions with the school officials. On only one occasion a principle came in to see what was happening, gave instructions to children, asked questions; which was stated as intrusive by facilitators. Evaluation of the workshops Facilitators were asked to evaluate the workshop based on its objectives (Do you think the workshop enabled children (1) to have an opinion about the nature of science, (2) to get more curious about science, (3) to get more willing to learn, question and reason?). They responses could be categorized under three headings; curiosity, changes in perception of science and increased interest in science. Some of the responses were quoted below. Children got motivated to do more experiments. The workshops are really effective. By working in a team, making observations and comparisons the children got more responsive to scientific thinking. Children began to see that science is not that out of reach, its in everyday life and they also began to question. They wondered what would happen if they did something during experiments and asked lots of questions. They began to ask why? and how? questions and tried to find their own aswers. We managed to evoke childrens curiosity. Children were more willing than Id expected. They freely asked about what they wondered. They even wrote a poem on the poster about science. Children listened to us very attentively, wanted to more experiments. They created new versions of the experiments and asked lots of what if questions. I observed that children began to express themselves more freely, asked more and reflected more than they do in their classes at school. They wanted to come again the week after. Suggestions for Following Workshops When asked to make suggestions for the following workshops facilitators gave the following answers. It would be better to increase the number of the experiments. Study the booklet before the workshops since you will need it to give better instructions and answer childrens questions. Pay attention to task/role-sharing in order not to have problems about materials and team size. Change the major facilitator/instructor for each experiment. It prevents you from getting too tired and it is also better for the children to listen to different facilitators, otherwise they lose their attentio n. Do not intervene with the major facilitator, it can be confusing for the children. 51

Prepare a little bit more material than the number of the children. If possible, do the experiments yourself before the workshops. 6th grade students found the energizers simple and dull. You can ask and create improvised energizers with them. We did it and it worked well. If we provide more detailed information about the project on the letter of parental permission we can have more children participate in the workshops. Field Visits Two types of field visits were done during the project period. Visits with project partner and visits with project experts. Visits with project partner: Field visits to different project groups were done with the project partner Bayer during the whole project period. The local and national media representatives also participated in these visits. Visits with project experts: Field visits to all project groups were done by the project team. In every city, young science ambassadors were visited in primary schools and then local evaluation meetings were done in order to support them in the process. These visits supported the young volunteers about the difficulties they have while facilitating the activities in the project, thereby improved the impact of the project.

Exchange Visits Among Science Ambassadors (Facilitators) Instead of evaluation meeting this year an exchange program among science ambassadors was planned and implemented as recommended in the last years project evaluation report. One facilitator from each project group visited another one. They had the opportunity to see and reflect what the other teams have been implementing as well as sharing their own experiences. These visits created a network in which the facilitators felt as a part of the whole picture and multiplied crucial experience and knowledge within the network. Providing mobility opportunities for young people for intercultural learning was another important outcome of this exchange program. Letters and Posters Letters and Posters were the two instruments developed to collect data from the participants of workshops; the children. At the end of the first day of the workshops, children were instructed by the facilitators to prepare a poster in small groups and then present it to other participants as a team (see Annex 4 for an example). The purpose of the posters was twofold. First, it provided a tool for children to recall experiences they had during the day and share them with each other. Second, it provided qualitative data for evaluation, which supports the data collected by the letters. 82 posters were examined. Examples of childrens statements are presented below. There is no age of doing science. Everyone can be a scientist. We are all scientists. It is not hard to be a young scientist, just work for it I wonder; how does this work?, what is that composed of? 52

Science is everywhere in our lives. Science should not only be in ones mind buy also in his/her heart. Science is not that hard to do as it seems. I learned that there are lots of colors in black by doing experiments, and Im going to tell my friends that science is important. Science helps us learn. Scientists do what they have put on their minds and provide benefits for people Scientists make life easier. Women also become scientists not just men do. A scientist is a person who is curious, patient, observant, brave and explorer. Do the experiment, discover yourself. Science is not boring but fun. Science is something happy and fun. We have discovered the enjoyable side of science. Experiment is fun. That science is boring a palaver. Come on molecules, enjoy yourself. Science = Fun We did experiments and learn; we played games and had fun. Science is fun, just like games we play. I thought it was going to be boring at first but I had so much fun. We did experiments, we had fun and we learned; all at the same time. According to the statements above, childrens perception about science and scientists had changed through the workshops. As it was assumed, with the effect of their experience in the workshops, children began to think science is not boring but fun and is a way of learning, science is everywhere in life, and everyone can be a scientist. In addition to the purposes of the posters mentioned earlier, it was observed that preparing and presenting posters in small groups helped children to experience more cooperation and teamwork. The main question asked with the letter was What kind of a scientist do you want to be?. Children were required to write a letter which described the kind of scientist they would like to be, what they would want to do and search as a scientist and why they chose those subjects (see Annex 5 for an example). 180 letters from 4th, 5th and 6th grade students were selected randomly for analysis; considering gender, grade and city distribution. Childrens responses were gathered under 8 categories for the final analysis which were based on the objectives of the workshops.

53

In Graphic 7, the overall distribution of the 464 responses were presented.

Graphic 7: Overall Distribution of Childrens Responses to the Letter

Graphic 7 demonstrated that children got highly motivated for being a scientist, got curios, had increased interest in science, had fun, appreciated the workshops and facilitators and began to express their creativity; consistent with the findings of posters. Having fun is the key to all the impact the workshops had on children. Examples of childrens responses were; I want to be a scientist when I grow up, After the experiments we did today I want to become a scientist , I want to be a chemist., Being a scientist is difficult but this won't change my mind, I want to be a scientist., I am a little science girl., I will tell my mom and dad that I will become a scientist., I would like to be a scientist., Everyone can be a scientist., I want to be a curious, patient and hardworking scientist., In my opinion a scientist is curious, examiner and inquisitive. That is the kind of scientist I want to be. (Motivation for becoming a scientist) We had lots of fun doing experiments, The experiments were very nice and I really had a lot of fun., On Saturday I had so much fun so that I didn't want to go home., Science was very boring before but now I think it's a lot of fun, I thought I would get bored at first but I learned new things by doing experiments and having fun., Learning science by doing experiments instead of learning it form books is more fun. (Fun) I liked doing experiments and I will continue to do them., Thanks to you, I don't think that science is boring, I think it's fun., I want to keep doing experiments at home, From now on I will do experiments more often., Do not get afraid of science, just have fun, I would observe the sky with a telescope and do research., These experiments can be helpful for us in the future., If I become a scientist I can satisfy my curiosity more easily by doing research., Now I want to do experiments at home all the time., I will tell the others what we have done today., I will do the experiments at home with my brothers., I wish we could always do enjoyable experiments like we did today. (Curiosity and Interest in Science) I really thank to our older brothers and sisters., I thank you a lot, you had us do experiments, Thank you for making us like science., I thank to older sisters and brothers who came here for us. , Thank you for playing games and doing experiments with us., With their support we did very nice experiments., 54

Thank you all for coming, I wish you'd come again., Two days werent enough, we wish youd always stay with us., I d wish it wouldnt end. (Gratification and Gratitude) If I were a scientist I would invent a bag which listens to me, I want to invent a box which finds lost items., I want to invent a solar - powered television., I would like to invent a time machine. , I would invent a machine by which I can talk to animals., I would build an oxygen factory in the space., I would invent a machine which regulates weather., I want to invent a teleportation machine., I want to invent flying houses and buildings. (Creativity/Discovery ) We learned about the colors in black., I learned how the flowers drink water., I learned how to make ice cream., I learned that flowers do really drink water, I learned that mineral salt makes ice melt. , I learned that black is not actually black. , We learned acid and base. ( Learned new things) Science is more valuable than a golden treasure for me, I want to invent something to protect environment, I want to invent lots of things which would make life easier for people. , I want to invent new drugs for people., I think there will be water famine in the future so I want to invent a machine which detects groundwater, and provide water for people., I want to invent solar-powered plains., I want to research the genes to help people., I want to create a robot named "ptan" which travels the world and gathers all the garbage in fifteen minutes., I would do research on atoms to decrease energy consumption., I would invent the things that people need. (Appreciation of Science) If I were a scientists I would go to schools and have the children do experiments and have fun. , When I grow up I will tell these experiments to my younger brothers and make them learn., I want to do experiments and play games with children when I grow up because I liked the experiments we did today very much., I want to teach experiments to other students, I want to be like you and teach experiments, I want to be like our teachers today. (Facilitators as role models) An additional finding that should be emphasized was the using of the word bilim insan instead of bilim adam. In Turkish, bilim adam refers to a male scientist. Using bilim adam causes and is a sign of gender discrimination. All children, with a few exceptions, used bilim insan to refer to scientists in their letters. Some of them emphasized this issue by writing; Girls also become scientists not just boys, we shouldnt think as boys or girls, it is already called bilim insan (scientist), I should be called bilim insan not bilim adam. Posters and Letters yielded the results below:

Children did really enjoy doing experiments and playing games. They were excited and motivated. They got more curious. They their interest in science increased. Their perception of science began to chance in the desired direction. They began to like science more and see the fun in it. Science became something accessible for them. They began to think everyone can be a scientist including themselves. They were able to express their creativity. They were grateful to the facilitators for the activities and the day. They recalled and depicted almost all of the experiments they did during the workshop on posters. They learned something new through the workshop.

55

Conclusions and Recommendations

According to the evaluation results BYSAP met or been planning to meet the key objectives presented in the project documents, in its second year. Effective project management plus revised and newly added project activities increased the impact of the project both on young science ambassadors and the children. Between June 2012 and June 2013, Project Content and booklets for young science ambassadors and for children were revised by the project consultant with the recommendations of pilot years evaluation report. Tools for monitoring and evaluation of the project were revised by the external expert. 24 Young TOG volunteers participated in the Scientific Literacy Training that took place in Istanbul. Local Dissemination Trainings were held in each project implementing city in order to share the knowledge and experiences with the new volunteers in order to expand the project team and reach more primary school children. In total, 175 young science ambassadors (target was 36) reached 1582 children (target was 1350), in 13 schools (target was 6), at the end of June 2013. Training for Bayer employees was designed and carried out with a participation of 30 employees. A Science Workshop was carried out for Bayer employees children where approximately 36 children participated in. Field visits to local project groups were done by TOG, Bayer Turkey and media representatives. As a new tool, exchange between each local project teams supported young science ambassadors to share knowledge and have see each others practices in order to improve their ability. BYSA Project was presented in Best Practices Education Conference that is hold by Education Reform Initiative. A science workshop was made by the young science ambassadors to 155 children in the scope of Bayer 150th Anniversary Exhibition.

24 young volunteers from 6 different CVF Youth Organizations participated in the Scientific Literacy Training; the main training in the project. In this training, young volunteers (Young Science Ambassadors) reflected on their understanding of science, scientific knowledge and practice, and developed curiosity about science. Moreover, they developed competencies necessary for facilitating the workshops they implemented during the project with children. In other words, young science ambassadors;

Understood the developmental characteristics of children more, paying regard to individual differences; Did case studies on communication with children and improved their communication skills; such as giving effective instructions, using "positive expression", using reward and reinforcement techniques, using open and closed ended questions. Did case studies on classroom management and improved their knowledge on various methods for managing undesirable behavior of children during the workshops; Acquired basics of children centered approach, which promotes the right of the children to choose, make connections and communicate; and also allows freedom for the children to think, experience, explore, question and search for answers. Need time and practice to better improve newly acquired knowledge and skills on communicating with children and classroom management, especially in cases of conflicts. Had a greater understanding of what it requires to be a team and gained basic skills and attitude to form a team and maintain its functions. Learned the objectives and implementation phases of experiments sufficiently. Learned about the characteristics of scientific knowledge. Reflected on their prejudices on scientific knowledge and practice.
56

Also, the opinions that changed with the effect of the training provided evidence for the improvement of participants view of science. Learned basic concepts of volunteerism and relations among them, and could debate on volunteerism being aware of what they meant. Got to know TOG, and its principles better than they did before.

Revision and restructuring of the sessions on Working with Children, adding sessions on Teamwork, Feedback and Case Studies strengthened the impact of the training. In addition, in order to expand the local project groups and provide opportunity for all the volunteers to receive training the project team made local dissemination trainings in each city. 96 volunteers participated in these trainings. 175 young science ambassadors and 1582 children joined the project between June 2012 June 2013 in six cities. Each project group started the workshops at distinct times since getting the legal permissions from Directorates of Education took different durations in each city. Results of Posters and Letters demonstrated the effects of the workshops on children.

Children did really enjoy doing experiments and playing games. They were excited and motivated. They got more curious. They their interest in science increased. Their perception of science began to chance in the desired direction. They began to like science more and see the fun in it. Science became something accessible for them. They questioned their prejudices about science and scientists, They began to think everyone can be a scientist including themselves. They were able to express their creativity. They were grateful to the facilitators for the activities and the day. They recalled and depicted almost all of the experiments they did during the workshop on posters. They learned something new through the workshop.

Trying to understand the interrelations between science, technology, society and environment, questioning their own prejudices about science and scientists, and understanding and appreciating the value of science and technology were seemed as difficult to reach objectives for these workshops so far, considering their duration and context. Nevertheless, the results suggest that the childrens perception of science and scientists have begun to change obviously.

As a result of this evaluation the following recommendations were made to improve the implementation strategy and to strengthen the impact of the project. Recommendations are grouped under three main headings; SLT, Workshops and General Recommendations. SLT (Scientific Literacy Training)

Creating an additional space in the program where the participants can experience what they have learned in the communication session. Not to allow single trainer to facilitate almost the whole day. Considering which trainings the participants had before SLT during admission period.
57

Assigning another role for the participants who didnt participate in the SLT but volunteered the previous year may, since they can get distracted and indifferent in the training.

Workshops and Facilitation

Paying particular attention to the debriefing questions. Studying the Facilitators Booklet more carefully. Making preparation meetings before the workshops, sharing roles and tasks more accurately in order not to have problems about materials and team size. Making evaluation after the workshops and giving feedback to each other. Changing the major facilitator/instructor for each experiment. Preparing a little bit more material than the number of the children. If possible, doing the experiments yourself before the workshops. Creating improvised energizers or games with the children if they find it boring or uninteresting.

General

Keeping up doing the exchange visits for young volunteers to interact and learn from each other. Organizing periodic meetings to support young volunteers specifically in terms of working with children and/or providing supervision. Organizing social events and activities which will enhance volunteer motivation. Providing a pool of experiments considering levels of different grade students. Providing more detailed information about the project on the letter of parental permission so that more children may participate in the workshops.

Conclusively, based on the data gathered so far, evaluation results showed that BYSAP was planned and implemented in a way that led to (1) an increased curiosity and interest in science; scientific knowledge and practice, (2) significant change in perception of science, scientific practice and scientists in its target groups.

58

Form No: __________ Pre-test

ANNEX -1
BAYER SCIENCE AMBASSADORS SCIENTIFIC LITERACY TRAINING
30 October 4 November 2012, ISTANBUL

EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE - I
This form is developed in order to evaluate the training; to figure out the extent to which the training objectives are met. Your contributions will help us to further develop the training. Thank you in advance for your sincere responses. No names needed. Your Age: ____________ Your Gender: _____________ Your major:_______________________

- Please asses the items using the scale below and write down your scores in the columns next to the items.

1. Dont know at all/Cant do at all/Strongly disagree...........................10.Know completely/Can do completely/Strongly agree

A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 I know what the children may expect form me as a facilitator. I know the aims of TOG. I know the required factors to be a team. Volunteerism has diverse definitions. I can solve a presenting problem while working with children. I know the function of feedback. I know how "open-ended" and "closed-ended" questions may affect children's self expressions. Scientific methods provide absolute proofs. I know the mechanisms for participating in decision making processes in TOG. Each member has a role both in the success and failure of e team. Volunteerism is a way of civic participation. I know the developmental characteristics of children aged between 11-14. I know how to use reward and reinforcement as I work with children. I can receive feedback from my team mates. I know hot to give effective instructions during the workshops. Only highly educated scientists understand science. I can work with people with any kind of character in a team. I can focus children's attention to a specific issue during the workshops. I know how TOG functions. I know the difference among volunteerism, helpfulness and charity. It can be fun to work in a science lab. I can manage an approach appropriate to the children's developmental characteristics. I can give effective instructions during the workshops. I know the principles of TOG. Becoming a team requires endurance (persistence, effort, consistency) I may not make big discoveries but studying science can be fun. I can specify the source of a problem during the workshops. I can change my mind for the sake of team's success. There is no imagination in science. I can inform people about TOG's aims.

59

Form No: __________ Post-test

A 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 I know what active participation means. Every child is different than the other. Scientific methods can answer all the questions. I know various methods for managing undesirable behavior of children during the workshops. I can empathize with children during the workshops. I can give feedback to my team mates. I know what "positive expression" in communication refers to. I know what kind of opportunities TOG provides for young people (e.g. scholarships, counseling, internship, EVS, etc.). I can debate on volunteerism being aware of what I mean. Every single child develops with his/her distinctive developmental phase . Electronic devices are indeed the examples of valuable products of science I can notice the negative expressions I make as I am communicating with children. Most people can understand science . I know about the activities of TOG. I can create a learning environment which suits the needs of children I work with. I know how to give feedback. I can differentiate between open and closed ended questions. Scientists do not have enough time for their families or for fun. I can inform people about how TOG functions. I can differentiate the expressions of "I" language and "You" language. Scientific knowledge includes subjectivity. I know the risks of appreciation, honoring, reinforcement methods. I can inform people about the principles of TOG. I know the impact of active participation. I know what "Disapproval Expression" refers to. Scientific study is boring. Disagreements within the team provides the team with opportunities for success. There is no cultural diversity in scientific knowledge. Each child has different abilities and aptitudes. I know how to get feedback. I can use the "I language" effectively in conversation. It might be very difficult for me to do scientific studies. I can inform people about TOG's activities. I can create an environment in which the children can easily share their thoughts and feelings. Imagination and creativity are important in the formation of scientific knowledge. I know how to act if any problems occurs during the workshops with children. Scientists have to work very hard. I can decide when to use appreciation, honoring, reinforcement methods during the workshops. I have the skills necessary for facilitating the workshops .

60

Form No: __________ Post-test

70. Have you participated in the BYSA Project last year? Yes No

71. Have you ever participated in a training with the theme Scientific Literacy before? Yes No If yes; please write the name(s) and duration(s) of the training(s):

72. Have you ever participated in a training with the theme Working with Children before? Yes No If yes; please write the name(s) and duration(s) of the training(s):

73. Please use this field (and the back page) to add any other comments that you would like.

Thank you for your participation... Erhan Okak

61

Form No: __________ Post-test

BAYER SCIENCE AMBASSADORS SCIENTIFIC LITERACY TRAINING

30 October 4 November 2012, ISTANBUL

EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE - I
This form is developed in order to evaluate the training; to figure out the extent to which the training objectives are met. Your contributions will help us to further develop the training. Thank you in advance for your sincere responses. No names needed. Your Age: ____________ Your Gender: _____________ Your major:_______________________

- Please asses the items using the scale below and write down your scores in the columns next to the items.

1. Dont know at all/Cant do at all/Strongly disagree...........................10.Know completely/Can do completely/Strongly agree

B 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 I know what the children may expect form me as a facilitator. I know the aims of TOG. I know the required factors to be a team. Volunteerism has diverse definitions. I can solve a presenting problem while working with children. I know the function of feedback. I know how "open-ended" and "closed-ended" questions may affect children's self expressions. Scientific methods provide absolute proofs. I know the mechanisms for participating in decision making processes in TOG. Each member has a role both in the success and failure of e team. Volunteerism is a way of civic participation. I know the developmental characteristics of children aged between 11-14. I know how to use reward and reinforcement as I work with children. I can receive feedback from my team mates. I know hot to give effective instructions during the workshops. Only highly educated scientists understand science. I can work with people with any kind of character in a team. I can focus children's attention to a specific issue during the workshops. I know how TOG functions. I know the difference among volunteerism, helpfulness and charity. It can be fun to work in a science lab. I can manage an approach appropriate to the children's developmental characteristics. I can give effective instructions during the workshops. I know the principles of TOG. Becoming a team requires endurance (persistance, effort, consistancy) I may not make big discoveries but studying science can be fun. I can specify the source of a problem during the workshops. I can change my mind for the sake of team's success. There is no imagination in science. I can inform people about TOG's aims. 62 C

B 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 I know what active participation means. Every child is different than the other. Scientific methods can answer all the questions. I know various methods for managing undesirable behavior of children during the workshops. I can empathize with children during the workshops. I can give feedback to my team mates. I know what "positive expression" in communication refers to. I know what kind of opportunities TOG provides for young people (e.g. scholarships, counseling, internship, EVS, etc.). I can debate on volunteerism being aware of what I mean. Every single child develops with his/her distinctive developmental phase . Electronic devices are indeed the examples of valuable products of science I can notice the negative expressions I make as I am communicating with children. Most people can understand science . I know about the activities of TOG. I can create a learning environment which suits the needs of children I work with. I know how to give feedback. I can differentiate between open and closed ended questions. Scientists do not have enough time for their families or for fun. I can inform people about how TOG functions. I can differentiate the expressions of "I" language and "You" language. Scientific knowledge includes subjectivity. I know the risks of appreciation, honoring, reinforcement methods. I can inform people about the principles of TOG. I know the impact of active participation. I know what "Disapproval Expression" refers to. Scientific study is boring. Disagreements within the team provides the team with opportunities for success. There is no cultural diversity in scientific knowledge. Each child has different abilities and aptitudes. I know how to get feedback. I can use the "I language" effectively in conversation. It might be very difficult for me to do scientific studies. I can inform people about TOG's activities. I can create an environment in which the children can easily share their thoughts and feelings. Imagination and creativity are important in the formation of scientific knowledge. I know how to act if any problems occurs during the workshops with children. Scientists have to work very hard. I can decide when to use appreciation, honoring, reinforcement methods during the workshops. I have the skills necessary for facilitating the workshops .

63

70. Please use this field (and the back page) to add any other comments that you would like.

Thank you for your participation... Erhan Okak

64

ANNEX - 2
BAYER SCIENCE AMBASSADORS SCIENTIFIC LITERACY TRAINING
30 October 4 November 2012, ISTANBUL

EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE - II
1. Please evaluate the sessions of the training in the table below, reflecting on how much you learned in each session.

Welcome Evening Civil Society and TOG Child Development Volunteerism Teamwork Feedback TOG Principles In the eyes of Children Communication with Children CwC and CM Bayer - Our Stakeholder Scientific Literacy I Scientific Literacy 2 Activities Day Do flowers drink water? Let's build a thermometer Colors dancing in the milk The Screaming Balloons Is black really black? Homemade Ice Cream Chemistry of Red Cabbage Field Experience (Case Study) Project Briefing Daily Evaluation Sessions Use this space if you have any comments for the sessions.

65

2. Please evaluate the technical conditions .

Information about the training given before by the organizers Transportation Accomodation Meals Meeting Hall Use this space if you have any comments for technical conditions.

3. Could you draw a symbol representing your experience through the training?

4. Please evaluate overall structure and flow of the program?

5. Please write your comments about the trainers.

66

6. What are your expectations from your peers, trainers and TOG after the training?

7. Please evaluate your own contribution and contribution of the participants to the training? Participants Contribution: Your Contibution:

8. Do you feel ready enough to facilitate the workshops?

9. Please evaluate the items below. At the end of this training;

I can explain how each experiment will be implemented I know how I can use the Facilitators' Booklet I know the implementation steps of the experiments I will facilitate I know the objectives of the experiments I will facilitateduring the workshops

67

10. Do you have any skills you acquired or improved during the training. If so, please share them briefly.

11. Do you have any opinions/attitudes that changed during the training. If so, please share them briefly.

12. Please share anything you would like to add.

68

ANNEX 3
THANKS!!

BAYER YOUNG SCIENCE AMBASSADORS PROJECT EXCHANGE OF EXPERIENCES FORM for the FACILITATORS

Workshop Info Me: Which activity?: My team: Duration of the activity: Date, School, City:

Me (your feelings, opinion, contributions, what you have gained, your dissatisfactions and your satisfactions before, during and after the activity, etc.)

Teamwork and Distribution of Tasks (number of team members, how did you share the tasks, how do you evaluate the work/activity, what were the positive and negative sides?)

Technical Conditions (materials, hall where the workshop took place, logistics, heat, etc.)

Program (which activities did you perform, the ones that went well, ones did not go so well and ones went poorly, etc.)

Participants (children) (their contribution to the workshop, their motivation, group dynamics, your observations based on workshop objectives, etc.)

Relations with the school officials

69

Your suggestions for the forthcoming workshops

How do you evaluate/assess this workshop on the basis of promoting (1) childrens knowledge on the nature of science, (2) their curiosity and interest on the scientific and technologic events/ facts/phenomena and (3) their will for understanding, questioning, and reasoning?

Anything you would like to share besides the former titles/headings

Thank you for your contribution!!

70

ANNEX 4
Sample posters

71

72

ANNEX 5
Sample Letters

73

74

75

76