Thinking scientifically during participation in a citizen-science project

Abstract

A movement has begun recently to involve nonscientists in scientific investigations through projects in which a range of individuals gather data for use by scientists to investigate questions of research importance. These projects are frequently referred to as citizen‐science projects, and the benefits are assumed to extend beyond the production of important large databases. Those who argue in support of citizen‐science projects assume that participants will increase their understanding about the process of science through this engagement in authentic science, in contrast to traditional, tightly scripted school laboratory investigations. However, very little research on the impact of participating in such projects has been carried out. This article examines the letters written by more than 700 participants in a citizen‐science project conducted by the Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology. Of these letters, which were unsolicited and not connected with a formal evaluation, nearly 80% revealed that participants had engaged in thinking processes similar to those that are part of science investigations. We cannot state that participation in a citizen‐science project caused this thinking, but we can say that participation provided a forum in which participants engaged in these habits of thought. The letters also raise some issues about some misunderstandings of science that citizen‐science projects should strive to address. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Sci Ed 84:265–275, 2000.

Innovation in Citizen Science – Perspectives on Science-Policy Advances

“…Most authors agree that citizen science can contribute substantially to data collection (e.g., Kasperowski 2016, Hochachka et al 2012), but concerns are sometimes voiced regarding data quality (Kosmala et al 2016, Vantieghem et al 2016, Kamp et al 2016, Fowler et al 2013. Several authors also point to the usefulness of citizen science for increasing understanding about scientific processes (Trumbull et al 2000, Brossard et al 2005, Jordan et al 2011) and for building public trust and acceptance for nature conservation (McKinley et al 2017). In addition, citizen science is often claimed to contribute to public understanding of science and scientific literacy (Cronje et al 2011, Bonney et al 2009, Bonney et al 2016, Brossard et al 2005, a concept that is currently being evaluated (e.g., Merenlender et al 2016;Phillips 2017).…”

Cell Spotting: educational and motivational outcomes of cell biology citizen science project in the classroom

“…Citizen science projects involve non-scientist citizens in scientific research projects by inviting them to collaborate in several different processes, steps, or activities of the scientific method, which may include choosing or defining questions for study, gathering information and resources, collecting and/or analysing data, interpreting data and drawing conclusions, disseminating conclusions, and discussing results and asking new questions [Bonney et al, 2009;Shirk et al, 2012]. Throughout the years, several reports have placed special attention on the understanding and assessment of the real impact of citizen science projects at the scientific, educational and motivational levels [Trumbull et al, 2000;Bonney et al, 2009;Kountoupes and Oberhauser, 2008;Marshall and Kleine, 2012;Zoellick, Nelson and Schauffler, 2012;Raddick et al, 2013;Science Communication Unit, 2013;Edwards, 2014, and references therein]. The evaluation and assessment of the educational impact of citizen science projects raises particular interest because although many of these projects are envisioned and implemented in scenarios of informal science education, many times the young students are one of the preferential target groups with their engagement being promoted through schools [Zoellick, Nelson and Schauffler, 2012].…”

Science learning via participation in online citizen science

“…Trumbull et al, 2000;Brossard, Lewenstein and Bonney, 2005;Evans et al, 2005;Cronje et al, 2011]. To participate in offline projects volunteers must invest enough time to go out of doors and often collect relatively complex data (e.g.…”

“…While these studies have struggled to demonstrate any significant increase in scientific literacy in general, they have typically found evidence that participants increase their scientific knowledge about the topic of project [Brossard, Lewenstein and Bonney, 2005;Cronje et al, 2011]. Furthermore Trumbull et al [2000] was able to qualitatively demonstrate the use scientific thinking during the engagement, and Evans et al [2005] argued that both development of science content knowledge and scientific thinking were demonstrated by participants.…”