Advertisement

Citizen Science: Connecting to Nature Through Networks

  • Brigid BarronEmail author
  • Caitlin K. Martin
  • Véronique Mertl
  • Mohamed Yassine
Chapter
Part of the Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series book series (CULS, volume 16)

Abstract

Citizen science projects represent an important example of mass collaboration at a global scale where nonscientists can contribute to science research across geographical locations. To more broadly and deeply capitalize on the potential for citizen science to invigorate inquiry-based science at school, we need to better understand how and why citizen science opportunities are taken up by particular teachers. In this chapter, we offer a framework for the analysis of conditions that influence voluntary participation in citizen science efforts. The framework is developed with empirical data from a longitudinal case study. The framework focuses on four dimensions that contributed sustained and evolving participation: (1) alignment between the citizen science opportunity with personal interests and teaching goals, (2) access to a networked community with curricular resources and a technical infrastructure, (3) an integrated indoor and outdoor classroom space that promoted place-based inquiry opportunities, and (4) a set of collaborative practices and networked opportunities that created conditions for an expanding set of partnerships. We close with a discussion of how the design of the socio-technical dimensions of citizen science efforts might be informed by both ethnographic and quantitative studies.

Keywords

Mass collaboration Creative collaboration Citizen science Participation 

Notes

Acknowledgment

This work is supported by the National Science Foundation Cyberlearning program (Grant REC-1124568) and Learning in Informal and Formal Environments Science of Learning Center, a National Science Foundation-funded (Grant REC-354453) effort seeking to understand and advance human learning through a simultaneous focus on implicit, informal, and formal learning, thus cultivating generalizable interdisciplinary theories that can guide the design of effective new technologies and learning environments. We also acknowledge and thank “Mr. Paulson,” the Vital Signs staff members, and the other teachers, students, and parents who contributed their time and invaluable expertise and ideas to this work.

References

  1. Ardoin, N. M., Schuh, J. S., & Gould, R. (2012). Exploring the dimensions of place: A confirmatory factor analysis of data from three ecoregional sites. Environmental Education Research, 18, 583–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 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, 462–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ball, D. L. (1996). Teacher learning and the mathematics reforms: What do we think we know and what do we need to learn? Phi Delta Kappan, 77, 500–508.Google Scholar
  4. Bang, M., & Medin, D. (2010). Cultural processes in science education: Supporting the navigation of multiple epistemologies. Science Education, 94, 1008–1026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barron, B. (2006). Interest and self-sustained learning as catalysts of development: A learning ecology perspective. Human Development, 49, 193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barron, B., Gomez, K., Pinkard, N., & Martin, C. K. (2014). The digital youth network: Cultivating digital media citizenship in urban communities. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Barron, B., Martin, C. K., Mercier, E., Pea, R., Steinbock, D., Walter, S., … Tyson, K. (2009, June). Repertoires of collaborative practice: Theoretical introduction and background. In C. O’Malley, D. D. Suthers, P. Reimann & A. Dimitracopoulou (Eds.), CSCL’09 Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (Vol. 2, pp. 25–27). New Brunswick, NJ: International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
  8. 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. Washington, DC: Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE).Google Scholar
  9. Bonney, R., Shirk, J. L., Phillips, T. B., Wiggins, A., Ballard, H. L., Miller-Rushing, A. J., & Parrish, J. K. (2014). Next steps for citizen science. Science, 343, 1436–1437.Google Scholar
  10. 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, 1099–1121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brown, J. S. (2000). Growing up digital: How the web changes work, education, and the way people learn. Change, 32, 10–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Butt, R. (1984). Arguments for using biography in understanding teacher thinking. In R. Halkes & J. K. Olson (Eds.), Teacher thinking (pp. 98–123). Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
  13. Butt, R. L., & Raymond, D. (1989). Studying the nature and development of teachers’ knowledge using collaborative autobiography. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 403–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Butt, R. L., Raymond, D., McCue, G., & Yamagishi, L. (1992). Collaborative autobiography and the teacher’s voice. In I. F. Goodson (Ed.), Studying teachers’ lives (pp. 51–98). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Calabrese-Barton, A. M. (2012). Citizen(s’) science. A response to “The future of citizen science.” Democracy and Education, 20. Retrieved from http://democracyeducationjournal.org/home/vol20/iss2/12/
  16. Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). Retrieved from http://www.coppa.org
  17. Collins, A. (2016). A brief history of mass collaboration: How innovations over time have enabled people to work together more effectively. In U. Cress, J. Moskaliuk, & H. Jeong (Eds.), Mass collaboration and education. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International.Google Scholar
  18. Cress, U., Feinkohl, I., Jirschitzka, J., & Kimmerle, J. (2016). Mass collaboration as co-evolution of cognitive and social systems. In U. Cress, J. Moskaliuk, & H. Jeong (Eds.), Mass collaboration and education. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International.Google Scholar
  19. Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Teacher learning that supports student learning. Educational Leadership, 55, 6–11.Google Scholar
  20. Elliott, M. (2016). Stigmergic collaboration: A framework for understanding and designing mass collaboration. In U. Cress, J. Moskaliuk, & H. Jeong (Eds.), Mass collaboration and education. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International.Google Scholar
  21. Fickel, L. (1999, April). Democracy is messy: Exploring the beliefs and personal theories of a high school social studies teacher. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
  22. Fischer, G. (2016). Exploring, understanding, and designing innovative socio-technical environments for fostering and supporting mass collaboration. In U. Cress, J. Moskaliuk, & H. Jeong (Eds.), Mass collaboration and education. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International.Google Scholar
  23. Gallo, T., & Waitt, D. (2011). Creating a successful citizen science model to detect and report invasive species. BioScience, 61, 459–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Glazer, J. (1999, April). Considering the professional community: An analysis of key ideas, intellectual roots, and future challenges. Paper presented at the American Education Research Association, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
  25. Goodson, I. F. (1992). Sponsoring the teacher’s voice: Teachers’ lives and teacher development. In A. Hargreaves & M. G. Fullan (Eds.), Understanding teacher development (pp. 110–121). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  26. Gutierrez, K. D., & Rogoff, B. (2003). Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of practice. Educational Researcher, 32, 19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Halatchliyski, I., Moskaliuk, J., Kimmerle, J., & Cress, U. (2014). Explaining authors’ contribution to pivotal artifacts during mass collaboration in the Wikipedia’s knowledge base. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 9, 97–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Haywood, B. K. (2014). A “sense of place” in public participation in scientific research. Science Education, 98, 64–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41, 111–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Khatib, F., DiMaio, F., Cooper, S., Kazmierczyk, M., Gilski, M., Krzywda, S., & Foldit Void Crushers Group (2011). Crystal structure of a monomeric retroviral protease solved by protein folding game players. Nature Structural & Molecular Biology, 18, 1175–1177.Google Scholar
  31. Lepczyk, C. A. (2005). Integrating published data and citizen science to describe bird diversity across a landscape. Journal of Applied Ecology, 42, 672–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Long, J. (2003). Connecting with the content: How teacher interest affects student interest in a core course (Electronic thesis or dissertation). Retrieved from https://etd.ohiolink.edu
  33. Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & González, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: A qualitative approach to connect households and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31, 132–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mueller, M. P., & Tippins, D. (2012). The future of citizen science. Democracy and Education, 20, 2.Google Scholar
  35. National Research Council. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Committee on Highly Successful Science Programs for K-12 Science Education. Board on Science Education and Board on Testing and Assessment, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  36. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  37. Pajak, E., & Blase, J. (1989). The impact of teachers’ personal lives on professional role enactment: A qualitative analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 26, 283–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Parise, L., & Spillane, J. (2010). Teacher learning and instructional change: How formal and on-the-job learning opportunities predict change in elementary school teachers’ practice. The Elementary School Journal, 110, 321–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Patrichi, M. (2011, April). Threats to using mass collaboration in education. Paper presented at the 7th International Scientific Conference eLearning and Software for Education, Bucharest, Romania.Google Scholar
  40. Penuel, B., & Means, B. (2004). Implementation variation and fidelity in an inquiry science program: Analysis of GLOBE data reporting patterns. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 294–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Polman, J. L. (2000). Designing project-based science: Connecting learners through guided inquiry. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  42. Powell, R. R. (1992). The influence of prior experiences on pedagogical constructs of traditional and nontraditional preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 8, 225–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Powell, R. R. (1996). Epistemological antecedents to culturally relevant and constructivist classroom curricula: A longitudinal study of teachers’ contrasting world views. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12, 365–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views on knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29, 4–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Raddick, M. J., Bracey, G., Carney, K., Gyuk, G., Borne, K., Wallin, J., … Planetarium, A. (2009). Citizen science: Status and research directions for the coming decade. AGB Stars and Related Phenomenastro 2010. Position Paper at the Astronomy and Astrophysics Decadal Survey, 46.Google Scholar
  46. Rippel, M., Schaefer, D., Mistree, F., & Panchal, J. H. (2009). Fostering collaborative learning and mass-customization of education in a graduate engineering design course. International Journal of Engineering Education, 25, 729.Google Scholar
  47. Shirk, J. L., Ballard, H. L., Wilderman, C. C., Phillips, T., Wiggins, A., Jordan, R., … Bonney, R. (2012). Public participation in scientific research: A framework for deliberate design. Ecology and Society, 17, 2.Google Scholar
  48. Trautmann, N. M., Shirk, J. L., Fee, J., & Krasny, M. E. (2012). Who poses the question?: Using citizen science to help K-12 teachers meet the mandate for inquiry. In J. L. Dickinson & R. Bonney (Eds.), Citizen science: Public participation in environmental research (pp. 179–190). Ithaka, NY: Comstock.Google Scholar
  49. Trumbull, D. J., Bonney, R., Bascom, D., & Cabral, A. (2000). Thinking scientifically during participation in a citizen-science project. Science Education, 84, 265–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wals, A. E., Brody, M., Dillon, J., & Stevenson, R. B. (2014). Convergence between science and environmental education. Science, 344, 583–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wiggins, A., & Crowston, K. (2011). From conservation to crowdsourcing: A typology of citizen science. In Proceedings of the 44th Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, Koloa, Hawaii. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1109/HICSS.2011.207

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brigid Barron
    • 1
    Email author
  • Caitlin K. Martin
    • 1
  • Véronique Mertl
    • 1
  • Mohamed Yassine
    • 1
  1. 1.Stanford School of EducationStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations