References
- 1Aristeidou, M and Herodotou, C. 2020. Online citizen science: A systematic review of effects on learning and scientific literacy. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 5(1): 1–12. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.224
- 2Bastian, M, Heymann, S and Jacomy, M. 2009. Gephi: an open source software for exploring and manipulating networks. In: Third International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. San Jose, California on
17–20 May 2009 . - 3Blondel, VD, Guillaume, J-L, Lanbiotte, R and Lefebvre, E. 2008. Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 10: 10008. DOI: 10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/P10008
- 4Bonney, R, Ballard, H, Jordan, R, McCallie, E, Phillips, T, Shirk, J and Wilderman, CC. 2009. 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).
- 5Chase, SK and Levine, A. 2016. A framework for evaluating and designing citizen science programs for natural resources monitoring. Conservation Biology, 30(3): 456–466. DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12697
- 6Craven, J and Hogan, T. 2008. Rethinking the science fair. Phi Delta Kappan, 89(9): 679. DOI: 10.1177/003172170808900915
- 7DeLisi, J, Kook, JF, Levy, AJ, Fields, E and Winfield, L. 2020. An examination of the features of science fairs that support students’ understandings of science and engineering practices. J Res Sci Teach, 58(4): 491–519. DOI: 10.1002/tea.21669
- 8Doerfel, ML. 1998. What constitutes semantic network analysis? A comparison of research and methodologies. Connections, 21(2): 16–26.
- 9Eugenio, BD and Glass, M. 2004. The kappa statistic: A second look. Computational Linguistics, 30(1): 95–101. DOI: 10.1162/089120104773633402
- 10Finarelli, MG. 1998. GLOBE: A worldwide environmental science and education partnership. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 7: 77–84. DOI: 10.1023/A:1022588216843
- 11Frensley, T, Crall, A, Stern, M, Jordan, R, Gray, S, Prysby, M, Newman, G, Hmelo-Silver, C, Mellor, D and Huang, J. 2017. Bridging the benefits of online and community supported citizen science: A case study on motivation and retention with conservation-oriented volunteers. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 2(1): 4, 1–14. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.84
- 12Geoghegan, H, Dyke, A, Pateman, R, West, S and Everett, G. 2016. Understanding motivations for citizen science. Reading, UK: UKEOF, University of Reading, Stockholm Environment Institute (University of York) and University of the West of England.
- 13Houseal, AK, Abd-El-Khalick, F and Destefano, L. 2014. Impact of a student–teacher–scientist partnership on students’ and teachers’ content knowledge, attitudes toward science, and pedagogical practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1): 84–115. DOI: 10.1002/tea.21126
- 14Kastens, K. 2014a. Pervasive and persistent understandings about data. Boston, MA: EDC Oceans of Data Institute. Available at
http://oceansofdata.org/sites/oceansofdata.org/files/pervasive-and-persistent-understandings-01-14.pdf . - 15Kastens, K. 2014b. The relationship between direct and data-mediated knowledge of the world. Boston, MA: EDC Oceans of Data Institute. Available at
http://oceansofdata.org/sites/oceansofdata.org/files/representation-and-referent-01-14.pdf . - 16Malmberg, J and Maull, K. 2013. Supporting climate science research with 21st century technologies and a virtual student conference for upper elementary to high school students. LEARNing Landscapes, 6(2): 249–264. DOI: 10.36510/learnland.v6i2.615
- 17Minner, DD, Levy, AJ and Century, J. 2010. Inquiry-based science instruction—what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4): 474–496. DOI: 10.1002/tea.20347
- 18National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2018. Learning through citizen science: Enhancing opportunities by design. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. DOI: 10.17226/25183
- 19National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology. 2016. Environmental protection belongs to the public: A vision for citizen science at EPA. Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency Report 219-R-16-001, National Service Center for Environmental Publications. Available at
https://www.epa.gov/faca/nacept-2016-report-environmental-protection-belongs-public-vision-citizen-science-epa . - 20Phillips, T, Porticella, N, Constas, M and Bonney, R. 2018. A framework for articulating and measuring individual learning outcomes from participation in citizen science. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 3(2): 3. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.126
- 21Phillips, TB, Ballard, HL, Lewenstein, BV and Bonney, R. 2019. Engagement in science through citizen science: Moving beyond data collection. Science Education, 103(3): 665–690. DOI: 10.1002/sce.21501
- 22Prell, C. 2012. Social Network Analysis: History, Theory and Methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
- 23R Core Team. 2021. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
- 24Saldaña, J. 2015. The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
- 25The GLOBE Program. 2018a. The GLOBE Program strategic plan 2018–2023. Boulder, CO: University Corporation for Atmospheric Research. Available at
https://www.globe.gov/documents/10157/32400137/GLOBE+Strategic+Plan+2018.pdf/e4a03152-45b6-4554-95a7-a0dec961d806 . - 26The GLOBE Program. 2018b. International Virtual Science Symposium – rubrics. Boulder, CO: University Corporation for Atmospheric Research. Available at
https://www.globe.gov/news-events/globe-events/virtual-conferences/2018-international-virtual-science-symposium/rubrics .