Background: Birding is ideal for engaging students in authentic scientific inquiry because it relies on specialized equipment, requires keen observation skills, engages prior knowledge, and activates critical thinking. However, there is very little research on the benefits of birding in K-12 education. Purpose: Two elementary teachers created an afterschool bird club to engage students in birding to help them develop a better appreciation for their surroundings and increase awareness of the natural world. This qualitative study was conducted over two academic years and investigated the role an afterschool birding club had on students’ interaction with nature and their peers. Methodology/Approach: Using a primarily ethnographic approach, teacher interviews, parent survey data and interviews, and field notes guided the understanding of the research question. Findings/Conclusions: The study reveals an evident value for elementary students in social interactions, improved relationships with others, a building of scientific knowledge and awareness, and an increased appreciation for nature. Implications: Benefits include allowing students to interact with tools and materials relating to science and bird identification. They make this a fun way to enact their passion and hopefully inspire children to develop a love for birds, birding, and a desire to conserve the local habitat.
AnjarwaniR.DoyinM.IndiatmokoB. (2020). Guided inquiry learning with outdoor activities setting to improve critical thinking ability and science process skills of elementary school students. Journal of Primary Education, 9(2), 129–135. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpe.v9i2.36178
2.
BeckA. M.MelsonG. F.da CostaP. L.LiuT. (2001). The educational benefits of a ten-week home-based wild bird feeding program for children. Anthrozoös, 14(1), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279301786999599
BonnetteR. N.CrowleyK.SchunnC. D. (2019). Falling in love and staying in love with science: Ongoing informal science experiences support fascination for all children. International Journal of Science Education, 41(12), 1626–1643. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1623431
5.
BuchholzB. A.PylesD. G. (2018). Scientific literacy in the wild: Using multimodal texts in and out of school. The Reading Teacher, 72(1), 61–70. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1678
6.
ChenY. S.KaoT. C.SheuJ. P. (2003). A mobile learning system for scaffolding bird watching learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(3), 347–359. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0266-4909.2003.00036.x
7.
CrottyM. J. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. The Foundations of Social Research, 1–256. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003115700-1
8.
DierkingL. D. (2007). Understanding the nature of science learning. In The culture of science education (pp. 239–249). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789087903602_024.
9.
EasterJ.HollisterE.WilcoxJ. (2019). Engineering encounters: Where have the birds gone?Science and Children, 057(04), 62–69. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/sc19_057_04_62
10.
FeeJ.TrautmannN. (2012). Connecting to your community through birds and citizen science. Science Scope, 36(3), 62–68.
11.
Google (n.d.). [Anonymized]. Retrieved March 5, 2024, from maps.google.com.
KinslowA. T.SadlerT. D. (2017). Socio-scientific issues for scientific literacy–the evolution of an environmental education program with a focus on birds. In MuellerM. P.TippinsD. J.StewartA. J. (Eds.), Animals and science education: Ethics, curriculum and pedagogy, 169–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56375-6_13
14.
MahlerD.GroßschedlJ.HarmsU. (2018). Does motivation matter?–the relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and enthusiasm and students’ performance. PloS one, 13(11), e0207252. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0207252
15.
MartinS. (2006). Where practice and theory intersect in the chemistry classroom: Using cogenerative dialogue to identify the critical point in science education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1(4), 693–720. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-006-9031-z
16.
MichrinaB. P.RichardsC. (1996). Person to person: Fieldwork, dialogue, and the hermeneutic method. State university of New York press.
17.
MuthersbaughD.KernA. L.CharvozR. (2014). Impact through images: Exploring student understanding of environmental science through integrated place-based lessons in the elementary classroom. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 28(3), 313–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2014.913217
18.
National Research Council (NRC) (2007). Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11625.
OrrD. W. (1992). Ecological literacy: Education and the transition to a postmodern world. State University of New York Press.
21.
PatrickB. C.HisleyJ.KemplerT. (2000). “What's everybody so excited about?”: The effects of teacher enthusiasm on student intrinsic motivation and vitality. The Journal of Experimental Education, 68(3), 217–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220970009600093
RennieL. J.FeherE.DierkingL. D.FalkJ. H. (2003). Toward an agenda for advancing research on science learning in out-of-school settings. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(2), 112–120. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10067
24.
RichardsS. E. (2019). Bird Count. Peachtree Publishing Co.
25.
RothW. M.RadfordL.LaCroixL. (2012, May). Working with cultural-historical activity theory. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-13.2.1814
26.
RothW. M.TobinK.ZimmermannA.BryantN.DavisC. (2002). Lessons on and from the dihybrid cross: An activity–theoretical study of learning in coteaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(3), 253–282. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10018
27.
SaldañaJ. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage Publications Limited.
28.
SedawiW.AssarafO. B. Z.ReissM. J. (2021). Regenerating our place: Fostering a sense of place through rehabilitation and place-based education. Research in Science Education, 51, 461–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09903-y
29.
SemkenS.FreemanC. B. (2008). Sense of place in the practice and assessment of place-based science teaching. Science Education, 92(6), 1042–1057. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20279
Sibley Backyard Birding Bingo: A Game for Bird Lovers (2021). Sibley Birds Game. Published by Clarkson Potter.
32.
SiryC. A.LangD. E. (2010). Creating participatory discourse for teaching and research in early childhood science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(2), 149–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9162-7
33.
SobelD. (2004). Place-based education: Connecting classrooms and communities. Closing the achievement gap: The SEER report. NAMTA Journal, 39(1), 61–78.
34.
TalT.DierkingL. D. (2014). Learning science in everyday life. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(3), 251–259. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21142
35.
TingK. L.SiewN. M. (2014). Effects of outdoor school ground lessons on Students’ science process skills and scientific curiosity. Journal of Education and Learning, 3(4), 96–107. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v3n4p96
WengerE. (2010). Communities of practice and social learning systems: The career of a concept. In Social learning systems and communities of practice (pp. 179–198). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84996-133-2_11.
38.
WhiteR. L.EbersteinK.ScottD. M. (2018). Birds in the playground: Evaluating the effectiveness of an urban environmental education project in enhancing school children’s awareness, knowledge and attitudes towards local wildlife. PloS One, 13(3), e0193993. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193993
