Bilim merkezlerine düzenek seçimi için çok amaçlı çok boyutlu bir sırt çantası modeli

Öz

Bilim Merkezleri kendilerinden beklenen görevleri içerilerinde bulundurdukları sergi ve düzenekler aracılığıyla gerçekleştirmektedir. Bir Bilim Merkezinde kuruluş aşamasındaki düzeneklerin seçimi sağlanacak toplumsal yarar üzerinde doğrudan etkilidir. Sözü edilen sergi, düzenek ve benzeri donanımların seçimi ise elde edilmek istenen yarar doğrultusunda, merkezin hedefleri ve ziyaretçi profili göz önünde tutularak; mekan sınırlamaları ve bütçe kısıtları altında yapılmaktadır. Literatürde müze ve bilim merkezlerinin sergilerini oluşturmak için, sergi düzeneği seçimine ilişkin bir matematiksel yaklaşım yer almamaktadır. Literatürde bulunan çalışmalar incelendiğinde bir müzede veya bilim merkezinde sergi oluşturmak için sezgisel yöntemlerin kullanıldığı ve özellikle küratörlerin deneyimlerinden yararlanıldığı görülmektedir. Bir bilim merkezi için yeni bir sergi oluşturmak, çeşitli düzeneklerden oluşturulacak bir portföyün belirli amaçları optimize etmeye yönelik olarak bir araya getirilmesi işlemi olarak bir sırt çantası problemi yapısında modellenebilir. Bu çalışmada, bilim merkezlerinde en uygun düzeneklerin seçimi için matematiksel programlama tabanlı bir yöntem önerilmektedir. Önerilen çok amaçlı ve çok boyutlu sırt çantası modeli; bilim merkezi misyonunu yüksek düzeyde destekleyen, öğreticilik düzeyi ve ilgi çekicilik düzeyi yüksek olan; buna karşılık toplam tesis alanı, satın alma bütçesi ve işletme bütçesi kısıtlarını da sağlayan düzeneklerin seçimini gerçekleştirmektedir. Modelde portföyü oluşturan düzeneklerin farklı bilim alanlarından seçilmesini sağlamak üzere bir ek kısıt da yer almaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bilim merkezi
• çok amaçlı sırt çantası problemi
• çok boyutlu sırt çantası problemi
• sergi ve düzenek seçimi.

Kaynakça

1. 1. Plummer J.D., Cho K., The role of narrative in informal programming designed to engage preschool-age children in science explanations, International Journal of Science Education, Part B, March 2023, DOI: 10.1080/21548455.2023.2180781.
2. 2. Souza V.M., Bonifácio V., Rodrigues A.V., School Visits to Science Museums: A Framework for Analyzing Teacher Practices, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 34 (4), 329-351, 2023.
3. 3. Rende K., Jones M.G., Refvem E., Carrier S.J., Ennes M., Accelerating high school students’ science career trajectories through non-formal science volunteer programs, International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 13 (1), 28-39, 2023.
4. 4. Sripaoraya N., Spronken-Smith R., Longnecker N., Intensive, ShortTerm Presenting With a Science Outreach Program Enhances Positive Science Attitudes and Interest in Lifelong Learning About Science. Frontiers in Education, 7, 719686, 2022.
5. 5. Domenici V., STEAM Project-Based Learning Activities at the Science Museum as an Effective Training for Future Chemistry Teachers. Education Sciences, 12, 30, 2022.
6. 6. Alt M.B., Shaw K.M., Characteristics of ideal museum exhibits, British Journal of Psychology, 75, 25-36, 1984.
7. 7. Perry D.L., What Makes Learning Fun? Principles for the Design of Intrinsically Motivation Museum Exhibits, AltaMira Press, Maryland, A.B.D., 2012.
8. 8. ElDamshiry, K.K., Khalil, M.H., Moussa, R.R., A prototype evaluation tool for museum exhibition design: Aligning display techniques with learning identities, Advanced Engineering Science, 54 (2), 1021-1040, 2022.

9. 9. Rhee B-A., Pianzola F., Choi J., Hyung W., Hwang J., Visual content analysis of visitors’ engagement with an instagrammable exhibition, Museum Management and Curatorship, 37 (6), 583-597, 2022.
10. 10. Museum Handbook, Part 3: Museum Collection Use, Chapter 7, National Park Service, Washington DC, A.B.D., 2001.
11. 11. Rudman H., Bailey-Ross C., Kendal J., Mursic Z., Lloyd A., Ross B., Kendal R.L., Multidisciplinary exhibit design in a Science Centre: a participatory action research approach, Educational Action Research. 26 (4), 567-588, 2018.
12. 12. Stuedahl D., Lefkaditou A., Ellefsen G.S., Skatun T., Design anthropological approaches in collaborative museum curation, Design Studies, 75, 101021, 2021.
13. 13. Hodder A.P.W., Hodder C., Life cycles of exhibitions in a science center: A New Zealand case study, e-Review of Tourism Research (eRTR), 7 (6), 114-123, 2009.
14. 14. Kim D., Lee J., Chun B.S., Hwang G., Paek W.K., Byun B., SMEP (Science Museum Exhibition Platform) for Sharing and exchange system of natural history collection, Journal of Asia-Pacific Biodiversity, 14 (3), 299-301, 2021.
15. 15. Imbernon U., Casanovas-Rubio M., Monteiro C., Armengou J., A decision-making method for planning exhibitions in arts organizations: A case study of CaixaForum Barcelona, Evaluation and Program Planning, 93, 102102, 2022.
16. 16. Bobbe, T., Fischer, R. How to design tangible learning experiences: A literature review about science exhibit design, in Lockton, D., Lenzi, S., Hekkert, P., Oak, A., Sádaba, J., Lloyd, P. (eds.), DRS2022: Bilbao, 25 June - 3 July, Bilbao, Spain. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2022.195.
17. 17. Kristinsdottir A., Toward sustainable museum education practices: confronting challenges and uncertainties, Museum Management and Curatorship, 32 (5), 424-439, 2017.
18. 18. Cheng J-C., Learning outcomes of transforming cuttingedge iPSC research into informal science courses for upper secondary school students, Journal of Biological Education, April 2023, DOI: 10.1080/00219266.2023.2192729.
19. 19. Hsieh, Y.-L., Lee, M.-F., Chen, G.-S., Wang,W.-J. Application of Visitor Eye Movement Information to Museum Exhibit Analysis. Sustainability, 14, 6932, 2022.
20. 20. Caporaso J.S., Ball C.L., Marble K.E., Boseovski J.J., Marcovitch S., Bettencourt K.M., Zarecky L., An Observational Investigation of How Exhibit Environment and Design Intersect to Influence Parent–Child Engagement, Visitor Studies, 25(2), 185-216, 2022.
21. 21. Qiang, L., Effects of different types of digital exhibits on children’s experiences in science museums, The Design Journal, 25 (1), 126-135, 2022.
22. 22. Pedretti E., T.Kuhn Meets T. Rex: Critical Conversations and New Directions in Science Centres and Science Museums, Studies in Science Education, 37 (1), 1-41, 2002.
23. 23. Lee H., Kang D.Y., Kim M.J., Martin S.N., Navigating into the future of science museum education: focus on educators’ adaptation during COVID 19, Cultural Studies of Science Education, 18, 647–667, 2023.
24. 24. Vassilakis C., Poulopoulos V., Antoniou A., Wallace M, Lepouras G., Nores M.L., exhiSTORY: Smart exhibits that tell their own stories, Future Generation Computer Systems, 81, 542-556, 2018.
25. 25. Whitney K., How Museums Tell Stories: An Interview with Amelia Wong, Journal of Museum Education, 48 (1), 16-20, 2023.
26. 26. Kamariotou V., Kamariotou M., Kitsios F., Strategic planning for virtual exhibitions and visitors’ experience: A multidisciplinary approach for museums in the digital age, Digital Applications in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage, 21, e00183, 2021.
27. 27. Kabassi K., Application of Multi‐Criteria Decision‐Making Models for the Evaluation Cultural Websites: A Framework for Comparative Analysis, Information, 12, 407, 2021.
28. 28. Hooper-Greenhill E., Museum and Gallery Education, Leicester University Press, Leicester, Great Britain, 1991. (Müze ve Galeri Eğitimi, Çev. Evren M.Ö., Kapçı E.G., Ankara Üniversitesi Çocuk Kültürü Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Yayınları No:4, Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi, Ankara, 1999).
29. 29. Gong X., Zhang X., Tsang M.C., Creativity development in preschoolers: The effects of children’s museum visits and other education environment factors, Studies in Educational Evaluation, 67, 100932, 2020.
30. 30. Kırcı N., An evaluation on syntactic and formal analysis of museums, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 25 (2), 189-199, 2010.
31. 31. Tran,L.U., King, H., The Professionalization of Museum Educators: The Case in Science Museums, Museum Management and Curatorship, 22 (2), 131-149, 2007.
32. 32. Achiam M., Marandino M., A framework for understanding the conditions of science representation and dissemination in museums, Museum Management and Curatorship, 29 (1), 66-82, 2014.
33. 33. Mortensen, M.F., Museographic Transposition: The Development of a Museum Exhibit on Animal Adaptations to Darkness. Education & Didactique 4 (1), 119-137, 2010.
34. 34. Simonneaux, L., Jacobi D., Language Constraints in Producing Prefiguration Posters for a Scientific Exhibition, Public Understanding of Science, 6 (4), 383-408, 1997.
35. 35. Marandino, M., Transposition or Recontextualisation? On the Production of Knowledge in Education in Science Museums, Revista Brasileira de Educaçao, 26, 95-108, 2004.
36. 36. King, E., Smith, M.P., Wilson, P.F., Janet Stott, J., Williams, M.A., Creating Meaningful Museums: A Model for Museum Exhibition User Experience, Visitor Studies, 26 (1), 59-81, 2023.
37. 37. Kellerer H., Pferschy U., Pisinger D., Knapsack Problems, Springer-Verlag Press, Berlin, Almanya, 2004.
38. 38. Durgut R., Aydın M.E., Adaptive binary artificial bee colony for multi-dimensional knapsack problem, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 36 (4), 2333-2348, 2021.
39. 39. Lust T., Teghem J., The multiobjective multidimensional knapsack problem: a survey and a new approach, International Transactions in Operational Research, 19, 495-520, 2012.
40. 40. The Exploratorium. Explore, Play, Discover: Websites, Activities, and More. https://www.exploratorium.edu/explore. Erişim tarihi Şubat 5, 2019.
41. 41. Saccani G., Hakanen J., Sindhya K., Ojalehto V., Hartikainen M., Antonelli M., Miettinen K., Potential of interactive multiobjective optimization in supporting the design of a groundwater biodenitrification process, Journal of Environmental Management, 254, 109770, 2020.
42. 42. Lokman B., An approach for solving single-machine bi-criteria scheduling problem, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 35 (4), 2075-2088, 2020.
43. 43. Hasanoğlu M.S., Dölen M., Comparison of multi-objective and single-objective approaches in feasibility enhanced particle swarm optimization, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 35 (2), 887-900, 2020.
44. 44. Ecer B., Kabak M., Dağdeviren M., Goal programming model for bi-objective inverse multiple criteria sorting problem, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 35 (4), 1729-1736, 2020.
45. 45. Birgören B., Sakallı Ü.S., Brass alloy blending problem from quality and cost perspectives: A multi-objective optimization approach, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 36 (1), 433-445, 2021.
46. 46. Yasar, E., Gurel, C., Science museum exhibits’ summative evaluation with knowledge hierarchy method, European Journal of Physics Education, 7 (1), 25-36, 2016.