Exemplary practices in field trips to natural environments

Abstract

In light of the literature that deals with challenges of outdoor education, this paper presents exemplary practices in field trips to natural environments. We offer an analysis of 62 field trips of students in grades 4-8 (age 10-14), guided by professional guides or by teachers. In aiming at elucidating the qualities of exemplary fieldtrips, we analyze five examples of high quality field trips. Each of the five was exemplary in several aspects, but not necessarily in all. Data were collected though observations and interviews with teachers, guides and students. Interpretative analysis was used in addition to an analytic framework that we developed previously. In general, we stress that good collaboration between the guide and the teacher, who enact active learning and psychomotor activity, and make much use of the environment for student exploration and interaction, are the key to high quality outdoor learning experiences. We provide several examples to support this claim. Other aspects we highlight are a sense of freedom, time and opportunity to enjoy nature and the opportunities to have meaningful social interactions. In light of the prevalent critique toward current outdoor education practice, we suggest the research community learn from good practices. What is good practice in outdoor teaching? How might we recognize it? What are its specific characteristics? We keep asking these questions, realizing how complex the learning experience we study is and acknowledging that the answer is not simple. Since we ask the questions with reference to guided school visits that our research group studied in the last decade, we focus on the broad question of how to understand, frame and design outdoor learning that corresponds with school-based learning. We use a systemic approach to outdoor learning that considers as many variables as possible that affect the quality of the activity and its outcomes. These variables include (1) the context-the school curriculum, the physical environment, the group's background and so forth; (2) the pedagogy and the agents who implement this pedagogy-teachers, field guides, the students and their interest, and (3) the content of the field trip. Although there is much literature that describes challenges and misuse of outdoor education experiences, we believe that the contribution of this body of literature to identifying high quality practices is limited. We already know much of what's wrong, but we know little of what works. In this paper we used a different approach than we used in previous studies by attempting to identify, present and discuss high quality practices of outdoor education, by looking at how the interplay between different aspects

Teaching and Learning Science Outdoors in Schools’ Immediate Surroundings at K-12 Levels: A Meta-Synthesis

“…Paradoxically, science education at school generally happens indoors; it is only on rare occasions that it unfolds outside (Glackin, 2013(Glackin, , 2016Rickinson et al, 2004). This might at least partly explain why many authors claim that more connections with real-life settings should be established to counterbalance the frequently reported and denounced lack of authenticity at school (Bencze & Hodson, 1999;Braund & Reiss, 2006;Fägerstam, 2014;Gafoor & Narayan, 2012;Krapp & Prenzel, 2011;Potvin, & Hasni 2014;Rivet & Krajcik, 2008;Smith, 2013;Tal, Alon, & Morag, 2014).…”

‘Risky fun’ or ‘Authentic science’? How teachers’ beliefs influence their practice during a professional development programme on outdoor learning

“…That is, compared to 'regular' teachers, avid users are identified as being able to create opportunities by adjusting their practice, working around challenges in structures of authority, and encouraging colleagues to see the potential of out-of-classroom teaching. More specifically, Tal, Lavie Alon, and Morag (2014) list exemplar practices of teachers in field trips to natural settings to include: activities that enable active learning and provide substantial interaction with the environment. Whilst these studies tell us that characteristics of teachers' practice can be categorised, as Kisiel (2014) accepts, they do not explain why teachers make different pedagogical decisions concerning opportunities outside the classroom.…”

«Utvidet klasserom» – Et verktøy for å designe uteundervisning i naturfag

“…Innvendingen er at Tal et al (2014) ikke viser hvordan designprinsippene er forbundet med dybdelaering. Elever forstår ikke nødvendigvis mer naturfag bare ved å vaere sosialt og fysisk aktive.…”

“…Vårt bidrag til å løse utfordringene er «Utvidet klasserom», som vi har utviklet og testet ut gjennom 20 år med FoU-prosjekter. Det som gjenstår er å diskutere hvorfor laerere skal bruke «Utvidet klasserom», enten i stedet for eller i tillegg til de andre verktøyene til Orion (1993), Tal et. al.…”

“…Laereren kan bruke de fire dimensjonene for å sikre at formålet med uteundervisningen ikke bare blir å forsterke teoretisk kunnskap. På den måten vil «Utvidet klasserom» imøtekomme intensjonene med uteundervisning (Braund & Reiss, 2006) i større grad enn for eksempel Tal et. al.…”