IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jenvss/v11y2021i1d10.1007_s13412-020-00594-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Student representations and conceptions of ecological versus social sciences in a conservation course

Author

Listed:
  • Amanda E. Sorensen

    (University of Nebraska–Lincoln)

  • Jeffrey Brown

    (Rutgers University)

  • Ashley Alred

    (University of Nebraska–Lincoln)

  • Joseph J. Fontaine

    (University of Nebraska–Lincoln)

  • Jenny M. Dauer

    (University of Nebraska–Lincoln)

Abstract

There is consensus among scientists that it is important that students understand the nature of science (NOS) and are competent in using primary literature to support understanding of complicated environmental problems. Because environmental issues involve social and ecological complexities, there is a need to create educational frameworks whereby students learn how to integrate and apply knowledge from both natural and social sciences. To explore the interplay between undergraduate students’ conceptions of NOS for ecology and sociology and how students apply discipline-specific knowledge to a socio-ecological issue, we administered a NOS evaluative survey and analyzed data from student modeling practices within the context of a course-based undergraduate research experience (CURE). We found that although students held similar conceptions of the NOS for both ecology and sociology disciplines, there were notable differences in how often and how accurately students applied discipline-specific knowledge when modeling a socio-ecological system. Such insight provides guidance for the development of future educational pedagogy that supports students’ ability to integrate knowledge from across natural and social sciences and applies it to real-world environmental issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Amanda E. Sorensen & Jeffrey Brown & Ashley Alred & Joseph J. Fontaine & Jenny M. Dauer, 2021. "Student representations and conceptions of ecological versus social sciences in a conservation course," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 11(1), pages 139-149, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jenvss:v:11:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s13412-020-00594-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s13412-020-00594-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13412-020-00594-w
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13412-020-00594-w?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gray, Steven & Chan, Alex & Clark, Dan & Jordan, Rebecca, 2012. "Modeling the integration of stakeholder knowledge in social–ecological decision-making: Benefits and limitations to knowledge diversity," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 229(C), pages 88-96.
    2. David J. Hawthorne & Cynthia A. Wei, 2016. "Learning to integrate across the natural and social sciences," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 6(2), pages 275-277, June.
    3. Amanda E. Sorensen & Rebecca C. Jordan & Rachel Shwom & Diane Ebert-May & Cindy Isenhour & Aaron M. McCright & Jennifer Meta Robinson, 2016. "Model-based reasoning to foster environmental and socio-scientific literacy in higher education," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 6(2), pages 287-294, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wilson Charles Wilson & Maja Slingerland & Frederick P. Baijukya & Hannah Zanten & Simon Oosting & Ken E. Giller, 2021. "Integrating the soybean-maize-chicken value chains to attain nutritious diets in Tanzania," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 13(6), pages 1595-1612, December.
    2. Laura Corazza & Simone Domenico Scagnelli & Chiara Mio, 2017. "Simulacra and Sustainability Disclosure: Analysis of the Interpretative Models of Creating Shared Value," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(5), pages 414-434, September.
    3. Meyer, Spencer R. & Johnson, Michelle L. & Lilieholm, Robert J. & Cronan, Christopher S., 2014. "Development of a stakeholder-driven spatial modeling framework for strategic landscape planning using Bayesian networks across two urban-rural gradients in Maine, USA," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 291(C), pages 42-57.
    4. Goswami, Rupak & Roy, Kalyan & Dutta, Sudarshan & Ray, Krishnendu & Sarkar, Sukamal & Brahmachari, Koushik & Nanda, Manoj Kr. & Mainuddin, Mohammed & Banerjee, Hirak & Timsina, Jagadish & Majumdar, Ka, 2021. "Multi-faceted impact and outcome of COVID-19 on smallholder agricultural systems: Integrating qualitative research and fuzzy cognitive mapping to explore resilient strategies," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    5. Maritza Satama & Eva Iglesias, 2020. "Fuzzy Cognitive Map Clustering to Assess Local Knowledge of Ecosystem Conservation in Ecuador," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-26, March.
    6. Drew Bush & Renee Sieber & Gale Seiler & Mark Chandler & Gail L. Chmura, 2019. "Bringing climate scientist’s tools into classrooms to improve conceptual understandings," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 9(1), pages 25-34, March.
    7. Carmen Maio & Giuseppe Fenza & Vincenzo Loia & Francesco Orciuoli, 2017. "Linguistic fuzzy consensus model for collaborative development of fuzzy cognitive maps: a case study in software development risks," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 463-479, December.
    8. Lina Yousry & Yixin Cao & Bruno Marmiroli & Olivier Guerri & Guillaume Delaunay & Olivier Riquet & Karl Matthias Wantzen, 2022. "A Socio-Ecological Approach to Conserve and Manage Riverscapes in Designated Areas: Cases of the Loire River Valley and Dordogne Basin, France," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-38, December.
    9. R. S. Clements & S. K. Birthisel & A. Daigneault & E. Gallandt & D. Johnson & T. Wentworth & M. T. Niles, 2021. "Climate change in the context of whole-farming systems: opportunities for improved outreach," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 1-20, June.
    10. Bélgica Bermeo Córdova & José Luis Yagüe Blanco & Maritza Satama & Carlos Jara, 2020. "Identification of Variables That Cause Agricultural Graduates Not to Return to the Rural Sector in Ecuador. Application of Fuzzy Cognitive Maps," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-20, May.
    11. Evgenia Micha & Owen Fenton & Karen Daly & Gabriella Kakonyi & Golnaz Ezzati & Thomas Moloney & Steven Thornton, 2020. "The Complex Pathway towards Farm-Level Sustainable Intensification: An Exploratory Network Analysis of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Perception," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-20, March.
    12. Ditzler, Lenora & Klerkx, Laurens & Chan-Dentoni, Jacqueline & Posthumus, Helena & Krupnik, Timothy J. & Ridaura, Santiago López & Andersson, Jens A. & Baudron, Frédéric & Groot, Jeroen C.J., 2018. "Affordances of agricultural systems analysis tools: A review and framework to enhance tool design and implementation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 20-30.
    13. Alex Mayer & Enrique R. Vivoni & David Kossak & Kathleen E. Halvorsen & Agustin Robles Morua, 2017. "Participatory Modeling Workshops in a Water-Stressed Basin Result in Gains in Modeling Capacity but Reveal Disparity in Water Resources Management Priorities," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 31(15), pages 4731-4744, December.
    14. Ziv, Guy & Watson, Elizabeth & Young, Dylan & Howard, David C. & Larcom, Shaun T. & Tanentzap, Andrew J., 2018. "The potential impact of Brexit on the energy, water and food nexus in the UK: A fuzzy cognitive mapping approach," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 487-498.
    15. Ratinger, Tomáš & Čamská, Klára & Pražan, Jaroslav & Bavorová, Miroslava & Vančurová, Iva, 2021. "From elite-driven to community-based governance mechanisms for the delivery of public goods from land management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    16. Masayasu Asai & Takashi Hayashi & Mitasu Yamamoto, 2019. "Mental Model Analysis of Biogas Energy Perceptions and Policy Reveals Potential Constraints in a Japanese Farm Community," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-20, January.
    17. Micha, Evgenia & Fenton, Owen & Daly, Karen & Kakonyi, Gabriella & Ezzati, Golnaz & Moloney, Thomas & Thornton, Steven F, 2019. "Mapping the pathways towards farm-level sustainable intensification of agriculture: an exploratory network 3 analysis of stakeholders’ views," SocArXiv 2rqjd, Center for Open Science.
    18. Mihaela Curea, 2023. "Intangible assets and resource allocation: insights from European companies," Journal of Financial Studies, Institute of Financial Studies, vol. 8(15), pages 86-105, November.
    19. Christine D. Miller Hesed & Elizabeth R. Van Dolah & Michael Paolisso, 2020. "Engaging faith-based communities for rural coastal resilience: lessons from collaborative learning on the Chesapeake Bay," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 37-57, March.
    20. David Gosselin & Shirley Vincent & Chris Boone & Antje Danielson & Rod Parnell & Deana Pennington, 2016. "Introduction to the special issue: negotiating boundaries: effective leadership of interdisciplinary environmental and sustainability programs," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 6(2), pages 268-274, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jenvss:v:11:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s13412-020-00594-w. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.