RESEARCH PAPER
Experiential Learning for Enhancing Environmental Literacy Regarding Energy: A Professional Development Program for Inservice Science Teachers
 
More details
Hide details
1
Dallas Baptist University, Dallas, USA
2
Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, Texas, USA
Online publish date: 2019-02-01
Publish date: 2019-02-01
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2019;15(6):em1699
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
This article describes results of a professional development (PD) program for inservice science teachers. The PD integrated experiential learning to enhance participants’ literacy regarding energy production and associated environmental costs. The PD focused on six energy sources and environmental politics that must be navigated to make decisions about their sustainability. Participants toured energy extraction/production sites including coal mines, hydroelectric dams, wind farms, and nuclear power plants. At each site, participants encountered differing perspectives on the environmental costs and benefits of the energy sources. Group discussions allowed for sharing participants’ thoughts on each perspective and mathematical modeling was used as a tool for evaluating each energy source. Data included pre- and post-content assessments and PD evaluation surveys. Analysis revealed the role that experiential learning played in changed perspectives on energy production, content knowledge growth, and impacts on the participants’ own classroom teaching.
 
REFERENCES (43)
1.
Baimbridge, M. (2004). Towards a new economics. In J. Blewitt & C. Cullingford (Eds.), The sustainability curriculum: The challenge for higher education (pp. 166-178). London, UK: Earthscan.
 
2.
Berlin, D. F. (2014). Place-based education: Connecting mathematics, science, community, and culture. In D. F. Berlin & A. L. White (Eds.), Initiatives in mathematics and science education with global implications (pp. 107-117). Columbus, OH: International Consortium for Research in Science and Mathematics Education.
 
3.
Bloom, M. A., Holden, M. E., Sawey, A. T., & Weinburgh, M. H. (2010). Promoting the use of outdoor learning spaces by K-12, in-service science teachers through an outdoor professional development experience. In Bodzin, A. M., Klein, B. S., and Weaver, S. (Eds.), The inclusion of environmental education in science teacher education (pp. 97-110). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90....
 
4.
Bloom, M. A., Quebec Fuentes, S., Feille, K. K., & Holden, M. E. (2015). Exploring the politics and sustainability of energy production: A professional development program for science teachers. Journal of Sustainability Education, 8.
 
5.
Blum, W., & Niss, M. (1989). Mathematical problem solving, modeling applications, and links to other subjects – state, trends and issues in mathematics instruction. In W. Blum, M. Niss, & I. Huntley (Eds.), Modelling, applications and applied problem solving: Teaching mathematics in a real context (pp. 1-21). Chichester, England: Ellis Horwood Limited.
 
6.
Bodzin, A. M., Klein, B. S., & Weaver, S. (2010). Preface. In A. M. Bodzin, B. S. Klein, & S. Weaver (Eds.), The inclusion of environmental education in science teacher education (pp. v-xiv). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90....
 
7.
Boorman, J. (Director/producer). (1972). Deliverance. [Motion picture]. Elmer Productions.
 
8.
Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (1985). Reflection: Turning experience into learning. New York, NY: RoutledgeFarmer.
 
9.
Bybee, R., McCrae, B., & Laurie, R. (2009). PISA 2006: An assessment of scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 865-883. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20....
 
10.
Carson, R. (1962). Silent spring. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
 
11.
Carter, R. L., & Simmons, B. (2010). The history and philosophy of environmental education. In A. M. Bodzin, B. S. Klein, & S. Weaver (Eds.), The inclusion of environmental education in science teacher education (pp. 3-16). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90....
 
12.
Friedman, T. L. (2008). Hot, flat, and crowded: Why we need a green revolution and how it can renew America. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
 
13.
Further Education Curriculum and Development Unit (FEU). (1981). Experience, reflection, learning. London, England: Department of Education and Science, Further Education Unit.
 
14.
Galbraith, P. L., Stillman, G., & Brown, J. (2010). Turning ideas into modeling problems. In R. Lesh, P. L. Galbraith, C. R. Haines, & A. Hurford (Eds.), Modeling students’ mathematical competencies (pp. 133-144). New York, NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-....
 
15.
Garner, R. (2004). Politics and sustainable development. In Blewitt, J. & Cullingford, C. (Eds.), The sustainability curriculum: The challenge for higher education, 208-217. London, UK: Earthscan.
 
16.
Garvey, D. (2013). Only experience can bring us to the truth. Journal of Sustainability Education, 5.
 
17.
Geller, P. (Director/producer), & Evans, M. (Producer). (2009). Coal Country [Motion picture]. Laurel, MD: Evening Star Productions.
 
18.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New Brunswick, NJ: Aldine Transaction.
 
19.
Haines, C. R., Galbraith, P. L., Blum, W., & Khan, S. (2007). Mathematical modeling (ICTMA 12): Education, engineering and economics. Chichester, UK: Horwood Publishing.
 
20.
Itin, C. M. (1999). Reasserting the philosophy of experiential education as a vehicle for change in the 21st century. The Journal of Experiential Education, 22(2), 91-98. https://doi.org/10.1177/105382....
 
21.
Klosterman, M., Sadler, T., & Brown, J. (2012). Science teachers’ use of mass media to address socio-scientific and sustainability issues. Research in Science Education, 42(1), 51-74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165....
 
22.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
 
23.
Lederman, N. & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (1998). Avoiding denatured science: Activities that promote understandings of the nature of science. In McComas, W. F. (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 83-126). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
 
24.
Louckes-Horsley, S., Stiles, K. E., Mundry, S., Love, N., & Hewson, P. W. (2010). Designing professional developments for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
 
25.
Maa, K. (2006). What are modeling competencies? ZDM Mathematics Education, 38(2), 113-142. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0265....
 
26.
Medrick, R. (2013). Experiential education for change. Journal of Sustainability Education, 5.
 
27.
Moon, J. A. (1999). Reflection in learning & professional development: Theory & Practice. London, UK: Kogan Page.
 
28.
Moscardini, A. O. (1989). Identification and teaching of mathematical modelling skills. In W. Blim, M. Niss, & I. Huntley (Eds.), Modelling, applications and applied problem solving: Teaching mathematics in a real context (pp. 36-42). Chichester, UK: Ellis Horwood Limited.
 
29.
Munakata, M. (2006). A little competition goes a long: Holding a mathematical modeling contest in your classroom. Mathematics Teacher, 100(1), 30-39.
 
30.
National Council for Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
 
31.
National Governors Association (NGA) Center for Best Practices, & Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSS0) (2010). Common Core State Standards Mathematics. Washington, D.C.: Author.
 
32.
National Research Council (2010). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/9596.
 
33.
NGSS Lead States (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
 
34.
North American Association for Environmental Education (2004). Environmental education materials: Guidelines for excellence. Retrieved from https://cdn.naaee.org/sites/de....
 
35.
Novak, D. (Director/producer), Rosenfeld, D. (Producer), Follini, C. J. (Producer), & Zoullas, A. (Producer). (2008). Burning the Future: Coal in America [Motion picture]. New York, NY: New Video Group, Inc.
 
36.
Parker, J., Wade, R., & Atkinson, H. (2004). Citizenship and community from local to global: Implications for higher education of a global citizenship approach. In J. Blewitt & C. Cullingford (Eds.), The sustainability curriculum: The challenge for higher education (pp. 63-77). London, UK: Earthscan.
 
37.
Pollak, H. O. (2011). What is mathematical modeling? In H. Gould, D.R. Murray, A. Sanfratello, & B.R. Vogeli (Eds.), Mathematical modeling handbook (pp. vi-vii). Bedford, MA: COMAP.
 
38.
Rebar, B. M., & Enochs, L. G. (2010). Integrating environmental education field trip pedagogy into science teacher preparation. In A. M. Bodzin, B. S. Klein, & S. Weaver (Eds.), The inclusion of environmental education in science teacher education (pp. 111-126). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90....
 
39.
Saylan, C., & Blumstein, D. T. (2011). The failure of environmental education [and how we can fix it]. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
 
40.
Slattery, M. (2015). Afterword. In Stratton, S., Hagevik, R., Feldman, A., & Bloom, M. (Eds.), Educating science teachers for sustainability (pp. 459-468). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
 
41.
Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2008). The Energy Report 2008. Retrieved from http://www.window.state.tx.us/....
 
42.
Thomas, D. R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(2), 237-246. https://doi.org/10.1177/109821....
 
43.
Winther, A. A., Cleary Sadler, K., & Saunders, G. (2010). Approaches to environmental education. In A. M. Bodzin, B. S. Klein, & S. Weaver (Eds.), The inclusion of environmental education in science teacher education (pp. 31-50). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90....
 
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215