Grüt: A Gardening Sensor Kit for Children

Valpreda, Fabrizio; Zonda, Ilaria

doi:10.3390/s16020231

Cited by 8 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…IoT is also being deployed for more pragmatic scenarios in education. For example, in Valpreda and Zonda (), an IoT‐based system was proposed with aim at increasing children's knowledge about agricultural food production and consumption. Other studies on deploying IoT to educate students with special needs exist (e.g., Sula et al, , ) for children with autism spectrum disorder.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic literature review on Internet of things in education: Benefits and challenges

Kassab

DeFranco

Laplante

2019

Computer Assisted Learning

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With close to 20.4 billion devices connected to the Internet to be deployed by 2020, Internet of things (IoT) is already being leveraged in diverse sectors. Now, because of the ubiquitous nature of IoT devices, schools and academic institutions are looking to incorporate IoT in educational activities. With the increased use of IoT in the education domain, it is of utmost importance to study how this technology with its distinguished system functions such as sensing and decision making can support and challenge the pedagogical processes for all interrelated actors (faculty, students, and staff) as well as all involved assets (e.g., libraries, classrooms, and labs). Although there have been several contributions on the inclusion of IoT into the education domain, there is still a lack of consolidated and coherent views on this subject. Hence, we are motivated to close the gap of knowledge and embarked on mapping out the published studies available. This study presents the results of a systematic literature review focusing on the benefits and the challenges faced in education in integrating IoT into the curriculum and educational environments. Different mapping views of the extracted studies are provided as long as a summary of the already implemented tools and a list of gap research questions yet to be investigated.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic literature review on Internet of things in education: Benefits and challenges

Kassab

DeFranco

Laplante

2019

Computer Assisted Learning

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All of the children reacted very positively to the avatar and could easily interpret the state of the plant based on the mood the plant-avatar expressed. However, a longer user test revealed that the children got bored of the avatar after longer use (Valpreda and Zonda 2016). No food waste behaviour or sustainability effects were measured.…”

Section: Individual Levelmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Only a few studies actually measure the effects on real FLW behaviour (Valpreda and Zonda 2016, Rohm, Oostindjer et al 2017, Reynolds, Goucher et al 2019. Therefore, effects of various interventions are currently unknown.…”

Section: Limited Number Of Interventions Measure Actual Flwmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drivers, barriers and interventions for food waste behaviour change: a food system approach

Zeinstra¹,

Haar²,

Bergen³

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contents 2 Methods 3 Overview of drivers and barriers for FLW along the food value chain 3.1 Agricultural production 3.2 Manufacturing 3.3 Retail 3.4 Hospitality and catering sector 3.5 Consumer and household level 3.6 Whole chain 3.7 Summary of findings on barriers and drivers of FLW 4 Interventions to reduce FLW 4.1 Agricultural production 4.2 Manufacturing 4.3 Retail 4.4 Hospitality & catering sector 4.5 Consumer and household level 4.6 Summary of findings on interventions 5 Discussion 5.1 Identified challenges 5.2 Strengths and limitations 5.3 Recommendations 6 Conclusion 4 | Public Wageningen Food & Biobased Research-Report 2011 Summary About a third of all food that is produced for human consumption is never eaten. It is widely acknowledged that food loss and food waste have a detrimental impact on the economy, the climate and the society, which has led to an increasing societal and academic interest in food loss and food waste reduction. Reducing food loss and food waste (henceforth FLW) is easier said than done, as it FLW is a complex and multifaceted problem, to which no straightforward solution exists. The objective of this project is to identify the drivers and barriers of FLW reduction behaviour from an actor perspective, and to explore possible solutions to the FLW problem across the food supply chain. The literature research specifically targets human behaviour within the food system. Insights from this report are intended to form a starting point for the development of successful intervention strategies to bring about behavioural changes that lead to FLW reduction throughout the food supply chain. An extensive literature search was performed in Scopus, Web of Science, ABI/Inform, CAB Abstracts and PsychInfo in November 2018. The exact same search was performed in October 2019, to add new publications in Q4 2018 and 2019 to the results. This search resulted in 489 papers. Based on title, abstract and our purpose of covering all actor domains, 63 papers were selected and summarized, highlighting the theoretical basis, actor in the chain, drivers for waste reduction, drivers for food waste, intervention description (if there was one) and the main results and conclusion. This literature study showed that most studies focus on drivers and barriers of FLW behaviour, and less on behavioural interventions to reduce FLW. Furthermore, the overview of drivers and barriers along the food value chain shows that most of them relate to the consumer level, followed by the retail and hospitality sector. It seems that the current literature provides fewer insights into behavioural drivers and barriers at the agricultural and manufacturing level. Most identified interventions focused at FLW of the consumers as end-user: interventions at the retail level focus on providing consumers with options (or opportunities) to reduce FLW, whereas household-level interventions focus on enhancing consumers' motivations and abilities to reduce FLW. Because a large part of FLW occurs at the consumer level, this focus is understanda...

show abstract

“…Dzubak, Shaw, Strohbehn, and Naeve (2016) provided the example of an online course on food safety and good agricultural practices: 'The validated curricula include four or five short video modules, activities, instructor/ facilitator lesson plans, knowledge assessment quizzes, and instructor manuals' (Dzubak et al, 2016, p. 1). Teaching can also happen through an application (app), which assumes the role of the teacher and helps the learner to garden (Valpreda & Zonda, 2016). Another way to teach is via video conferences: Smith, Wright, Hrncirik, and Deen (2017) described a programme in which a U.S. university used video conferences to train school garden staff in Burundi.…”

Section: Teachingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Any Sign of Virtual School Garden Exchanges? Education for Sustainable Development in School Gardens since 1992: A Systematic Literature Review

Lochner¹,

Rieckmann

Robischon³

2019

Journal of Education for Sustainable Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A core aim of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) is to link local action with global thinking. In this systematic literature review, we quantitatively and qualitatively analyzed a sample of 158 peer-reviewed articles on school gardening. Our particular interest was in Virtual School Garden Exchanges (VSGEs). In VSGEs, learners plant school gardens and use digital media (e.g., videos, photos, video conferences) to engage in virtual communication about their gardens and related topics. Because this is a new area of research, we approached the broader topic of the ‘school garden’ from three perspectives: (1) the embedding of the global perspective of ESD, (2) the use of digital media, and (3) the establishment of international exchanges between school gardeners. Just 14 articles directly incorporated these three perspectives and were thus analyzed in more detail using a qualitative content analysis. As a result, we identified possible directions for future research on VSGE.

show abstract

Grüt: A Gardening Sensor Kit for Children

Cited by 8 publications

References 6 publications

A systematic literature review on Internet of things in education: Benefits and challenges

A systematic literature review on Internet of things in education: Benefits and challenges

Drivers, barriers and interventions for food waste behaviour change: a food system approach

Any Sign of Virtual School Garden Exchanges? Education for Sustainable Development in School Gardens since 1992: A Systematic Literature Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About