Exploring the links between teaching approaches and student outcomes at a residential setting

Exploring the links between teaching approaches and student outcomes at a residential setting
复制标题

探索住宿环境中的教学方法和学生成绩之间的联系

DOI:
10.1080/13504622.2022.2044454
复制
发表时间:
2022
影响因子:
3.2
通讯作者:
Blackwell, M. J.
Blackwell, M. J.
中科院分区:
环境科学与生态学3区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Frensley, B. Troy;Stern, M. J.;Powell, R. B.;Blackwell, M. J.

文献摘要

参考文献

相似文献

在这项案例研究中,我们使用混合方法来确定环境教育(EE)课程的特点,这些课程与美国一个住宅EE中心的学生的环境素养结果最密切相关。参加住宅EE课程的学生花费数天时间参加大量的课程、活动和体验,从而可能有更多的机会提高学生的环境素养相关知识、态度、技能和行为意图。为了探索什么教学方法最有效地提高学生的即刻结果,并为实践者提供见解,我们观察了80节课,跟踪了20种可观察到的教学方法,并进行了问卷调查,以衡量学生自我报告的环境素养结果的变化。相关分析显示,四个变量与增强的学生结果有关:情感信息、环境问题焦点、相关性和有效的时间管理。基于事实的教学和数据收集这两个变量与学生的成绩呈负相关。对这六个变量进行线性回归分析,得到了一个模型,解释了环境素养结果中34%的差异。我们讨论了这些发现,并分享了我们定性观察到的每种做法的例子。我们还讨论了我们的混合方法在该领域的更广泛应用。本文的补充数据可在https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2022.2044454在线获得。
In this case study, we used a mixed-methods approach to identify the characteristics of environmental education (EE) lessons most positively associated with students’ environmental literacy outcomes at one residential EE center in the U.S. Students attending residential EE programs spend multiple days participating in numerous lessons, activities, and experiences, resulting in perhaps more opportunities to enhance students’ knowledge, attitudes, skills, and behavioral intentions related to environmental literacy. To explore what teaching approaches were most effective at enhancing immediate student outcomes and to provide insights for practitioners, we observed 80 lessons, tracked 20 observable teaching approaches, and administered questionnaires to measure students’ self-reported changes in environmental literacy outcomes. Correlation analyses revealed four variables related to enhanced student outcomes: affective messaging, environmental issue-focus, relevance, and effective time management. Two variables, fact-based teaching and data collection, were negatively correlated with student outcomes. Linear regression analysis with these six variables resulted in a model explaining 34% of the variance in the environmental literacy outcome. We discuss these findings and share examples of each practice from our qualitative observations. We also discuss broader applications of our mixed methods approach for the field.Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2022.2044454 .
DOI: 10.1086/499753
发表时间: 2004-03-01
影响因子: 1.7
作者:
Bohn, CM;Roehrig, AD;Pressley, M
通讯作者: Pressley, M
实地考察和体验式学习周期
DOI: 10.1177/1092587220963530
发表时间: 2020
期刊: Journal of Interpretation Research
影响因子: --
作者:
M. Stern;R. Powell
通讯作者: R. Powell
DOI: 10.1080/0305764x.2020.1770693
发表时间: 2020
影响因子: 2.3
作者:
Jan Činčera;B. Johnson;R. Kroufek
通讯作者: R. Kroufek
DOI: 10.1177/109258721301800203
发表时间: 2013
期刊: Journal of Interpretation Research
影响因子: --
作者:
R. Powell;M. Stern
通讯作者: M. Stern
衡量环境教育计划的影响和现场学习:利用行动研究周期开发供年轻学生使用的工具
DOI: 10.1017/s0814062600000926
发表时间: 2005
影响因子: 1.6
作者:
R. Ballantyne;J. Packer;M. Everett
通讯作者: M. Everett