Connecting Field Trip and Classroom Learning: Evaluating the Utility of a Museum-Based Framework in an Environmental Education Context

Abstract

Field trips have been shown to be more effective when they connect with \nclassroom learning. The Framework for Museum Practice (FMP) proposes that museum \neducators use four principles when creating pre- and post-field trip activities for teachers \nto use. This case study, conducted at the Central Wisconsin Environmental Station \n(CWES), evaluates the usefulness of the FMP in an environmental education context. \nFirst, the FMP was compared to national environmental education guidelines \nusing content analysis. Findings show both documents are concerned with the themes of \ndepth, skills building, instructional soundness, and usability while themes such as \nfairness, accuracy and action orientation are absent from the FMP. Second, teachers \nvisiting CWES on field trips were surveyed about their opinions of FMP principles and \ntheir use of pre- and post-field trip activities. Surveys indicate most teachers theoretically \nagree with FMP principles 1, 3 and 4. These principles encourage adoption of the \nteachers’ perspective, creating opportunities for teachers and students to work together \ntowards an end product, and allowing students to practice literacy, research or dialogues \nskills. Only half of the teachers theoretically agree with FMP principle 2 (the need to \nconduct both pre- and post-field trip activities.) Finally, pre- and post-field trip activities \nbased on FMP principles were pilot-tested. Pilot tests indicate that teachers need pre- and \npost-field trip materials that are easy for both teachers and students to use and that FMP-based \nmaterials mostly met these criteria. Though results indicate the FMP can be useful \nin an environmental education context, surveys and pilot tests also indicate that barriers \nsuch as lack of time can prevent teachers from effectively connecting field trip and \nclassroom learning.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.