{"title":"高等教育环境科学中的移动学习:领域现状和未来可能性","authors":"E. Bone, Dionysia Evaputri, Jenny Santaanop","doi":"10.24135/pjtel.v4i1.123","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Authentic, place-based learning is essential for students of ecological and environmental sciences, providing connection to the discipline and building environmental literacy (O’Neil et al. 2020). In a COVID-affected world where opportunities to provide field-based learning may be limited, evaluating how mobile technologies may be used to enhance the field-based learning experiences of students is increasingly important. \nAdvances in mobile technologies have seen a surge in customised applications for species identification, data collection and collation aimed at public users and citizen scientists (e.g. iNaturalist: Unger et al. 2020; eBird: Sullivan et al. 2009; FrogID: Rowley et al. 2019). With field-based learning central to ecology and environmental science disciplines, there is a clear opportunity for the expanded use of mobile tools in higher education. We evaluated recent projects through a systematic review of the use of mobile learning technologies and approaches in field-based environmental sciences within higher education over the last decade. \nOur search criteria terms encompassed mobile learning, mobile devices, teaching methods, field-based learning, undergraduate students and science disciplines and identified 1613 initial records. After removing irrelevant and duplicate records, 130 studies were identified that implemented mobile learning within science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) disciplines, with engineering (32/130 studies, 24.6%), geology and geosciences (17/130, 13.1%) and natural/environmental sciences (17/130, 13.1%) the most common. Narrowing this search again to field-based studies, we identified 18 records, most of which (12/18, 66.7%) were in geology and geosciences disciplines. \nA range of mobile learning technologies were used in the field, spanning the SAMR continuum (Laurillard 2012) from the substitution of traditional field activities with species identification apps (Pfeiffer et al. 2009; Thomas and Fellowes 2017), and augmentation of field experiences with multimedia resources such as podcasts (Jarvis and Dickie 2010) and other apps and resources viewed on mobile devices (Welsh et al. 2015; France et al. 2016; Unger et al. 2018), through to the modification and reinvention of field-based learning by incorporating multimedia displays, visualisations, games and information hotspots (Habib et al. 2012; Fitzpatrick et al. 2012; Bursztyn et al. 2015), virtual field trips and augmented reality (Stokes et al. 2010; Howard 2011; Litherland and Stott 2012; Kingston et al. 2012; Bursztyn et al. 2017; Prietnall et al. 2019), and customised apps that allow student-generated content (Chang et al. 2012) such as data collection, analysis and reflection (Chatterjea 2012; Wang et al. 2016). Studies used both enterprise and custom-built tools, with most incorporating geolocation capabilities. \nOur review criteria only identified two studies in ecology disciplines, both of which utilised an existing enterprise application for species identification (Pfeiffer et al. 2009; Thomas and Fellowes 2017). There remains ample opportunity to develop collaborative mobile learning systems that use custom-built applications for field data collection and are integrated with the learning management systems, such as those in development in collaborative international projects (Bone et al. 2020). We strongly encourage the exploration of the potential for mobile learning in these contexts, and the publication of other projects that have incorporated mobile tools in ecological and environmental sciences curricula.","PeriodicalId":384031,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mobile learning in higher education environmental science: state of the field and future possibilities\",\"authors\":\"E. Bone, Dionysia Evaputri, Jenny Santaanop\",\"doi\":\"10.24135/pjtel.v4i1.123\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Authentic, place-based learning is essential for students of ecological and environmental sciences, providing connection to the discipline and building environmental literacy (O’Neil et al. 2020). In a COVID-affected world where opportunities to provide field-based learning may be limited, evaluating how mobile technologies may be used to enhance the field-based learning experiences of students is increasingly important. \\nAdvances in mobile technologies have seen a surge in customised applications for species identification, data collection and collation aimed at public users and citizen scientists (e.g. iNaturalist: Unger et al. 2020; eBird: Sullivan et al. 2009; FrogID: Rowley et al. 2019). With field-based learning central to ecology and environmental science disciplines, there is a clear opportunity for the expanded use of mobile tools in higher education. We evaluated recent projects through a systematic review of the use of mobile learning technologies and approaches in field-based environmental sciences within higher education over the last decade. \\nOur search criteria terms encompassed mobile learning, mobile devices, teaching methods, field-based learning, undergraduate students and science disciplines and identified 1613 initial records. After removing irrelevant and duplicate records, 130 studies were identified that implemented mobile learning within science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) disciplines, with engineering (32/130 studies, 24.6%), geology and geosciences (17/130, 13.1%) and natural/environmental sciences (17/130, 13.1%) the most common. Narrowing this search again to field-based studies, we identified 18 records, most of which (12/18, 66.7%) were in geology and geosciences disciplines. \\nA range of mobile learning technologies were used in the field, spanning the SAMR continuum (Laurillard 2012) from the substitution of traditional field activities with species identification apps (Pfeiffer et al. 2009; Thomas and Fellowes 2017), and augmentation of field experiences with multimedia resources such as podcasts (Jarvis and Dickie 2010) and other apps and resources viewed on mobile devices (Welsh et al. 2015; France et al. 2016; Unger et al. 2018), through to the modification and reinvention of field-based learning by incorporating multimedia displays, visualisations, games and information hotspots (Habib et al. 2012; Fitzpatrick et al. 2012; Bursztyn et al. 2015), virtual field trips and augmented reality (Stokes et al. 2010; Howard 2011; Litherland and Stott 2012; Kingston et al. 2012; Bursztyn et al. 2017; Prietnall et al. 2019), and customised apps that allow student-generated content (Chang et al. 2012) such as data collection, analysis and reflection (Chatterjea 2012; Wang et al. 2016). Studies used both enterprise and custom-built tools, with most incorporating geolocation capabilities. \\nOur review criteria only identified two studies in ecology disciplines, both of which utilised an existing enterprise application for species identification (Pfeiffer et al. 2009; Thomas and Fellowes 2017). There remains ample opportunity to develop collaborative mobile learning systems that use custom-built applications for field data collection and are integrated with the learning management systems, such as those in development in collaborative international projects (Bone et al. 2020). We strongly encourage the exploration of the potential for mobile learning in these contexts, and the publication of other projects that have incorporated mobile tools in ecological and environmental sciences curricula.\",\"PeriodicalId\":384031,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24135/pjtel.v4i1.123\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24135/pjtel.v4i1.123","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
摘要
真实的、基于地点的学习对于生态和环境科学的学生来说是必不可少的,它提供了与学科的联系,并建立了环境素养(O 'Neil et al. 2020)。在受covid - 19影响的世界中,提供实地学习的机会可能有限,评估如何利用移动技术来增强学生的实地学习体验变得越来越重要。移动技术的进步使得针对公众用户和公民科学家的物种识别、数据收集和整理的定制应用激增(例如iNaturalist: Unger等人,2020;eBird: Sullivan et al. 2009;FrogID: Rowley et al. 2019)。由于实地学习是生态学和环境科学学科的核心,因此在高等教育中扩大使用移动工具显然是一个机会。我们通过系统回顾过去十年来高等教育中基于实地环境科学的移动学习技术和方法的使用,对最近的项目进行了评估。我们的搜索标准包括移动学习、移动设备、教学方法、实地学习、本科生和科学学科,并确定了1613条初始记录。在删除不相关和重复的记录后,我们确定了130项研究在科学、技术、工程和数学(STEM)学科中实施了移动学习,其中工程(32/130项研究,24.6%)、地质和地球科学(17/130,13.1%)和自然/环境科学(17/130,13.1%)最为常见。再次将搜索范围缩小到基于实地的研究,我们确定了18条记录,其中大多数(12/18,66.7%)来自地质和地球科学学科。在野外使用了一系列移动学习技术,跨越SAMR连续体(Laurillard 2012),从用物种识别应用程序替代传统的野外活动(Pfeiffer et al. 2009;Thomas and Fellowes 2017),以及多媒体资源(如播客(Jarvis and Dickie 2010)和移动设备上查看的其他应用程序和资源)的现场体验的增强(Welsh et al. 2015;France et al. 2016;Unger et al. 2018),通过整合多媒体显示、可视化、游戏和信息热点,对基于现场的学习进行修改和重塑(Habib et al. 2012;Fitzpatrick et al. 2012;Bursztyn et al. 2015),虚拟实地考察和增强现实(Stokes et al. 2010;霍华德2011;利特兰和斯托特2012;Kingston et al. 2012;Bursztyn et al. 2017;Prietnall et al. 2019),以及允许学生生成内容的定制应用程序(Chang et al. 2012),例如数据收集、分析和反思(Chatterjea 2012;Wang et al. 2016)。研究使用了企业和定制的工具,其中大多数结合了地理定位功能。我们的审查标准只确定了两项生态学学科的研究,这两项研究都利用了现有的企业应用程序进行物种鉴定(Pfeiffer等人,2009;Thomas and Fellowes 2017)。开发协作移动学习系统仍有充足的机会,这些系统使用定制的应用程序进行现场数据收集,并与学习管理系统集成,例如协作国际项目中正在开发的系统(Bone et al. 2020)。我们强烈鼓励在这些背景下探索移动学习的潜力,并发表将移动工具纳入生态和环境科学课程的其他项目。
Mobile learning in higher education environmental science: state of the field and future possibilities
Authentic, place-based learning is essential for students of ecological and environmental sciences, providing connection to the discipline and building environmental literacy (O’Neil et al. 2020). In a COVID-affected world where opportunities to provide field-based learning may be limited, evaluating how mobile technologies may be used to enhance the field-based learning experiences of students is increasingly important.
Advances in mobile technologies have seen a surge in customised applications for species identification, data collection and collation aimed at public users and citizen scientists (e.g. iNaturalist: Unger et al. 2020; eBird: Sullivan et al. 2009; FrogID: Rowley et al. 2019). With field-based learning central to ecology and environmental science disciplines, there is a clear opportunity for the expanded use of mobile tools in higher education. We evaluated recent projects through a systematic review of the use of mobile learning technologies and approaches in field-based environmental sciences within higher education over the last decade.
Our search criteria terms encompassed mobile learning, mobile devices, teaching methods, field-based learning, undergraduate students and science disciplines and identified 1613 initial records. After removing irrelevant and duplicate records, 130 studies were identified that implemented mobile learning within science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) disciplines, with engineering (32/130 studies, 24.6%), geology and geosciences (17/130, 13.1%) and natural/environmental sciences (17/130, 13.1%) the most common. Narrowing this search again to field-based studies, we identified 18 records, most of which (12/18, 66.7%) were in geology and geosciences disciplines.
A range of mobile learning technologies were used in the field, spanning the SAMR continuum (Laurillard 2012) from the substitution of traditional field activities with species identification apps (Pfeiffer et al. 2009; Thomas and Fellowes 2017), and augmentation of field experiences with multimedia resources such as podcasts (Jarvis and Dickie 2010) and other apps and resources viewed on mobile devices (Welsh et al. 2015; France et al. 2016; Unger et al. 2018), through to the modification and reinvention of field-based learning by incorporating multimedia displays, visualisations, games and information hotspots (Habib et al. 2012; Fitzpatrick et al. 2012; Bursztyn et al. 2015), virtual field trips and augmented reality (Stokes et al. 2010; Howard 2011; Litherland and Stott 2012; Kingston et al. 2012; Bursztyn et al. 2017; Prietnall et al. 2019), and customised apps that allow student-generated content (Chang et al. 2012) such as data collection, analysis and reflection (Chatterjea 2012; Wang et al. 2016). Studies used both enterprise and custom-built tools, with most incorporating geolocation capabilities.
Our review criteria only identified two studies in ecology disciplines, both of which utilised an existing enterprise application for species identification (Pfeiffer et al. 2009; Thomas and Fellowes 2017). There remains ample opportunity to develop collaborative mobile learning systems that use custom-built applications for field data collection and are integrated with the learning management systems, such as those in development in collaborative international projects (Bone et al. 2020). We strongly encourage the exploration of the potential for mobile learning in these contexts, and the publication of other projects that have incorporated mobile tools in ecological and environmental sciences curricula.