Opinions of Prospective Biology Teachers about “Outdoor Learning Environments”: The Case of Museum Visit and Scientific Field Trip

Year 2020, Volume: 7 Issue: 2, 115 - 134, 01.08.2020

Nurcan Uzel

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.20.23.7.2

Cited By: 1

Abstract

This study aims to determine the opinions of prospective biology teachers about outdoor learning environments by drawing on the cases of museum visit and scientific field trip. In line with this aim, phenomenology research design was utilized. Criterion sampling, which is one of the purposeful sampling methods used in qualitative research studies, was resorted to with a view to determining the participants. In accordance with the phenomenology of the research, 17 prospective biology teachers in their first year of their studies during 2018-2019 academic year in a public university constituted the participants of the research. In order to determine the opinions of prospective biology teachers about outdoor learning environments, an opinion form and an observation form were made use of as data collection tools. Content analysis was referred to in the analysis of research data. In their views on the contributions of the outdoor learning environments, prospective teachers seemed to concentrate on the issues of gaining new information, concretizing the knowledge, learning in the natural environment, and learning by doing and living. It was understood that the codes of “following the guide/teacher”, “acting in a planned manner” and “practice” came to the fore in the opinions of the prospective biology teachers regarding the things to be done during the implementation phase of the outdoor learning environments. While the codes of “getting opinion” and “question-answer method” came into prominence in the prospective teachers' views on the things to be done in the evaluation of outdoor learning environments; especially due to its content, after the scientific field trip, prospective teachers expressed opinions about “the examination of the notes taken, pictures, samples, and so on.” It was also observed that codes emerged from the suggestions of prospective biology teachers regarding the use of outdoor learning environments focused more on these aspects of the process: “should be a well-planned trip”, “should be informative”, “time management” and “participant/ teacher characteristics”.

Keywords

outdoor learning environments, museum, scientific field trip, teacher education, biology education

References

• Akman, B., Özen Altınkaynak, Ş., Ertürk Kara, H.G., & Can Gül, Ş. (2015). The views of preschool teachers on museum education. Journal of Uludag University Faculty of Education, 28(1), 97-115.
• Aktın, K. (2017). Development of the historical thinking skills of children with museum education in pre-school period. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 13(2), 465-486.
• Arianti, Y., & Aminatun, T. (2019). An analysis of outdoor learning towards students’ outcomes in learning biology. The International Seminar on Bioscience and Biological Education, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1241, 1-6. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1241/1/012061
• Aslan, A. (2019). Determination of prospective teachers’ attitudes on scientific field trips and views on hydroelectric power plants. Journal of Research in Informal Environments, 4(1), 61-83.
• Aytaç, A. (2014). The place and importance of the field trip method for the social science teacher candidates education. Journal of Hasan Ali Yücel Education Faculty, 11(21), 55-69.
• Bostan Sarıoğlu, A., & Küçüker, H. (2017). Investigation of preservice science teachers' opinions regarded to outdoor school learning environments. Journal of Research in Informal Environments, 2(1), 1-15.
• Bozdoğan, A.E., Okur, A., & Kasap, G. (2015). A sample application for a planned field trip: A factory trip. The Black Sea Journal of Social Sciences, 7(2), 1-12.
• Braund, M., & Reiss, M. (2006). Towards a more authentic science curriculum: The contribution of out‐of‐school learning. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 1373-1388.
• Bülbül, H. (2016). Creating cultural heritage consciousness on middle school students through museum education. ODU Journal of Social Science Research, 6(3), 681-694.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün Ö.E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2012). Scientific research methods. Ankara: Pegem Publication.
• Creswell, J.W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
• Creswell, J.W. (2013). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative inquiry & Research design] (Trans.Eds.: M. Bütün & S.B. Demir). Ankara: Siyasal.
• Çavuş, R., Umdu Topsakal, Ü., & Öztuna Kaplan, A. (2013). Teachers views’ on awareness of environmental acquiring in informal learning environments: The sample of Kocaeli science houses. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 3(1), 15-26.
• Çetin, T., Kuş, Z., & Karatekin, K. (2010). Opinions of class and social sciences teachers about trip-observation method. Gaziosmanpaşa University Social Sciences Research Journal, 5(2), 158-180.
• Demir, M.K. (2007). The study of classroom teacher candidates’ perspectives towards field trip method. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty, 27(3), 83-98.
• Demir, N., & Öner Armağan, F. (2018). Views of the secondary school students towards planetariums. The Journal of International Education Science, 18, 118-131.
• Dillon, J., Rickinson, M., Teamey, K., Morris, M., Choi, M.Y., Sanders, D., & Benefield, P. (2006). The value of outdoor learning: Evidence from research in the UK and elsewhere. School Science Review, 87(320), 107-111.
• Doğan, Y., Çiçek, Ö., & Saraç, E. (2018). The field trip experiences of pre-service science teachers in the environmental science course. Erzincan University Journal of Education Faculty, 20(1), 104-120.
• Ekiz, D. (2013). Scientific research methods. Ankara: Anı Publication.
• Erten, Z., & Taşçi, G. (2016). Developing activities of out of the school learning environments for science classes, and analysing their effects on students’ scientific process skills. Erzincan University Journal of Education Faculty, 18(2), 638-657.
• Fidan, N. (2012). Okulda öğrenme ve öğretme [Learning and teaching at school]. Ankara: Pegem Publication.
• Karademir, E. (2013). Öğretmen ve öğretmen adaylarının fen ve teknoloji dersi kapsamında “okul dışı öğrenme etkinliklerini” gerçekleştirme amaçlarının planlanmış davranış teorisi yoluyla belirlenmesi [Determination of Objectives Realization at Outdoor Science Education Activities of Teachers and Pre-Service Teachers by the Theory of Planned Behavior Within the Scope of Science and Technology Lesson, Dissertation]. (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Hacettepe University, The Institute of Social Sciences, Ankara.
• Karadeniz, C., & Okvuran, A. (2014). A night at the museum: Museum education with Ankara University students at Çorum Museum of Archeology. Elementary Education Online, 13(3), 865‐879.
• Karamustafaoğlu, S., Ayvalı, L., & Ocak, Y. (2018). Teachers’ opinions on informal environments in pre-school education. Journal of Research in Informal Environments, 3(2), 38-65.
• Kısa, Y., & Gazel, A.A. (2016). Social studies teacher and student evaluation of teaching museum of use of opinions (Museums Afyonkarahisar). International Journal of Field Education, 2(1), 51-83.
• Malkoç, S., & Kaya, E. (2015). The usage of non-classroom environments in social studies education. Elementary Education Online, 14(3), 1079-1095.
• Mertoğlu, H. (2019). Opinions of science pre-service teachers on out-of-school activities conducted in different learning environments. Journal of Research in Informal Environments, 4(1), 37-60.
• Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd Edition). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
• Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
• MTA (2019). MTA Şehit Cuma Dağ Natural History Museum. Retrieved July 31, 2019 from: http://www.mta.gov.tr/v3.0/sayfalar/muze/egitim-birimi/muzemizi-gezelim/
• Nicol, R. (2002). Outdoor education: Research topic or universal value? Part one. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 2, 29-41.
• Ocak, İ., & Korkmaz, Ç. (2018). An examination of the views of science and pre-school teachers on non-formal learning environments. International Journal of Field Education, 4(1), 18-38.
• Okur-Berberoğlu, E., & Uygun, S. (2013). Examining of outdoor education development in the world and in Turkey. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 9(2), 32-42.
• Saraç, H. (2017). Researches related to outdoor learning environments in Turkey: Content analysis study. Journal of Education Theory and Practical Research, 3(2), 60-81.
• Selanik-Ay, T., & Erbasan, Ö. (2016). Views of classroom teachers about the use of out of school learning environments. Journal of Education and Future, 10, 35-50.
• Selanik-Ay, T., & Kurtdede Fidan, N. (2014). Teacher candidates' views about using museums in social studies education. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 13(48), 69-89.
• Sontay, G., Tutar, M., & Karamustafaoğlu, O. (2016). Student views about “Science teaching with outdoor learning environments”: Planetarium tour. Journal of Research in Informal Environments, 1(1), 1-24.
• Szczepanski, A., Malmer, K., Nelson, N., & Dahlgren, L.O. (2007). The distinctive nature and potential of outdoor education from a teacher’s perspective: An intervention study of teachers in school. Didaktisk Tidskrift, 16, 89-106.
• Tatar, N., & Bağrıyanık, K. E. (2012). Opinions of science and technology teachers about outdoor education. Elementary Education Online, 11(4), 883-896.
• Thomas, G. (2015). Signature pedagogies in outdoor education. Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education, 6(2), 113-126.
• Türkmen, Ç. (2010). İnformal (sınıf-dışı) fen bilgisi eğitimine tarihsel bakış ve eğitimimize entegrasyonu [Historical view of informal (out-of-class) science education and its integration into our education]. Cukurova University Faculty of Education Journal, 39, 46-59.
• Türkmen, H. (2015). Primary teachers point of view about science teaching in outdoor learning environments. Journal of European Education, 5(2), 47-55.
• Uzel, N., Çıkrık, S., Yel, M., & Gül, A. (2019, June). Biyoloji öğretmen adaylarının okul dışı çevrelere eğitim amaçlı gezi düzenleyebilmesine ilişkin öz-yeterlik inançları [Self-efficacy beliefs about biology teacher candidates' organizing educational trips out of school environments]. V. TURKCESS International Education and Social Sciences Congress, İstanbul.
• Yener, D., Aksüt, P., Kiras, B., & Yener, Y. (2018). Pre-service science teachers‘ opinions about science trip and Science-Technology-Society-Environment: “The example of science in museum”. Başkent University Journal of Education, 5(2), 212-224.
• Yıldız, K., Baykal, T., & Altın, M. (2002). A model study on wetlands for the environment to be better known and its importance to be recognized. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty, 22(3), 1-9.
• Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences]. Ankara: Seçkin Publication.
• Yıldırım, R. (2012). İlköğretim II. kademe sosyal bilgiler derslerinde gezi-gözlem yönteminin uygulanma durumunun incelenmesi [Study of application for excursion observation method in primary school 2nd grade social studies]. (Unpublished Master's Thesis). Afyon Kocatepe University, The Institute of Social Sciences, Afyonkarahisar.