A river-study conceptual model on handhelds supported observation, analysis, experimentation, and report writing for 72 secondary students in fieldwork¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2011 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In a 2008 Northern Thailand geography field trip, 72 secondary school students used a handheld-delivered River conceptual model before, during, and after fieldwork as a presentation aid, fieldwork support, and reflection/report tool. → Daniel Churchill 2011

Evidence¶

Daniel Churchill 2011¶

Daniel Churchill. (2011). Conceptual Model Learning Objects and Design Recommendations for Small Screens. Educational Technology & Society, 14(1), 203-216. https://www.worldcat.org/issn/1436-4522

q2 · i? · design · r1

A case study of a conceptual model designed in line with the article's recommendations, used during a geography field trip. Teachers first displayed the model via a projector as a visual aid; students then used it outdoors to support their river study task and later in a PowerPoint report template with conceptually challenging questions. The article reports the case descriptively with no outcome measures.

"In February 2008, the author traveled to Northern Thailand with a group of 72 secondary school students and two of their Geography teachers from Hong Kong."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Small-screen design recommendations were explicated through an inquiry in which teachers and students interacted with learning objects on handheld devices
• Reading text and presenting graphics on handheld screens are more difficult than on paper, and interactivity may be compromised — related
• Exposure to field trips to informal science institutions produces small positive effects on middle school students' standardized science test scores — related
• Augmented reality and QR-code mobile systems enable context-aware language learning in designated physical zones — related
• In the PISG script, students' field-trip individual observations were largely off-target for the chosen plant, while by the post-field trip individuals showed some improvement in scientific thinking — related