2017
DOI: 10.1080/03004279.2017.1420096
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Seven place-conscious methods to stimulate situational interest in science teaching in urban environments

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
12
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Ten of the studies used qualitative methods only, 11 studies used a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods, with only four studies using exclusively quantitative methods and having sample sizes of more than 300 students. Articles were related to STEM with some focusing on mathematics (Althauser and Harter, 2016;Walkington and Bernacki, 2019), science (Buck et al, 2016;Francis et al, 2016;Leonard et al, 2016;Rahmawati and Koul, 2016;Gates, 2017;Zimmerman and Weible, 2017;Fűz, 2018;Bølling et al, 2019;Flanagan et al, 2019;Herman et al, 2019;Iversen and Jónsdóttir, 2019;Kermish-Allen et al, 2019;Kinslow et al, 2019;McClain and Zimmerman, 2019;Zimmerman et al, 2019;Littrell et al, 2020a;Littrell et al, 2020b;Land et al, 2020), technology (Litts et al, 2020), and general community issues with links to STEM pedagogy (Donnison and Marshman, 2018;Ritter et al, 2019;Kim et al, 2020). While most studies approached localized learning by taking students to community and environmental contexts outside of the classroom, other studies connected students with experts and their communities through the internet (Kermish-Allen et al, 2019) or brought the outside world into classrooms through virtual reality (Ritter et al, 2019;Boda and Brown, 2020).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Ten of the studies used qualitative methods only, 11 studies used a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods, with only four studies using exclusively quantitative methods and having sample sizes of more than 300 students. Articles were related to STEM with some focusing on mathematics (Althauser and Harter, 2016;Walkington and Bernacki, 2019), science (Buck et al, 2016;Francis et al, 2016;Leonard et al, 2016;Rahmawati and Koul, 2016;Gates, 2017;Zimmerman and Weible, 2017;Fűz, 2018;Bølling et al, 2019;Flanagan et al, 2019;Herman et al, 2019;Iversen and Jónsdóttir, 2019;Kermish-Allen et al, 2019;Kinslow et al, 2019;McClain and Zimmerman, 2019;Zimmerman et al, 2019;Littrell et al, 2020a;Littrell et al, 2020b;Land et al, 2020), technology (Litts et al, 2020), and general community issues with links to STEM pedagogy (Donnison and Marshman, 2018;Ritter et al, 2019;Kim et al, 2020). While most studies approached localized learning by taking students to community and environmental contexts outside of the classroom, other studies connected students with experts and their communities through the internet (Kermish-Allen et al, 2019) or brought the outside world into classrooms through virtual reality (Ritter et al, 2019;Boda and Brown, 2020).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Increased interest and knowledge promoted students' aspirations towards careers in STEM fields (Leonard et al, 2016;Gates, 2017). Teachers from multiple articles reported that their students enjoyed hands-on activities with real-world application to their personal lives outside of the classroom (e.g., Althauser and Harter, 2016;Buck et al, 2016;Rahmawati and Koul, 2016;Gates, 2017;Zimmerman and Weible, 2017;Donnison and Marshman, 2018;Fűz, 2018;Bølling et al, 2019;Flanagan et al, 2019). There were two ways to approach the issue of personal relevance.…”
Section: Increased Student Aspirations Enjoyment Interest and Engagementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To enhance the effect of learning in outdoor places, it seems important to offer students repeated contact with the natural environment (Ernst and Stanek 2006). Teachers can use the environment in their school's immediate surroundings to give students an opportunity to explore nature more frequently (Bølling, Hartmeyer, and Bentsen 2017;Carrier, Tugurian, and Thomson 2013;Fägerstam and Blom 2013). The advantage of these places is that they are easily accessible on a daily basis compared to sites that require travel, such as nature centres or field trips (Fančovičová and Prokop 2011;Lustick 2009).…”
Section: Learning Ecology Outdoors In the Local School Contextmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The main outcomes that have been investigated in scientific articles examining the benefits of outdoor science education include: (1) learning related to ecology (e.g., Ben-Zvi Assaraf & Orion, 2009;Fisher-Maltese & Zimmerman, 2015) or environmental education (e.g., Carrier, 2009;Hyseni Spahiu, Korca, & Lindemann-Matthies, 2014), (2) development of students' attitudes/ motivations/interest (e.g. Bølling, Hartmeyer, & Bentsen, 2019;Dettweiler, Lauterbach, Becker, & Simon, 2017) Becker, & Simon, 2017 teachers' positive perceptions regarding outdoor learning (e.g. Borsos, Patocskai, & Boric, 2018;Glackin, 2016)2016, and (4) students' positive perceptions of outdoor learning (e.g., Carrier, Thomson, Tugurian, & Stevenson, 2014;Dhanapal & Lim, 2013).…”
Section: Challenges and Benefits Of Outdoor Science Education For Stumentioning
confidence: 99%