Abstract
Web-based geospatial tools such as Google Earth and instructional resources integrated with appropriately designed instructional materials show great potential in promoting spatial thinking with diverse learners. This chapter describes two instructional middle school modules, Environmental Issues: Land Use Change and Energy that use Google Earth as a learning technology to promote understandings of earth and environmental science concepts. The design principles used to guide the development of the instruction are described. Recommendations for other curriculum developers interested in using Google Earth as a learning tool to foster spatial thinking skills are presented. The role of using educative curriculum materials as a form of professional development with Google Earth is discussed.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Alberti, M. (2005). The effects of urban patterns on ecosystem function. International Regional Science Review, 28(2), 168–192.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Baker, T. R., & Bednarz, S. W. (2003). Lessons learned from reviewing research in GIS education. Journal of Geography, 102(6), 231–233.
Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1996). Reform by the book: What is-or might be-the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25(9), 6–8.
Bednarz, S. W. (2003). Nine years on: Examining implementation of the National Geography Standards. Journal of Geography, 102(3), 99–109.
Bednarz, S. W. (2004). Geographic information systems: A tool to support geography and environmental education? GeoJournal, 60, 191–199.
Bednarz, S. W., Acheson, G., & Bednarz, R. S. (2006). Maps and map learning in social studies. Social Education, 70(7), 398–404.
Bell, P., Hoadley, C. M., & Linn, M. (2004). Design-based research in education. In M. C. Linn, E. A. Davis, & P. Bell (Eds.), Internet environments for science education (pp. 73–85). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bodzin, A. (2008). Integrating instructional technologies in a local watershed investigation with urban elementary learners. The Journal of Environmental Education, 39(2), 47–58.
Bodzin, A., & Anastasio, D. (2006). Using web-based GIS For Earth and environmental systems education. The Journal of Geoscience Education, 54(3), 295–300.
Bodzin, A., & Cirruci, L. (2009). Integrating geospatial technologies to examine urban land use change: A design partnership. Journal of Geography, 108(4–5), 186–197.
Bodzin, A., & Shive, L. (2004). Designing for watershed Inquiry. Applied Environmental Education and Communication, 3(4), 249–258.
Bodzin, A., Waller, P., Edwards, L., & Kale, D. (2007). Investigating the use of inquiry and web-based activities with inclusive biology learners. The American Biology Teacher, 69(5), 371–377.
Butler, D. (2006). The web-wide world. Nature, 439, 776–778.
Carrarra, A., & Fausto, G. (Eds.). (1995). Geographical information systems in assessing natural hazards. Boston: Kluwer Academic.
Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. S. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 24(3), 3–14.
Davis, E. A., & Varma, K. (2008). Supporting teachers in productive adaptation. In Y. Kali, M. C. Linn, & J. E. Roseman (Eds.), Designing coherent science education (pp. 94–122). New York: Teachers College Press.
Fermann, E. J. (2006, October, 22–25). Google earth-based lessons and lab activities for earth science classes. Poster presented at the 2006 Geological Society of America annual meeting, in Philadelphia, PA.
Gagne, R., Briggs, L., & Wager, W. (1992). Principles of instructional design (4th ed.). Fort Worth, TX: HBJ College Publishers.
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed. Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic Books.
Geography Education Standards Project. (1994). Geography for life: National geography standards. Washington, DC: National Geographic Society.
Gersmehl, P. J., & Gersmehl, C. A. (2006). Wanted: A concise list of neurologically defensible and assessable spatial thinking skills. Research in Geographic Education, 8, 5–38.
Heit, M., Shortried, A., & Parker, H. D. (Eds.). (1991). GIS applications in natural resources. Fort Collins, CO: GIS World.
Huber, T. P. (1983). Remote sensing in environmental education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 14, 33–36.
International Society for Technology in Education. (2000). National educational technology standards for students: Connecting curriculum and technology. Eugene, OR: Author.
Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Thinking technology: Toward a constructivist design model. Educational Technology, 34(4), 34–37.
Kali, Y. (2006). Collaborative knowledge-building using the design principles database. International Journal of Computer Support for Collaborative Learning, 1(2), 187–201.
Kerski, J. (2003). The implementation and effectiveness of geographic information systems technology and methods in secondary education. Journal of Geography, 102(3), 128–137.
Kirman, J. M., & Nyitrai, L. (1998). The ability of sixth grade children to use Radarsat satellite images. Journal of Geography, 97, 56–62.
Klagges, H., Harbor, J., & Shepardson, D. (2002). Teachers as learners examine land-use change in the local environment using remote sensing imagery. Journal of Geography, 101(4), 137–143.
Laymon, C. (2003). Satellite remote sensing of land use change. Directions magazine, July 23. http://www.directionsmag.com/article.php?article_id = 365.
McLaughlin, M. W., & Mitra, D. (2001). Theory-based change and change-based theory: Going deeper, going broader. Journal of Educational Change, 2(4), 301–323.
Meyer, J., Butterick, J., Olin, M., & Zack, G. (1999). GIS in the K-12 curriculum: A cautionary note. Professional Geographer, 51(4), 571–578.
National Research Council. (1996). The national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council. (2006). Learning to think spatially: GIS as a support system in K-12 education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
North American Association for Environmental Education. (2000). Excellence in environmental education – guidelines for learning (K-12). Rock Springs, GA: Author.
Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Patterson, M. W., Reeve, K., & Page, D. (2003). Integrating geographic information systems into the secondary curricula. Journal of Geography, 102(6), 275–281.
Remillard, J. T. (2000). Can curriculum materials support teachers’ learning? Two fourth-grade teachers use of a new mathematics text. The Elementary School Journal, 100(4), 331–350.
Schneider, R., & Krajcik, J. (2002). Supporting science teacher learning: The role of educative curriculum materials. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(3), 221–245.
Shear, L., Bell, P., & Linn, M. C. (2004). Partnership models: The case of the deformed frogs. In M. C. Linn, E. A. Davis, & P. Bell (Eds.), Internet environments for science education (pp. 289–314). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Spiro, R., & Jehng, J. (1990). Cognitive flexibility and hypertext: Theory and technology for the nonlinear and multidimensional traversal of complex subject matter. In D. Nix & R. Spiro (Eds.), Cognition, education and multimedia: Exploring ideas in high technology (pp. 163–205). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Stahley, T. (2006). Earth from above. The Science Teacher, 73(7), 44–48.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design, expanded (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Acknowledgments
We wish to give special acknowledgment to Lori Cirucci, Dork Sahagian, and Tamara Peffer, our partners in this effort. This work was supported in part by a NASA Explorer School grant and the Toyota USA Foundation Web-enhanced Environmental Literacy and Inquiry Modules for Middle School Learners (WELIM) grant.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
Energy unit instructional design model
1.1 Elicit Prior Understandings
At the beginning of the unit, the teacher evaluates what students know through a concept map, content knowledge, and attitude and behavior pretests.
1.2 Explore and Investigate
Students explore and investigate concepts through geospatial-supported investigations, laboratory experiments, and other curricular materials to help them acquire desired knowledge, skills, and attitudes.
1.3 Modify Instruction
The teacher adjusts instruction as needed based on students’ responses to the learning activities (formative assessment).
1.4 Assess
At the end of the unit, the teacher evaluates students through their completed artifacts and summative assessment. These include energy policy presentations, concept maps, and content knowledge, attitude, and behavior posttests.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bodzin, A.M., Anastasio, D., Kulo, V. (2014). Designing Google Earth Activities for Learning Earth and Environmental Science. In: MaKinster, J., Trautmann, N., Barnett, M. (eds) Teaching Science and Investigating Environmental Issues with Geospatial Technology. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3931-6_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3931-6_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-3930-9
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-3931-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)