Advertisement

Citizen Science: An Opportunity for Learning in the Networked Society

  • Ornit Sagy
  • Yaela Naomi Golumbic
  • Hava Ben-Horin Abramsky
  • Maya Benichou
  • Osnat Atias
  • Hana Manor Braham
  • Ayelet Baram-Tsabari
  • Yael Kali
  • Dani Ben-Zvi
  • Yotam Hod
  • Dror Angel
Chapter
Part of the Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series book series (CULS, volume 17)

Abstract

Seeking to promote science communication, civic engagement, and informal education, citizen science is a genre of research that connects scientists and non-scientists around projects involving science. This meeting point creates opportunities for potential benefits to both sides. Scientists may advance their research and obtain prestigious funding while non-scientists stand to gain enjoyment, new skills, and knowledge. To learn more how these inspiring outcomes can be promoted, we conceptualize citizen science and its myriad stakeholders as an ecology. We complement this metaphor with the term mutualism to express our desire for interactions in which all parties benefit from their involvement and propose a Mutualistic Ecology of Citizen Science (MECS) as an analytic framework that can potentially contribute to the design and conceptualization of learning in citizen science projects. In this chapter, we operationalize this framework, using four lenses that span several disciplines to look at potential benefits to different participants.

Keywords

Citizen science Public participation in research Science communication Learning communities Statistical education Science literacy Socioscientific issues Scientists Mutualistic Ecology of Citizen Science Learning in citizen science 

References

  1. Aikenhead, G. S. (2005). Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice. New York: Teachers College.Google Scholar
  2. Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 132–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Akkerman, S., & Bruining, T. (2016). Multi-level boundary crossing in a professional development school partnership. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(2), 1–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Andújar, B., Campderrós, G., García, M., Marino, M., Mas, M., et al. (2015). Twenty tips for high-school students engaging in research with scientists. Frontiers for Young Minds, 3, 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aristeidou, M., Scanlon, E., & Sharples, M. (2013). A design-based study of citizen inquiry for geology. In Proceedings of the doctoral consortium at the European conference on technology enhanced learning, co-located with the EC-TEL 2013 conference 7–13. CEUR.Google Scholar
  6. Atias, O., Sagy, O., Kali, Y., Angel, D., & Edelist, D., (2017). Jellyfish and people—a citizen-science collaboration with mutual benefits to citizens and scientists. Poster presented at the American Educational Research Association Conference, San Antonio, Texas, April.Google Scholar
  7. Azevedo, F. S. (2013). The tailored practice of hobbies and its implication for the design of interest-driven learning environments. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22(3), 462–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ballard, H. L., Dixon, C. G., & Harris, E. M. (2017). Youth-focused citizen science: Examining the role of environmental science learning and agency for conservation. Biological Conservation, 208, 65–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barron, B. (2006). Interest and self-sustained learning as catalysts of development: A learning ecology perspective. Human Development, 49(4), 193–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Barron, B., Martin, C. K., Mertl, V., & Yassine, M. (2016). Citizen science: Connecting to nature through networks. In U. Cress, J. Moskaliuk, & H. Jeong (Eds.), Mass collaboration and education (Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series) (Vol. 16, pp. 257–284). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom. New Haven/London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Ben-Zvi, D., Gravemeijer, K., & Ainley, J. (2018). Design of statistics learning environments. In D. Ben-Zvi, K. Makar, & J. Garfield (Eds.), International handbook of research in statistics education (pp. 473–502). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Bielaczyc, K., Kapur, M., & Collins, A. (2013). In C. E. Hmelo-Silver, C. A. Chinn, C. Chan, & A. M. O’Donnell (Eds.), International handbook of collaborative learning. New York: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  14. Bizer, C. (2009). The emerging web of linked data. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 24(5), 87–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bonney, R., Ballard, H., Jordan, R., McCallie, E., Phillips, T., Shirk, J., & Wilderman, C. C. (2009). Public participation in scientific research: Defining the field and assessing its potential for informal science education. A CAISE Inquiry Group Report, (July), 1–58.Google Scholar
  16. Bonney, R., Cooper, C., & Ballard, H. (2016). The theory and practice of citizen science: Launching a new journal. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 1(1).Google Scholar
  17. Bonney, R., Cooper, C. B., Dickinson, J., Kelling, S., Phillips, T., Rosenberg, K. V., et al. (2009). Citizen science: A developing tool for expanding science knowledge and scientific literacy. Bioscience, 59(11), 977–984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Bonney, R., Phillips, T., Enck, J., Shirk, J., & Trautmann, N. (2014). Citizen Science and Youth Education. Washington, DC: Research Council Committee on Out-of-School Time STEM.Google Scholar
  19. Bonney, R., Phillips, T. B., Ballard, H. L., & Enck, J. W. (2015). Can citizen science enhance public understanding of science? Public Understanding of Science, 25(1), 2–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Bronstein, J. L. (1994). Our current understanding of mutualism. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 69(1), 31–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Brossard, D., Lewenstein, B., & Bonney, R. (2005). Scientific knowledge and attitude change: The impact of a citizen science project. International Journal of Science Education, 27(9), 1099–1121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Brown, A. L. (1994). The advancement of learning. Educational Researcher, 23(8), 4–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Bucchi, M., & Trench, B. (2014). Routledge handbook of public communication of science and technology. Abingdon, UK/New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Bybee, R. W., & DeBoer, G. E. (1994). Research on goals for the science curriculum. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 357–387). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.Google Scholar
  25. Bybee, R., McCrae, B., & Laurie, R. (2009). PISA 2006: An assessment of scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 865–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Cooper, C. B., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2016). Two meanings of citizen science. In D. Cavalier & E. B. Kennedy (Eds.), The rightful place of science: Citizen science (pp. 51–62). Tempe, AZ: Consortium for Science, Policy & Outcomes.Google Scholar
  27. Crall, A. W., Jordan, R., Holfelder, K., Newman, G. J., Graham, J., & Waller, D. M. (2012). The impacts of an invasive species citizen science training program on participant attitudes, behavior, and science literacy. Public Understanding of Science, 21(1), 1–20.Google Scholar
  28. Curtis, V. (2015). Online citizen science projects: An exploration of motivation, contribution and participation. Ph.D. dissertation submitted to the Open University (United Kingdom).Google Scholar
  29. Del Savio, L., Prainsack, B., & Buyx, A. (2016). Crowdsourcing the human gut. Is crowdsourcing also “citizen science”? Journal of Science Communication, 15(3), 1–16.Google Scholar
  30. Dickinson, J. L., Shirk, J., Bonter, D., Bonney, R., Crain, R. L., Martin, J., et al. (2012). The current state of citizen science as a tool for ecological research and public engagement. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 10(6), 291–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Dvir, M., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2018). The role of model comparison in young learners’ reasoning with statistical models and modeling. ZDM – International Journal on Mathematics Education, 50(7), 1183–1196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Edelson, D. C., Kirn, S. L., & workshop participants. (2018). Designing citizen science for both science and education: A workshop report. (Technical Report No. 2018–01). Colorado Springs, CO: BSCS Science Learning.Google Scholar
  33. Evans, C., Abrams, E., Reitsma, R., Roux, K., Salmonsen, L., & Marra, P. P. (2005). The neighborhood nestwatch program: Participant outcomes of a citizen-science ecological research project. Conservation Biology, 19(3), 589–594.Google Scholar
  34. Flávio S. Azevedo. (2013). The Tailored Practice of Hobbies and Its Implication for the Design of Interest-Driven Learning Environments. Journal of the Learning Sciences 22(3), 462–510.Google Scholar
  35. Gal, I. (1994, September). Assessment of interpretive skills. Summary of working group, Conference on Assessment Issues in Statistics Education. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  36. Gal, I. (2002). Adults’ statistical literacy: Meanings, components, responsibilities. International Statistical Review, 70(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Galloway, M. A., Willett, K. W., Fortson, L. F., Cardamone, C. N., Schawinski, K., Cheung, E., et al. (2015). Galaxy zoo: The effect of bar-driven fuelling on the presence of an active galactic nucleus in disc galaxies. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 448(4), 3442–3454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Garfield, J., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2008). Developing students’ statistical reasoning: Connecting research and teaching practice. Springer.Google Scholar
  39. Golumbic, Y. N. (2015). What makes citizen science projects successful, and what can we learn from them for future projects? THE Technion literature review of citizen science projects. Technion Citizen Science Project (TCSP). Haifa, Israel: The Technion—Israel Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  40. Golumbic, Y. N., Baram-Tsabari, A., & Fishbain, B. (2016). Increased knowledge and scientific thinking following participation of school students in air-quality research. In Proceedings of Indoor Air 2016.Google Scholar
  41. Golumbic, Y. N., Baram-Tsabari, A., & Fishbain, B. (2017). Why and how should we facilitate scientific information to the public [in Hebrew]. Ecology and the Environment, 8(3), 5–6.Google Scholar
  42. Golumbic, Y. N., Orr, D., Baram-Tsabari, A., & Fishbain, B. (2017). Between vision and reality: A case study of scientists’ views on citizen science. Citizen Science Theory and Practice, 2(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Golumbic, Y. N., Fishbain, B., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (Forthcoming). User centered design of a citizen science air-quality monitoring project. International Journal of Science Education, Part B.Google Scholar
  44. Haklay, M. (2013). Citizen science and volunteered geographic information—overview and typology of participation. In D. Sui, S. Elwood, & M. Goodchild (Eds.), Crowdsourcing geographic knowledge: Volunteered geographic information (VGI) in theory and practice (pp. 105–122). Berlin, Germany: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hardin, J., Hoerl, R., Horton, N. J., Nolan, D., Baumer, B., Hall-Holt, O., et al. (2015). Data science in statistics curricula: Preparing students to “think with data”. The American Statistician, 69(4), 343–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Haywood, B. K., & Besley, J. C. (2014). Education, outreach, and inclusive engagement: Towards integrated indicators of successful program outcomes in participatory science. Public Understanding of Science (Bristol, England), 23(1), 92–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hodson, D. (2003). Time for action: Science education for an alternative future. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 645–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Irwin, A. (1995). Citizen science. A study of people, expertise and sustainable development. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  49. Jackson, C., Østerlund, C., Maidel, V., Crowston, K., & Mugar, G. (2016). Which way did they go? Newcomer movement through the Zooniverse. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM conference on computer-supported cooperative work & social computing (pp. 623–634). New York: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  50. Kolstø, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues. Science Education, 85(3), 291–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kountoupes, D. I., & Oberhauser, K. S. (2008). Citizen science and youth audiences: Educational outcomes of the Monarch Larva Monitoring Project. Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, 1(1). http://jces.ua.edu/citizen-science-and-youth-audiences-educational-outcomes-of-the-monarch-larva-monitoring-project/
  52. Krajcik, J., Codere, S., Dahsah, C., Bayer, R., & Mun, K. (2014). Planning instruction to meet the intent of the next generation science standards. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 157–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Kulikowich, J. M., & Young, M. F. (2001). Locating an ecological psychology action for situated methodology. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(1–2), 17–26.Google Scholar
  54. Kullenberg, C., & Kasperowski, D. (2016). What is citizen science?—A scientometric meta-analysis. PLoS One, 11(1).  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0147152
  55. Manor, H., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2015). Students’ emergent articulations of models and modeling in making informal statistical inferences. In Proceedings of the ninth international research forum on statistical reasoning, thinking, and literacy (SRTL9) (pp. 107–117). Paderborn, Germany: University of Paderborn.Google Scholar
  56. Manor, H., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2017). Students’ emergent articulations of statistical models and modeling in making informal statistical inferences. Statistics Education Research Journal, 16(2), 116–143.Google Scholar
  57. McKinley, D. C., Miller-Rushing, A. J., Ballard, H. L., Bonney, R., Brown, H., Cook-Patton, S. C., et al. (2017). Citizen science can improve conservation science, natural resource management, and environmental protection. Biological Conservation, 208, 15–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Laugksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84(1), 71–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Lewenstein, B. (2016). Can we understand citizen science? Journal of Science Communication, 15(01), 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Lievrouw, L. A. (2010). Social media and the production of knowledge: A return to little science? Social Epistemology, 24(3), 219–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Mueller, M. P., Tippins, D., & Bryan, L. (2012). The future of citizen science. Democracy and Education, 20(1), 2.Google Scholar
  62. Pettibone, L., Vohland, K., Bonn, A., Richter, A., Bauhus, W., Behrisch, B., Borcherding, R., Brandt, M., Bry, F., Dörler, D., Elbertse, I., Glöckler, F., Göbel, C., Hecker, S., Heigl, F., Herdick, M., Kiefer, S., Kluttig, T., Kühn, E., Kühn, K., Oswald, K., Röller, O., Schefels, C., Schierenberg, A., Scholz, W., Schumann, A., Sieber, A., Smolarski, R., Tochtermann, K., Wende, W. and Ziegler, D. 2016. Citizen science for all – a guide for citizen science practitionersGoogle Scholar
  63. Penuel, W. R., Allen, A. R., Coburn, C. E., & Farrell. (2015). Conceptualizing research-practice partnerships as joint work at boundaries. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 20(1–2), 182–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Pratt, D., Johnston-Wilder, P., Ainley, J., & Mason, J. (2008). Local and global thinking in statistical inference. Statistics Education Research Journal, 7(2), 107–129.Google Scholar
  65. Raddick, M. J., Bracey, G., Carney, K., Gyuk, G., Borne, K., Wallin, J., & Jacoby, S. (2009). Citizen science: Status and research directions for the coming decade. Astro2010: The astronomy and astrophysics decadal survey, Position Paper no. 46. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009astro2010P..46R
  66. Redondo, M. L., Queiruga Dios, M. A., Sáiz Manzanares, M. C., & Juez Navarro, S. (2018). Citizen science in school. In M. F. P. C. Martins Costa, J. B. Vásquez Dorrío, & J. M. Fernández Novell (Eds.), Hands-on science. Advancing science. Improving education. (pp. 194–198). Hands-on Science Network. Braga, Portugal: Copissaurio Repro – Centro Imp. Unip. Lda. Campus de Gualtar, Reprografia Complexo II. http://www.hsci.info/hsci2018/images/pdfs/eBookHSCI2018.pdf
  67. Reiser, B. J. (2013, September). What professional development strategies are needed for successful implementation of the next generation science standards. In paper written for the Invitational research symposium on science assessment (Vol. 24, p. 25).Google Scholar
  68. Roberts, D. A., & Bybee, R. W. (2014). Scientific literacy, science literacy, and science education. In N. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. II, pp. 545–558). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  69. Romine, W. L., Sadler, T. D., & Kinslow, A. T. (2016). Assessment of scientific literacy: M. F. P. C. (QuASSR). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(2), 274–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Sadler, T. D. (2011). Situating socio-scientific issues in classrooms as a means of achieving goals of science education. In Socio-scientific issues in the classroom: Teaching, learning and research (pp. 1–9). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Sadler, T. D., Romine, W. L., & Topçu, M. S. (2016). Learning science content through socio-scientific issues-based instruction: A multi-level assessment study. International Journal of Science Education, 38(10), 1622–1635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Sadler, T. D., Foulk, J. A., & Friedrichsen, P. J. (2017). Evolution of a model for socio-scientific issue teaching and learning. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 5(2), 75–87.Google Scholar
  73. Sickler, J., & Cherry, T. M. (2012). Lost ladybug project summative evaluation report. Edgewater, MD.Google Scholar
  74. Silva, C., Monteiro, A. J., Manahl, C., Lostal, E., Schäfer, T., Andrade, N., et al. (2016). Cell spotting: Educational and motivational outcomes of cell biology citizen science project in the classroom. Journal of Science Communication, 15(01), A02.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Silvertown, J. (2009). A new dawn for citizen science. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 24(9), 467–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Stebbins, R. A. (1997). Serious leisure and well-being. In J. T. Haworth (Ed.), Work, leisure and well-being (pp. 117–130). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  77. Stilgoe, J., Lock, S. J., & Wilsdon, J. (2014). Why should we promote public engagement with science? Public Understanding of Science, 23(1), 4–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Sullivan, B. L., Aycrigg, J. L., Barry, J. H., Bonney, R. E., Bruns, N., Cooper, C. B., et al. (2014). The eBird enterprise: An integrated approach to development and application of citizen science. Biological Conservation, 169, 31–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sullivan, B. L., Phillips, T., Dayer, A. A., Wood, C. L., Farnsworth, A., Iliff, M. J., et al. (2017). Using open access observational data for conservation action: A case study for birds. Biological Conservation, 208, 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Teacher, A. G. F., Griffiths, D. J., Hodgson, D. J., & Inger, R. (2013). Smartphones in ecology and evolution: A guide for the apprehensive. Ecology and Evolution, 3(16), 5268–5278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Trench, B. (2008). Towards an analytical framework of science communication models. In D. Cheng, M. Claessens, N. R. J. Gascoigne, T. J. Metcalfe, B. Schiele, & S. Shi (Eds.), Communicating science in social contexts: new models, new practices (pp. 119–138). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Watson, J. M. (1997). Assessing statistical thinking using the media. In I. Gal & J. B. Garfield (Eds.), The assessment challenge in statistics education. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  83. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice, learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization Articles, 7(2), 225–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Wilderman, C. C. (2004). Shermans Creek: A portrait. Technical Status Report. Carlisle, PA: Alliance for Aquatic Resource Monitoring (ALLARM). Dickinson College.Google Scholar
  86. Yoho, R. A., & Vanmali, B. H. (2016). Controversy in biology classrooms—citizen science approaches to evolution and applications to climate change discussions. Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education, 17(1), 110–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Zeidler, D. (2015). Socioscientific issues. In Encyclopedia of science education (pp. 998–1003). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ornit Sagy
    • 1
  • Yaela Naomi Golumbic
    • 2
  • Hava Ben-Horin Abramsky
    • 1
  • Maya Benichou
    • 1
  • Osnat Atias
    • 1
  • Hana Manor Braham
    • 1
  • Ayelet Baram-Tsabari
    • 2
  • Yael Kali
    • 1
  • Dani Ben-Zvi
    • 1
  • Yotam Hod
    • 1
  • Dror Angel
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Learning, Instruction, and Teacher Education, Faculty of EducationUniversity of HaifaHaifaIsrael
  2. 2.Faculty of Education in Science and TechnologyTechnion – Israel Institute of TechnologyHaifaIsrael
  3. 3.Department of Maritime Civilizations, Charney School of Marine ScienceUniversity of HaifaHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations