Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-nwzlb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-29T15:10:36.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Exploring the Impact of Integrated Fieldwork, Reflective and Metacognitive Experiences on Student Environmental Learning Outcomes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 June 2015

Roy Ballantynet*
Affiliation:
University of Queensland
David Anderson
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia
Jan Packer
Affiliation:
University of Queensland
*
School of Tourism, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia. Email: r.ballantyne@uq.edu.au

Abstract

Although the important role of providing fieldwork experiences for students in the natural environment is now well-established within environmental education literature, there is still little research evidence to guide teachers in their choice of effective teaching strategies. This paper presents findings from an interpretive case study designed to investigate the value of combining experience-based fieldwork in a mangrove and coastal environment with reflective and metacognitive activities. Analysis of video recordings, researcher observation notes and interviews of a class of Year 11 biology students who participated in the activities resulted in the emergence of five themes. These themes together provided evidence of enhanced student environmental learning, and included student appreciation for various learning contexts, self-awareness of group learning processes, and awareness of the integration of cross-curriculum knowledge. The study supports and illustrates the contention that the most effective environmental learning experiences are likely to be those that integrate learning in the natural environment with classroom learning strategies.

Type
Feature Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, D., Lucas, K. B., Ginns, I. S., & Dierking, L. D. (2000). Development of knowledge about electricity and magnetism during a visit to a science museum and related post-visit activities. Science Education, 84(5), 658679.Google Scholar
Anderson, D., & Nashon, S. (2007). Predators of knowledge construction: Interpreting students' metacognition in an amusement park physics program. Science Education, 91(2), 298320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, D., Nashon, S. M., & Thomas, G. P. (2009). Evolution of research methods for probing and understanding metacognition. Research in Science Education, 39(2), 181195.Google Scholar
Anderson, D., Thomas, G. P., & Nashon, S. M. (2009). Social barriers to engaging in meaningful learning in biology field trip group work. Science Education, 93(3), 511534.Google Scholar
Baird, J. R. (1986). Improving learning through enhanced metacognition: A classroom study. European Journal of Science Education, 8(3), 263—282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baird, J. R., & White, R. T. (1996). Metacognitive strategies in the classroom. In Treagust, D. F., Duit, R., & Fraser, B. J. (Eds.), Improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics (pp. 190200). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
Ballantyne, R., Fein, J., & Packer, J. (2001). Programme effectiveness in facilitating intergenerational influence in environmental education: Lessons from the field. Journal of Environmental Education, 32(4), 815.Google Scholar
Ballantyne, R., & Packer, J., (2002). Nature-based excursions: School students' perceptions of learning in natural environments. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 11(3), 218236.Google Scholar
Ballantyne, R., & Packer, J. (2009). Introducing a fifth pedagogy: Experience-based strategies for facilitating learning in natural environments. Environmental Education Research, 15(2), 243262.Google Scholar
Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Falk, J. (2010). Visitors' learning for environmental sustainability: Testing short- and long-term impacts of wildlife tourism experiences using structural equation modelling. Tourism Management, doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2010.11.003.Google Scholar
Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Sutherland, L. (2010). Visitors' memories of wildlife tourism: Implications for the design of powerful interpretive experiences. Tourism Management, doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2010.06.012.Google Scholar
Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (Eds). (1985). Reflection: Turning experience into learning. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
Burnett, J. R. (1995). Small group interaction among senior science students during field instruction at a marine park. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.Google Scholar
Desautel, D. (2009). Becoming a thinking thinker: Metacognition, self-reflection, and classroom practice. Teachers College Record, 111(8), 19972020.Google Scholar
Dettmann-Easler, D., & Pease, J. L. (1999). Evaluating the effectiveness of residential environmental education programmes in fostering positive attitudes towards wildlife. Journal of Environmental Education, 13(1), 3339.Google Scholar
Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education, Studies in Science Education, 38, 3972.Google Scholar
Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculation about the nature and development of metacognition. In Weinert, F. E. & Kluwe, R. H. (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 2129). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Gallagher, J. J., & Tobin, K. G. (1991). Reporting interpretive research. In Gallagher, J. (Ed.), NARST monograph no. 4 (pp. 8595). Manhattan, KS: National Association of Research in Science Teaching.Google Scholar
Griffin, J., & Symington, D. (1997). Moving from task-oriented to learning-oriented strategies on school excursions to museums. Science Education, 81(6), 763779.Google Scholar
Gruenewald, D. A. (2003). The Best of Both Worlds: A Critical Pedagogy of Place. Educational Researcher, 32(4), 312.Google Scholar
Gunstone, R. F. (1994). The importance of specific science content in the enhancement of metacognition. In Fensham, P. J., Gunstone, R. F. & White, R.T. (Eds.), The content of science: A constructivist approach to teaching and learning (pp. 131146). Washington, DC: Falmer Google Scholar
Hisasaka, T., Anderson, D., Nashon, S., Shigematsu, K., Watanabe, E., Yagi, I., & Hatakeyama, S. (2004). Recognition of amusement park as a studying space. Physics Education in Tohoku, 13, 3134.Google Scholar
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Mann, K., Gordon, J., & MacLeod, A. (2009). Reflection and reflective practice in health professions education: A systematic review. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 14(4), 595621.Google Scholar
Mason, L., & Scirica, F. (2006). Prediction of students' argumentation skills about controversial topics by epistemological understanding. Learning and Instruction, 16(5), 492509.Google Scholar
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Mintzes, J. J., & Wandersee, J. H. (1998). Reform and innovation in science teaching: A human constructivist view. In Mintzes, J. L., Wandersee, J. H. & Novak, J. D. (Eds.), Teaching science for understanding: A human constructivist view (pp. 2958). San Diego, CA: Academic.Google Scholar
Moon, J. (1999). Reflection in Learning and Professional Development: Theory and Practice. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
Nielsen, W., Nashon, S., & Anderson, D. (2009). Metacognitive engagement during field-trip experiences: A case study of students in an amusement park physics program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(3), 265288.Google Scholar
Ramey-Gassert, L., Walberg, H. J. III., & Walberg, H. J. (1994). Reexamining connections: Museums as science learning environments. Science Education, 78, 345363.Google Scholar
Rennie, L. J. & McClafferty, T. P. (1996). Science centres and science learning. Studies in Science Education, 27, 5398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rickinson, M. (2001). Learners and learning in environmental education: A critical review of the evidence. Environmental Education Research, 7(3), 207320.Google Scholar
Rickinson, M., Lundholm, C., & Hopwood, N. (2009). Environmental learning: Insights from research into the student experience. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Smith, G. A. (2007). Place-based education: Breaking through the constraining regularities of public school. Environmental Education Research, 13(2), 189207.Google Scholar
Stake, R.E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication.Google Scholar
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Swan, S. M. (1988). Helping children to reflect on their learning: An investigation of a teaching strategy designed to encourage young children to reflect on their learning. Unpublished M.Ed.St. Project, Monash University, Melbourne.Google Scholar
Thomas, G. P., Anderson, D., & Nashon, S. M. (2008). Development and validity of an instrument designed to investigate elements of science students' metacognition, self-efficacy and learning processes: The SEMLI-S. International Journal of Science Education, 30(13), 17011724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, R. T. (1993). Insights on conceptual change derived from extensive attempts to promote metacognition. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association (AERA), Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
White, R. T. (1998). Decisions and problems in research on metacognition. In Fraser, B. J. & Tobin, K. G. (Eds.), International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 12071213). London: Kluwer.Google Scholar