Abstract
This interpretive study of learning environments involved two groups of Israeli science teachers who participated in courses and implemented field trips as part of science‐technology‐society (STS) education and under the framework of general system theory. The different groups of preservice and experienced teachers were selected in order to provide diverse perspectives on learning environments associated with the enactment of field trips as enrichment for the science classroom. The article describes the field trip programs and provides examples of how teachers in different stages of their professional development perceive the content, learning activities and problem solving as characteristics of the learning environment. The learning environment categories identified under the content characteristic were interest, interdisciplinary, innovation, difficulty, and contexualising. Under the activity characteristic were autonomy, involvement, collaboration, interaction, effectiveness and concretisation. Under problem solving were identified interaction, availability of resources, teacher support and democracy. The teachers' perceptions of the experienced learning environment were diverse and the categories described provide a framework of planning improvement in the content domain as well as in the enactment process of the field trip planned according to the principles of the general system theory.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Allen, B. C., & Herried, C. F. (1998). The petition – A global warming case study, debating the causes and consequences of Earth's changing climate. Journal of College Science Teaching, 28, 82–85.
Bakshi, T. S., & Lazarowitz, R. (1982). A model for interdisciplinary ecology project in secondary school. Environmental Education and Information, 2, 203–213.
Bell, B. (1998). Teacher development in science education. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 681–693). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Borgwald, J. M., & Schreiner, S. (1994). Science and the movies: The good, the bad, and the ugly – A novel interdisciplinary course for teaching science to nonscience majors. Journal of College Science Teaching, 23, 367–369.
Bybee, R. Y. (1993). Reforming science education: Social perspectives and personal reflections. New York: Teachers College Press.
Chen, D., & Stroup, W. (1993). General System Theory: Toward a conceptual framework for science and technology education for all. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 2, 447–459.
Dori, Y. J., & Herscovits, O. (1999). Question posing capability as an alternative evaluation method: Analysis of an environmental case study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 411–430.
Dori, Y. J., & Tal, R. T. (2000). Industry-environment projects: Formal and informal science activities in a community school. Science Education, 84, 95–113.
Erickson, F. (1998). Qualitative research methods for science education. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 1155–1173). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Eulefeld, G. (1991). Environmental education and inclusive thinking. In S. Keiny & U. Zoller (Eds.), Conceptual issues in environmental education (pp. 155–170). New York: Peter Lang.
Falk, J. H., Koran, J. J., & Dierking, L. D. (1986). The trips of science: Assessing the learning potential of science museums. Science Education, 70, 503–508.
Falk, J. F., Martin, W. W., & Balling, J. D. (1978). The novel field-trip phenomenon: Adjustment to novel settings interferes with task learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 15, 127–134.
Fisher, D. L., & Fraser, B. J. (1981). Validity and use of My Class Inventory. Science Education, 65, 145–156.
Fraser, B. J. (1994). Research on classroom and school climate. In D. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 493–541). New York: Macmillan.
Fraser, B. J. (1998a). Science learning environments: Assessment, effects and determinants. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education(pp. 527–564). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Fraser, B. J. (1998b). Classroom environment instruments: Development, validity and applications. Learning Environment Research, 1,7–33.
Fraser, B., & Fisher, D. (1982). Predicting students’ outcomes from their perceptions of classroom psychosocial environment. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 498–518.
Fraser, B. J., Giddings, J. G., & McRobbie, C. J. (1995). Evolution and validation of a personal form of an instrument for assessing science laboratory classroom environments. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 399–422.
Fraser, B. J., & Tobin, K. (1991). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in classroom environment research. In B. J. Fraser & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Educational environments: Evaluation, antecedents and consequences (pp. 271–292). London: Pergamon.
Fraser, B. J., & Walberg, H. J. (Eds.). (1991). Educational environments: Evaluation, antecedents and consequences. London: Pergamon.
Gayford, C. (1998). The perspectives of science teachers in relation to current thinking about environmental education. Research in Science & Technological Education, 16, 101–113.
Gertel, G. (1996). The use of outdoor learning environments – An historical review. In N. Orion & G. Gertel (Eds.), Teaching in the outdoor environment (pp. 8–10) (in Hebrew). Jerusalem, Israel: Israel Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport.
Goh, S. C., & Tobin, K. (1999). Student and teacher perspectives in computer-mediated learning environments in teacher education. Learning Environments Research, 2, 169–190.
Hofstein, A., & Lazarowitz, R. (1986). A comparison of the actual and preferred classroom learning environment in biology and chemistry as perceived by high school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, 189–199.
Hofstein, A., & Rosenfeld, S. (1996). Bridging the gap between formal and informal science learning. Studies in Science Education, 28, 87–112.
Johnson, R. T., & Johnson, D. W. (1991). Cooperative learning: The best of the one-room schoolhouse. The Teacher Educator, 27, 6–13.
Keiny, S. (1991). System thinking as a prerequisite for environmental problem solving. In S. Keiny & U. Zoller (Eds.), Conceptual issues in environmental education (pp. 171–184). New York: Peter Lang.
Kiley, T. J., & Jensen, R. A. (1998, April). What preservice teachers are surprised to learn about – and from – gifted students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
Krepel, W. J., & Durral, C. R. (1981). Field trips: A guideline for planning and conducting educational experiences. Washington DC: National Science Teachers Association.
Maor, D., & Fraser, B. J. (1996). Use of classroom environment perceptions in evaluating inquiry-based computer-assisted learning. International Journal of Science Education, 18, 401–421.
Marx, R. W., Freeman, J. G., Krajcik, J. S., & Blumenfeld, P. C. (1998). Professional development of science teachers. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 667–680). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
McRobbie, C., & Fraser, B. (1993). Associations between student outcomes and psychosocial science environment. The Journal of Educational Research, 87, 78–85.
Moos, R. H. (1979). Evaluating educational environments: Procedures, measures, findings and policy implications. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Moos R. H., & Trickett, E. J. (1987).Classroom environment scale manual (2nd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Orion, N. (1993). A model for the development and the implementation of field trips as an integral part of the science curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 93, 325–331.
Orion, N., & Hofstein, A. (1994). Factors that influence learning during a scientific field trip in a natural environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 1097–1119.
Rudman, C. L. (1994). A review of the use and implementation of science field trips. School Science and Mathematics, 94, 138–141.
Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.
Spitulnik, M. E., Stratford, S., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Using technology to support students’ construction in science. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 363–381). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Tal, R. T. (1999, January). The field trip as an alternative approach to learning and assessment. Paper presented at the International Workshop on Science Teacher Education: Toward the New Millenium, Haifa, Israel.
Tal, R. T., Dori, Y. J., & Lazarowitz, R. (2000). A project-oriented alternative assessment system. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 26, 171–191.
Tal, R. T., Dori, Y. J., Keiny, S., & Zoller, U. (2001). Assessing conceptual change of teachers involved in STES education and curriculum development – The STEMS project approach. International Journal of Science Education, 23(3), 247–261.
Tobin, K. (1998). Qualitative perceptions of learning environments on the World Wide Web. Learning Environments Research, 1, 139–162.
Tobin, K., & Fraser, B. J. (1998). Qualitative and quantitative landscapes of classroom learning environment. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 623–640). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Tobin, K., Kahle, J., & Fraser, B. (Eds.). (1990). Windows into science classrooms: Problems associated with higher-level cognitive learning. London: Falmer Press.
Walberg, H. J., & Anderson, G. J. (1968). Classroom climate and individual learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 59, 414–419.
Wilensky, U., & Resnik, M. (1999). Thinking in levels: A dynamic systems approach to making sense of the world. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8, 3–19.
Zoller, U. (1991). Problem solving and the ‘problem solving paradox’ in decision-making-oriented environmental education. In S. Keiny & U. Zoller (Eds.), Conceptual issues in environmental education (pp. 71–88). New York: Peter Lang.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tal, R.T. Incorporating field trips as science learning environment enrichment – an interpretive study. Learning Environments Research 4, 25–49 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011454625413
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011454625413