A Short Review of School Field Trips: Key Findings from the Past and Implications for the Future

Abstract

This review of the literature on field trips to out-of-school settings will briefly summarize key findings and discuss implications for future research and field trip practice. Cognitive and affective learning can occur as a result of class visits to out-of-school settings, and learning outcomes are fundamentally influenced by the structure of the field trip, setting novelty, prior knowledge and interest of the students, the social context of the visit, teacher agendas, student experiences during the field trip, and the presence or absence and quality of preparation and follow-up. Field trips, however, are not ideal for teaching complex concepts or even isolated facts, they are not "better classroom settings"; instead, they serve best as opportunities for exploration, discovery, first-hand and original experiences. Despite systemic pressures to the contrary, teachers and informal educators tend to agree on this broader vision of field trips and this article makes a variety of suggestions for putting such a vision into practice.

Study Abroad Field Trip Improves Test Performance through Engagement and New Social Networks

“…Field trips are, however, no longer considered to be a simple extension or improvement on traditional classroom-based learning, but as an opportunity for affective learning through skills development, awareness and the like (see also Storksdieck et al, 2007;DeWitt & Storksdieck, 2008), which prepare the students for future learning (Orion & Hofstein, 1994;Hofstein & Rosenfeld, 1996;Storksdieck et al, 2007). In fact, it has been argued that the social and affective outcomes of a field trip provide a stronger rationale for field trips than learning outcomes alone (Wellington, 1990;Hooper-Greenhill, 1991;Csikszentmihalyi & Hermanson, 1995;Meredith et al, 1997;Rix & McSorley, 1999).…”

“…The cognitive and affective learning benefits of a field trip are influenced by the: (1) structure of the trip, (2) novelty of the setting, (3) prior introduction to the material, (4) social context and (5) quality of preparation and post-trip discussion (Haigh & Gold, 1993;DeWitt & Storksdieck, 2008). Habeshaw et al (1992) argue that only as a part of a small group are the students enquiring and reflective, through both intensive supervision and tutoring, and have the opportunity to complete interactive assignments and tasks.…”

Exploring a school–aquarium collaboration: An intersection of communities of practice

“…It is important to recognize that there is a body of evidence, much of it focusing on school field trips, indicating that school-ISI interactions can indeed support student learning and that certain pedagogical strategies can be used for creating beneficial science learning experiences (see, e.g., Anderson & Lucas, 1997;Bamberger & Tal, 2007;Falk, Martin, & Balling, 1978;Gennaro, 1981;Griffin, 1994;Kubota & Olstad, 1991;Orion, 1993;Rennie & McClafferty, 1995;Storksdieck, Werner, & Kaul, 2005). Several studies suggest, however, that these research efforts are not effectively informing teacher practice within the museum setting (Anderson, Kisiel, & Storksdieck, 2006;DeWitt & Storksdieck, 2008;Griffin & Symington, 1997;Kisiel, 2005Kisiel, , 2007Storksdieck et al, 2005). Furthermore, recent studies suggest that science museum resources are generally underused by the teachers they hope to serve (Bevan, 2007;Finkelstein, 2005;Phillips, Finkelstein, & Wever-Frerichs, 2007) and that external factors such as rising costs and accountability concerns are likely influencing teacher and school participation (Anderson et al, 2006;DeWitt & Storksdieck, 2008).…”

“…Several studies suggest, however, that these research efforts are not effectively informing teacher practice within the museum setting (Anderson, Kisiel, & Storksdieck, 2006;DeWitt & Storksdieck, 2008;Griffin & Symington, 1997;Kisiel, 2005Kisiel, , 2007Storksdieck et al, 2005). Furthermore, recent studies suggest that science museum resources are generally underused by the teachers they hope to serve (Bevan, 2007;Finkelstein, 2005;Phillips, Finkelstein, & Wever-Frerichs, 2007) and that external factors such as rising costs and accountability concerns are likely influencing teacher and school participation (Anderson et al, 2006;DeWitt & Storksdieck, 2008).…”

An Exploratory Study of the Uses of a Multisensory Map—With Visually Impaired Children

“…To engage pupils in learning geography, many scholars recommend building on children's experiences of space (e.g., [1][2][3]), for instance by organizing field trips [4][5][6]. Moreover, some geographers have long challenged vision as the primary or only way to learn and experience space, and to favor embodied and multisensory approaches instead [7][8][9].…”