Have a personal or library account? Click to login
A Framework for Articulating and Measuring Individual Learning Outcomes from Participation in Citizen Science Cover

A Framework for Articulating and Measuring Individual Learning Outcomes from Participation in Citizen Science

Citizen Science: Theory and Practice
Volume 3 (2018): Issue 2
By: Tina Phillips,  Norman Porticella,  Mark Constas and  Rick Bonney  
Open Access
|Aug 2018

References

  1. 1Ajzen, I. 1985. From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In: Kuhl, J and Beckmann, J (eds.), Action Control, From Cognition to Behavior. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-69746-3_2
    Back to article
  2. 2Ajzen, I. 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2): 179–211. DOI: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
    Back to article
  3. 3American Association for the Advancement of Science. (ed.) 1993. Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Back to article
  4. 4Ayala, CC, Yin, Y, Shavelson, RJ and Vanides, J. 2002. Investigating the cognitive validity of science performance assessment with think alouds: Technical aspects. Presented at the Annual meeting of the American Educational Researcher Association. New Orleans, LA.
    Back to article
  5. 5Ballard, HL and Belsky, JM. 2010. Participatory action research and environmental learning: Implications for resilient forests and communities. Environmental Education Research, 16(5–6): 611–627. DOI: 10.1080/13504622.2010.505440
    Back to article
  6. 6Ballard, HL, Fernandez-Gimenez, ME and Sturtevant, VE. 2008. Integration of local ecological knowledge and conventional science: A study of seven community-based forestry organizations in the USA. Ecology and Society, 13(2): 37. http://hdl.handle.net/10535/2424.
    Back to article
  7. 7Ballard, HL and Huntsinger, L. 2006. Salal harvester local ecological knowledge, harvest practices and understory management on the Olympic Peninsula, Washington. Human Ecology, 34(4): 529–547. DOI: 10.1007/s10745-006-9048-7
    Back to article
  8. 8Bandura, A. 1982. Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2): 122–147. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122
    Back to article
  9. 9Bandura, A. 1997. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. 1st edition New York: Worth Publishers.
    Back to article
  10. 10Bandura, A. 2000. Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3): 75–78. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8721.00064
    Back to article
  11. 11Bandura, A, Adams, NE and Beyer, J. 1977. Cognitive processes mediating behavioral change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(3): 125–139. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.35.3.125
    Back to article
  12. 12Bauer, MW, Petkova, K and Boyadjieva, P. 2000. Public knowledge of and attitudes to Science: Alternative measures that may end the “science war.” Science, Technology and Human Values, 25(1): 30–51. DOI: 10.1177/016224390002500102
    Back to article
  13. 13Becker-Klein, R, Peterman, K and Stylinski, C. 2016. Embedded assessment as an essential method for understanding public engagement in citizen science. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 1(1). DOI: 10.5334/cstp.15
    Back to article
  14. 14Becker, M, Caminiti, S, Fiorella, D, Francis, L, Gravino, P, Haklay, M (Muki), Hotho, A, Loreto, V, Mueller, J, Ricchiuti, F, Servedio, VDP, Sîrbu, A and Tria, F. 2013. Awareness and learning in participatory noise sensing. PLOS ONE, 8(12): e81638. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0081638
    Back to article
  15. 15Bela, G, Peltola, T, Young, JC, Balázs, B, Arpin, I, Pataki, G, Hauck, J, Kelemen, E, Kopperionen, L, van Herzele, A, Keune, H, Hecker, S, Suškevičs, M, Roy, HE, Itkonen, P, Külvik, M, László, M, Basnou, C, Pino, J and Bonn, A. 2016. Learning and the transformative potential of citizen science: Lessons from the Study of Nature. Conservation Biology, 30(5): 990–999. DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12762
    Back to article
  16. 16Bell, S, Marzano, M, Cent, J, Kobierska, H, Podjed, D, Vandzinskaite, D, Reinert, H, Armaitiene, A, Grodzińska-Jurczak, M and Muršič, R. 2008. What counts? Volunteers and their organisations in the recording and monitoring of biodiversity. Biodiversity and Conservation, 17(14): 3443–3454. DOI: 10.1007/s10531-008-9357-9
    Back to article
  17. 17Berkowitz, AR, Ford, ME and Brewer, CA. 2005. A framework for integrating ecological literacy, civics literacy, and environmental citizenship in environmental education. In: Johnson, EA and Mappin, MJ (eds.), Environmental Education and Advocacy: Changing Perspectives of Ecology and Education, 227–266. Cambridge University Press.
    Back to article
  18. 18Bickman, L. 2000. Summing up program theory. New Directions for Evaluation, 2000(87): 103–112. DOI: 10.1002/ev.1186
    Back to article
  19. 19Bodzin, AM. 2008. Integrating Instructional Technologies in a Local Watershed Investigation with Urban Elementary Learners. The Journal of Environmental Education, 39(2): 47–58. DOI: 10.3200/JOEE.39.2.47-58
    Back to article
  20. 20Bonney, R. 2004. Understanding the process of research. In: Chittenden, D, Farmelo, G and Lewenstein, BV (eds.), Creating Connections: Museums and the Public Understanding of Current Research, 199–210. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
    Back to article
  21. 21Bonney, R, Ballard, H, Jordan, R, McCallie, E, Phillips, T, Shirk, J and Wilderman, CC. 2009a. 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).
    Back to article
  22. 22Bonney, R, Cooper, CB, Dickinson, J, Kelling, S, Phillips, TB, Rosenberg, KV and Shirk, J. 2009b. Citizen Science: A Developing Tool for Expanding Science Knowledge and Scientific Literacy. Bioscience, 59(11): 977–984. DOI: 10.1525/bio.2009.59.11.9
    Back to article
  23. 23Bonney, R, Phillips, TB, Ballard, HL and Enck, JW. 2016. Can citizen science enhance public understanding of science? Public Understanding of Science, 25(1): 2–16. DOI: 10.1177/0963662515607406
    Back to article
  24. 24Braschler, B, Mahood, K, Karenyi, N, Gaston, KJ and Chown, SL. 2010. Realizing a synergy between research and education: How participation in ant monitoring helps raise biodiversity awareness in a resource-poor country. Journal of Insect Conservation, 14(1): 19–30. DOI: 10.1007/s10841-009-9221-6
    Back to article
  25. 25Brewer, C. 2002. Outreach and partnership programs for conservation education where endangered species conservation and research occur. Conservation Biology, 16(1): 4–6. DOI: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.01613.x
    Back to article
  26. 26Brossard, D, Lewenstein, B and Bonney, R. 2005. Scientific knowledge and attitude change: The impact of a citizen science project. International Journal of Science Education, 27(9): 1099–1121. DOI: 10.1080/09500690500069483
    Back to article
  27. 27Center for the Advancement of Informal Science Education. 2011. Principal Investigator’s Guide: Managing Evaluation in Informal STEM Education Projects. Washington, DC.
    Back to article
  28. 28Char, C, Parrish, J, Friesner, J and Dolliver, J. 2014. Promoting Rigorous Citizen Science: Coastal Observation and Seabird Survey Team (COASST) Evaluation Report on Citizen Impact. Seattle, WA: University of Washington.
    Back to article
  29. 29Chen, H-T. 2005. Theory-Driven Evaluation. In: Mathison, S (ed.), Encyclopedia of Evaluation. SAGE Publications, Inc. DOI: 10.4135/9781412950558.n542
    Back to article
  30. 30Clary, EG and Snyder, M. 1999. The motivations to volunteer: Theoretical and practical considerations. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8(5): 156–159. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8721.00037
    Back to article
  31. 31Clary, EG, Snyder, M, Ridge, RD, Copeland, J, Stukas, AA, Haugen, J and Miene, P. 1998. Understanding and assessing the motivations of volunteers: A functional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6): 1516–1530. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1516
    Back to article
  32. 32Cooper, CB, Dickinson, J, Phillips, TB and Bonney, R. 2007. Citizen Science as a Tool for Conservation in Residential Ecosystems. Ecology and Society, 12(2): 11. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss2/art11/.
    Back to article
  33. 33Cornwell, ML and Campbell, LM. 2012. Co-producing conservation and knowledge: Citizen-based sea turtle monitoring in North Carolina, USA. Social Studies of Science, 42(1): 101–120. DOI: 10.1177/0306312711430440
    Back to article
  34. 34Cosquer, A, Raymond, R and Prevot-Julliard, A-C. 2012. Observations of everyday biodiversity: A new perspective for conservation? Ecology and Society, 17(4). DOI: 10.5751/ES-04955-170402
    Back to article
  35. 35Crain, R, Cooper, C and Dickinson, JL. 2014. Citizen science: A tool for integrating studies of human and natural systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 39(1): 641–665. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-environ-030713-154609
    Back to article
  36. 36Crall, AW, Jordan, R, Holfelder, K, Newman, GJ, Graham, J and Waller, DM. 2012. The impacts of an invasive species citizen science training program on participant attitudes, behavior, and science literacy. Public Understanding of Science, 22(6): 745–764. DOI: 10.1177/0963662511434894
    Back to article
  37. 37Crall, AW, Newman, GJ, Stohlgren, TJ, Holfelder, KA, Graham, J and Waller, DM. 2011. Assessing citizen science data quality: An invasive species case study: Assessing citizen science data quality. Conservation Letters, 4(6): 433–442. DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2011.00196.x
    Back to article
  38. 38Cronin, DP and Messemer, JE. 2013. Elevating adult civic science literacy through a renewed citizen science paradigm. Adult Learning, 24(4): 143–150. DOI: 10.1177/1045159513499550
    Back to article
  39. 39Danielsen, F, Burgess, ND, Balmford, A, Donald, PF, Funder, M, Jones, JPG, Alviola, P, Balete, DS, Blomley, T, Brashares, J, Child, B, Enghoff, M, Fjeldså, J, Holt, S, Hübertz, H, Jensen, AE, Jensen, PM, Massao, J, Mendoza, MM, Ngaga, Y, Poulsen, MK, Rueda, R, Sam, M, Skielboe, T, Stuart-Hill, G, Topp-Jørgensen, E and Yonten, D. 2009. Local participation in natural resource monitoring: A characterization of approaches. Conservation Biology, 23(1): 31–42. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01063.x
    Back to article
  40. 40Danielsen, F, Jensen, PM, Burgess, ND, Altamirano, R, Alviola, PA, Andrianandrasana, H, Brashares, JS, Burton, AC, Coronado, I, Corpuz, N, Enghoff, M, Fjeldså, J, Funder, M, Holt, S, Hübertz, H, Jensen, AE, Lewis, R, Massao, J, Mendoza, MM, Ngaga, Y, Pipper, CB, Poulsen, MK, Rueda, RM, Sam, MK, Skielbow, T, Sørensen, M and Young, R. 2014. A multicountry assessment of tropical resource monitoring by local communities. BioScience, 64: 236–51. DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biu001
    Back to article
  41. 41Devictor, V, Whittaker, RJ and Beltrame, C. 2010. Beyond scarcity: Citizen science programmes as useful tools for conservation biogeography: Citizen science and conservation biogeography. Diversity and Distributions, 16(3): 354–362. DOI: 10.1111/j.1472-4642.2009.00615.x
    Back to article
  42. 42Dewey, J. 1938. Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.
    Back to article
  43. 43De Young, R. 1993. Changing Behavior and Making It Stick: The Conceptualization and Management of Conservation Behavior. Environment and Behavior, 25(3): 485–505. DOI: 10.1177/0013916593253003
    Back to article
  44. 44Engeström, Y. 1999. Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In: Miettinen, R and Punamäki, R-L (eds.), Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511812774.003
    Back to article
  45. 45Esmond, J, Dunlop, P and Clan, W. 2004. Developing the volunteer motivation inventory to assess the underlying motivational drives of volunteers in Western Australia. Perth: Clan WA.
    Back to article
  46. 46Evans, C, Abrams, E, Reitsma, R, Roux, K, Salmonsen, L and Marra, PP. 2005. The Neighborhood Nestwatch Program: Participant outcomes of a citizen-science ecological research project. Conservation Biology, 19(3): 589–594. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00s01.x
    Back to article
  47. 47Falk, JH and Dierking, LD. 2003. Lessons without Limit: How free-choice learning is transforming education. Lanham, MD: Rowman Altamira.
    Back to article
  48. 48Falk, JH, Storksdieck, M and Dierking, LD. 2007. Investigating public science interest and understanding: Evidence for the importance of free-choice learning. Public Understanding of Science, 16(4): 455–469. DOI: 10.1177/0963662506064240
    Back to article
  49. 49Fenichel, M and Schweingruber, HA. 2010. Surrounded by science: Learning science in informal environments. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
    Back to article
  50. 50Fernandez-Gimenez, ME, Ballard, HL and Sturtevant, VE. 2008. Adaptive management and social learning in collaborative and community-based monitoring: A study of five community-based forestry organizations in the western USA. Ecology and Society, 13(2): 4. DOI: 10.5751/ES-02400-130204
    Back to article
  51. 51Fishbein, M and Ajzen, I. 1975. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
    Back to article
  52. 52Flagg, B. 2016. Contribution of multimedia to girls’ experience of citizen science. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 1(2). DOI: 10.5334/cstp.51
    Back to article
  53. 53Friedman, AJ, Allen, S, Campbell, PB, Dierking, LD, Flagg, BN, Garibay, C, Korn, R, Silverstein, G and Ucko, DA. 2008. Framework for evaluating impacts of informal science education projects. National Science Foundation Workshop.
    Back to article
  54. 54Funnell, SC. 2000. Developing and using a program theory matrix for program evaluation and performance monitoring. New Directions for Evaluation, 2000(87): 91–101. DOI: 10.1002/ev.1185
    Back to article
  55. 55Funnell, SC and Rogers, PJ. 2011. Purposeful program theory: Effective use of theories of change and logic models, 31. John Wiley and Sons.
    Back to article
  56. 56Heimlich, J and Ardoin, N. 2008. Understanding behavior to understand behavior change: A literature review. Environmental Education Research, 14(3): 215–237. DOI: 10.1080/13504620802148881
    Back to article
  57. 57Hidi, S and Renninger, KA. 2006. The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2): 111–127. DOI: 10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4
    Back to article
  58. 58Hiller, SE. 2012. The impact of a citizen science program on student achievement and motivation: A social cognitive career perspective. Thesis (PhD). George Mason University.
    Back to article
  59. 59Hobbs, SJ and White, PCL. 2012. Motivations and barriers in relation to community participation in biodiversity recording. Journal for Nature Conservation, 20(6): 364–373. DOI: 10.1016/j.jnc.2012.08.002
    Back to article
  60. 60Hungerford, HR and Volk, TL. 1990. Changing learner behavior through environmental education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 21(3): 8–21. DOI: 10.1080/00958964.1990.10753743
    Back to article
  61. 61Jackson, CB, Osterlund, C, Mugar, G, Hassman, KD and Crowston, K. 2014. Motivations for sustained participation in crowdsourcing: Case studies of citizen science on the role of talk. IEEE, 1624–1634. DOI: 10.1109/HICSS.2015.196
    Back to article
  62. 62Jordan, RC, Ballard, HL and Phillips, TB. 2012. Key issues and new approaches for evaluating citizen-science learning outcomes. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 10(6): 307–309. DOI: 10.1890/110280
    Back to article
  63. 63Jordan, RC, Gray, SA, Howe, DV, Brooks, WR and Ehrenfeld, JG. 2011. Knowledge gain and behavioral change in citizen-science programs: Citizen-scientist knowledge gain. Conservation Biology, 25(6): 1148–1154. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01745.x
    Back to article
  64. 64Kaplan, S. 1995. The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15(3): 169–182. DOI: 10.1016/0272-4944(95)90001-2
    Back to article
  65. 65Kellert, SR and Wilson, EO. 1993. The biophilia hypothesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.
    Back to article
  66. 66Kolb, DA. 1984. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development (1st ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
    Back to article
  67. 67Kollmuss, A and Agyeman, J. 2002. Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8(3): 239–260. DOI: 10.1080/13504620220145401
    Back to article
  68. 68Kosmala, M, Wiggins, A, Swanson, A and Simmons, B. 2016. Assessing data quality in citizen science. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 14(10): 551–560. DOI: 10.1002/fee.1436
    Back to article
  69. 69Kountoupes, DL and Oberhauser, KS. 2008. Citizen science and youth audiences: Educational outcomes of the Monarch Larva Monitoring Project. Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, 1(1): 10–20.
    Back to article
  70. 70Krasny, ME and Bonney, R. 2005. Environmental education through citizen science and participatory action research. In: Johnson, E and Mappin, M (eds.), Environmental education and advocacy: Changing perspectives of ecology and education, 292–319. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    Back to article
  71. 71Lave, J and Wenger, E. 1991. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511815355
    Back to article
  72. 72Lederman, NG. 1992. Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4): 331–359. DOI: 10.1002/tea.3660290404
    Back to article
  73. 73Lederman, NG. 1999. EJSE Editorial: The state of science education: Subject matter without context. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 3(2).
    Back to article
  74. 74Lederman, NG, Abd-El-Khalick, F, Bell, RL and Schwartz, RS. 2002. Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6): 497–521. DOI: 10.1002/tea.10034
    Back to article
  75. 75Lederman, NG, Schwartz, RS, Abd-El-Khalick, F and Bell, RL. 2001. Pre-service teachers’ understanding and teaching of nature of science: An intervention study. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 1(2): 135–160. DOI: 10.1080/14926150109556458
    Back to article
  76. 76Lewandowski, E and Oberhauser, K. 2017. Butterfly citizen scientists in the United States increase their engagement in conservation. Biological Conservation, 208: 106–112. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2015.07.029
    Back to article
  77. 77Maltese, AV and Tai, RH. 2010. Eyeballs in the fridge: Sources of early interest in science. International Journal of Science Education, 32(5): 669–685. DOI: 10.1080/09500690902792385
    Back to article
  78. 78McCaffrey, RE. 2005. Using citizen science in urban bird studies. Urban Habitats, 3(1): 70–86.
    Back to article
  79. 79McCallie, E, Bell, L, Lohwater, T, Falk, JH, Lehr, JL, Lewenstein, BV and Wiehe, B. 2009. Many experts, many audiences: Public engagement with science and informal science education. (A CAISE Inquiry Group Report). Washington, DC: Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE).
    Back to article
  80. 80McKinley, DC, Miller-Rushing, AJ, Ballard, HL, Bonney, R, Brown, H, Cook-Patton, SC, Evans, DM, French, RA, Parrish, JK, Phillips, TB, Ryan, SF, Shanley, LA, Shirk, JL, Stepenuck, KF, Weltzin, JF, Wiggins, A, Boyle, OD, Briggs, RD, Chapin, SF, III, Hewitt, DA, Preuss, PW and Soukup, MA. 2016. Citizen science can improve conservation science, natural resource management, and environmental protection. Biological Conservation, 208: 15–28. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.05.015
    Back to article
  81. 81Mejlgaard, N and Stares, S. 2010. Participation and competence as joint components in a cross-national analysis of scientific citizenship. Public Understanding of Science, 19(5): 545–561. DOI: 10.1177/0963662509335456
    Back to article
  82. 82Meyer, NJ, Scott, S, Strauss, AL, Nippolt, PL, Oberhauser, KS and Blair, RB. 2014. Citizen science as a REAL environment for authentic scientific inquiry. Journal of Extension, 52(4).
    Back to article
  83. 83Miller-Rushing, A, Primack, R and Bonney, R. 2012. The history of public participation in ecological research. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 10(6): 285–290. DOI: 10.1890/110278
    Back to article
  84. 84Mugar, G, Østerlund, C, Hassman, KD, Crowston, K and Jackson, CB. 2014. Planet hunters and seafloor explorers: legitimate peripheral participation through practice proxies in online citizen science. CSCW ‘14 Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, 109–119. New York: ACM Press. DOI: 10.1145/2531602.2531721
    Back to article
  85. 85National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Science Literacy: Concepts, Contexts, and Consequences. In: Snow, CE and Dibner, KA (eds.). Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. DOI: 10.17226/23595
    Back to article
  86. 86National Research Council. 1996. National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
    Back to article
  87. 87National Research Council. 2009. Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. DOI: 10.17226/12190
    Back to article
  88. 88National Science Board. 2014. Science and engineering indicators 2014. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation (NSB 14-01).
    Back to article
  89. 89NGSS Lead States. 2013. Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, D.C: National Academies Press. DOI: 10.17226/18290
    Back to article
  90. 90Nov, O, Arazy, O and Anderson, D. 2014. Scientists@Home: What drives the quantity and quality of online citizen science participation? PLoS ONE, 9(4): e90375. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0090375
    Back to article
  91. 91Oberhauser, K and Prysby, MD. 2008. Citizen science: Creating a research army for conservation. American Entomologist, 54(2): 103–104. DOI: 10.1093/ae/54.2.103
    Back to article
  92. 92Osbaldiston, R and Schott, JP. 2012. Environmental sustainability and behavioral science meta-analysis of proenvironmental behavior experiments. Environment and Behavior, 44(2): 257–299. DOI: 10.1177/0013916511402673
    Back to article
  93. 93Osborne, J, Simon, S and Collins, S. 2003. Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9): 1049–1079. DOI: 10.1080/0950069032000032199
    Back to article
  94. 94Overdevest, C, Orr, CH and Stepenuck, K. 2004. Volunteer stream monitoring and local participation in natural resource issues. Human Ecology Review, 11(2): 177–185.
    Back to article
  95. 95Phillips, T, Ferguson, M, Minarchek, M, Porticella, N and Bonney, R. 2014. User’s Guide for Evaluating Learning Outcomes in Citizen Science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Lab of Ornithology. Retrieved from: http://cdn1.safmc.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/28101058/CitizenScienceUsersGuide_Evaluation_2014.pdf.
    Back to article
  96. 96Phillips, TB, Bonney, R and Shirk, J. 2012. What is our impact? Toward a unified framework for evaluating outcomes of citizen science participation. In: Dickinson, JL and Bonney, R (eds.), Citizen science: Public participation in environmental research, 82–95. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. DOI: 10.7591/cornell/9780801449116.003.0006
    Back to article
  97. 97Phillips, TB, Lewenstein, BV and Bonney, R. 2006. A case study of citizen science. In: Cheng, D, Metcalf, J and Schiele, B (eds.), At the human scale, international practices in science communication, 317–334. Beijing: Science Press.
    Back to article
  98. 98Price, CA and Lee, H-S. 2013. Changes in participants’ scientific attitudes and epistemological beliefs during an astronomical citizen science project. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(7): 773–801. DOI: 10.1002/tea.21090
    Back to article
  99. 99Raddick, MJ, Bracey, G, Carney, K, Gyuk, G, Borne, K, Wallin, J and Jacoby, S. 2009. Citizen science: Status and research directions for the coming decade. AGB Stars and Related Phenomenastro 2010: The Astronomy and Astrophysics Decadal Survey, 2010, 46.
    Back to article
  100. 100Raddick, MJ, Bracey, G, Gay, PL, Lintott, CJ, Murray, P, Schawinski, K, Szalay, AS and Vandenberg, J. 2010. Galaxy Zoo: Exploring the motivations of citizen science volunteers. Astronomy Education Review, 9(1). DOI: 10.3847/AER2009036
    Back to article
  101. 101Reed, J, Raddick, MJ, Lardner, A and Carney, K. 2013. An exploratory factor analysis of motivations for participating in Zooniverse, a collection of virtual citizen science projects. In: 2013 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), 610–619. DOI: 10.1109/HICSS.2013.85
    Back to article
  102. 102Roth, W-M and Lee, S. 2002. Scientific literacy as a collective praxis. Public Understanding of Science, 11(1): 33–56. DOI: 10.1088/0963-6625/11/1/302
    Back to article
  103. 103Roth, W-M and Lee, S. 2004. Science education as/for participation in the community. Science Education, 88(2): 263–291. DOI: 10.1002/sce.10113
    Back to article
  104. 104Roth, W-M and Roychoudhury, A. 1993. The concept map as a tool for the collaborative construction of knowledge: A microanalysis of high school physics students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(5): 503–534. DOI: 10.1002/tea.3660300508
    Back to article
  105. 105Rotman, D, Preece, J, Hammock, J, Procita, K, Hansen, D, Parr, C, Lewis, D and Jacobs, D. 2012. Dynamic changes in motivation in collaborative citizen-science projects. Presented at the Computer Supported Cooperative Work 2012, 217–226. Seattle, Washington: ACM Press. DOI: 10.1145/2145204.2145238
    Back to article
  106. 106Ryan, RM and Deci, EL. 2000a. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1): 54–67. DOI: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
    Back to article
  107. 107Ryan, RM and Deci, EL. 2000b. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1): 68–78. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
    Back to article
  108. 108Schmeller, DS, Henry, P-Y, Julliard, R, Gruber, B, Clobert, J, Dziock, F, Lengyel, S, Nowicki, P, Déri, E, Budrys, E, Kull, T, Tali, K, Bauch, B, Settele, J, van Swaay, C, Kobler, A, Babij, V, Papastergiadou, E and Henle, K. 2009. Advantages of volunteer-based biodiversity monitoring in Europe. Conservation Biology, 23(2): 307–316. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01125.x
    Back to article
  109. 109Schneider, B and Cheslock, N. 2003. Measuring results. San Francisco, CA: Coevolution Institute.
    Back to article
  110. 110Schultz, PW. 2011. Conservation means behavior. Conservation Biology, 25(6): 1080–1083. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01766.x
    Back to article
  111. 111Schunk, DH. 1991. Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26(3–4): 207–231. DOI: 10.1080/00461520.1991.9653133
    Back to article
  112. 112Shamos, MH. 1995. The myth of scientific literacy. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
    Back to article
  113. 113Shirk, JL, Ballard, HL, Wilderman, CC, Phillips, T, Wiggins, A, Jordan, R, McCallie, E, Minarchek, M, Lewenstein, BV, Krasny, ME and Bonney, R. 2012. Public participation in scientific research: A framework for deliberate design. Ecology and Society, 17(2). DOI: 10.5751/ES-04705-170229
    Back to article
  114. 114Sickler, J, Cherry, TM, Allee, L, Smyth, RR and Losey, J. 2014. Scientific value and educational goals: Balancing priorities and increasing adult engagement in a citizen science project. Applied Environmental Education and Communication, 13(2): 109–119. DOI: 10.1080/1533015X.2014.947051
    Back to article
  115. 115Stern, MJ, Powell, RB and Ardoin, NM. 2008. What difference does it make? Assessing outcomes from participation in a residential environmental education program. The Journal of Environmental Education, 39(4): 31–43. DOI: 10.3200/JOEE.39.4.31-43
    Back to article
  116. 116Stern, PC. 2000. New environmental theories: Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3): 407–424. DOI: 10.1111/0022-4537.00175
    Back to article
  117. 117Sturgis, P and Allum, N. 2004. Science in society: Re-evaluating the deficit model of public attitudes. Public Understanding of Science, 13(1): 55–74. DOI: 10.1177/0963662504042690
    Back to article
  118. 118Sullivan, BL, Wood, CL, Iliff, MJ, Phillips, TB, Fink, D and Kelling, S. 2009. eBird: A citizen-based bird observation network in the biological sciences. Biological Conservation, 142(10): 2282–2292. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2009.05.006
    Back to article
  119. 119Tai, RH, Qi Liu, CQ, Maltese, AV and Fan, X. 2006. Planning early for careers in science. Science, 312(5777): 1143–1144. DOI: 10.1126/science.1128690
    Back to article
  120. 120Theobald, EJ, Ettinger, AK, Burgess, HK, DeBey, LB, Schmidt, NR, Froehlich, HE, Parrish, JK, et al. 2015. Global change and local solutions: Tapping the unrealized potential of citizen science for biodiversity research. Biological Conservation, 181: 236–244. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.10.021
    Back to article
  121. 121Thompson, S and Bonney, R. 2007. Evaluating the impacts of participation in an online citizen science project: A mixed-methods approach. In: Trant, J and Bearman, D (eds.), Museums and the web 2007: Selected papers from an international conference, 187–199. Toronto: Archives and Museum Informatics.
    Back to article
  122. 122Toomey, AH and Domroese, MC. 2013. Can citizen science lead to positive conservation attitudes and behaviors? Human Ecology Review, 20(1): 50–62, 67.
    Back to article
  123. 123Trautmann, N, Shirk, J, Fee, J and Krasny, ME. 2012. Who poses the question? Using citizen science to help K-12 teachers meet the mandate for inquiry. In: Dickinson, JL and Bonney, R (eds.), Citizen science: Public participation in environmental research, 179–191. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. DOI: 10.7591/cornell/9780801449116.003.0013
    Back to article
  124. 124Trumbull, DJ, Bonney, R, Bascom, D and Cabral, A. 2000. Thinking scientifically during participation in a citizen-science project. Science Education, 84(2): 265–275. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200003)84:2<;265::AID-SCE7>3.0.CO;2-5
    Back to article
  125. 125Trumbull, DJ, Bonney, R and Grudens-Schuck, N. 2005. Developing materials to promote inquiry: Lessons learned. Science Education, 89(6): 879–900. DOI: 10.1002/sce.20081
    Back to article
  126. 126Ulrich, R. 1993. Biophilia, biophobia, and natural landscapes. In: Kellert, SR and Wilson, EO (eds.), The biophilia hypothesis, 73–137. Washington, DC: Island Press.
    Back to article
  127. 127Vining, J, Ebreo, A, Bechtel, RB and Churchman, A. 2002. Emerging theoretical and methodological perspectives on conservation behaviour. In: Bechtel, R and Churchman, A (eds.), New handbook of environmental psychology, 541–558. New York: Wiley.
    Back to article
  128. 128Vygotsky, LS and Cole, M. 1978. Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
    Back to article
  129. 129Weinberg, RS, Gould, D and Jackson, A. 1979. Expectations and performance: An empirical test of Bandura’s self-efficacy theory. Journal of Sport Psychology, 1(4): 320–331.
    Back to article
  130. 130Wells, NM and Lekies, KS. 2012. Children and nature: Following the trail to environmental attitudes and behavior. In: Dickinson, JL and Bonney, R (eds.), Citizen science: Public participation in environmental research, 201–213. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. DOI: 10.7591/cornell/9780801449116.003.0015
    Back to article
  131. 131Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511803932
    Back to article
  132. 132Wilson, EO. 1984. Biophilia: The human bond with other species. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Back to article
  133. 133Wing, S, Horton, RA, Marshall, SW, Thu, K, Tajik, M, Schinasi, L and Schiffman, SS. 2008. Air pollution and odor in communities near industrial swine operations. Environmental Health Perspectives, 116(10): 1362–1368. DOI: 10.1289/ehp.11250
    Back to article
  134. 134Wright, DR, Underhill, LG, Keene, M and Knight, AT. 2015. Understanding the motivations and satisfactions of volunteers to improve the effectiveness of citizen science programs. Society and Natural Resources, 28(9): 1013–1029. DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2015.1054976
    Back to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.126 | Journal eISSN: 2057-4991
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Submitted on: Oct 3, 2017
Accepted on: May 31, 2018
Published on: Aug 28, 2018
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year
Keywords:
learning outcomes,
evaluation,
informal science learning

© 2018 Tina Phillips, Norman Porticella, Mark Constas, Rick Bonney, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 3 (2018): Issue 2Next article