Abstract
Through innovative use of technology, we propose a pedagogical framework to improve the achievement of the threshold learning outcomes defined for Australian curriculum in environmental science. The proposed framework is grounded in the theory of disciplinary intuitions. It aims to improve understanding of the local environment through assessment of microclimates, thereby developing increased understanding of complex environmental issues, and promote systemic change in environmental science education by engaging students in novel and authentic tasks. The proposed framework seeks to make environmental factors immediately relevant to students through study of their local environment. Students can develop an understanding of complex environmental issues through learning activities which interrogate the local environment datasets.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
Not applicable.
References
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., & Bloom, B. S. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Allyn & Bacon.
diSessa, A. A. (1983). Phenomenology and the evolution of intuition. In D. Gentner & A. L. Stevens (Eds.), Mental Models. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
diSessa, A. A. (1988). Knowledge in pieces. In G. Forman & P. Putall (Eds.), Constructivism in the computer age. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
diSessa, A. A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2 & 3), 105–225.
diSessa, A. A., & Sherin, B. L. (2000). Meta-representation: An introduction. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19(4), 187–190.
Gautier, C., Deutsch, K., & Rebich, S. (2006). Misconceptions about the greenhouse effect. Journal of Geoscience Education, 54(3), 386–395.
Husserl, E. (1936). The crisis of the European sciences and transcendental phenomenology. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Jones, S. M., Yates, B. F., & Kelder, J.-A. (2011). Learning and teaching academic standards project: Science learning and teaching academic standards statement. Sydney: Australian Learning and Teaching Council.
Kirkup, L., & Johnson, L. (2013). Good practice guide (science) threshold learning outcome 3: Inquiry and problem-solving. Sydney: Office for Learning and Teaching.
Lim, K. Y. T. (Ed.). (2015). disciplinary intuitions and the design of learning environments. Dordrecht: Springer.
Luria, A. R. (1973). The working brain: An introduction to neuropsychology. New York: Basic Books.
Matthews, K. E., & Hodgson, Y. (2012). The science students skills inventory: Capturing graduate perceptions of their learning outcomes. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education (formerly CAL-laborate International), 20(1), 24–43.
McBain, B., Phelan, L., Ferguson, A., Brown, P., Brown, V., Hay, I., Horsfield, R., Taplin, R. (2015). Learning and teaching academic standards (LTAS): Environment and sustainability. Final Report. Office for Learning and Teaching, Sydney. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274006942_Learning_and_Teaching_Academic_Standards_Statement_for_Environment_and_Sustainability (15 May 2019).
Mohapatra, S. (2015). Business school education and technology-a case study. Education and Information Technologies, 20(2), 335–346.
Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Piaget, J. (1977). The role of action in the development of thinking, knowledge and development (pp. 17–42). Springer USA.
Pinker, S. (1997). How the mind works. New York: Penguin Books.
Robinson, Z. (2011). Teaching climate change in higher education: barriers and opportunities. Pedagogy of Climate Change, Haslett, S., France, D. and Gedye, S. (Eds.), 36–50.
Sarkar, S., Mohapatra, S., & Sundarakrishnan, J. (2017). Assessing impact of technology based digital equalizer programme on improving student learning outcomes. Education and Information Technologies, 22(1), 195–213.
Schmidt, H. G., De Volder, M. L., De Grave, W. S., Moust, J. H. C., & Patel, V. L. (1989). Explanatory models in the processing of science text: The role of prior knowledge activation through small-group discussion. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(4), 610–619.
Smith, J. P., III, diSessa, A. A., & Roschelle, J. (1994). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 115–163.
Smith, J. P., diSessa, A. A., & Roschelle, J. (1993). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3, 2.
Spires, H. A., & Donley, J. (1998). Prior knowledge activation: Inducing engagement with informational texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 249–260.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language (A. Kozulin, Trans.). Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Wood, D. J., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sajjanhar, A., Lim, K.Y.T. & Ren, Y. Pedagogical framework for environmental science. Educ Inf Technol 25, 3631–3641 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10016-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10016-2