Integrating Emerging Pedagogies and Technologies in Environmental and Formal Basic Education

  • Flavio Augusto de Souza BerchezEmail author
  • Natalia Pirani Ghilardi-Lopes
  • Sabrina Gonçalves Raimundo
  • Antonio Mauro Saraiva
Part of the Brazilian Marine Biodiversity book series (BMB)


Emerging pedagogies and technologies are instrumental in adapting educational processes and tools to changes and challenges of the contemporary world. Among them, the global climate changes, together with their associated processes and consequences, bring capital questions for education of all levels, from policymakers to elementary students. This chapter presents the conceptual and practical integration between emerging pedagogies, as outdoor, phenomenon-based education and citizen science, within a transdisciplinary framework, to be applied in formal basic education. Two successful case studies at coastal areas are presented. “Phenomenon-based education” is focused on real-world problem solving and interdisciplinary approaches. Natural environments, the most usual in “outdoor education,” offer countless complex and systemic phenomena for analysis, which require not only interdisciplinary collaboration, but also ethical and normative coordination, whence a “transdisciplinary” approach. “Citizen science” is a complementary instrument for studying and comprehending phenomena through actual scientific investigation. All of them are in agreement with “environmental education” principles, which, besides providing an integrated vision of the world that includes all living beings and their environments, also empower people to develop proactive and responsible reactions to social problems. Recent and emerging technologies, including digital media, by contributing to emerging pedagogies, have become important allies for education, especially when considering younger generations, for whom smartphones, tablets, and other devices are essential elements in their lifestyle. Several tools, such as “QR codes,” and their alternatives, viz., “radio frequency identification tags” (RFID) and “augmented reality,” are discussed, according to how they can be particularly applicable to outdoor education. Efficient “social network” and “educommunication” strategies are complementary educational instruments, fostered by new technologies and digital media, essential to sharing and multiplying highly successful results, and to enabling students, educators, and community members to discuss and solve socio-environmental problems. Our understanding is that these emergent pedagogies and technologies can increase the society’s access to formal and environmental education, thus corresponding to relevant tools to sustainability.


Emerging pedagogies Phenomenon based education Outdoor education Transdisciplinarity Citizen science Augmented reality Social networks 


  1. Anderson A (2012) Climate change education for mitigation and adaptation. J Educ Sustain Dev 6(2):191–206. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bayley A, Henry T, McBride L, Puckett J (2011) A new era in educational technology: why now? In: Bailey A, Henry T, McBride L, Puckett J (eds) Unleashing the potential of technology in education. The Boston Consulting Group, Boston, pp 6–12Google Scholar
  3. Beames S, Humberstone B, Allin L (2017) Adventure revisited: critically examining the concept of adventure and its relations with contemporary outdoor education and learning. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning 17:275–279. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bogner FX (1998) The influence of short-term outdoor ecology education on long-term variables of environmental perspective. J Environ Educ 29(4):17–29. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bonk CJ, Graham CR, Cross J, Moore MG (2012) The handbook of blended learning: global perspectives, local designs. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  6. Brasil (1999) Lei n° 9.795, de 27 de abril de 1999. Dispõe sobre a educação ambiental, institui a Política Nacional de Educação Ambiental e dá outras providências. Diário Oficial da União, BrasíliaGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown M (2006) Adventure education and physical education. In: Kirk D, Macdonald D, O’Sullivan M (eds) The handbook of physical education. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 685–702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown M (2009) Reconceptualising outdoor adventure education: activity in search of an appropriate theory. J Outdoor Environ Educ 13(2):3–13. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chang HY, Wu HK, Hsu YS (2013) Integrating a mobile augmented reality activity to contextualize student learning of a socioscientific issue. Br J Educ Technol 44:E95–E99. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen CC, Huang TC (2012) Learning in a u-museum: developing a context-aware ubiquitous learning environment. Comput Educ 59(3):873–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Darwall WRT, Dulvy NK (1996) An evaluation of the suitability of non-specialist volunteer researchers for coral reef fish surveys. Mafia Island, Tanzania — A case study. Biol Conserv 78:223–231. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Delaney DG, Sperling CD, Adams CS, Leung B (2008) Marine invasive species: validation of citizen science and implications for national monitoring networks. Biol Invasions 10:117–128. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dunkley RA (2016) Learning at eco-attractions: exploring the bifurcation of nature and culture through experiential environmental education. J Environ Educ 47(3):213–221. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Field SC, Lauzon LL, Meldrum JT (2015) A phenomenology of outdoor education leader experiences. J Exp Educ 39(1):41–44. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Foster-Smith J, Evans SM (2003) The value of marine ecological data collected by volunteers. Biol Conserv 113:199–213. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gardiner SM (2004) Ethics and global climate change. Ethics 114(3):555–600. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Goffredo S, Pensa F, Neri P et al (2010) Unite research with what citizens do for fun: “recreational monitoring” of marine biodiversity. Ecol Appl 20:2170–2187. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Grabinger RS, Dunlap JC (1995) Rich environments for active learning: a definition. Res Learn Technol 3:5–34. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hechter RP, Phyne LD, Vermette LA (2012) Integrating technology in education: moving the TPCK framework towards practical applications. Educ Res Perspect 39:136–152Google Scholar
  20. Harari YN (2014) Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind. HarperCollins, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Klopfer E, Squire K (2008) Environmental detectives—the development of an augmented reality platform for environmental simulations. Educ Technol Res Dev 56:203–228. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kurti A, Spikol D, Milrad M (2008) Bridging outdoors and indoors educational activities in schools with the support of mobile and positioning technologies. Int J Mob Learn Org 2(2):166–186. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Leather M (2018) A critique of forest school: something lost in translation. J Outdoor Environ Educ 21(1):5–18. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Liu TY (2009) A context-aware ubiquitous learning environment for language listening and speaking. J Comput Assist Learn 25:515–527. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Liu TY, Tan TH, Chu YL (2009) Outdoor natural science learning with an RFID-supported immersive ubiquitous learning environment. Educ Technol Soc 12(4):161–175Google Scholar
  26. Max-Neef MA (2005) Foundations of transdisciplinarity. Ecol Econ 53(1):5–16. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McCurdy LE, Winterbottom KE, Mehta SS, Roberts JR (2010) Using nature and outdoor activity to improve children’s health. Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care 40:102–117. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mendez D, Slisko J (2013) Software socrative and smartphones as tools for implementation of basic processes of active physics learning in classroom: an initial feasibility study with prospective teachers. Eur J Phys Educ 4(2):17–24Google Scholar
  29. Nichele AG, Schlemmer E, Ramos AF (2015) QR Codes na Educação em Química. Renote 13(2):1–9Google Scholar
  30. Norris C, Hossain A, Soloway E (2011) Using smartphones as essential tools for learning: a call to place schools on the right side of the 21st century. Educ Technol 51(3):18–25Google Scholar
  31. O'Brien L (2009) Learning outdoors: the forest school approach. Education 3-13 37(1):45–60. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. OECD (2016) PISA 2015: Brasil, 2016. Available at: Accessed 09 May 2017
  33. Pantzar M (1997) Domestication of everyday life technology: dynamic views on the social histories of artifacts. Des Issues 13(3):52–65. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Riordan M, Klein EJ (2010) Environmental Education in Action: How Expeditionary Learning Schools Support Classroom Teachers in Tackling Issues of Sustainability. Teacher Education Quarterly 37(4): 119–137Google Scholar
  35. Rozzi R, Stuart Chapin III F, Baird Callicott J, Pickett STA, Power ME, Armesto JJ, May Jr. RH (2015) Introduction: Linking Ecology and Ethics for an Interregional and Intercultural Earth Stewardship. In: Rozzi R, Stuart Chapin III F, Baird Callicott J, Pickett STA, Power ME, Armesto JJ, May Jr. RH (eds) Earth Stewardship: Linking Ecology and Ethics in Theory and Practice. Springer International Publishing AG, Cham, pp 1–16Google Scholar
  36. Santos CR, Grilli NM, Ghilardi-Lopes NP, Turra A (2018) A collaborative work process for the development of coastal environmental education activities in a public school in São Sebastião (São Paulo State, Brazil). Ocean Coastal Manag 164:147–155. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schaal S, Lude A (2015) Using mobile devices in environmental education and education for sustainable development - comparing theory and practice in a nation wide survey. Sustainability 7:10153–10170. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sibthorp J, Paisley K, Gookin J, Furman N (2008) The pedagogic value of student autonomy in adventure education. J Exp Educ 31:136–151. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Soares IO (2011) Educomunicação: o Conceito, o Profissional, a Aplicação. Editora Paulinas, São PauloGoogle Scholar
  40. Tanner T (1980) Significant life experiences: a new research area in environmental education. J Environ Educ 11(4):20–24. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. UNESCO (1978) Intergovernmental conference on environmental education. Tbilisi (USSR) 74–26 October 1977. UNESCO ED/MD 49, Paris, 101pGoogle Scholar
  42. Wu H-K, Lee SW-Y, Chang H-Y, Liang J-C (2013) Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Comput Educ 62:41–49. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Flavio Augusto de Souza Berchez
    • 1
    Email author
  • Natalia Pirani Ghilardi-Lopes
    • 2
  • Sabrina Gonçalves Raimundo
    • 3
  • Antonio Mauro Saraiva
    • 4
  1. 1.Biosciences Institute and CienTec/USPUniversity of São Paulo (USP)São PauloBrazil
  2. 2.Center for Natural and Human SciencesFederal University of ABC (UFABC)São Bernardo do CampoBrazil
  3. 3.Biosciences Institute, Botany DepartmentUniversity of São Paulo (USP)São PauloBrazil
  4. 4.Escola PolitécnicaUniversity of São Paulo (USP)São PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations