Literature Review Rough Draft
Jeremy Smith Introduction For one theme of this literature review, I read research articles that address the multiple health problems stemming from a lack of outdoor play in children. In another theme, research shows how environmental ed programs are an important part of high achieving schools, and how they help to close the achievement gap of minority students. Additional articles demonstrate how, notwithstanding, minority students spend even less time outdoors than white children. In an additional theme, research shows how formative experiences in nature help to awaken in children positive attitudes for future stewardship of our environment. Finally, articles show how the integration of digital devices into outdoor education, given our current technological and social patterns, are beneficial and even necessary for its success. This researcher’s action research study hopes to contribute to knowledge about how children interact with nature and each other through the integration of digital devices. In doing so, it hopes to gain additional insights into how the integration of technology into outdoor experiences may (or may not), promote language development in English language learners through extension activities that are integrated into the nature experience. Theme 1: Outdoor Play and Children’s Health This theme addresses the health problems in children that result from inactivity. There is information about this in the Coyle, Rivkin, Clements, and Louv writings. The Clements study, An investigation of the status of outdoor play. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, is from a British organization called the Children and Nature Network. It is actually an exhaustive compilation of many studies that look at changes in outdoor play in an international context. It contains articles from countries such as England, Canada, Switzerland, Norway, the United States, Denmark, and Australia. Across nations, researchers have found that the amount of time children spend outdoors has decreased, that the kind of outdoor play that children are engaged in has also changed over time, and that the barriers to outdoor play are similar from country to country. The impact on children’s health that researchers have found range from vitamin D deficiency, myopia, decreased cardiopulmonary performance, obesity, strength, balance and gross motor performance, diabetes, and ADHD. The articles also point out the many cognitive, social, and health benefits that increased exposure to outdoor environments provide to children. The authors cite cognitive benefits from play in nature, including creativity, problem-solving, focus and self-discipline. Social benefits include cooperation, flexibility, and self-awareness. Emotional benefits include stress reduction, reduced aggression and increased happiness. Children will be smarter, better able to get along with others, healthier and happier when they have regular opportunities for free and unstructured play in the out-of-doors. In the different articles, data was collected in many ways. Its collection ranges from very scientific numbers based data to attitudes surveys. A weakness in several studies is that several depend on interviews and surveys from adults and are based on their memories of childhood play patterns. Adult memory, (I know mine at least), may not be a reliable source of data. The seminal book Last Child in the Woods by Richard Louv is another exhaustive account of the benefits and dangers that revolve around children’s exposure, or lack thereof, to outdoor spaces. It’s probably the most widely cited text in this field of study. The book draws its information from an impressive list of studies in the notes section. It also includes a guide for readers to become involved in the growing movement of outdoor education. While the book is narrative in nature, it includes many references to data driven findings, including many of the ones discussed in the Clements compilation. Theme 2: Environmental Education Programs Increase Student Performance The Lieberman, G., & Hoody, L. report called Closing the achievement gap: Using the environment as an integrating context for learning is a product of the State Education and Environment Roundtable. This Roundtable includes education agencies from 12 states working to improve student learning by integrating the environment into K-12 curricula and school reform efforts. This Roundtable became interested in the potential of environment-based education programs to improve student learning, change long-standing pedagogical paradigms, and influence the way young people learn to live successfully in the world that surrounds them. Because of the limited amount of research on the efficacy of environment-based education programs, members designed a study to identify the most innovative and successful programs, describe their effectiveness, and analyze their commonalities and differences. They also sought to identify the factors that contributed to the success of these programs and any challenges they encountered during implementation. The article is an executive summary of the report that resulted from that study. It focuses on a specific area of environmental education: using the environment as an integrating context for learning (EIC). This term, which was coined by the Roundtable, encompasses the educational practices that the group believes should form the foundation of environment-based education programs in America’s schools. The report is based on a study of 40 schools from across the United States that have adopted the concepts and frameworks of EIC including: 15 elementary, 13 middle, and 12 high schools. It is informed by comments and experiences gathered through interviews with more than 250 teachers and principals, and more than 400 students. The article states that the observed benefits of EIC programs are both broad-ranging and encouraging.They include: • better performance on standardized measures of academic achievement in reading, writing, math, science, and social studies; • reduced discipline and classroom management problems; • increased engagement and enthusiasm for learning; and, • greater pride and ownership in accomplishments The 40 successful programs examined in this study share these fundamental educational strategies; they: • break down traditional boundaries between disciplines; •provide hands-on learning experiences, often through problem-solving and project-based activities; • rely on team teaching; • adapt to individual students and their unique skills and abilities; and, • develop knowledge, understanding, and appreciation for the environment –community and natural surroundings. In short, evidence gathered from this study of 40 schools indicates that students learn more effectively within an environment-based context than within a traditional educational framework. By providing a comprehensive educational framework, instead of traditional compartmentalized approaches, EIC appears to significantly improve student performance in reading, writing, math, science and social studies, and enriches the overall school experience. The report contains summaries of comparative analyses of comprehensive and discipline-specific standardized tests scores and GPA ‘s. For example, the assessments indicating that EIC students perform better than traditional students are as follows: In the nine comprehensive assessments given,100% showed that EIC students outperformed their peers in compartmentalized programs. In Language Arts, in the 17 assessments given, 100% of the students outperformed their peers. In Math, in the 7 assessments given, 71% outperformed peers. In Science, in the 4 assessments given, 75% outperformed. In Social Studies, in the 2 assessments given, 100% outperformed. In total, in the 39 assessments given, 92% of the assessments show that EIC students score higher than non EIC students. Furthermore, 100% of assessments also showed improved student attendance, behavior, and attitudes toward school. Educators also reported that the primary effects on the interpersonal skills of EIC students include: better ability to work in group settings (98%). (Environment-based learning helps students discover their own skills and appreciate those of others because it capitalizes on a variety of abilities.) It promotes stronger communication skills (94%). (As they work together, students learn to share ideas, discuss their reasoning, and develop new ideas that emerge from team discussions.) Acting with greater civility toward others (93%). (Working together in EIC programs, students begin to treat each other with more care and they exhibit more self-discipline.) Again, this study is based on school visits and reports from administrators, teachers, and children. It is mainly qualitative rather than quantitative. It is based on the opinions of participating students and educators, comparative analyses of standardized achievement and behavioral data, the observations of the researchers, and the research team’s interpretation and analysis of these opinions and observations. Although this study was not intended to be quantitative, the research team also collected as much quantitative data as possible to provide additional insight into the experiences of the study schools. Although evidence from 40 schools can not be considered conclusive, this study brings together a major body of knowledge gained from experienced educators and successful programs. A second source for information on the benefits of outdoor education on school performance is Joanne Lozar Glenn called Environment-based education: Creating high performance schools and students. It is a study that gives credit to and follows from the Leiberman and Hoody report outlined above. Glenn’s report consists of a collection of 7 case studies of schools in Texas, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Kentucky, and Florida where schools are using the environment to motivate students to learn and bring new life and meaning into their school experience. These studies document current evidence supporting the premise that, compared to traditional educational approaches, environmental-based education improves academic performance across the curriculum. Their findings are consistent with the findings of Leiberman and Hoody. Again, they found that students who are in environmentally focused schools demonstrate better performance on standardized measures of academic achievement in reading, writing, math, science,and social studies. They also have reduced discipline and classroom management problems, increased engagement and enthusiasm for learning, and greater pride and ownership in accomplishments. They make a recommendation in the article that The U.S. Department of Education establish an Office of "Ombudsman for the Environment." The function of the office would be to establish close linkages and coordination with the relevant units of the Department of Education, and with the EPA, the National Science Foundation, and other government agencies concerned with U.S. education. The author cites the 1983 report A Nation at Risk, which showed how the United States has been losing its preeminence in education among other nations. Since this report, the National Commission on Excellence in Education has been working to improve our nation’s schools. Specifically, in 1994, Congress passed the national Goals 2000 legislation. The author of this article says that the environmentally focused schools in his study satisfy these goals because of their hallmarks traits of: integrated learning across disciplines, problem solving, decision making, independent and group learning, issues-based instructional activities, and a balanced variety of perspectives. The study goes on to claim that while schools can integrate their curriculum around different disciplines such as art, geography, or archeology, the environment lends itself best to integration between disciplines because it is naturally inter-disciplinary, place-based, and lends itself to inquiry-based learning and team teaching. Also, parents give environmental education a 96% approval rating, which bodes well for their involvement and school to home connections. What I like about this study is that it goes into more detail about the schools it studies, for example, several of the schools they study have high minority/high poverty student populations, which is not unlike the school I work in. The case studies show through a variety of different state assessments how their students have truly closed the achievement gap. The study compares primarily reading, language, and math scores between EIC focused schools and other schools in the states they are from. Scores are higher in all the schools they looked at. The case studies describes in detail strategies that the different schools use to create a more integrated, environmentally focused curriculum. Quantitative, state assessment based data is then presented from each school in charts and graphs to show performance. Theme 3: Outdoor Experiences Foster Environmental Awareness and Stewardship Attitudes I focus on this theme because I, (and I know I am not alone), am deeply concerned for the future of our planet. One of educators’ main goals in fostering environmental education is the awakening in children of environmental awareness and activism. In her study Life paths into effective environmental action, Louise Chawla notes that helping children develop a sense of empathy and sympathy (such as for wildlife) are a foundation for the development of caring for the natural world. She says that adults can help children to see the world through this lens. Children who have some of the strongest emotional ties to nature are more inclined to want to protect the natural environment and species. In her study, structured open-ended interviews were conducted with 30 environmentalists in Kentucky and 26 in Norway (35 men, 21 women). In interviews that lasted between 1 and 2 hr, people whose lives demonstrated their commitment to protect or improve the environment were asked to tell when and where they grew up and went to school, their parents' occupations, and their own vocations and environmental activities. They were then asked to tell the story of their most important environmental efforts and the sources of their commitment, to share their wisdom regarding how to work most effectively, and to describe their vision for wise development. Importantly for educators, most people described childhood as the foundation of their relationship with the environment. Childhood predominated in importance both in terms of the number of types of formative experiences with which it was associated and its frequency of mention. Only three respondents did not begin their explanations of their commitment with childhood. She says that the effect of the right type of nature experience can be lifelong, and that in many cases this involves repetitive, long-term nature activities. Interestingly, she found that it can also be related to experiences that more intensively immerse a young person in nature. Chawla refers to an important long-range study of 2,000 adults in which researchers Wells and Lekies found that childhood participation in nature activities (e.g., hiking, camping, or playing in the woods), had a significant, positive effect on both adult environmental attitudes and behaviors. People who participated in “wild” nature activities as children were more likely to have pro-environmental attitudes and behaviors as adults. They concluded that wild experiences as children are more likely to produce adults who have a lifelong commitment to nature conservation. Positive results were also seen from less wild activities such as planting flowers, but young people being more immersed in nature had the greatest results. Theme 4: Integration of Technology into Environmental Education is Beneficial The Chavez study is a frequently referenced source of information on the role of technology in environmental education. It describes an action research project done with 38 youth ages 8-13 in Los Angeles. Children were asked to perform different tasks in nature. Some involved the use of technology, and some did not. The technology dependent activities are “camera safari” and a geocaching activity. The non-tech activities are “etchings/rubbings”, and a “nature scavenger hunt”. Data were collected on two areas: (I) votes by activity and (2) observer notes by activity. The majority of youth voted "green" (or "it was cool," "it rocked") on every activity. However, more voted "green" for the activities of geocaching for treasure (92%) and camera safari (86%) which were the technology dependent activities, than voted "green" for the non-technology dependent activities of nature scavenger hunt (76%) and etching/rubbing (62%). Only one person voted "red" (or "it was dumb," "it was a waste of time") for any activity. The etching/rubbing activity received the highest percentage of yellow (or "not sure," "it was alright") votes. Observers noted increased engagement and interest around the tech supported activities. The data evaluated suggest the use of technology to get youth outdoors is positive. However, these findings are based on an exploratory study of 38 youth. Chavez is careful to state that the results cannot be generalized beyond the youth who participated. She states that much more research needs to be conducted with youth to confirm and refine these results. For example, exact replications of the study conducted (four specific activities) can test technology versus non-technology dependent activities. In addition, she says that follow-up studies might examine if the interest in these activities continues beyond the testing day. Another set of studies might examine age and use of technology in outdoor settings and specifically whether some activities are better suited to older or younger youth. This is a promising jumping off point for my own action research. Specifically, I plan to look at her question about how interest in the activities may go beyond the testing day. But beyond just interest, I’m curious to see if the integration of tech into outdoor activities will lead to more exploration and use of language in extension activities in the form of nature reports. Kevin J. Coyle’s study, done nearly a decade later in 2017, provides a more in depth look at tech devices in nature. Through this study it can be appreciated how much thought has been put into integrating tech and nature in the past decade. In summary, this National Wildlife Federation’s study found that: “there is a role for mobile technology and other forms of technology in helping children to experience nature and to develop a lasting affinity for the natural world and the outdoors. Digital Apps and technology that encourage children and their caregivers to make the indoor/outdoor transition have particular value because they affirmatively try to bridge the gap between these two worlds.Technology by itself is not what is keeping a majority of American children indoors and away from nature. While digital technology, in all forms, is very evident in children’s lives, its causal effect in keeping children indoors is probably overshadowed by larger societal shifts in parental concerns over risk and safety and even the very definition of good parenting. Digital Apps need to more affirmatively account for and address the powerful and persistent barriers that exist in society for children to have more outdoor time. These barriers are complex and revolve around new definitions of safety and security of children who are outdoors. In the past 20 or more years, the definition of parenting and childcare giving has shifted toward high concern over hazards and threats, and a standard of vigilant supervision of outdoor children until they are teenagers.” He discusses how out of the thousands of digital apps that claim to promote environmental education, relatively few are designed to create a true and lasting affinity with nature. He says that many of these apps are designed for the classroom, but not for group, school based outdoor activities and that they need to be because parents are increasingly unable or unwilling to take their kids out into nature and this role is shifting toward schools, park agencies, or outdoor education organizations. Coyle then gives some interesting app design guidelines to actually do this. These outdoor app guidelines include: Activate the senses and expose children to natural beauty, A focus on animals in nature, Create perceptions of safety in nature, Encourage physical activity, Foster nature adventure scenarios, Connect close-knit social groups, Provide for caregiver roles, Protect equipment outdoors, Extend the experience, Collect and store observations, Make it wearable and hands free, and Use mobile senses and all the technology features (photos, sound recording, geo-location, immediate identification, recording to databases, interfacing with social media and more). His findings point to the possibility that digital apps that employ many of these features can offer significant opportunities to educate young people on how to use technology as an enrichment to the nature and outdoor experience. Summary These studies relate to the action research I propose to conduct because, for one, they give background information on the problems related to screen time and insufficient outdoor play. They also show how environmental education has academic and social benefits, especially around Napa County’s 6 C’s. Other research shows how early experiences in nature create a positive mindset around the stewardship of the environment. Finally, they show how integrating digital devices into outdoor instruction can enrich students’ experiences. My action research will either confirm or refute findings that technology is an effective tool when teaching outdoor ed. It might also show if and or how integration of tech into outdoor experiences might aid in academic achievement, with a special focus on English language learners. The task now is to design an action research project that can collect enough relevant data to provide additional insights into if, how, and why or why not. I hope it does. I’m obviously biased in favor of outdoor ed, and since tech is the future, I’d like to show how it can work for the environment, for kids’ academic and social development, and for outdoor educators. Resources Chavez, Deborah J. (2009) Youth Day in Los Angeles: Connecting Youth and Nature with Technology USDA Forest Service. Retrieved from: https://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/chavez/psw_2009_chavez002.pdf Chawla, L. (1999). Life paths into effective environmental action. The Journal of Environmental Education, 31(1), 15-26. Retrieved from: http://0-web.a.ebscohost.com.library.touro.edu/ehost/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=b328b64f-1fe4-436b-971b-cbc49c795b3d%40sdc-v-sessmgr03&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=EJ592056&db=eric Chawla, L (2000). Significant Life Experiences Revisited: a review of research on sources of environmental sensitivity Whitney Young College, Kentucky State University. Retrieved from: https://www.colorado.edu/cedar/sites/default/files/attached-files/Chawla,%20L.%20(1998).%20Significant%20life%20experiences%20revisited.%20Journal%20of%20Environmental%20Education,%2029(3),%2011-21..pdf Clements, R. (2004). An investigation of the status of outdoor play. Contemporary Issues of Early Childhood, 5(1), 46-50. Retrieved from: https://www.childrenandnature.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/CECCNNWorldwideResearch.pdf Coyle, Kevin J. (2017) Digital Technology’s Role in Connecting Children and Adults to Nature and the Outdoors National Wildlife Federation Retrieved from: https://www.nwf.org/~/media/PDFs/Kids-and-Nature/NWF_Role-of-Technology-in-Connecting-Kids-to-Nature_6-30_lsh.ashx Glenn, J. L. (2000). Environment-based education: Creating high performance schools and students. Washington, DC: NEETF. Retrieved from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED451033.pdf Leach, Ana (2018) Improving Children’s Access To Nature Begins with Addressing Inequality The Guardian Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/teacher-network/2018/mar/01/improving-childrens-access-nature-addressing-inequality-bame-low-income-backgrounds Lieberman, G., & Hoody, L. (1998). Closing the achievement gap: Using the environment as an integrating context for learning. San Diego, CA: State Education and Environmental Roundtable. Retrieved from: http://www.seer.org/extras/execsum.pdf Louv, R. (2005). Last child in the woods: Saving our children from nature-deficit disorder. Chapel Hill, NC: Algonquin Books. Rivkin, M. S. (1995). The great outdoors: Restoring children’s right to play outside. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Wells, Nancy M., Lekies, Kristi S. (2006) Nature and the Life Course: Pathways from Childhood Nature Experiences to Adult Environmentalism. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/252512760_Nature_and_the_Life_Course_Pathways_from_Childhood_Nature_Experiences_to_Adult_Environmentalism1 Wesson, Mark (2011) Connecting Children to Nature: Integrating Technology into Nature Programs and Incorporating Environmental Education into an Urban After School Program Colorado State University, ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 2011. 1503695. Retrieved from: https://0-search-proquest-com.library.touro.edu/pqdthss/docview/916424289/4DAAF70ED06648B0PQ/1?accountid=40250 Additional resources to be looked at: Clements, R. (2004). An investigation of the status of outdoor play. Contemporary Issues of Early Childhood, 5(1), 46-50. Cole, A. (2007). Expanding the field: Revisiting environmental education principles through multidisciplinary frameworks. The Journal of Environmental Education, 38(2), 35-43. Coyle, K. (2005). Environmental literacy in America: What ten years of NEETF/Roper research and related studies say about environmental literacy in the U.S. The National Environmental Education & Training Foundation. Retrieved from: http://www.neetf.org/pubs/ELR2005.pdf (accessed May 6, 2006). Kumar, J., Muntner, P., Kaskel, F. J., Hailpern, S. M., & Melamed, M. L. (2009). Prevalence and associations of 25-Hydroxyvitamin D deficiency in US children: NHANES 2001-2004. Pediatrics, 124(3), 362-370. Palmer, J. (1993). Development of concern for the environment and formative experiences of educators. The Journal of Environmental Education, 24(3), 26-30. Palmer, J., Suggate, J., Bajd, B., & Tsaliki, E. (1998). Significant influences on the development of adults’ environmental awareness in the UK, Slovenia, and Greece. Environmental Education Research, 4(4), 429-444. 6 Pergams, O., & Zaradic, P. (2006). Is love for nature in the US becoming love of electronic media? 16-year downtrend in national park visits explained by watching movies, playing video games, internet use, and oil prices. Journal of Environmental Management, 80, 387-393. Satterthwaite , D. (2000). Will most people live in cities? BMJ: British Medical Journal, 7269(321), 1143-1145. Singer, D., Singer, J., D'Agostino, H., & DeLong, R. (2009). Children's pastimes and play in sixteen nations. American Journal of Play,1(3), 283-312. United Nations (2008). United nations population division: World urbanization prospects. Retrieved from: http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/ wup2007/2007WUP_ExecSum_web.pdf. Verheij, R.A.,Maas, J. & Groenewegen, P.P. (2008).Urban rural health differences and the availability of green space. European Urban and Regional Studies, 307(15). DOI: 10.1177/0969776408095107
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorJeremy Smith teaches third grade at Calistoga Elementary School. Archives
July 2020
Categories |