Advertisement

Small, Subject-Oriented Educational Resource Gateways: What Are Their Roles in Geoscience Education?

  • Matteo CattadoriEmail author
  • Cristiana Bianchi
  • Maddalena Macario
  • Luca Masiello
Chapter
Part of the Innovations in Science Education and Technology book series (ISET, volume 21)

Abstract

I-CLEEN, a project led by the Museum of Science of Trento (Italy), has developed and currently manages an information gateway of Earth system science educational resources. The aim of the project is to support Italian science teachers in setting up Earth science student-centred lessons. To do so effectively, the gateway exhibits the following key features: it adopts a bottom-up approach to resource development that relies on strong cooperation between science teachers and professional researchers (who also act as resource referees); it is subject oriented and enhances the multi- and interdisciplinary traits that characterise geosciences; it embraces the concept of open source, through the technological tools (LifeRay) used and copyright policies adopted.

A service usability study was performed after the first launch of the gateway, and the results were used to develop the second release, which is currently online.

During the preliminary phase of the project, as well as the development and set-up of the gateway, valuable insight was gained in various different fields:
  • On the current situation in geoscience education in Italy – where teachers are encouraged to take up a student-centred approach, experiential education and learning initiatives, but currently opt for academic teaching methods because they lack the support and the tools needed

  • On the educational resource gateways currently available online, on the materials they provide and on the role of ICT in Earth science education

  • On the results achieved and the tools developed during previous science communication activities that involved teachers and students in research projects

Keywords

Science Teacher Educational Resource Open Educational Resource Editorial Team School Discipline 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Akrich, M. (2006). The description of technical object. In A. Mattozzi (Ed.), Il senso degli oggetti tecnici. Roma: Meltemi.Google Scholar
  2. Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1). Washington, DC: George Washington University.Google Scholar
  3. Bruni, A. (2005). Shadowing software and clinical records: On the ethnography of non-humans and heterogeneous contexts. Organization, 12(3), 357–378, SAGE.Google Scholar
  4. Cattadori, M., Florindo, F., & Rack, F. (2011). The short- and long-term effects in the school system of a research immersion experience for science educators: An example from ANDRILL (ANtarctic geological DRILLing). Geosphere, 7, 1331–1339. doi: 10.1130/GES00678.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cavalli, A. (2000). Gli insegnanti nella scuola che cambia. Seconda indagine IARD sugli insegnanti. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
  6. Cavalli, A., & Argentin, G. (2010). Gli insegnanti italiani: come cambia il modo di fare scuola. Terza indagine dell’Istituto IARD sulle condizioni di vita e di lavoro nella scuola italiana. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
  7. Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, L. A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  8. Costa, M., & Emiliani, Z. F. (1982). Indagine sui titoli di studio degli insegnanti di “Scienze matematiche, chimiche, Fisiche e Naturali” in servizio presso la scuola media. COASSI, 1, 1–20.Google Scholar
  9. Desire Consortium. (2000). Information gateways handbook. University of Bristol. http://www.desire.org/handbook/contents.html. Accessed 1 Nov 2011.
  10. Doran, P. T., & Zimmerman, M. K. (2009). Examining the scientific consensus on climate change. Eos, 90(3), 21–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ebbutt, D. (1985). Educational action research: Some general concerns and specific quibbles. In R. G. Burgess (Ed.), Issues in educational research. Qualitative methods. Lewes: The Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  12. European Commission. (2007). Science education NOW: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. Directorate General for Research. http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/report-rocard-on-science-education_en.pdf. Accessed 1 Dec 2011.
  13. European Commission. (2010). Common European principles for teacher competences and qualifications. Directorate General for Education and Culture. http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/2010/doc/principles_en.pdf. Accessed 1 Dec 2011.
  14. Fox, S., Manduca, C. A., & Iverson, E. (2005). Building educational portals atop digital libraries. D-Lib Magazine. http://dlib.org/dlib/january05/fox/01fox.html. Accessed 1 Dec 2011.
  15. Greco, R. (2010). Reinventare il laboratorio. Ricerca-azione sulla didattica laboratoriale delle Scienze della Terra: analisi e prospettive. Ph.D. thesis, University of Camerino.Google Scholar
  16. Harwood, D. M., Levy, R., Cowie, J., Florindo, F., Naish, T., Powell, R., & Pyne, R. (2006). Deep drilling with the ANDRILL programme in Antarctica. Scientific Drilling, 3, 43–45. doi: 10.2204/iodp.sd.3.09.2006.Google Scholar
  17. Huffman, L., Levy, R., Lacy, L., Harwood, D. M., Berg, M., Cattadori, M., Diamond, J., Dooley, J., Dahlman, L., Frisch-Gleason, R., Hubbard, J., Lehmann, R., Mankoff, K., Miller, V., Pound, K., Rack, F., Scotto Di Clemente, G., Siegmund, A., Thomson, J., Trummel, E., Williams, R., The ANDRILL MIS, & SMS Project Science Teams. (2009). ANDRILL’s education and outreach programme 2005–2008: MIS and SMS project activities during the 4th IPY. Terra Antartica, 15, 221–235.Google Scholar
  18. Kaiser, B., Allen, B., & Zicus, S. (2010). Polar science and global climate: An international resource for education and outreach. London: Pearson Custom Publishing.Google Scholar
  19. Kemmis, S., & Mc Taggart, R. (1981). The action research planner (1st ed.). Victoria: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Koch, T. (2000). Quality-controlled subject gateways: Definitions, typologies, empirical overview. Online Information Review, 24, 24–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lea, S., Stephenson, J. D., & Troy, J. (2003). Higher education students’ attitudes to student centred learning: Beyond ‘educational bulimia’. Studies in Higher Education, 28, 321–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Michael, J. A., & Modell, H. I. (2003). Active learning in secondary and college science classrooms: A working model of helping the learning to learn. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  23. Ministero della Pubblica Istruzione. (2006). La dispersione scolastica. Indicatori di base per l’analisi del fenomeno. Anno Scolastico 2004/2005. Direzione Generale Studi e Programmazione. Ufficio di statistica. http://archivio.pubblica.istruzione.it/news/2007/allegati/dispersione_as0405.pdf. Accessed Dec 2011.
  24. Ministero della Pubblica Istruzione. (2007). Indicazioni per il curricolo per la scuola dell’infanzia e per il primo ciclo d’istruzione. http://www.indire.it/indicazioni/templates/monitoraggio/dir_310707.pdf. Accessed Dec 2011.
  25. Ministero della Pubblica Istruzione. (2010). Linee guida per il passaggio al nuovo ordinamento. d.P.R. 15 marzo 2010, articolo 8, comma 3.Google Scholar
  26. NSF National Science Foundation. (2007). Merit review broader impacts criterion: Representative activities. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/broaderimpacts.pdf. Accessed 1 Nov 2011.
  27. OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environments: First results from TALIS. OECD Publishing. http://www.sourceoecd.org/education/9789264056053. Accessed 1 Dec 2011.
  28. OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2010). Education at a glance OECD Indicators. Centre for Educational Research and Innovation. OECD Publishing. http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/education-at-a-glance-2010_eag-2010-en. Accessed 1 Nov 2011.
  29. Polillo, R. (2010). Facile da usare. Una moderna introduzione all’ingegneria dell’usabilità. Milano: Apogeo.Google Scholar
  30. Silverman, D. (2002). Come fare ricerca qualitativa. Roma: Carocci.Google Scholar
  31. SPreaD Partners. (2008). The SPreaD Toolkit. MFG Baden-Württemberg mbH. http://www.spread-digital-literacy.eu/fileadmin/_spread/downloads/SPreaD_Toolkit.pdf. Accessed 1 Dec 2011.
  32. Wiley, D. (1998). Open content. http://web.archive.org/web/19990429221830/www.opencontent.org/home.shtml. Accessed 1 Dec 2011.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matteo Cattadori
    • 1
    Email author
  • Cristiana Bianchi
    • 2
  • Maddalena Macario
    • 3
  • Luca Masiello
    • 4
  1. 1.Education SectionMuseo delle Scienze (Trento Science Museum)TrentoItaly
  2. 2.Section of Mathematics, Science and TechnologyIPRASE Centre for the Career-Long Professional Learning and Updating of Teachers of TrentoTrentoItaly
  3. 3.School of Science and TechnologyUniversity of CamerinoCamerinoItaly
  4. 4.Department of Sociology and Social ResearchUniversity of TrentoVeronaItaly

Personalised recommendations