This is a brief description of the initial two phases of my community engagement project, organised using the ​action research spiral (Zuber-Skerrit, 2001).

Phase 1

PLAN
While designing the activity trail, these are some of the things we kept in mind:
  • Aligning activities to the current curriculum is very important both in terms of relevance to students and to teacher buy-in resources (Griffin & Symington, 1997; NRC, 2009; Price & Hein, 1991).
​
  • Students gain the most from field experiences when the experience is not ‘isolated’, but is well integrated into their school curriculum (Klug, Hodder, & Swain, 2002).  Follow-up activities are also critical to the success of field experiences (Griffin, 1994).
  • When creating activities that leverage contextualised learning, it is important to first know the contexts that are most relevant and relatable to the learner, and not the designer. With that understanding, the activity can be then designed to focus on pre-existing knowledge and skills and use them in a novel situation (Rivet & Krajcik, 2007).
​
  • Experiential learning is learning by doing. The focus here is not on the product but rather on the process of learning (Kolb, 1984). Inquiry-Based learning occurs when students solve a novel and perplexing problem, with some amount of scaffolding and guidance (Hmelo-Silver, Duncan, & Chinn, 2007).
 
  • During discovery based learning, students work independently to gain a deeper understanding of the process around them (Alfieri, Brooks, Aldrich, & Tenenbaum, 2011).
 
  • In activities focused on service learning, students are encouraged to think about issues that have real-world consequences and come up with potential solutions (Bringle & Hatcher, 1999).
ACT
  • The LTER and the KBS Grounds crew prepared a ¾ mile long trail that went through the LTER research plots.
  • We conducted a couple of trail fieldtrips
  • Based on the feedback we modified some of our processes and products.
  • We opened the trail for a season and had several schools bring their students to the trail. 
OBSERVE
In addition to my observations, we collected feedback from scientists, teachers, parents and school administrators which we then used in the reflection phase.
REFLECT
At the end of the first phase it quickly became evident that we need to make two major changes:
  • We needed a way to expose the students to the research without compromising the research. Therefore, we decided to move the physical location of the trail to the W.K. Kellogg Bird Sanctuary
  • We needed more help and input. Even though we made it explicit that the teachers needed to prepare themselves before coming to the trail, we found that this was not happening. Therefore, we recruited local volunteers to be guides on the trail.

Phase 2

PLAN
In the Phase 2 planning stage we:
  •  Changed the activities to be more relevant to the new location. 
  • Added more hands- on activities. One of the critical factors that influences the impact of a field trip, both in terms of the cognitive and the affective domain, is the presence of hands-on-activities (Griffin, 1994; Griffin & Symington, 1997; NRC, 2009; Price & Hein, 1991). The new framework for K-12 education encourages providing students with opportunities to experience how science is actually done by manipulating instruments and making observations themselves. (NRC, 2012)
  • Stressing the ‘scientist’ identity. We intentionally included specific activities that encouraged students to think of themselves as ‘scientists’ as these labels or identities can both ‘mark and make expertise’ (Bell, Tzou, Bricker, & Baines, 2013).
  • Recruited and trained volunteers to be guides on the trail. Klug et al. (2002), pointed out that well trained volunteers can greatly enhance the scope and quality of such programing at field stations. 
ACT
  • Adapted the trail to the new location.
  • Recruited and trained volunteers
  • Conducted several field trips.
OBSERVE
​Similar to the first phase we solicited evaluations and feedback from all the concerned parties including the volunteer guides. 
REFLECT
​At the end of the second phase we considered the feedback and thought of the various ways in which we could improve the learning experience for the students, including:
  • Providing additional visual aids to the guides.
  • Shortening the trail
  • Tailoring some of the activities to kindergarteners. 

Phase 3 onwards

​The trail has gone through several more iterations and still goes strong!
References:
  • Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1).
  • Bell, P., Tzou, C., Bricker, L., & Baines, A. D. (2013). Learning in diversities of structures of social practice: Accounting for how, why and where people learn science. Human Development, 55(5–6), 269–284. https://doi.org/10.1159/000345315
  • Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (1999). Reflection in service learning: Making meaning or experience. Educational Horizons, Spring, 179–185.
  • Griffin, J. (1994). Learning to learn in informal science settings. Research in Science Education, 24(1), 121–128.
  • Griffin, J., & Symington, D. (1997). Moving from task‐oriented to learning‐oriented strategies on school excursions to museums. Science Education, 81(6), 763–779.
  • Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and Achievement in Problem-Based and Inquiry Learning: A Response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107.
  • Klug, M. J., Hodder, J., & Swain, H. (2002). The Role of Biological Field Stations in Education and Recruitment into the Biological Sciences. In Report of the NSF-sponsored workshop,“Education and Recruitment into the Biological Sciences: Potential Role of Field Station and Marine Laboratories.”
  • Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as The Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
  • National Research Council [NRC]. (2009). Science Learning in Designed Settings. In Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
  • National Research Council [NRC]. (2012). A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
  • Price, S., & Hein, G. E. (1991). More than a field trip: Science programmes for elementary school groups at museums. International Journal of Science Education, 13(5), 505–519.
  • Rivet, A. E., & Krajcik, J. S. (2007). Contextualizing instruction: Leveraging students’ prior knowledge and experiences to foster understanding of middle school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 79–100​
  • Zuber-Skerrit, O. (2001). Action learning and action research: paradigm, praxis and programs. In S. Sankaran, B. Dick, R. Passfield, & P. Swepson (Eds.), Effective Change Management Using Action Research and Action Learning: Concepts, Frameworks, Processes and Applications (pp. 1–20). Lismore, Australia: Southern Cross University Press.