Educational Technology

Robelia, B., Greenhow, C. & Burton, L. (2011). Environmental learning in online social networks: Adopting environmentally responsible behaviors. Environmental Education Research, 17(4), 553–575.

The authors note that online social networks are increasingly important information and communication tools for young people and the environmental movement. They present a study that sought to understand how participating in an embedded Facebook (FB) application called “Hot Dish” could improve students’ environmental knowledge and potentially be responsible for their future environmental behaviors. A survey revealed that social networking application users reported above-average knowledge of climate change science and that self-reported environmental behaviors increased during young people’s involvement with the FB application, the world’s largest social network site (SNS). Focus groups indicated that peer role modeling through interaction on the site motivated pro-environmental behaviors, that is, behavior that seeks to minimize the negative impact of one’s actions on the natural and built world. Lastly, participation in a community of like-minded users spurred many participants to learn more about climate change and do more to limit its impact.

At the time, the article provided a relevant study regarding the use of social networks for to be used for educational purposes and data on the relatively new “Hot Dish” application. Notably, the authors describe the function of an SNS (a web-based service) such as FB, allowing individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system’. Furthermore, the authors describe the “Hot Dish” application and its key features. Essentially, they outlined and integrated three theoretical perspectives that inform our orientation to environmental education: (1) free-choice learning theory, (2) social learning theory, and (3) behavior change theories that outline the complex interactions between socially situated knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and behavioral change.

Regarding the studies’ research methodology, they emphasize an earlier social-media study conducted by Cobb et al. (2003) using design-based research. The study consisted of two primary research questions (RQs) with alternate questions. RQ1 asked, “What did Hot Dish users learn by using the FB application?” RQ1a: “How knowledgeable about climate change science are users as compared with respondents to state and national surveys?” RQ1b: “How did Hot Dish articles and community discussion contribute to users’ knowledge of environmental issues and action strategies?” RQ2 asked, “How did the Hot Dish FB community contribute to users’ adoption of responsible environmental behavior?” RQ2a: “How did self-reported environmentally responsible behaviors change after participation in the Hot Dish community?” RQ2b: “How did participation in Hot Dish relate to users’ civic engagement with their local environmental communities?” From a presentation perspective, the research question reports relevant survey results and focus group data, making it easier for the reader to make connections.

To address the qualitative research questions, the researchers utilized four data-reporting features: (1) users’ statistics, (2) survey questions, (3) online focus groups, and (4) users’ comments. Users’ statistics were intensively tracked during the eight weeks ending 4 May 2009. Before the survey was launched, a group of n = 346 users posted 1557 stories (original entries via text, video, and images) within Hot Dish. Toward the end of the competition, the number of users climbed as participants sought to increase their status in the competition by inviting friends. Hot Dish participants completed 1523 eco-challenges. Valid survey responses were collected from 111 Hot Dish members for a response rate of 32.1%. Sixteen users participated in two online focus groups (high/medium users and low users) of eight members.

The authors noted several limitations. First, Hot Dish users’ predisposition to be more knowledgeable and engaged should be considered before generalizing the results to larger groups over longer periods. Second, the group involved in the research was probably more receptive to suggestions for changing their behavior and more willing to discuss the science and politics of climate change. Third, this was a small study of FB users in an application that had only been available for a few months; therefore, data presented in this study must be interpreted cautiously. Fourth, the survey questions were taken from other surveys and were used in dissimilar contexts with different demographics. Lastly, the fact-based nature of the knowledge questions may make them a more objective measure. However, measuring environmental behavior is more difficult.

SNSs such as FB, Twitter, Snapchat, etc., are not particularly used as practice for the learners at our institution. Therefore, the article serves as nothing more than a reference point for studies conducted using this type of technology. The closest application we use is Microsoft Teams which only has a chat feature during a meeting in progress or a one-to-one telephone call. At a minimum, additional research will be conducted to see how we can maximize this application, especially if we must return to a distributed learning mode due to another pandemic. Nevertheless, this article has inspired me to explore the topic of free-choice learning, which I was unfamiliar with.

Falk, J. H., Storksdieck, M., & Dierking, L. D. (2007). Investigating public science interest and understanding: Evidence for the importance of free-choice learning. Public Understanding of Science, 16(4), 455–69.

Although some of the public’s interest and knowledge about science is unquestionably shaped by compulsory schooling, given that the average adult spends only a fraction of their life participating in some kind of formal schooling, the authors argue, from a preliminary investigation, that the contribution of school-based science learning to the long-term public understanding of science is limited, particularly for the majority of Americans who do not go on to post-secondary schooling. A random telephone survey of Los Angeles, California residents, in two separate instances (1997 and 2000), found that nearly half (43 percent) of the public’s self-reported science understanding derives from leisure time, free-choice learning; science understanding was primarily acquired for reasons related to personal interest, need and/or curiosity. The authors suggest that the article describes initial research attempting to develop a baseline understanding of the public’s self-defined understanding of science, and their working knowledge of science, so to speak, and argues for an alternative perspective to lifelong science learning, an asset-based approach.

The article summarizes lifelong science learning, a traditional perspective of the public’s understanding of science, and assesses the public’s interest in and understanding of science. As a part of the research, the initial investigation was framed by a single research question, “What do people know about science?” In 1997, during the first investigation component, the researchers conducted a random telephone survey of Los Angeles, California residents (n = 1,007) and asked them questions about their science and technology knowledge. Interviews were conducted in English (90 percent) and Spanish (10 percent). The authors noted that most of the sample self-reported having a very high interest in science and technology and possessing a moderate to slightly greater than moderate knowledge of science and technology. In 2000, a second round of telephone interviews (n = 877) was conducted in different Los Angeles communities than the first. Interviews were conducted in English (86 percent) and Spanish (14 percent). The major difference between the two data collection efforts was the accessibility of the Internet for the latter sample. In order to ensure reliability, the survey instrument was mostly composed of closed-ended items, with a few open-ended questions. The authors emphasize that if these findings can be substantiated, free-choice learning would need to be recognized as a major vehicle for public science learning and informal settings as vital education players.

As a companion to institutional learning for adult learners, free-choice learning can positively impact their life. Free-choice learning refers to a type of learning that occurs outside of formal educational settings, such as schools or classrooms. It is a self-directed learning process driven by the learner’s interests, curiosity, and motivation rather than being imposed by external factors such as grades or curriculum requirements. In free-choice learning, the learner has the freedom to choose what they want to learn and how they want to learn it. This can include exploring topics not typically covered in traditional education settings, such as hobbies, personal interests, or current events. Learners can set their own goals, pace their learning, and decide when and how to apply what they have learned. Free-choice learning can occur through various mediums, including books, online resources, museums, community programs, and other informal learning environments. It is often seen as a way to promote lifelong learning and foster a sense of agency and autonomy in individuals.