University of Manitoba / ArcticNet Schools on Board Evaluation Final Report (2015)

University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Schools on Board Evaluation
Final Report (2015)
Martin Fortier
Prepared by:
200 – 141 Bannatyne Avenue
Winnipeg, MB
(204) 946-1888
Forward Schools on Board inquiries to:
Lucette Barber, Research Associate
University of Manitoba
Tel: 204-474-9158
Cell: 204-799-7328
Email: [email protected]
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................ 4
Background ................................................................................................................................................................................ 6
Evaluation Scope and Purpose ........................................................................................................................................... 7
Methodology ......................................................................................................................................................................... 7
Findings ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 9
Connecting to Science ....................................................................................................................................................... 9
Connecting to the Environment .................................................................................................................................. 10
Program Impact................................................................................................................................................................. 12
Knowledge about Science and the Environment ............................................................................................ 12
Attitudes and Behaviours Toward Science ....................................................................................................... 13
Attitudes and Behaviours Toward the Environment .................................................................................... 14
Impacts on Teaching................................................................................................................................................... 16
Impact on Future Education or Careers ............................................................................................................. 17
Impact on Personal Growth ..................................................................................................................................... 18
Impact on Social Connections ................................................................................................................................. 19
Overall Impressions .................................................................................................................................................... 20
How Can the Program Improve? ................................................................................................................................ 21
Conclusions .............................................................................................................................................................................. 22
Recommendations............................................................................................................................................................ 25
Limitations ............................................................................................................................................................................... 26
Acknowledgements.......................................................................................................................................................... 26
References ................................................................................................................................................................................ 26
Appendix A - Program Evaluation Framework ......................................................................................................... 27
Appendix B – Online Survey .............................................................................................................................................. 28
Appendix C – Student Interview Guide......................................................................................................................... 33
Appendix D – Teacher Interview Guide ....................................................................................................................... 34
Appendix E – Focus Group Guide .................................................................................................................................... 35
Appendix F – Focus Group Informed Consent ........................................................................................................... 37
Appendix G – Student Evaluation Survey .................................................................................................................... 38
Appendix H – Qualitative Data Themes ........................................................................................................................ 42
Appendix I – Student Participants’ Current Vocation and Education .............................................................. 43
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Executive Summary
Schools on Board is a national field program of ArticNet that brings high school students and
teachers from across Canada ‘on board’ the Arctic research vessel, CCGS Amundsen. Since 2004, this
unique program has provided 85 students and 24 teachers with an experiential learning
opportunity focused on Arctic research in Canada’s north. Developed in 2003 and based out of the
Clayton H. Riddell Faculty of Environment, Earth and Resources at the University of Manitoba
(Winnipeg, Canada), the program aims to promote science, increase awareness of climate change
issues, and inspire young Canadians to explore future studies and career opportunities of Arctic
research.
In 2014, evaluation of Schools on Board sought to assess the short- and long-term impacts on
student and teacher participants described in the program model that proposes direct and active
exposure to science and nature in a real-life environmental science experience leads to more
positive attitudes and behaviours towards the environment and science. Program information
from 2004-2014 was gathered through:
•
•
•
•
an online survey sent to 92 past student and teacher participants (where current contact
information was available);
interviews with a randomly selected group of past student and teacher participants
representing each program year and region;
a focus group conducted with participants during the 2014 excursion; and
student evaluation surveys on knowledge and interest in environmental science completed
at the end of the 2009, 2010 and 2011 excursions.
Findings were analyzed for themes relating to: connections made to science and the environment;
improved attitudes and behaviours about science and the environment; and personal and career
impacts.
Connecting to science and the environment
Participants described connecting to science through experiential learning. Specifically, they
identified “hands on” science as important in their learning experience and described the
importance of engaging with scientists, connecting with the northern environment, and relating
with each other and Northern community members. Spending time in the Arctic exposed students
to the changing environment and the impacts of global warming on the North.
Improved attitudes and behaviours about science and the environment
Participants increased their knowledge and improved their attitudes about scientific research and
the North. Students involved in the 2009-2011 programs reported on knowledge gained on a
variety of topics. Results showed increased knowledge among all 2009-2011 students across all
topics, as well as increased interest in engineering, natural sciences and research. The experience
also increased participants’ awareness about environmental issues and the need for environmental
advocacy: 100% of survey respondents reported an increased awareness of Arctic climate change
impacts, awareness of social issues related to climate change and an increased sense of
responsibility towards the environment.
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
4
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Personal and career impacts
Beyond the scientific impacts, students benefitted from the social connections fostered through
Schools on Board. For all participants, these included connections made with scientists, crew and
students. In addition teacher participants appreciated the connections made with program staff.
Overall, participants reflected positively on Schools on Board – using words such as “adventure,”
“amazing,” and “experience” to describe the experience. Almost all (98%) of survey respondents
rated Schools on Board as a “significant life experience” and all (100%) would recommend the
program to others.
For teachers, Schools on Board changed what and how they teach. Educators reported using more
“hands on” and experiential learning strategies, integrating Arctic or Polar Science and Inuit
knowledge into their lessons, and referencing the research of scientists they had met on board the
ship when back in the classroom.
Schools on Board experiences impacted students’ careers and academic pursuits. Online survey
respondents (87%) reported how Schools on Board “opened doors” to more experiences and
opportunities, most frequently mentioning opportunities in employment, scholarships and postsecondary education. Students also reported gaining confidence, motivation and an interest in
pursuing further education.
School engagement
Very few negative or detrimental aspects were identified. One negative consequence for students
was the need to catch up with school work or falling behind at school. Some interview respondents
described difficulty reintegrating into school after the program. Although the majority of
respondents indicated supportive school engagement, 20% survey respondents felt they had no
school support during or after the program.
Recommendations
Evaluation results confirmed that many aspects of the program are valued and should stay the
same.
Actionable recommendations to improve the program include:
•
•
•
•
better preparing students for learning and the on-board experience;
developing activities to teach traditional knowledge and Inuit culture to continue building
connections to Northern communities;
developing strategies to remain connected with schools and alumni; and
enhancing communication between schools and students.
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
5
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Background
Schools on Board is an outreach program of ArcticNet 1 based out of the Clayton H. Riddell Faculty of
Environment, Earth and Resources at the University of Manitoba (Winnipeg, Canada). It was
developed in 2003 to bridge Arctic research with science education in high schools across Canada,
to increase awareness of issues related to climate change in Canada and to excite young Canadians
about the challenges and career opportunities of Arctic research. At the core of the program, the
Arctic Field Program "on board" the Canadian research icebreaker CCGS Amundsen gives schools
the unique opportunity to send students and teachers to the Arctic to participate in an educational
experience that is completely integrated with the research activities of the ArcticNet science team.
This national field program exposes participants to the research objectives and methods of
numerous science teams representing research disciplines from institutions across Canada. While
on board, participants are completely integrated with operations conducted on the ship; providing
a unique learning experience in Arctic climate change research. Since 2004, the program has been
offered 10 times with a total of 85 students and 24 teachers taking part.
Program highlights include:
• Travel to the Canadian Arctic
• Face-to-face interactions with scientists and Canadian Coast Guard personnel
• Focus on Arctic climate change sciences
• Field work and lab activities with researchers and graduate students
• Engagement with local youth, Elders, and policy-makers in northern communities
• Being a member of a small team of high school students from across Canada (north and
south)
Schools on Board is centred on a theoretical model that offers “direct contact with an authentic
learning environment in nature and science” that results in “raising positive attitudes (caring, a
sense of ownership) and positive behaviours (decisions and actions) towards the environment
and science” (Barber, 2009). In other words, by directly and actively engaging students and
educators in a real-life environmental science experience, Schools on Board leads participants
toward adopting new ideas and actions related to science and the environment.
ArcticNet is a Network of Centres of Excellence of Canada that brings together scientists and managers in
the natural, human health and social sciences with partners from Inuit organizations, northern community,
federal and provincial agencies and the private sector to study the impacts of climate change and
modernization in the coastal Canadian Arctic.
1
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
6
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Evaluation Scope and Purpose
The evaluation focused on assessing the short- and long-term impacts on student and teacher
participants in the ten years (2004-2014) of Schools on Board programming. Specifically, the
evaluation sought to understand:
•
•
•
What are the impacts on the personal and working lives of participating students?
What are the impacts on the personal and working lives of participating teachers?
How can the program improve?
While the evaluation process focused on these three overarching questions, findings are presented
as they pertain to the theoretical program model and organized around: (1) connections made with
science and the environment and (2) the resulting impact on attitudes and behaviours. Additional
benefits not directly addressed through the program model are also identified.
Methodology
The evaluation methodologies outlined in the framework (Appendix A) were approved through the
University of Manitoba Research Ethics Board. Data was collected through:
•
•
•
•
a retrospective online survey;
teacher and student telephone interviews;
a focus group held during the 2014 expedition; and
program evaluation surveys from 2009-2011
Online surveys (Appendix B) were sent to all past
participants (2004-2014) for whom there were valid
email addresses (92/109). As an incentive, survey
respondents were entered in a draw for an iPad mini.
Sixty-three people (43 students and 20 teachers)
responded to the survey for an overall response rate
of 68%, representing 58% of all past Schools on
Board participants 2. Over 15% of the respondents
self-identified as Aboriginal (Figure 1 and 2) and all
regions (north, east, west) of the country were
represented. Table 1 provides a demographic
breakdown of online survey respondents.
Figure 1. Seventeen percent of survey
respondents identified as Aboriginal
Aboriginal
17%
Non-Aboriginal
83%
This response rate is high compared to 42%, the average response rate for Fluid Survey, the online survey
tool that was used. http://fluidsurveys.com/university/response-rate-statistics-online-surveys-aiming/
2
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
7
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Table 1: Online Survey Demographics
Students
n
%
Year
Region
2004 – 2006 (3 programs)
2007 – 2010 (5 programs)
2011 – 2014 (3 programs)
NWT / Nunavut / Labrador
British Columbia
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
International
Self-identified as Aboriginal
Sex
Male
Female
In-depth phone interviews (Appendices C and
D) were conducted with a random sample of
past participants selected to represent
different years, sexes and regions. Forty
individuals were invited to take part in an
interview – 26 responded and were
interviewed (19 students, 7 teachers).
A focus group (Appendix E and F) was held on
board the CCGS Amundsen on the last day of the
2014 program with ten student participants.
The focus group was conducted by program
staff and a summary of the discussion was
submitted for analysis along with other data
collected.
Teachers
n
%
n
Total
%
10
20
13
16%
32%
21%
7
11
2
11%
17%
3%
17
32
15
27%
49%
24%
8
13%
3
5%
11
17%
6
6
11
7
6
7
14
29
10%
10%
17%
11%
10%
11%
22%
46%
7
2
2
2
2
5
5
15
11%
3%
3%
3%
3%
8%
8%
24%
13
8
13
9
8
12
19
44
21%
13%
21%
14%
13%
19%
30%
70%
Figure 2. The majority of Aboriginal online
survey participants self-identified as Inuit
Inuit
5
First Nation
1
Saami
1
Inuvialuit
1
Penobscot Indian
1
Inupiaq
1
Other, please specify...
1
Student Evaluation surveys (Appendix G) have been given to all student participants of the program
since 2004. Data from the 2009-2011 surveys was amalgamated for use in this evaluation.
Qualitative data from interviews and the focus group were themed into the categories and subcategories of “About”, “In” and “For” based on a review of the characteristics of science education,
environmental education and scientific outreach (Appendix H). “About” refers to content and
knowledge. “In” refers to experiential learning in authentic settings. “For” refers primarily to issues
and decision-making relevant to pro-science and pro-environmental attitudes and behaviours and
speaks to the impact of the program (Barber, 2009). Once sorted in this manner, the interpretation
of participant statements led to the following categories of findings: 1) connecting to science, 2)
connecting to the environment and 3) program impacts. These are described in greater detail in
the next section.
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
8
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Findings
Connecting to Science
“Schools on Board provided
meaningful, true science experiences
that contributed to something real.”
(Student participant)
The primary aim of Schools on Board is to have
students and educators connect with scientists and
researchers within their work setting. When asked to
describe their experience, participants most commonly spoke about the authentic and experiential
learning process; over half the interview and focus group data was related to the authentic and
experiential learning environment. Participants valued getting “to work in laboratories and work
with specimens,” and one participant said it was “so hands on ... it made everything come alive.”
Participants spoke about the positive connections made with the researchers, describing them as
“super friendly,” “awesome and inclusive,” and “fantastic...knowledgeable and welcoming.”
Scientists “went above and beyond,” “gave insight into…research,” treated students as “equal” and
were “happy to have…[students] there [to]…help with their work.” Connections to science occurred
through these interactions with scientists; “to...be right along [side] people doing their scientific
work is such a great introduction” to science.
We got to experience the science first hand rather
than just reading about it. And we’re not just
being treated like kids, we’re being treated like
scientists. We’re participating as scientists.
I was quite pleasantly surprised with how open
the scientists were… to talking with … grade 11
students.
The direct contact with researchers demonstrated the scientific process through hands-on
exposure, reinforcing overall learning by “doing.” Students learned about scientific methods, the
importance of paying “attention to detail” while appreciating the passion of the scientists and the
real-world applications of the experiments they
observed.
In the classrooms it’s a ton of theory but
Schools on Board was so hands on and it made
everything come alive. It’s the difference
between talking about a titration in a
classroom and taking a water sample from the
ocean and actually doing a titration with the
researchers.
“When we were working in the labs
on the ship, it was easy for us to see
why every little step in the
experiment matters in the long run
and why it’s important.”
(Student participant)
I think the biggest piece was seeing real scientists doing real research…it was very
hands on for the students. [A] real life experience.
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
9
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
There’s such a variety of projects that are going on and you’re
connecting with pretty young scientists on board – their energy and
passion for what they’re doing is contagious. That really
reinforces…learning.
Participants repeatedly cited the value of practical and hands-on learning as
a way to better understand scientific inquiry; “we...were an active part of the
research...and were taught techniques that I can now use in my studies which
helped me succeed in university.”
“[The] engagement, support, and interest
of [the] scientists toward the students
[was an important aspect].”
(Teacher participant)
It was certainly very hands on and cutting edge and a view into how to do research
at the university level … to be able to meet with scientists on board and their
process of coming up with experiments and questions they are trying to answer is
really interesting and gives you an idea what life is out there in university type
research.
ArcticNet brings together researchers from across disciplines to study the impact of climate change
on the coastal Canadian Arctic. The multidisciplinary nature of the program was seen positively by
many of the students who described the program as having “helped…put some things in context,”
and bringing “to life things that … had [been] learned through a textbook ... [while] include[ing] big
concepts like climate change or small things like titration.” Because of its “very interdisciplinary”
approach it is seen as “a much more versatile experience than in a classroom” reflective of how
“science is being done nowadays - very collaboratively.” As one participant stated: “not only did
they expose us [to] other sciences (meteorology, environmental studies), but also opened [our]
eyes … [to] becoming a teacher up north, becoming coast guards, etc.”
Connecting to the Environment
As an outreach program, Schools on Board aims to provide context
for the science being conducted on the icebreaker and connect
students to the physical and cultural geography of the Canadian
North in order to understand the global and local impacts of climate
change. While on board, participants observe first-hand the natural
and social environment of the Arctic as they are introduced to the
communities and cultures of the North.
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
“Experiencing the beauty
of the Arctic landscape
will stay with me forever.”
(Student participant)
10
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Just as connections to science were made by engaging with scientists, connecting with the northern
environment occurred through connections made with the people. Interviewees talked about the
connections they made with local residents – hearing first-hand about “the changes they’ve seen
and what their concerns are … how they are using science to ensure … their way of life will have a
future” and noting it “was cool to connect with the people there.”
I really enjoyed the visit to Kugluktuk. It
was nice to add that perspective to the trip
and to be able to meet some of the people
who will be experiencing the changes that
we’re studying right now.
After getting to spend 4 or 5 days in a
remote northern community, I completely
fell in love with the dynamics of the town up
Kugluktuk, NU
there. I didn’t expect to get to learn so much
about the culture and the dynamics of how
people live and how people communicate. We were definitely experiencing culture
shock in this little town of about 1,000 people when we first got there but after a day
you realize that you’re living an experience of a lifetime.
Northern students also talked about how the experience of being in the north impacted
them.
I live in the North and this trip helped me
learn more about my home and how it can
change a lot. I can help tell my friends what
the changes are and how our home is
affected and how the different animals are
going to change too. I found that very
interesting and beneficial to me.
We took a day trip to Hebron. It’s an
abandoned community that my family is
actually from. It was a great opportunity for the researchers and students alike to
explore the area. I got to share my story as well so it was a great experience.
Spending time in the Arctic exposed students to the changing environment and the impacts of
global warming on the North. For example “the domino effect that it’s having on all the systems, for
example polar bears, the over population of seals, not enough cod” and “the effects of climate
change on northern people.” Historical, social and geo-political aspects of the North were also
shared including: “sovereignty issues; oil and gas exploration in the arctic,” “the history of the North
West Passage,” “the Franklin expedition,” “Inuit history,” “Canadian history,” “anthropology” and
“the [role of the] coast guard.” Information was shared through lectures that were “pitched at an
adult level.”
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
11
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Scientists also did small bite sized lectures
on issues in climate change, how the North is
warming, the implications for Inuit, but the
kids were getting exposed to all of this connection to the world and how this is
important, how it is relevant and how you
can be a part of it.
Program Impact
Knowledge about Science and the Environment
Through hands-on exposure participants gained new “knowledge and information [about] arctic
and polar science,” and “general climate change research.” One participant stated that during the
“16 day expedition … [they] learned more than … [during] 4 years in high school.” Almost all
student evaluation survey respondents (99%) increased their understanding of scientific research.
The subject areas with the largest increases in knowledge were Chemistry in the Arctic, Benthic
Ecology and Contaminants with significant increases in knowledge across all subject areas (Figure
3).
Figure 3. 2009-2011 participants indicated an increased knowledge in all topic areas (n = 30)
10
8
6
4
Before
2
After
0
*A Wilcoxen Signed Rank Parametric test was used to compare the before and after averages and the
difference was significant in all cases.
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
12
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Attitudes and Behaviours Toward Science
Students expressed a genuine enthusiasm toward the science
74% developed an interest to
they observed on the trip. They described the experience as one
pursue education related to
that “justified learning science in school [and]...showed how
climate change, sustainability
important science was for a very concrete purpose.” There was
or the environment.
repeated reference to the “realness” and “real life” application of
(Online Survey results)
the work, how it makes the theoretical learning “applicable” and
allowed them to “see that it’s something.” By seeing and
observing the practical uses, students identified the work as
purpose driven and therefore more motivating. This was supported by the data from the yearly
survey that was administered from 2009–2011 in which all students indicated an increased interest
in engineering, research and natural sciences (Figure 4).
Figure 4. 2009-2011 participants indicated an increased interest in engineering, research and natural
science (n = 30)
10
8
6
4
Before
2
After
0
Engineering
Research
Natural Science
*A Wilcoxen Signed Rank Parametric test was used to compare the before and after averages and the
difference was significant in all cases.
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
13
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
On the online survey, 76% of respondents said experience with Schools on Board increased their
interest in science and 50% said it increased their interest in pursuing a career in scientific
research “a lot” (Figure 5).
I did this water sample analysis with some of the scientists and that just blew my
mind. It was really cool to be able to collect data, analyze it, put it through the
machines, find an answer. In school you are always doing theory stuff ... this was
actually useful by real people doing real science.
We were doing real research ... going through it with a real goal in the end, it made
the learning concrete. Having to actually do the experiment and knowing why we
were doing it allowed me to easily remember the stuff about phytoplankton. It gives
you a goal. It gives you a motivation. Sometimes at school just performing on a test
isn’t motivation ... If I am doing an experiment and I have to know how to use this
measuring apparatus. I will remember that for a long time because I actually did it
and it had a purpose.
Figure 5: Interest and understanding of scientific research increased
A lot
Interest in science
Some
None at all
21%
76%
Understanding of scientific
research
Interest in pursuing scientific
research
A little
16% 2%
83%
50%
3%
31%
15%
5%
Attitudes and Behaviours Toward the Environment
Interviewees and focus group participants identified raising awareness about environmental issues
and the need for advocacy as a “really important part of the program.” Following the trip, advocacy
was undertaken through “coming back and talking to people.” Participants said connections made
with the North raised their awareness about climate change and “a sense of wanting to protect and
preserve that beauty for future generations.” One participant spoke to being “much more
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
14
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
environmentally conscious than before…the trip and encourage[ing] everybody to do their part
because … [they could] see how it’s really affecting the northern communities.”
We gave a presentation about global warming with [pictures] and videos and
testimonials that was really eye opening to my classmates who didn’t go. We
realized that we can act as stewards of the environment. The experience really
empowered me, for sure.
Afterward when I heard things about climate change I thought back to all that I had
seen with the hands on science. They weren’t just numbers anymore.
All online survey respondents reported an increased awareness of Arctic climate change
impacts, awareness of social issues related to climate change and a sense of responsibility to
the environment as a result of Schools on Board – for over half this signified a large
increase.
Figure 6: All participants increased awareness of environmental issues
A lot
Some
Awareness of the impacts of climate change in the
Arctic
Awareness of social issues related to climate
change
Sense of responsibility to the environment
A little
None at all
79%
17% 3%
68%
56%
30%
37%
2%
8%
Related to this was an increased knowledge about northern and Inuit communities and culture, and
increased appreciation for the North in general. This was identified as the most significant benefit
by 25% of online survey respondents – as one participant described:
Meeting and interacting with people in the North was one of the most wonderful
parts of the experience. I learned so much about life and culture in the North.
Experiencing the beauty of the Arctic landscape will stay with me forever.
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
15
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Participants shared ways in which these connections now shape how they think about the North
and its relationship with the rest of Canada.
Whenever something is in the news I am always looking to what is happening in the
North. I am much more aware of the problems up there. I think that is important
because a lot of Canadians are not. It helped me become aware of what is happening
in the northern part of the country.
I think that although the science aspect is a big part of it, the stuff that we got to do
with the different members of the community both the youth and the elders helped
to shape how I view the North.
Impacts on Teaching
For the teachers, Schools on Board changed what and how they teach. Teachers reported
that the experience led to new “activities and lesson plans designed from the Schools on
Board experience … creat[ing] a more “real” science experience” and “[incorporating]… field
work into the class.” Science curricula were enhanced to include more about the Arctic or
polar sciences.
There was no application [of] polar science at all
around the time I went. After, I attended
conferences and professional development days
and I provided lesson plans on how to incorporate
polar education to all subject areas - everything
from science (biology, physics, chemistry) to math
and English. I’m … one of the founding members [of
Polar Educators International (PEI)]. The sharing
and the creativity and eagerness to apply polar
concepts to every course has really grown.
Through connections made, teachers took materials provided by the scientists back to their
classrooms and felt better able to speak to how scientists work in the real world. Teachers also
mentioned “[broadened] perspective[s] on … issues [of] climate change” including “perspective[s]
on Aboriginal issues and how those two things tie together.”
The process excited me more to get kids excited about collecting data in their own
environment. I really strongly connected to my community I was working in in the
North. I worked continuously to bridge both traditional knowledge and scientific
knowledge and show ways we can measure things within the traditional knowledge
stream and how we can see scientific knowledge through a traditional lens.
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
16
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Impact on Future Education or Careers
The majority of student participants who completed the online survey are currently in school
(Figure 7) in a variety of programs or are working (Appendix I). Of the twenty one interviewees
who described their area of study, the majority studied or were studying undergraduate sciences
(9). There were also interviewees in med school (3), nursing (3) or pursuing Masters level sciences
(2). During the interview, a
Figure 7. Most student participants are still in school n = 43
number of past
participants attributed
11%
their education and career
Post Secondary (Bachelor / Undefined)
32%
direction to their
participation in Schools on
Grad School
9%
Board. Interviewees
22%
High School
mentioned “narrow[ing]
12%
Northern
down what [they] wanted
School (Undefined)
to do with [their] life,”
15%
Non-Northern
deciding ‘to work in …
Gap year
6%
polar research,”
56%
subsequently “enter[ing]
Working
18%
into marine biology” and
22%
Caring for Kids / Family
having the program help
3%
“foster [their] love of
science” giving them the
“motivation to pursue it.”
Schools on Board played a huge part [in] what I’ve done for education. I went to the
University of Manitoba and did my undergrad in environmental studies. Now I work
for Sea-ice Environmental Research Facility (SERF) at the U of M. I’m working with
the group that is running Schools on Board but now as a scientist. It’s pretty cool.
They actually asked about [Schools on Board] in my med school interview! It jumps
out at people in all of my interviews, even when applying for jobs.
I do a lot of communication and outreach on Inuit perspectives on research and I
always refer back to my experience with being with the researchers on the ship
when out in communities.
It’s a really great example of the humanities and sciences meeting for a common
goal. It just opened a lot of doors. Looking back, if there had been opportunities to
get involved in Arctic or northern research I would have done that. I was totally
captivated by the experience. In the future I might go the nurse practitioner route
and go up north.
On the online survey, 87% of participants reported that Schools on Board opened doors to more
experiences and opportunities. Most frequently mentioned were opportunities in employment,
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
17
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
scholarships and university admission. Sixty-two percent of participants used their Schools on
Board experience on a job, university or scholarship application.
The experience also led to public speaking engagements (6 mentions) along with more general
opportunities (9). These opportunities presented themselves as a result of networking (6),
increased confidence (5), expanded awareness of career choices (5) and being more extroverted
(1).
Interviewees reported doing “a lot of presentations in
the community” and developing “great public speaking
skills” as a result of Schools on Board. One interviewee
reported that by doing “tons of presentations…to about
6-7 schools (full assemblies); a presentation for all the
conservation districts in Manitoba; [and] a SAG [Special
Areas Groups] conference (teachers)” their “public
speaking skills [are] much better.”
Impact on Personal Growth
Over 50% of online survey respondents said Schools on Board increased their confidence and
interest in pursuing education ‘a lot.’ Ninety-eight percent said program participation increased
their confidence to ‘some extent’ (Figure 8).
Figure 8: Confidence and interest in pursuing education
increased for most participants
Confidence
56%
Interest in
pursuing
education
33%
52%
A lot
Some
33%
A little
8% 6%
None at all
The program was also described as offering a personal growth
experience: “a maturing process ... a big adventure and
experience to have when ... in high school” with opportunities
for “learning about different research processes, ways of life,
[and] cultures.”
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
10% 2%
“It’s so rare and unique and
people always want to know more
about it and are genuinely curious
about my experience.”
(Student participant)
18
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
One participant characterized their involvement as a “good life experience,” saying:
It was just good life experience. People who have done this have seen some very
rare things. I loved meeting the people. Stepping out of the box … your comfort zone
and stepping on to the ship, I still remember that feeling.
Another participant said that the program “gave [them] a whole new perspective on life and
really matured [them].”Giving them an opportunity to think “towards [their] future and
what [they] wanted to do with [their] life.”
Impact on Social Connections
When asked if Schools on Board had benefits beyond science most participants responded “yes,”
identifying the social connections made on board as the most common additional benefit.
You make really great connections with the other students on the trip and the
scientists and crew members on board which aren't easily forgotten. I still talk with
my fellow [participants] and remember everyone
Meeting new people, learning
on the trip fondly. These connections [are] what
their different languages, how we
made the trip extra memorable for me.
all related to each other and all
Going off on your own without friends and family
got along. Learning others culture
and then making all these great connections …
was also a huge benefit to me.
that’s definitely the biggest benefit beyond science
(Student participant)
for me - the social connections.
Teachers and students both mentioned the social connections they made as a result of Schools on
Board. Interviewees described Schools on Board as “really unique [because it] brings together
youth from all across Canada,” that “the people involved in the program were really wonderful and
really friendly… from the coast guard and crew on the ship to the scientists and other students,”
that there was an “interesting connection between the students from ... Nunavut and those from the
south” and that the program coordinator was “really a dynamic leader and really [professionally]
supportive.” Many noted that these relationships continued after the program, stating they are “still
friends with a majority of the people [they] went with,” and “stayed very good friends” with
participants and “some of the scientists.”
A number of interviewees mentioned benefiting through
networking or expanded networks. For example: “being a part of
the network … professionally, being connected with the program
coordinators [and] … people doing alternative outreach,” and
“being able to connect with the scientists as well as the different
people … in the community [was] … very important.”
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
19
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Overall Impressions
Interview participants considered it a “privilege to be chosen,” “an experience of
a lifetime” that inspired their “sense of adventure.” One described the experience:
Unlike anything you’ve done before. It was like a dream. We all had stars
in our eyes. It was amazing and introduced us to another world. To
actual[ly] be able to see the ice cracking and see firsthand what global
warming is doing to the world. It went above and beyond from anything
I’ve ever experienced.
When asked to choose one word that described Schools on Board, participants most frequently
used: “adventure,” “amazing,” and “experience” (Figure 9). Later in the same survey, participants
were asked to choose three words from a list of 16 that described the Schools on Board program.
All options were selected at least once (Figure 10). The words that were most frequently chosen
were “unique,” “adventurous,” “inspiring,” “educational,” and “scientific.”
Figure 9: Participants generated one word to describe their Schools on Board experience: “Amazing”,
“Adventure” and “Experience” were most common.
Figure 10. Participants selected 3 words from the list below that best described the Schools on
Board program. “Unique,” “Adventurous” and “Inspiring” were the three most common.
Unique
Adventurous
Inspiring
Educational
Scientific
Transformational
12
Motivating
12
Fun
9
Social connections
7
Authentic
6
Inquiry-driven
5
Confidence-building
5
Empowering
5
Teamwork
5
Career-oriented
4
Innovative 1
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
21
20
20
24
27
20
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
How Can the Program Improve?
On the online survey, 10%
Figure 11. Over ten percent of participants perceived
(6/61) of respondents reported
schools to be uninvolved before, during or after the
experiencing negative
program
A lot
Some
A little
None at all
consequences as a result of
participating in the program.
Four of these participants faced
Before
14%
17%
37%
32%
increased demands upon return;
catching up on missed school
work, post-excursion
presentations and follow-up.
Two participants stated their
During
17%
21%
30%
32%
schools had “no understanding”
of or involvement in the
program (e.g. not offering
extensions to catch up on
assignments). One respondent
After
13%
23%
27%
37%
noted that the experience can
“be quite ... overwhelming” and
“making sure students are well
informed about the program prior to embarking ... is crucial.” Similar issues were identified in
interviews where 7 out of 26 people reported negative impacts on school work – needing to spend
time catching up after the program.
Figure 12. Twenty percent of participants felt they had no
school support during and after the program
A lot
Before
42%
During
42%
After
43%
Some
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
A little
None at all
29%
18%
26%
18%
19%
11%
11%
21%
20%
When asked specifically about
school involvement and support,
online survey responses
corroborated statements about
limited school support. Twenty
percent of respondents indicated
they received no support from
their schools during or after the
program. While 42% did report a
high level of school support,
fewer (34%) indicated a high
level of school involvement (for
example: not only supporting an
individual student’s participation,
but actively engaging in the
program).
21
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Additional negative consequences mentioned by interview participants included sea sickness (2),
having to choose which students would represent the school (1 teacher) and negative
consequences as a result of not understanding cultural differences (1).
Interview participants were asked what they would change about the program; eight out of 26
people responded “nothing.” Suggestions for improving the program included providing more
scientific background such as context for the research (4), more base level science at the beginning
(2) and more information about analysis (1). One suggestion was to have students consider the
various research projects taking place and choose one project to work on more in-depth over the
course of the program. Spending more time exploring and understanding cultural differences was
also seen as a potential improvement, including (for one participant) opportunity to learn a few
words in other participants’ first language.
Three interviewees and one online survey respondent suggested the program could be longer and
that more time could be spent in communities (two online survey respondents expressed a desire
to travel North or participate again). Improving connections between the students and the school in
real time via satellite or web links was suggested, as was continued research and alumni updates
via newsletter. Other suggestions included shortening the scientific presentations (2), changing the
timing (September is difficult for participants) (2), and sharing information about seasickness (1).
Interview participants were also asked what they would not change about the program:sixteen of
26 people would not change the experience of being on board a research vessel with scientists,
highlighting the connection to scientists and hands-on learning. Participants also commented they
would not change the experiences in Northern communities and with Northern culture (8), the
involvement of students from across Canada (4), the size of the group (2) and the length of time (2).
Conclusions
Participant feedback demonstrates that the Schools on Board experience successfully connected
students and educators to a “hands-on” learning experience in science and in the environment
resulting in more positive attitudes and behaviours toward both.
Connections made to science and the environment were highly valued
by participants. Opportunities to take part in actual research and
conduct experiments provided participants with an increased
appreciation for scientific methods and fostered relationships with a
range of disciplines. Practical, hands-on experiences had more meaning
than classroom based learning, improving retention of information.
Connections made to the environment were fostered through
engagement with local communities, providing a broader perspective
on issues facing northern Canadians. Participants indicated an
increased appreciation for the North’s physical beauty, as well as
strongly connecting to the cultural, environmental and social aspects of
life in the North.
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
22
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Program impacts included increased motivation for
continued learning. Understanding and interest in
science increased “a lot” among approximately 80% of
online survey respondents. Almost all online survey
respondents (99%) increased their understanding of
scientific research and half of those surveyed online
increased their interest in pursuing scientific research in
the future. Teachers adapted their classroom activities
and curriculum to reflect what they learned, resulting in
a broader reach beyond the Schools on Board experience
itself.
Schools on Board also impacted individuals’ attitudes toward the environment and raised
awareness about climate change and its impact on the North. Seventy-four percent of those
surveyed online are interested in pursuing education related to climate change, sustainability or the
environment as a result of the experience. All participants increased awareness of the impacts of
climate change and related social issues to some degree (79% increased their awareness “a lot”).
Participants reported feeling a greater sense of responsibility and shared their perspective in
presentations and by talking to others individually. All participants felt a greater sense of
responsibility toward the environment (56% a lot, 37% some, 8% a little) after the program.
In addition to more positive attitudes toward science and the environment, participants gained new
skills and confidence, specifically in public speaking through presentations given in schools and
community. These presentations broaden the reach and impact of Schools on Board by engaging
and connecting with a broader audience. Participants also valued the opportunities provided for
networking and new social connections made and maintained through the program. Many felt their
Schools on Board experience helped open doors to education, career and other general
opportunities.
Opportunities for improving Schools on Board exist. Some
students reported a lack of support and involvement with
schools. This translated into challenges reintegrating
academically, feeling pressure to prepare presentations and
follow-up while catching up on missed work. The degree to
which students felt supported by their school was
somewhat limited and identifying ways to connect schools
before, during and after the program would improve the
student and school experience.
While students reported being engaged in and enjoying the scientific and cultural aspects of the
experience, some had suggestions for improvement. These included providing more scientific
information on basic sciences and methods before and during the trip, as well as providing research
and alumni updates after via a newsletter. Ensuring students and teachers with an understanding of
the cultural differences between north and south was suggested. By design, Schools on Board is an
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
23
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
extreme experience, however, developing strategies for dealing with the potentially overwhelming
nature of the experience, including seasickness, was also recommended.
Overall participants reflected positively on their experience with Schools on Board. Ninety-eight
percent of survey respondents rated Schools on Board as a significant life experience – and every
respondent said they would recommend the program to others.
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
24
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Recommendations
Recommendations presented by participants were discussed by program staff who identified
possibilities to address the recommendations, or justifications where changes were not possible.
Before the Program
Recommendation
Plan to lengthen the
experience
Plan to change the time
of year
Prepare students for on
board learning
Possibilities and Justifications
•
•
•
•
•
•
During the Program
Program length is primarily determined by the time of year where
there is availability of space on the ship and time away from school.
Time of year is determined by the ship. Timing needs to be critically
looked at in terms of doing it outside of the school year while
maintaining strong communications with the school.
Make a manual available prior to program for schools and
participants.
Encourage students to visit the website to prepare for the
experience.
Prepare pre-activities tailored to science on board.
Create a data analysis module for on board programming.
Recommendation
Possibilities and Justifications
Continue to value the
community connection
•
•
•
•
•
Ensure community visit is at least 2 days
Plan community visits at the beginning of the trip
Intended outcomes: knowledge exchange with Elders, peers and
policy makers
Celebration day at the end of the program
Develop a pre-activity and an on ship module dealing with Inuit
culture and ITK
Schedule free time – to get to know scientists informally; to explore
the ship; to get to know one-another; to explore communities
Support Group
Dynamics
•
Recommendations
Possibilities and Justifications
Develop strategies to
remain connected with
schools and alumni,
other opportunities
Support students for
Academic Reintegration
•
•
After the Program
Use Facebook to connect with alumni
Create a communications strategy
•
•
•
Ensure that students are aware of their schools’ outreach plans
Create a more active support role for the school contact
Recommend meetings with the student and school contact prior to
and after the program
Support students with
• Prepare general PowerPoint slides and ask students to include them
public speaking
in their presentations
engagements after being • Ask students for a copy of student presentations for records and also
on board
for exemplars.
Evaluation results also confirmed that many aspects of the program are valued and should continue
including:
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
25
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Immersing participants in every way by being included in all aspects of life on board a
working icebreaker.
Encouraging participants to get up in the middle of the night to sample.
Ensuring geographical representation of participants.
Fostering engagement between youth from the north and south.
Maintaining the smaller group size and planning activities that encourage good group
dynamics (buying groceries, cooking together)
Maximizing opportunities and interactions in northern communities
Maintaining cross curricular aspect of the program (ie: history, Inuit culture)
Keeping the fun in science
Fostering personal and social connections
Creating active engagement between scientists and participants
Ensuring Inuit and Northerner perspectives of climate change in the Arctic are included to
provide context for the science.
Limitations
As participation in the survey and interviews was voluntary, there is a potential self-selection bias
inherent in the results. It is unclear how the views or opinions of participants who did not respond
to survey or interview requests would have differed.
Although the evaluation includes participants from all years of the program (2004–2014), results
are aggregated across all ten years. More in-depth analysis to compare results between years would
be needed to understand if the observed impacts are likely to last over the long-term or if effects
drop off over time. Comments or suggestions for improvement from earlier participants may no
longer be applicable.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank all the participants who took the time to be interviewed, to complete the
online and participant surveys, and who participated in the focus group. The high response rate
has resulted in a very strong and representative participant voice to this evaluation.
Schools on Board is supported by ArcticNet, the Centre for Earth Observation Science (University of
Manitoba), NSERC PromoScience and the various organizations that sponsor the participating
schools. The continued success of the program is attributed to the many groups and individuals
who provide their time, knowledge and resources including school administrators, teachers, the
captain and crew of the CCGS Amundsen, and ArcticNet scientists and graduate students.
Photo credit to Schools on Board (ArcticNet), unless otherwise noted.
References
Barber, L. (2009). Scientific outreach: Linking environmental science education in high schools with
scientific research - A case study of the Schools on Board. Master’s thesis. University of Manitoba,
Winnipeg, MB
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
26
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Appendix A - Program Evaluation Framework
Evaluation question
What are the impacts
of the program on the
personal and working
lives of participating
students?
What are the impacts
of the program on the
personal and working
lives of participating
teachers?
How can the program
improve?
Indicator
• #/% of participants who connect what they are currently doing to their
School on Board experience
• #/% of participants who used Schools on Board as part of a job, school
or scholarship application
• #/% of participants who have gone on to work or study in a scientific
field or related field
• Description of unintended outcomes of Schools on Board
• Description of the most important aspects of the Schools on Board
Program as explained by program participants
• % change in knowledge about science, climate change and the Artic
• % change in interest about science, research, climate change
• #/% of participants who connect what they are currently doing their
School on Board experience
• #/% of participants who used Schools on Board as part of a job, school
or scholarship application
• #/% of participants who have changed the content or method of their
teaching
• Description of how teachers have changed their content or method of
teaching
• Description of unintended outcomes of Schools on Board
• Description of the most important aspects of the Schools on Board
Program as explained by past program participants
• % change in interest about science, research and climate change
• % change in knowledge about science, climate change and the Arctic
Description of what participants would and would not change
Examples of how the program failed to meet expectations
Identification of negative consequences to participating in the program
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
Data collection methods
Responsible
Student Evaluation Surveys
Project staff
Focus Group
Project staff
Teacher Interviews
Health in Common
Participant Online Surveys
Health in Common
Focus Group
Project staff
Interviews
Participant Online Surveys
Health in Common
Health in Common
Focus Group
Project staff
Student Interviews
Participant Online Surveys
Health in Common
Health in Common
27
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Appendix B – Online Survey
Schools on Board Survey
Schools on Board is partnering with Health in Common, a not for profit planning and evaluation
organization, to conduct an extensive program assessment of The Schools on Board field program.
Having your input is very important to us. This evaluation: has been approved by the Joint Faculty
Research Ethics Board at the UofM; should take you only 20 minutes to complete; is voluntary and you
may quit at anytime; will be used to improve the program; and will be published. Your answers will
remain confidential - they will not be connected to you as an individual.
If you have any questions
about this survey, please contact: Anna Weier, Planning and Evaluation Facilitator, Health in Common
email:[email protected] phone: 204-946-1888. Draw!! Submit this survey and enter to win
an iPad mini (value: $400)
1. In what year did you attend Schools on Board?
2. What province/territory did you live in the year that you participated in Schools on Board?
3. If you were an international student, what country did you live in the year that you participated
in Schools on Board?
4. Were you a teacher or a student participant?
Teacher
Student
5. Do you self-identify with an Aboriginal group?
Yes
No
If yes, which of the following applies to you?
Metis
First Nation
Inuit
Other, please specify... ______________________
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
28
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
6. Please specify your gender:
Male
Female
7. What are you doing in your life right now?
(ex: going to school, working outside the home, taking care of kids/family, etc.)
8. What is the highest level of school that you have achieved?
Some high school, no diploma
High school graduate, diploma or the equivalent (for example: GED)
Some college credit, no degree
Trade/technical/vocational training
Bachelor's degree and year ______________________
Master's degree and year ______________________
Professional degree and year ______________________
Doctorate degree and year ______________________
9. How involved and supportive was your school of your participation in the School's on Board
Program?
None at all A little Some
A lot
School involvement before the field program
School involvement during the field program
School involvement after the field program
School support for you before the field program
School support for you during the field program
School support for you after the field program
10. When you came off the ship did you consider your Schools on Board experience as a significant
life experience?
Yes
No
Please explain.
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
29
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
11. Do you attribute any decision made regarding your continued or future education or job
opportunities to your Schools on Board experience?
Not at all
A little
Some
A lot
12. Did the program increase your...
Not at all A little Some A lot
Sense of responsibility to the environment
Confidence
Understanding of scientific research
Awareness of the impacts of climate change in the Artic
Awareness of social issues related to climate change
Interest in pursuing education
Interest in pursuing scientific research
Interest in science
13. What is ONE WORD that comes to mind when you think of Schools on Board?
14. Did the program generate or confirm an interest to pursue post-secondary or professional
development opportunities related to climate change, sustainability, the environment or other
topics you learned about on board?
Yes
No
If yes, please describe.
15. Did you use your experience with Schools on Board on any application - job, university,
scholarship?
Yes
No
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
30
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
If yes, please describe.
16. Which three words best describe your Schools on Board experience?
Adventurous
Educational
Transformational
Scientific
Unique
Career-oriented
Inquiry-driven
Confidence-building
Empowering
Authentic
Inspiring
Innovative
Fun
Teamwork
Social connections
Motivating
17. Do you think you Schools on Board experience helped open doors to more experiences and
opportunities for you?
Yes
No
If yes, please describe.
18. Do you feel participating in a Schools on Board field program has benefits beyond science?
Yes
No
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
31
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
If yes, please describe.
19. What is the impact of Schools on Board taking place in the field as opposed to in a classroom?
20. Do you think that in 10 years you will consider your Schools on Board experience as a
significant life experience?
Yes
No
21. Would you recommend the program to others?
Yes
No
22. Were there any negative consequences to your participation in the program?
Yes
No
If yes, please describe.
Thank you!
Thanks for filling out this survey. If you are interested in the results of our evaluation, please visit our
website (schoolsonboard.ca) after January 1st, 2015 to view the report.As a thank you for completing
this survey, you are eligible to enter a draw for an iPad mini (value: $350). Maximum number of
participants in the survey: 100. If you are interested, please enter your e-mail address below. Your email address and other identifying information will not be linked to the other information that you have
provided.
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
32
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Appendix C – Student Interview Guide
Interview Guide: Schools on Board
Follow Up Student Interviews
Hello, my name is ______ and I’m calling for the Schools on Board Interview that we set up via e-mail.
I work for a separate organization called Health in Common. We have ethics approval through the
University of Manitoba Joint Ethics Review Board and we are gathering the information and will
share it with Schools on Board staff for the purpose of improving the program, communicating
about the impacts of the program and academic publication. They will also have access to
information that we collect, such as your answers to today’s questions, but that information will
have no identifiers on it, so they won’t specifically know who said it. The interview will be
approximately half an hour in duration, but you can stop at any time and you don’t have to answer
any questions that you don’t want to. Are you still willing to be involved in the interview?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
When did you participate in the program (year)?
What grade were you in when you participated in Schools on Board?
Which province or territory were you living in when you took part?
Do you self-identify with an Aboriginal group in Canada? If so which one? Metis? First Nation?
Inuit?
What do you remember most about your Schools on Board experience?
What are you doing now in terms of your life, education and/or career? (ex: going to school,
working outside the home, taking care of kids/family etc.)
Follow up: Did your experience with Schools on Board help you get there? If yes, how
and how much?
How was your experience with Schools on Board different from your experience with learning
science at school?
Prompts: Did the Schools on Board experience help you better understand things you had
already learned in class or things you learned after the program?
Did you get what you were expecting or hoping to get out of the program?
Follow up: How did the program meet, fail to meet, or exceed your expectations?
Were there any negative consequences to your participation in the program?
What, if anything, would you absolutely NOT change about this program?
What, if anything, would you definitely change about the program?
Do you feel that your experience with Schools on Board has benefits beyond science? Please
describe.
Thanks so much for your time. Just so you know, if a few weeks we will be sending out a link to an
online survey and it would be great if you would be willing to fill that out as well. Some of the
questions on that survey will be somewhat similar, but there will also be a number of questions that
are quite different.
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
33
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Appendix D – Teacher Interview Guide
Interview Guide: Schools on Board
Follow Up Teacher Interviews
Hello, my name is ______ and I’m calling for the Schools on Board Interview that we set up via e-mail.
I work for a separate organization called Health in Common. We have ethics approval through the
University of Manitoba Joint Ethics Review Board and we are gathering the information and will
share it with Schools on Board staff for the purpose of improving the program, communicating
about the impacts of the program and academic publication. They will also have access to
information that we collect, such as your answers to today’s questions, but that information will
have no identifiers on it, so they won’t specifically know who said it. The interview will be
approximately half an hour in duration, but you can stop at any time and you don’t have to answer
any questions that you don’t want to. Are you still willing to be involved in the interview?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
When did you participate in the program (year)?
Which province or territory were you living in when you took part?
What subject area were you teaching at the time? Has this changed?
Do you self-identify with an Aboriginal group in Canada? If so which one? Metis? First Nation?
Inuit?
What do you remember most about your Schools on Board experience?
What are you doing now in terms of your life or career? (ex: going to school, teaching, school
administration, working outside the school system, taking care of kids/family etc.)
How was your experience with Schools on Board different from how you learned about science
when you were in school? When you were in teacher’s college/training
Did your Schools on Board experience impact the way that you teach? Did the experience
impact the topics you teach?
How did the program meet, fail to meet, or exceed your expectations?
Were there any negative consequences to your participation in the program? If yes, what were
they?
Are there other impacts to your life beyond science from participating with Schools on Board?
What, if anything, would you absolutely NOT change about this program?
What, if anything, would you definitely change about this program?
Thanks so much for your time. Just so you know, if a few weeks we will be sending out a link to an
online survey and it would be great if you would be willing to fill that out as well. Some of the
questions on that survey will be somewhat similar, but there will also be a number of questions that
are quite different.
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
34
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Appendix E – Focus Group Guide
Focus Group Discussion Guide:
Schools on Board
Purpose of meeting: Welcome and thank you for coming today.
We would like to gather information about the Schools on Board program and how it impact
participants. Your ideas and feedback about this program are very important to help us know how
we are doing.
How the focus group will work:
The discussion will last between an hour and an hour and a half. I will ask you some questions
about your experience with the program. What you say will be kept confidential. In other words, no
one will know that you specifically said it. Please also keep what others say in this group
confidential. What you tell us will be put together into report and shared the rest of Artic Net and
other people who are interested in this program. We would also like to write up an academic paper
using the information collected.
There are no right or wrong answers.
What you say and what happens in this meeting will be typed up. The meeting will also be audio
recorded so that my notes can be checked. The recording and notes will be destroyed after we are
done writing the report.
Participant Introductions
To start, let’s go around and each say one thing about Schools on Board that has stood out for you.
Discussion Questions:
Open Discussion:
1. Describe your overall experience being part of Schools on Board?
Probes: Was it difficult or easy for you? Was it enjoyable? Did it turn out to be the same or
different from what you expected when you first signed up? Did the planned activities
before the program prepare you for being on board?
2. What would have made this experience better for you?
Probes: Was anything missing? Was there enough information or too much? Were the
facilitators effective?
3. What’s different for you now that you’ve been part of this group? Has anything changed?
Probes: Can you give me an example of:
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
35
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
•
•
•
something that you learned
something you think about differently
something you plan to do differently
4. What was the most important thing you learned?
Probes: Was it a specific piece of information or something about yourself or your
community?
5. What was the biggest challenge for you in being involved in the program?
Were there any logistical issues that were difficult? Did you feel personally challenged in
some way?
6. Write on 3 pieces of flipchart paper – High point, Low point, Turning point.
Let’s do a quick go around. Please tell me:
What been one high point of the group for you personally?
What has been one low point of the group for you personally?
What has been one turning point of the group for you personally?
Summarize responses on corresponding flipchart. After everybody has had a turn, ask for
general comments on the lists: any surprises, gaps?
Closing:
7. If there is one thing you would want people to know about this program, what would it be?
Thank participants and remind them how the information will be used. If participants want a
summary of the final report be sure to consider how you will provide this to them.
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
36
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Appendix F – Focus Group Informed Consent
Focus Group Informed Consent:
Schools on Board
We are doing an evaluation of Schools on Board. The Focus Group is to learn how you felt about the
School on Board program. Information shared in the group session will be used to guide the future
of the program.
Thank you for agreeing to take part. As a participant you should know:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The group will be run by a facilitator who will ask questions and facilitate discussion;
Your participation is voluntary and you are free to leave at any time;
You are free to not answer any question;
These sessions are confidential. Please do not share other people’s personal information;
What is said and what happens in the group will be written down and audio recorded for
later evaluation.
All the information taken will be stored safely at the University of Manitoba as per PHIA
requirements.
No names or identifying information will be included in any reports or documents resulting
from this evaluation. It will all be kept confidential.
Questions about the project may be directed at any time to Michelle Watts, Program Coordinator of
Schools on Board by phone at (204)272-1542 or e-mail at [email protected]
I am fully aware of the nature of this focus group and have agreed to
participate in it. I have read (or had it interpreted to me), understood
and been given a copy of this consent form.
________________________________
Participant’s Signature
________________________________
Parent/Guardian’s Signature
________________________________
Facilitator’s Signature
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
_________________________
Date
_________________________
Date
_________________________
Date
37
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Appendix G – Student Evaluation Survey
Participant Evaluation – 2013 Field Program
1. Please circle most appropriate rating. If the item does not apply to you, circle N/A (not applicable).
Feel free to elaborate on any of these items on the back of this page.
PROGRAM PLANNING
1 (poor) --------4 (so-so)--------7 (very good)
Information provided prior to departure
1
Communication with Schools on Board prior to the trip
Information provided about risks and safety
Suggested email activities as tools for teambuilding and
preparing for the trip
Overall organization of the field program
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
N/A
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
N/A
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
7
7
N/A
N/A
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
N/A
Lab/demo – Energy budget
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
N/A
Lab – zooplankton Chaetognaths
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
N/A
Lab – identification/classification
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
N/A
ONBOARD EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM
SCIENCE
Lab/demo – physical oceanography/ice
thermodynamics
Lab - benthic lab
Lab - phytoplankton
Other lab (specify):
Fieldwork - meteorology – weather observation
Fieldwork – rosette deployment
Fieldwork – box core deployment
Fieldwork – net deployment
Fieldwork – remote sensing
Other fieldwork (specify):
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
38
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Design Challenge – Rat-a-Pult
1
3
4
5
6
7
N/A
OTHER
1
2
History – Northwest Passage
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
N/A
Exposure to Traditional Knowledge
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
N/A
Relevance to the program
Exposure to issues related to climate change
Other (specify):
1
2
2
3
4
5
6
7
N/A
3
4
5
6
7
N/A
Exposure to the ‘culture of scientific research’
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
N/A
COMMUNITY/CULTURAL PROGRAM
5
6
7
N/A
2
4
6
7
1
3
5
6
Interactions with crew members of the CCGS Amundsen
2
4
5
LIFE ON THE SHIP
1
3
4
1
Your day-to-day experience of living on a ship
2
3
7
N/A
N/A
Interactions with community members, leaders and
elders
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
N/A
Exposure to life in the Arctic & Northern culture
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
N/A
Interactions with northern youths/students
2
3
4
5
6
7
N/A
2. If someone asked you, “What was the highlight of the program?” What would that be?
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
39
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
3. Using the following 2 tables, rank your knowledge and interest level in each of the categories
before and after the program (1=low; 10 = high)
SCIENCE, ENGINEERING &
RESEARCH
KNOWLEDGE LEVEL PRIOR
TO PROGRAM
KNOWLEDGE LEVEL AFTER
PROGRAM
Scientific Inquiry/ Nature of
Science
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Physical Oceanography
Marine Biology – Zoology
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Benthic Ecology/Sedimentology
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Marine Geology
Meteorology
Arctic Geography
Arctic Climate Change -Science
Arctic Climate Change - Issues
Traditional Knowledge
SCIENCE, ENGINEERING &
RESEARCH
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
INTEREST LEVEL PRIOR
TO PROGRAM
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
INTEREST LEVEL AFTER
PROGRAM
Natural sciences
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Research
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Engineering/Technology
Other: Canadian Coast Guard
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
4. Overall Impression - Please use back of the last page if you need more space.
• Did this program exceed, meet or fall short of your expectations? Why?
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
40
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
• Provide an example (or more than one) of something significant that you have learned as a result
of this program
• How did this experience impact you?
• Share any suggestions that you have for the next field program?
• Demographic information:
o ______Student ______Teacher
o ______Male
______ Female
o __________________ Postal Code
***Information collected from this program evaluation will be used primarily for program
improvements, and may also be used for educational research. All information provided will remain
confidential. Any identifying information will be removed. ***
☐ Check if you do not want this evaluation to be used for research purposes.
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
41
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Appendix H – Qualitative Data Themes
For
Change in Values and Attitude
Impact on Career Choices
Taking Action and Making Change
Personal Growth
Networking
Public Speaking Opportunities
In
Authentic Northern Culture/Community
Authentic Science Setting – Passion culture of research
Experiential – Hands on Learning
Science Personal Connection
Social Environment
Artic Beauty
Adventure/Extreme/Unique
About
Multi and Interdisciplinary Learning
Scientific Knowledge Learning
Peer Learning
Knowledge of Issues
Cross Cultural Learning
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
42
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
Appendix I – Student Participants’ Current Vocation and Education
Southern Students
Northern Students
Program
Year
2004
Current Vocation
Education
Medical School
2004
2004
2005
Undergraduate student (second degree)
Working outside of the home
Graduate Student - Masters of Science
2005
2005
2006
2006
2006
Undergraduate Student
Working at a Child Develop Center
Pilot
Resident family physician
Stay at Home Mother of Two
Bachelor's of Science in
Kinesiology, 2009
Bachelor of Arts – 2010
Bachelors (unspecified) 2009
Bachelor of Science (Honours) in
Geological Sciences
Bachelor of Arts 2014
Some high school, no diploma
BSc. Biology 2013
Doctorate degree 2014
Trade/technical/vocational
training
BSc Biology, 2013
Bachelors (unspecified) 2014
Bachelors Indigenous
Environmental Studies (2013)
Bachelor’s degree (unspecified)
High school graduate
2006
2006
2008
2008
2008
2008
2008
International
2008
International
2008
International
2008
International
2008
International
2008
International
2008
International
2008
International
2008
International
Teaching abroad
Undergraduate student (unspecified)
Aboriginal Liaison, ConocoPhillips Canada, taking
care of kids and family
Graduate Student - Masters in Physical Therapy
Undergraduate Student - Accounting; Full Time
Bank of Montreal
Working
Physiotherapist
High school graduate, diploma or
the equivalent (for example: GED)
Bachelors in Physiotherapy 2012
Undergraduate/college
High school graduate
Full-time employment as a petroleum engineer
Civil Engineering, 2013
Gap year – taking care of child
Graduate student - PhD student
Undergraduate Student
Physiotherapist
Bachelor in Geography, 2013.
Bachelor in History, 2011
MSc Polar & Alpine Change
Bachelors degree (unspecified)
2014
Bachelors in Physiotherapy 2012
Undergraduate/college
High school graduate
Gap year – taking care of child
Bachelor in Geography, 2013.
Bachelor in History, 2011
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
43
University of Manitoba / ArcticNet
2008
International
2008
International
2008
International
2009
2009
2009
2009
2009
2010
2010
2010
2011
2011
2011
2011
2011
Graduate student - PhD student
MSc Polar & Alpine Change
Undergraduate Student
Bachelors degree (unspecified)
2014
Masters in Industrial engineering
and Management year 2014
Bachelors (unspecified)
Bachelors
Working
Medical school
Military/Federal Government, studying
Commerce Degree
Undergraduate student (unspecified)
Undergraduate student (unspecified)
Undergraduate student, teaching music lessons,
performing
Graduate student (unspecified)
Medical School
Undergraduate student - science, biochemistry
Gap year – travel & work in Australia
Undergraduate student - BSc in Environmental
Science/Physical Geography
Undergraduate student - Math
Undergraduate student (unspecified), Freelance
Artist
Studying abroad in Prague Czech Republic
Schools on Board Evaluation Report
February, 2015
High school graduate
High school graduate
High school graduate
Bachelors (unspecified)
Bachelors (unspecified) 2014
High school graduate
High school graduate
High school graduate
High School graduate
High school graduate
Some college credit, no degree
44