↓ Skip to main content

Do Lessons in Nature Boost Subsequent Classroom Engagement? Refueling Students in Flight

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
35 news outlets
blogs
12 blogs
twitter
335 X users
facebook
14 Facebook pages
googleplus
3 Google+ users
reddit
6 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
104 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
256 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Do Lessons in Nature Boost Subsequent Classroom Engagement? Refueling Students in Flight
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02253
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ming Kuo, Matthew H. E. M. Browning, Milbert L. Penner

Abstract

Teachers wishing to offer lessons in nature may hold back for fear of leaving students keyed up and unable to concentrate in subsequent, indoor lessons. This study tested the hypothesis that lessons in nature have positive-not negative-aftereffects on subsequent classroom engagement. Using carefully matched pairs of lessons (one in a relatively natural outdoor setting and one indoors), we observed subsequent classroom engagement during an indoor instructional period, replicating these comparisons over 10 different topics and weeks in the school year, in each of two third grade classrooms. Pairs were roughly balanced in how often the outdoor lesson preceded or followed the classroom lesson. Classroom engagement was significantly better after lessons in nature than after their matched counterparts for four of the five measures developed for this study: teacher ratings; third-party tallies of "redirects" (the number of times the teacher stopped instruction to direct student attention back onto the task at hand); independent, photo-based ratings made blind to condition; and a composite index each showed a nature advantage; student ratings did not. This nature advantage held across different teachers and held equally over the initial and final 5 weeks of lessons. And the magnitude of the advantage was large. In 48 out of 100 paired comparisons, the nature lesson was a full standard deviation better than its classroom counterpart; in 20 of the 48, the nature lesson was over two standard deviations better. The rate of "redirects" was cut almost in half after a lesson in nature, allowing teachers to teach for longer periods uninterrupted. Because the pairs of lessons were matched on teacher, class (students and classroom), topic, teaching style, week of the semester, and time of day, the advantage of the nature-based lessons could not be attributed to any of these factors. It appears that, far from leaving students too keyed up to concentrate afterward, lessons in nature may actually leave students more able to engage in the next lesson, even as students are also learning the material at hand. Such "refueling in flight" argues for including more lessons in nature in formal education.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 335 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 256 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 256 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 49 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 11%
Researcher 20 8%
Student > Bachelor 19 7%
Lecturer 13 5%
Other 41 16%
Unknown 86 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 37 14%
Psychology 25 10%
Environmental Science 15 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 5%
Arts and Humanities 13 5%
Other 46 18%
Unknown 106 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 635. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 April 2024.
All research outputs
#35,383
of 25,805,386 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#54
of 34,800 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#752
of 453,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#2
of 530 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,805,386 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,800 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 453,232 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 530 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.