Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Going Squirrelly: Evaluating Educational Outcomes of a Curriculum-aligned Citizen Science Investigation of Non-native Squirrels Cover

Going Squirrelly: Evaluating Educational Outcomes of a Curriculum-aligned Citizen Science Investigation of Non-native Squirrels

Open Access
|Jul 2020

Figures & Tables

cstp-5-1-275-g1.png
Figure 1

Distance distribution of Newfoundland schools from the nearest Let’s Talk Science (LTS) site. The distribution of schools located varying distances from an LTS site (in Corner Brook or St. John’s) participating in the Newfoundland Squirrel Project (main figure) is similar to the distance distribution of all schools in the Newfoundland section of the Newfoundland and Labrador English School District (inset). Dashed lines indicate the cut-off between rural and non-rural schools (where rural is defined as being >35 km from a city centre), and there is no difference in the proportion of total schools classified as rural between the participating and total groups (p = 0.599).

Table 1

Comparison of changes in the mean values of each measurement instrument between the science and mathematics measures.

VariableChange in scienceChange in mathematicstPCohen’s d
M (SD)M (SD)
Need satisfaction0.04 (0.44)–0.13 (0.60)2.220.0300.27
Future intentions0.11 (0.83)0.08 (0.67)0.230.8170.03
Enjoyment–0.05 (0.75)0.00 (0.87)–0.330.742–0.04

[i] Note: Positive values indicate greater satisfaction, intentions and enjoyment at time 2.

Table 2

Comparison of changes in participants’ perceptions of three psychological needs between science and mathematics measures.

VariableChange in scienceChange in mathematicstPCohen’s d
M (SD)M (SD)
Relatedness0.07 (0.74)–0.01 (0.96)0.530.6010.06
Competence0.16 (0.76)–0.16 (0.86)2.520.0140.31
Autonomy–0.10 (0.74)–0.21 (0.78)1.180.2430.15

[i] Note: Positive values indicate greater satisfaction, intentions and enjoyment at time 2.

Table 3

Comparison of time-1 and time-2 values of the mean scores for each measurement instrument for the science measure.

VariableTime 1Time 2tPCohen’s d
M (SD)M (SD)
Need satisfaction3.49 (0.54)3.53 (0.44)0.820.4170.10
Future intentions2.81 (1.15)2.91 (1.19)1.040.3000.13
Enjoyment3.73 (1.13)3.68 (1.16)0.520.6040.06

[i] Note: Positive values indicate greater satisfaction, intentions and enjoyment at time 2.

Table 4

Regression analyses predicting changes in participants’ future intentions to participate in science.

PredictorsBTp
Science relatedness0.070.580.565
Science competence0.453.88<0.001
Science autonomy–0.18–1.590.117

[i] F(3,61) = 5.37, p = 0.002, R2: 0.21 Standardized predictors were used. Two participants were excluded because of missing data.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.275 | Journal eISSN: 2057-4991
Language: English
Submitted on: Sep 13, 2019
Accepted on: May 30, 2020
Published on: Jul 15, 2020
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2020 Heather Spicer, Daniel Nadolny, Erin Fraser, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.