Computers & Education 57 (2011) 1228–1239

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers & Education

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/compedu

The study on integrating WebQuest with mobile learning for environmentaleducation

Cheng-Sian Chang a, Tzung-Shi Chen b,*, Wei-Hsiang Hsu c

aDepartment of Information and Learning Technology, National University of Tainan, Tainan, TaiwanbDepartment of Computer Science and Information Engineering, National University of Tainan, Tainan, TaiwancDawan Elementary School, Tainan, Taiwan

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 7 April 2010Received in revised form21 December 2010Accepted 22 December 2010

Keywords:Elementary educationImproving classroom teachingteaching/learning strategies

* Corresponding author.E-mail addresses: chengsian1117@gmail.com (C.-S

0360-1315/$ – see front matter � 2010 Elsevier Ltd. Adoi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.12.005

a b s t r a c t

This study is to demonstrate the impact of different teaching strategies on the learning performance ofenvironmental education using quantitative methods. Students learned about resource recycling andclassification through an instructional website based on the teaching tool of WebQuest. There were 103sixth-grade students participating in this study and broken down into three groups: traditionalinstruction, traditional instruction with WebQuest and WebQuest instruction with outdoors. The majorcontribution of this study is the introduction of WebQuest into the outdoor instruction. The results of thisstudy show that using WebQuest in outdoor instruction influences students’ learning performancepositively. Two other interesting results are: (1) when WebQuest was used in real situations, studentscould acquire more knowledge and experiences, and (2) in the learning activity of the experiment, thestudents accomplished different learning tasks and expressed their own opinions and perspectives,which could foster their critical thinking skills. On the other hands, the students in outdoor situationcould be positive to participate in learning activity; furthermore, they could ponder the learning contentsby observing the real context and then they began to classify/categorize the resources. These findingswill contribute to the development of teaching and learning for government, schools and teachers; forinstance, teachers act as assistants or tutors and provide students with others public network resources,including PDAs, smartphones, tablet personal computers or the Internet, to improve their learning inoutdoor learning environments, such as campus, museums or zoos.

� 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Many studies on m-learning have been provided and applied to a variety of outdoor learning settings, such as museums, botanicalgardens or other appropriate settings (Akkerman, Admiraal, & Huizenga, 2009; Chen, Kao, & Sheu, 2003; Chu, Hwang, Huang, & Wu, 2008;Wishart & Triggs, 2010). Students participating in an m-learning environment can enhance their learning performance (Chen, Chang, Lin, &Yu, 2009; Liu, Tan, & Chu, 2009) and improve their creativity (Cavusa & Uzunboylu, 2009). Much research has shown that the mobile deviceas a mobile guide can help child to increase their environmental or geographical knowledge and their motivation to engage in learningactivities (Akkerman et al., 2009; Chen, Chang, Li, & Li, 2008; Ruchter, Klar, & Geiger, 2010; Uzunboylu, Cavus, & Ercag, 2009).

However, it is not enough to establish m-learning for use in the outdoor education environment because m-learning is a relatively newtool in the pedagogical arsenal and it helps students and teachers navigate the options available in the expanding world of distance learning(Liaw, Hatala, & Huang, 2010). An entire outdoor education environment requires a set of learning activities that allow students toparticipate in the process of learningmore easily. These learning activities include complex cognitive and social processes that are necessaryin order to interact with the world around them.

WebQuest is treated as “an inquiry-oriented activity in which some or all of the information that learners interact with comes fromresources on the Internet, optionally supplemented with videoconferencing” (Dodge, 1997). Many studies have demonstrated that Web-Quest can improve students’ learning abilities by promoting cooperative learning and allocating individual roles to students that requiresthem to share their different results within a small-group context (Pelliccione & Craggs, 2007). Through this process, students can obtain

. Chang), chents@mail.nutn.edu.tw (T.-S. Chen), shiumingje@yahoo.com.tw (W.-H. Hsu).

ll rights reserved.

C.-S. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 57 (2011) 1228–1239 1229

learning resources immediately, learning the skill of inquiry; furthermore, information overload can be reduced (Milson & Downey, 2001). Inother words, WebQuest not only challenges students to search for information but also puts emphasis on fostering the students’ abilities toanalyze, integrate, evaluate and solve problems (Dodge, 2001). Furthermore, students can debate issues, participate in meaningfuldiscussions, engage in role-play simulations and, most importantly, become connected and involved learners (Watson, 1999).

AWebQuest can be thought of as a micro-world, where students explore an issue in a learning environment that is both cooperative andcontextual (Kundu & Bain, 2006). However, the majority of projects was implemented in the classroom, such as Chan (2007), Chang andChang (2007), Chuo (2007) and Gaskill, McNulty, and Brooks (2006).

The aim of this study, based on the above considerations, was three-fold. First of all, a series of teaching scenarios of WebQuest weredesigned to support outdoor education engaging with these concepts of a pedagogical model. The concepts of the pedagogical model werebased on learner-centered, collaborative and self-presentation concepts incorporating with mobile technologies and online learningresource. Secondly, the learning activity was integrated into a course in sixth-grade education. The course includes (1) the descriptions ofenvironmental problem and protection and (2) the conditions and procedure of the resource classification. Finally, an empirical study wasconducted to evaluate students’ the learning performances and overall perceptions on the WebQuest activities in the outdoor education.

This study adopted an innovative approach by using a teaching scenario of WebQuest and mobile technology in outdoor education envi-ronment to examine the effect upon the environmental education. The studyalso seeks to explore participants’ learningperformanceand collecttheir opinions on their learning experience in the teaching scenario. Three research questions raised fromprevious studies are given as follows:

1. Does the specially designedWebQuest enable the participants to get better learning performance in a unit called Resource Recycling andClassification in the outdoor education environment?

2. Do different learning settings make an impact on the students’ learning portfolios and participation levels?3. Does there exist a causal relationship between the students’ satisfaction and their learning performances, and can the relationship be

verified?

2. Theoretical framework

Dale (1969) addressed that children’s study should be from concrete experience, such as direct experiences (real-life experiences),contrived experiences (interactive models), and dramatic participation (role plays) to abstract thinking. Outdoor education provideslearners with first-hand and concrete experience, which connects the learner with real people and real issues (Higgins & Nicol, 2002). Knapp(1996) and Woodhouse & Knapp (2000) advanced the theory that outdoor education aims to provide learners with meaningful contextualexperiences by using both natural and constructed environments. This method further gives teachers and students an opportunity tocomplement and expand classroom instruction that is apt to be dominated by print and electronic media.

The outdoor environment is the one which is most neglected by teachers, curriculum developers, and researchers (Biggs & Tap, 1986;Orion & Hofstein, 1994). Numerous studies (Fido & Gayford, 1982; Tilling, 2004) reported that teachers tended to prevent outdoor activi-ties from occurring because they were unfamiliar with the philosophy, technique, and organization of field trips. Additional, when carryingout outdoor education, teachers must take the risk and safety of students into account (Brookes, 2002) and consider appropriate teachingmaterials, which often impedes effective instruction (Yi-Ju, 2000).

Ubiquitous computing and mobile technologies offer much scope for designing innovative learning experiences that can take place ina variety of outdoor and indoor settings (Rogers et al., 2005). Mobile learning (m-learning), is one feasible solution to the challenges ofoutdoor instruction because it has the handheld feature of portability, social interactivity, context sensitivity, connectivity and individuality(Klopfer, Squire, & Jenkins, 2002). Chen et al. (2003) put forth the theory that the m-learning environment has six unique characteristics: (a)urgency of the learning need, (b) initiative of knowledge acquisition, (c) mobility of the learning setting, (d) interactivity of the learningprocess, (e) situating of the instructional activity, and (f) integration of the instructional content. Based on the m-learning environment, theteacher or manager can establish a new outdoor education environment.

Dodge and March developed WebQuest in 1995 at San Diego State University. WebQuest can be broken down into two parts: Webconsisting of a network that includes a website and the Internet, and Quest, which is the concept of discovery, exploration and inquiry(Chang & Chang, 2007). It is designed to provide students with an independent or small-group activity that incorporates research, problem-solving and the application of basic skills (Kelly, 2000; Yoder, 1999). The Internet is usually the chief information resource for WebQuest,although other, more traditional resources, such as newspapers and journals, can also be used (Warters, 2000).

The advantage of m-Learning is that learning experiences can be quickly accumulated to form complete and accurate knowledge, since allstudents can continuously observe, contact and experience meaningful contextual experiences. The advantage of WebQuest is that it fostersthe students’ abilities of learning by allowing them to search for the information needed to complete a task in a way that challenges theirintellectual and academic ability rather than by Internet skills alone (Vidoni &Maddux, 2002). Therefore, IntegratingWebQuest withMobileLearning can bring new learning experience to students and enhance their learning skills.

3. Method

The approach of this study adopted the experimental design of a nonequivalent pre-test–posttest control group. The period of theexperiment was from March 2009 to April 2009. The experimental procedure is described as follows and is shown as Fig. 1:

- Pre-examination: All students took a pre-examination at the beginning of the course. The pre-examination was used to obtain thestudents’ base levels of knowledge and their understanding of the learning topics.

- Learning activity: The students of this experiment were separated into three groups to participate separately in three different teachingmethods with some learning objects and tasks. The results of these tasks were recorded with a quantitative value as the participants’learning portfolios.

Week 01 Week 02 Week 03 Week 04 Week 05

EexperimentalGroup

First Control Group

IntroductionTask 1 for Learning Object 1

Task 2 for Learning Object 2

Post-

Examination

and

Questionnaire

Survey

Post-Examination

Task 3 for Learning Object 3

Second Control Group

Pre-Examination

IntroductionLearning Object 1

Learning Object 2

Learning Object 3

IntroductionTask 1 for Learning Object 1

Task 2 for Learning Object 2Task 3 for Learning Object 3

Watching the movie

Learning in Classroom

Learning in Computer-Classroom

Learning in the Treasure House & Computer-Classroom

Post-Examination and

Questionnaire Survey

WebQuest teaching

Traditional teaching

Fig. 1. Experimental design processes of two control groups and experimental group.

C.-S. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 57 (2011) 1228–12391230

- Post-examination: After the learning activity was completed, all of the students took a post-examination in order to measure theirunderstanding of the topics, that is, in order to quantify the range of their knowledge changes. But the content of post-examination isdifferent from pre-examination. There was an interval of five weeks between the pre-examination and the post-examination. Partic-ipants were also asked to fill out a questionnaire in order to track their system usage, satisfactionwith the system and learning behavior.

- Data analysis: After the experiment, we analyzed the students’ learning performances, learning portfolios and overall systemsatisfaction.

3.1. Environmental education as experimental course

The goal of environmental protection is to prevent damage by early recognition of possible hazards (Brunner & Baccini, 1992). Anunderstanding of the complexities of the interrelationships between the natural environment and human activity is said to be a necessarycondition for the maintenance and improvement of environmental quality (Chan, 1996). Thus, one of the principal goals of environmentaleducation is to develop the responsible environmental behavior of people (Ramsey & Hungerford, 1989).

To improve and promote peoples’ environmental knowledge, attitude and behavior, many studies applied different teaching or trainingmethods in different places. Ajiboye and Silo (2008) improve Botswana Children’s environmental knowledge, attitudes and practicesthrough the School Civic Clubs. Uzunboylu et al. (2009) integratedmobile technologies, data services, andmultimedia messaging systems toincrease students’ use of mobile technologies and to develop environmental awareness. The results in these studies indicated that theenvironment-awareness of participants increased significantly, and attitudes toward maintaining clean environments and preventingpollution improved.

A unit called Resource Recycling and Classification in environmental education was used during the study as experimental course. In2003, a grade-1-through-9-curriculum guideline in Taiwan was promulgated and environmental education was viewed as one of six majortopics by the Ministry of Education. The teaching materials were created based on curriculum guideline of environmental protection (referto http://www.edu.tw/eje-/content-.aspx%3Fsite_content_sn¼15326). This study combines a teaching scenario of WebQuest with mobiletechnology in the outdoor education environment to improve and promote students’ environmental knowledge, attitude and behavior.

3.2. Subjects

One hundred and three sixth-grade students in a public school in Tainan, Taiwan, participated in this study, and their ages rangedfrom 11 to 12, as shown in Fig. 1. These participants were separated into three groups: the experimental group included 35 students, thefirst control group was composed of 34 students, and the second control group consisted of 34 students. The teacher for each of thethree groups was the same throughout the study. The participants of the experimental group used WebQuest in an outdoor educationenvironment, and the teaching activities occurred at the treasure house in the elementary school. The first control group underwenttraditional teaching in the classroom, and the second control group underwent traditional classroom teaching combined withWebQuest.

Before analyzing the research hypotheses, we examined the level of knowledge about environmental protection in each of the threegroups by using one-way ANCOVA (Analysis of Covariance), and we found it to be equivalent among the groups. The results of the pre-examination showed that the experimental group (M ¼ 49.89, SD ¼ 9.471), the first control group (M ¼ 47.26, SD ¼ 8.113) and the secondcontrol group (M ¼ 50.12, SD ¼ 8.559) had no significant differences between them (F ¼ .638, r ¼ .530 > .05).

C.-S. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 57 (2011) 1228–1239 1231

3.3. The design of learning content

The teaching goals and learning contents were different for each week, as depicted in Table 1.

3.4. Instruction design

3.4.1. Traditional teachingStudents in the traditional classroom learned about resource recycling and classification by way of lectures. During the lecture, students

presented the teacher with a problem concerning resource recycling and classification and the teacher answered the question directly. Inaddition, the teacher showed relevant films about environmental protection and resource recovery. The goal was to give students a deeperunderstanding of the importance of resource recovery. The teacher needed to spend one or 2 h instructing the learning content of resourcerecycling and classification every week.

3.4.2. WebQuest teachingBoth the second control groupandtheexperimental groupusedaWebQuest teachingwebsite thatwasestablished for this study. Thedesign

of the WebQuest teaching website consisted of six modules, including Introduction, Task, Process, Resources, Evaluation and Conclusion. Thesamecontents of thiswebsitewereusedbyboth theexperimental groupand the second control group. Thedifferencesbetween the twogroupswere the setting inwhich the instruction took place and the learning tools utilized. To be precise, the learning activities for the second controlgroup took place in the computer-classroom using computers. Through Internet, the participants can gather the information of resourcerecovery and classification. On the other hand, the experimental group participated in the learning activities to enforce the resource recyclingand classification in the treasure house, using both PDAs (to gather information), as shown in Fig. 2(a), and computers (to create a PowerPointpresentation and awebsite). Students could discusswith themembers of group and execute the resource recycling and classification as shownin Fig. 2(b and c). A lot of posterswas put up on the treasure housewith the recovered and classifiedmethod of resource and the treasure housecan allow student learn how to carry on resource recovery and classification. Ramsey (1993) indicate that integration of issue instruction andaction training in school course would seem likely to achieve the goal of citizen participation in environmental issue remediation.

3.5. WebQuest learning activities

The procedures of the WebQuest learning activity were designed in accordance with the six major components of WebQuest advancedby Dodge (1995). The explanation of each step follows and is shown in Fig. 3:

- Introduction: This study chose a unit called Resource Recycling and Classification in the Natural Science & Life Technology curriculumfor students. This study used some animation designed and implemented by Flash MX to explain the concepts of the unit and learningobjectives (as shown in Table 1). The goal was to capture the students’ attention and interest on this topic.

- Tasks: The three tasks in the experiment were designed and implemented by two professional teachers. Students needed to completethree tasks in turn, including a learning sheet, a briefing, and the construction of a website.

- Processes: Each task includes a learning process.1. Learning sheet: The learning sheet, which included four topics and based on the learning objective 1, was designed by two

professional teachers of Natural Science & Life Technology. Students, was divided into nine groups with three or four learning partnereach, needed to complete each topic in Fig. 2(b and c). This task was designed to allow the students to acquire knowledge quickly andeffectively and foster social intercourse and solving problemswith cooperation (Bruffee, 1984; Chatti, Srirama, Kensche, & Cao, 2006).

2. Briefing: This was an individual learning activity. Each student was required to create a PowerPoint presentation, according to a topicwhich was based on learning objective 2 and assigned by the teacher, and to present the contents of the topic in the classroom asshown in Fig. 2(d). The studies on PowerPoint presentation showed that students believed that they learned more from PowerPointpresentation (Bartscha & Cobern, 2003; Lowry, 1999).

3. Website fabrication: This was an individual learning activity. Each student was required to create a website with contents that werebased on the learning objective 3 and included the method of work and suggestions for the need of resource recycling and

Table 1The teaching goals and learning contents for the three experimental groups.

Learningobjects

Teaching goals Learning contents

Object 1 Let students know that the use of natural resources can improvequality of life but also destroys the natural landscape and bringsabout environmental pollution at the same time.

1. Animals and plants offer a source of food to people, and energyand minerals supply food, clothing, transportation, etc.for people’s daily lives.

2. Natural resources are not abundant and overuse will exhaust them.Object 2 Let students learn the concept of resource recovery

so they can form habits of resource recovery and classification.1. Realizing rubbish decrement and resource recovery so it

can be utilized again2. Realizing the signs of resource recovery, the items of classification

and the channel of resource recovery.Object 3 Let students understand that the earth’s resources are limited.

In addition to classifying resources, encourage them to defendtheir beautiful home with concrete action.

1. Exploring why there are environmental problems produced andhow to reduce these problems.

2. Teaching students how to become green consumers anddiscussing the green consumption principle.

Fig. 2. The learning status and process of the experimental group.

C.-S. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 57 (2011) 1228–12391232

classification. However, during this process, the students were allowed to discuss their findings with other students and were evenencouraged to browse through their classmates’ websites. To discourage the temptation to copy each other’s work, the studentsunderstood that points would be deducted in the case of such behavior. The purpose was to enhance andmeasure the students’ skillsin information technology.

- Resources: After instruction, teachers were required to put the information presented in the lesson on resource recycling and classi-fication into the WebQuest website, where the students could search for related information and content.

- Evaluation: This study used different evaluating scales to measure the quantity of students’works as depicted in Table 2. Two teachersparticipated in the process of evaluation to measure the works. One teacher had a background in Natural Science & Life Technology andthe other teacher had a background in Computer Science. The item score was the average score graded by two teachers.

- Conclusion: Two Teachers were required to summarize each lesson in order to reinforce what the students learned so they could applythe knowledge acquired to daily life. Besides, the teachers needed to point out each student’s advantages and disadvantages, accordingto the results of implementing learning tasks.

Week 01 Week 02 Week 03 Week 04 Week 05

IntroductionTask 1 for

Learning Object 1Task 3 for Learning Object 2

Implementing Learning Sheet

Utilizing WebQuest

websites study

Utilizing WebQuest

websites study

Studying in WebQuest websites

Discussion in group

Making PowerPoint Web fabrication

Evaluating Learning Sheet

Oral report

Evaluating Website

Evaluating PowerPoint

and Oral report

Task 3 for Learning Object 3

Evaluation

Learning activities

Fig. 3. The procedures of the WebQuest experiments in two groups.

Table 2The performance indicators for rating scales.

Rating scales Performance indicators Description

Rating for learningsheet(total score: 25)

The appearance of content (100%) To evaluate the level of the learning sheet, this study estimated the contentof the learning sheet because each group only answered some of the questionsby searching for the information on the WebQuest website.

Rating forbriefing(total score: 50)

The appearance of content (40%) To evaluate the level of the briefing, this study estimated it based on three performanceindicators because the briefing was an individual learning activity and each studentdiffered in his/her ability to collect and arrange information, design and refine thePowerPoint, and present the oral report.

The skill of designand completion (30%)The presentationof oral report (30%)

Rating for websitefabrication(total score: 50)

The appearance of content (60%) To evaluate the level of the website, this study estimated it from two indicatorsbecause the briefing was an individual learning activity and each student differedin his/her ability to collect and arrange the information, and design and refine the website.

The skill of designand completion (40%)

C.-S. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 57 (2011) 1228–1239 1233

3.6. Research tools

A WebQuest teaching website was built to carry out the experiment, as shown in Fig. 4, and the pre- and post-examinations weredesigned by the participating teachers. The questions of a questionnaire were designed based on the assessment of learner satisfaction wasprovided by Wang (2003). The questionnaire using a 5-point Likert scale (from “1” being “strongly disagree” to “5” being “strongly agree”)was used to evaluate whether the website content and learning activity of WebQuest satisfied the participants’ needs, in addition toexamining whether the usage of computers and e-learning captured the participants’ attention and enhanced their learning interest.

Three rating scales (from “1” being “very poor” to “5” being “very good”) as the performance indicators were designed to evaluate theparticipants’ performance in those three tasks, as depicted in Table 2. These indicators, which revealed the results of students’ learningprocesses in each task, were regarded as their learning portfolios and their participating levels.

This study used SPSS 12 as the analytic tool. Three statistic methods were adopted to analyze the data which was collected by test andquestionnaire. First, one-way ANCOVA was to analyze the difference of learning performance in the diverse learning groups. Second, themethod of k-means clustering was to differentiate the student’s participation levels from their learning portfolios. Finally, regressionanalysis was to analyze the relationship between the students’ satisfaction and learning performances.

4. Results

4.1. The influence of learning strategies on the students’ learning performance

Different teaching strategies (traditional instruction, WebQuest with traditional instruction and WebQuest with outdoor instruction)made an impact on the learning performance of environmental education for the students.

This study analyzed the differences between pre-examination, post-examination and learning strategies using ANCOVA in order toeliminate the influence of the pre-examination. First, there was an interaction of minor degree between pre-examination achievement andthe learning strategies (F2, 100 ¼ 2.346, r ¼ .101), which showed that the regression slopes of the three teaching strategies were homoge-neous. Since the homogeneity requirement wasmet, wewere able to carry onwith the ANCOVA analysis, as depicted in Table 3. Based on thepremise that the pre-examination achievement was the covariate (F1, 99 ¼ 17.621, r ¼ .000), the learning strategies showed a significantdifference in post-examination achievement (F2, 99 ¼ 22.764, r ¼ .000). This result shows that using WebQuest with outdoor instructionleads to differences in learning performance, after removing the influence of the pre-examination. The post-hoc analysis for the learningmodel showed that achievement in using WebQuest with traditional instruction and WebQuest with outdoor instruction was higher thanthe achievement of traditional instruction alone. On the other hand, compared with the achievement of the second control group (Web-Quest with traditional instruction), the experimental group (WebQuest with outdoor instruction) showed no significant difference(r ¼ .056), although the experimental group did have a higher learning performance.

4.2. Comparison of learning portfolios between the two WebQuest teaching strategies

Different teaching strategies (WebQuest with traditional instruction and WebQuest with outdoor instruction) made an impact on thestudents’ learning portfolios. The achievements of the first task, the second task and the third task in these two groups are regarded as

Fig. 4. The interface of the WebQuest website.

Table 3ANCOVA results for assessment of post-examination achievement.

Teaching strategies Number of students Estimated marginal mean SD F-Value (p-value) Pairwise comparison

WebQuest with Outdoor Instruction 35 72.346 1.294 22.764a (.000) (1) > (3)a

(2) > (3)a

WebQuest with Traditional Instruction 34 67.930 1.316Traditional Instruction 34 60.006 1.312

a *r < .05, **r < .01, ***r < .001.

C.-S. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 57 (2011) 1228–12391234

providing a comparative basis for the learning portfolios. Using an independent T-test, Table 4 illustrates the two groups in each learningtask and the differences between them. In Table 4, Exp represents the experimental group and Sec represents the second control group.

In the learning sheet task, compared with the achievement of the second control group (M¼ 17.057, SD¼ 2.912), the experimental group(M ¼ 18.286, SD ¼ 1.775) showed a significant difference (t ¼ 2.106, r ¼ .04). In the briefing task, compared with the achievement of thesecond control group, the experimental group showed no significant difference on three performance indicators. In the website task,compared with the achievement of the second control group, the experimental group showed no significant difference on two performanceindicators.

4.3. The influence of participation levels on the students’ learning performance

The learning sheet task was a collaborative learning activity and therefore could not be cited as being covered by the indicators of theparticipation levels. This study used the k-means clustering method to classify students into three clusters according to their performanceindicators. Three clusters with different levels of performance indicators were obtained, as depicted in Table 5, which explains theircharacteristics. Cluster 1 represents the group of students at the high-participation level, cluster 2 represents the group of students at themiddle-participation level, and cluster 3 represents the group of students at the low-participation level.

This study used ANCOVA to treat pre-test scores as a covariate. There was an interaction of minor degree between pre-examinationachievement and the participation levels (F2, 66 ¼ .485, r ¼ .618), which showed that the regression slopes of the three teaching strategieswere homogeneous. Since the homogeneity requirement was met, we could carry on with the ANCOVA analysis, as depicted in Table 6.Based on the premise that the pre-examination achievement was the covariate (F1, 65 ¼ 8.227, r ¼ .006), the participation levels showed nosignificant difference for post-examination achievement (F2, 65 ¼ 2.971, r ¼ .058).

4.4. Analysis of satisfaction with the system and learning tasks

Factor analysis was adopted to analyze the questionnaire, with the questions having three main dimensions. Table 7 shows the factorloadings for each of the three dimensions. Questions 1 through 4 were used to measure the satisfaction with learning tasks. Questions 5through 8 were used to measure the usage behavior of computers and e-learning. Questions 9 through 11 were used to measure thesatisfaction with the system. Therefore, this questionnaire had good construct validity. Since Cronbach’s alpha value was .826 and higherthan .7, this questionnaire also had good reliability.

4.5. The relationship between the students’ satisfaction and learning performances

We used different independent variables combined to show the casual relationship between the students’ satisfaction, the taskperformance and the learning performance. The performance indicators have been summed up and form the task performances. By usingthe standard multiple regression procedures, path analysiswas adopted to analyze the casual relationship, and each dependent variable wasregressed on the variables that had causal paths leading to it. The bweights represented are illustrated in Fig. 5. First, the usage behavior ofcomputers and e-learning (t ¼ 2.984, r ¼ .004) and the satisfaction with the system (t ¼ 3.082, r ¼ .003) was related positively to the taskperformance (F ¼ 6.734, r ¼ .001, adj-R2 ¼ .202). Second, task performance (t ¼ 3.082, r ¼ .003) was related positively to the learningperformance (F ¼ 4.497, r ¼ .003, adj-R2 ¼ 17.1%).

Table 4The T-test results of the performance indicators of different tasks.

Rating scales Performance indicators Groups Mean SD T-Value (p-value)

Rating for Learning Sheet The appearance of content Exp 18.29 1.775 2.106a (.040)Sec 17.06 2.912

Rating for Briefing The appearance of content Exp 10.60 3.574 .658 (.513)Sec 10.89 2.832

The skill of design and completion Exp 8.91 2.811 .859 (.393)Sec 8.38 2.296

The presentation of oral report Exp 8.83 2.905 .348 (.729)Sec 8.62 2.074

Rating for Website Fabrication The appearance of the content Exp 14.00 5.83 .155 (.877)Sec 13.79 5.139

The skill of design and completion Exp 10.03 3.585 .653 (.516)Sec 9.50 3.116

a *r < .05, **r < .01, ***r < .001.

Table 5The clustering analysis results of the performance indicators.

Cluster Rating for briefing Rating for website fabrication

The appearanceof content

The skill of designand completion

The presentationof oral report

The appearanceof the content

The skill of designand completion

1 11.76 9.66 9.69 19.24 12.722 11.4 9.55 9.65 12.25 8.93 7.25 6.3 6.4 7.8 6.35

C.-S. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 57 (2011) 1228–1239 1235

5. Discussions

WebQuests were more effective than some other activities at supporting a higher cognitive presence, which was demonstrated byKanuka, Rourke, and Laflamme (2007). The results of students’ learning performance showed that there was an increase in students’performance level when the students used the WebQuest. A great deal of research also reached the same finding (e.g., Chan, 2007; Chuo,2007; Gaskill et al., 2006). Comparedwith the use of tradition instruction, in the learning activity ofWebQuest takes studentsmore time andenergy to finish the learning tasks, and makes them highly engaged in the use of higher order thinking skills (Perrone, Clark, & Repenning,1996; Souers, Kauffman, McManus, & Parker, 2007).

Many researchers believed that knowledge was effectively acquired in real-life environments (authentic context) of social-cognition andculture through problem-solving and social practice (Billett, 1996; Brown, Colllns, & Duguld, 1989; Schell & Black, 1997; Young, 1993). Fromthe results of the performance indicators, there were no significant differences in all learning tasks, except for the learning sheet task,between the second control group and the experimental group. One of the possible reasons is that the experimental group completed thelearning sheet in the treasure house but the second control group did it in the computer-classroom. Consequently, the students of theexperimental group implemented the learning sheet with richer content by themeans of observing and practicing the processes of resourcerecycling and classification. This revealed that students had better learning performance, and develops critical thinking skills while theywere situated in a setting reflecting the topic instruction (Cavusa & Uzunboylu, 2009; Yatani, Onuma, Sugimoto, & Kusunoki, 2004). Oncontrary, under the same marking condition (marking PowerPoint presentation file and website in computer-classroom); there were nodifferences in the performance in the tasks between the experimental group and the second control group.

Learning is a process inwhich knowledge is acquired through the transformative experience, according to the Learning-by-Doing theory(Dewey, 1938; Kaagan, 1999). The results of the experiment demonstrate that combining the learning activity with outdoor instruction canenhance students’ learning motivation, improve the participation degree, and enhance the learning performance. This finding is quitesimilar to those of previous studies (Huang, Lin, & Cheng, 2010; Lai, Yang, Chen, Ho, & Chan, 2007; Liu & Chu, 2010). Although there were nosignificant differences in the participation level between the groups, we found that increasing the achievement of students in learningcorrelates with their participation degree positively. Additionally, concerning the high-participation level, the number of students in theexperimental group was larger than that in the second control group because building own multimedia works increased students’ moti-vation and improved their learning attitude (Barbour, Rieber, Thomas, & Rauscher, 2009).

The results of the questionnaire indicated that the students thought accomplishing learning tasks could help them acquire more whenlearning the course (Gwo-Jen,Wan-Ling, Po-Han, Yueh-Min, & Ya-Yan, 2010). Also, they thought that theWebQuest website could help themsearch for relevant information quickly so it was a useful tool, and they further hoped they could use it in different disciplines. Furthermore,they had a higher inclination to search for answers to their questions and to solve problems if using computers and e-learning. Prior researchhas also found similar findings (e.g., Gaskill et al., 2006; Laborda, 2010; Leite, Vieira, Silva, & Neves, 2007).

The studywas further focusedon the relationship among the students’ satisfaction, task performance and learningperformance. The resultsof this study indicated that when interested in using computer and e-Learning and satisfied with the function of the system in the outdoorenvironments, the students could complete theirwork or tasks better andgethigher the sense of achievement. Prior studies pinpointed thatm-Learning can help students perform on learning better (e.g., Cavus & Ibrahim, 2009; Huang et al., 2010; Liu et al., 2009). Greenwald andHedges(1996) found that a broad range of resourceswere positively related to student outcomes; with appropriate expansion, resources can improvethe learning achievement of all students. On the other hand, there was not direct correlation between the students’ satisfactionwith learningtasks andtheirperformanceof the tasks. That is, the students’performanceof the learning taskhadnothing todowith their satisfactionwith thetask. Similarly, Bean and Bradley (1986) found that learning performance had a strong positive effect on learning satisfaction. Even though theparticipating studentswere satisfied and liked the learning activities ofWebQuest, but, many students in Taiwanwere short of participating inthe complicated learning activities, whereas they lacked the abilities to express opinions and to make a report about their learning process.

5.1. Limitations and future research

The WebQuest website was a teaching website; therefore, it could not trace data in the students’ learning portfolio, such as usage timeper week or usage frequency per week. This study attempted to use the performance indicators from the learning portfolios to analyze the

Table 6ANCOVA results of post-examination achievement at different participation levels.

Cluster Groups Number of students Mean (SD) Estimated marginal mean SD F-Value (r -value)

High-participation level Exp 18 74.22 (6.17) 73.17 6.47 2.971 (.058)Sec 11 71.45 (6.86)

Middle-participation level Exp 7 72.14 (6.18) 69.45 5.55Sec 13 68.00 (4.81)

Low-participation level Exp 10 70.00 (7.75) 66.20 9.57Sec 10 62.40 (10.06)

Annotation: Exp represents experimental group and Sec represents second control group.

Table 7The students’ satisfaction with the system and learning tasks (N ¼ 69).

Dimension Question Mean SD Factorloading

Eigenvalue

Cumulativevariance

Satisfaction withthe learning tasks

I can enter the state of studying easily by achieving every task gradually. 4.10 .807 .549 4.308 35.157%I clearly know the focal point of the study by achieving every task gradually. 3.94 .968 .734The process of gradually finishing every task helps me to learn. 4.13 .821 .809The process of gradually finishing every task captures my learning interest. 3.78 .937 .528

Usage behavior ofcomputers ande-Learning

I am interested in using computer software and networks. 4.25 .812 .582 1.674 45.703%I often use an e-learning platform or Computer-Assisted Instruction. 3.46 1.092 .495When I have a question, I will look for the answer by using Internetsites such as Google or Yahoo! Answers.

4.29 .941 .622

I have presented my own opinion or helped others to solve their problemsvia blog or discussion forum.

3.57 1.23 .712

Satisfactionwith the system

I can reduce the time it takes to collect information from the Internetby using the WebQuest website.

4.09 .836 .695 1.086 51.289%

I can learn more knowledge about resource recycling andclassification using the website.

4.23 .825 .589

I hope to apply this system in other disciplines. 4.07 .846 .547

The satisfaction with learning tasks

The usage behavior of the computer and e-

Learning

The satisfaction with system

TaskPerformance

LearningPerformance

-.117

.325**

.340**

.143

-.199.106

.434***

0.001***0.05,**0.1,<* < <

Fig. 5. The relationship of students’ cognitions and learning performances.

C.-S. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 57 (2011) 1228–12391236

participation level of students. The results of this study showed that students can achieve better learning performances while theyconscientiously participate in the learning task in the outdoor setting.

A common problem with learning at schools is in the limited contents of the courses. This was visible to learn the concepts of resourcerecycling and classification which is based on the program of Natural Science & Life Technology. The participants have preliminaryunderstood resource recycling and classification, which may reduce students’ learning motivation and interest. According to the obser-vations mentioned previously, three suggestions are given for future work.

- Combining the learning activity of WebQuest with outdoor instruction can apply in different learners, such as the education ofadolescent or adult, and different courses, such as cultural exploration or geology.

- The learning activities can be more diverse, such as making poster, compiling manual or popularizing the concept of course to others.Through different learning activities, students can foster and develop more learning abilities, such as expression and Informationintegration.

- In this study, aWebQuest teaching websitewas built to carry out the experiment. However, we think that many learning-assisting tools,such as blog, wiki or concept map, can help students to record and express their own opinions. And then students can develop criticalthinking skills by discussing with others.

6. Conclusions

6.1. Contributions

The major contribution of this study is the introduction of WebQuest in outdoor instruction compared with traditional instruction in theclassroom and traditional instruction usingWebQuest. WebQuest in outdoor instruction has been developed to probe the students’ learningperformance, satisfaction and behavior. This study not only examined the differences of learning performances among traditional instructionin the classroom, traditional instruction using WebQuest, and WebQuest in outdoor instruction, but also it found a significant associationamong the students’ satisfaction, participation levels (task performance), and learning performance. Therefore, elementary school should

C.-S. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 57 (2011) 1228–1239 1237

provide studentswithmore online educational resources and learning settings; participating in different learning activities allows students tofocus on completing learning tasks and acquiring more knowledge and experience (Chen & Chung, 2008; Huang et al., 2010).

This study addressed three research questions and showed some interesting findings. The first interesting finding was that the learningperformance of the experiment group was a higher than the control group. Lugg (2007) reported that educational experiences in outdoorsituation could be significant in developing environmental sensitivity and knowledge. Therefore, the WebQuest combining with outdoorsituation could help students to acquiremore knowledge and to accumulate learning experience. This learning experience can help studentsto maintain clean environments and increase their awareness of environmental concerns.

The second interesting findingwas that theWebQuest includedmainly a topic description, a list of relevant web resources, and a series oftask requirements and processes (MacGregor & Lou, 2004). In the learning activity of the experiment, the students accomplish differentlearning tasks and present their own opinion and perspective, which can foster their learning skills (Leite et al., 2007).

The purpose of the environmental protection is to prevent pollution by early recognition of possible hazards. This study providedenvironmental educators with a method and an opportunity to foster students’ responsibility and to develop their environment-awareness.Through participating in outdoor learning activities, students can have a firsthand experience of how important the environmentalprotection is; more specifically, students can realize how important to protect environment is by perceiving the destruction of the pollutionto the environment, observing the real context and launching to classify the resources.

6.2. Recommendations

6.2.1. Recommendations to the governmentWe found that using WebQuest with outdoor instruction makes a positive influence to the learning performance of students. During the

period of our research, we observed that most of the students in the experimental group had better participation levels and interacted withother students more often than the students in the classroom interacted.

We suggest that the government provide to students and others public network resources, including PDAs, smartphones, tablet personalcomputers or the Internet, for use in an outdoor learning environment, such as museums or zoos, and WebQuest websites with otherdisciplines, and then integrate them. The government should also encourage the WebQuest providers to build an Integrated Learning NetService, which will include not only the knowledge found in a textbook, but also pluralistic information on medicine and health, ecology,travel tips, etc.

6.2.2. Recommendations to schoolsIn the city, most of the elementary schools have a good infrastructure of information technology, such as computer-classrooms, networks

and teaching websites. We suggest that schools apply these technologies and integrate teaching settings such as the treasure house toachieve creativeways of instructing students, thereby improving their learning abilities. The second suggestion for schools is to build relatedWebQuest websites for their curriculums and to design the learning procedure and tasks as tools to assist them in instructing the courses.The goal is to promote the usage and learning behavior of e-learning by incorporating e-learning into the students’ courses.

Many studies have provided teachers and students with learning system or environment to help them acquiring more learning expe-rience and knowledge. Table 8 compiled the related practices from research in recent years, which can provide for school, teachers orstudents takes in the future the teaching and learning reference.

Table 8A concise list of practices from studies and learning platforms.

Authors (years)/website name

The descriptions of articles and learning platforms

Yang and Lin (2010) To learn the characteristics and classification of plants, this study designed two-phase seven-step learning activity and created a mobilelearning environment with the integration of the Shared Display Groupware (SDG). SDG allows students to share information from individualand public spaces. The results of the study showed that students have positive appraisal, particularly, they could share information andcreate a common focus during group discussions via SDG. In addition, students had improved their abilities to create conditions for classifyingplants via the support of the SDG system in mobile learning environment.

Chen, Lien, Annetta,and Lu (2010)

This study examined the influences of an educational computer game on children’s cultural identities using computer game, calledFORmosaHope (FH). Students participating in the game need to enter the “Village” for a free exploration and may trigger a series oflearning events. The evidence showed that FH has significant effect on students’ cultural learning and is helpful in some degree to studentsfrom lower socioeconomic families as compared with students from middle and upper socioeconomic families.

Nature versusnurture

This is a WebQuest of psychological teaching (http://education.csm.edu/students/mbonacci/Technology/webquest.htm). The purpose isthat let students find the difference between “nurture” stance of social psychologists and “nature” stance of social psychologists.The WebQuest has a complete produce of teaching and learning, which can be regarded as a reference materials to design WebQuestteaching activity in future.

To recycle ornot to recycle

This is a WebQuest of resource recycling http://education.iupui.edu/webquests/recycle/index.htm). The purpose of this program is to reducethe amount of waste at the local landfill. The program would require both residents and businesses to separate their waste into garbageand material that is recyclable. The WebQuest has a complete produce of teaching and learning, which can be regarded as a referencematerials to design WebQuest teaching activity in future.

Green power This organization was established in 1988 by the Hong Kong resident (http://www.greenpower.org.hk/gp/main.asp). The purpose is forpromoting the environmental education because they believe that education is most fundamental method to change idea and the behaviorof people. The organization will design the activity and publish the publication about environmental education in unfixed time. And thewebsite will offer the relevant materials of environmental education too.

Recycle moreWisconsin

The aims to bring together communities across Wisconsin to prevent valuable recyclables from going to waste in our landfills. To achieve thisgoal they are providing education on the benefits of recycling and the opportunities to recycle at home, work, school, and all public places.This is a website of resource recycling (http://www.recyclemorewisconsin.org/index.php), which admonish and teach people why recycle,what to recycle, and what happens to my recyclables.

C.-S. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 57 (2011) 1228–12391238

6.2.3. Recommendations to teachersFrom results of this study, we found that learning task is a very effective assisting tool for students. Teachers should interact with

students frequently. We provide two suggestions for teachers. First, teachers can assign homework or address problems which are relatedwith curriculum to students and then the students can discuss with one another via an e-learning platform. Second, the learning tasks basedon different subjects, chapters and sections should be built by teachers, school or government as learning tools or activities, which can helpstudents to acquire more knowledge from extracurricular learning resource and foster diversified learning skills such as oral report,collaborative wok or making report. This is the shortcoming of Taiwan education in elementary school.

References

Ajiboye, J. O., & Silo, N. (2008). Enhancing Botswana children’s environmental knowledge, attitudes and practices through the school civic clubs. International Journal ofEnvironmental & Science Education, 3(3), 105–114.

Akkerman, S., Admiraal, W., & Huizenga, J. (2009). Storification in history education: a mobile game in and about medieval Amsterdam. Computers & Education, 52(2), 449–459.Barbour, M., Rieber, L. P., Thomas, G., & Rauscher, D. (2009). Homemade powerpoint games: a constructionist alternative to WebQuests. TechTrends, 53(5), 54–59.Bartscha, R. A., & Cobern, K. M. (2003). Effectiveness of PowerPoint presentations in lectures. Computers & Education, 41, 77–86.Bean, J. P., & Bradley, R. K. (1986). Untangling the satisfaction-performance relationship for college students. The Journal of Higher Education, 57(4), 393–412.Biggs, A., & Tap, P. (1986). The school surroundings: a useful tool in education. The American Biology Teacher, 48(1), 27–31.Billett, S. (1996). Situated learning: bridging sociocultural and cognitive theorising. Learning and Instruction, 6(3), 263–280.Brookes, A. (2002). Lost in the Australian bush: outdoor education as curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34(4), 405–425.Brown, J. S., Colllns, A., & Duguld, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.Bruffee, K. A. (1984). Collaborative learning and the “Conversation of Mankind”. College English, 46(7), 635–652.Brunner, P. H., & Baccini, P. (1992). Regional material management and environmental protection. Waste Management & Research, 10(2), 203–212.Cavus, N., & Ibrahim, D. (2009). m-Learning: an experiment in using SMS to support learning new English languagewords. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 78–91.Cavusa, N., & Uzunboylu, H. (2009). Improving critical thinking skills in mobile learning. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 434–438.Chan, K. K. W. (1996). Environmental attitudes and behaviour of secondary school students in Hong Kong. The Environmentalist, 16, 297–306.Chan, Y.-Y. Teaching queueing theory with an inquiry-based learning approach: a case for applying WebQuest in a course in simulation and statistical analysis. Paper

presented at the 37th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Milwaukee, WI, October 10–13, 2007.Chang, W. H., & Chang, W. C. A study on WebQuest incorporated into the life learning field of nine-years-joint curriculum. Paper presented at the Digital Contents

Management and Applications (DCMA 2007), Tainan, Taiwan, 1–2 June 2007.Chatti, M. A., Srirama, S., Kensche, D., & Cao, Y. Mobile web services for collaborative learning. Paper presented at the Fourth IEEE International Workshop on Wireless, Mobile

and Ubiquitous Technology in Education, 2006.Chen, C. M., & Chung, C. J. (2008). Personalized mobile English vocabulary learning system based on item response theory and learning memory cycle. Computers & Education,

51(2), 624–645.Chen, H.-P., Lien, C.-J., Annetta, L., & Lu, Y.-L. (2010). The influence of an educational computer game on children's cultural identities. Educational Technology & Society, 13(1),

94–105.Chen, T.-S., Chang, C.-S., Li, D.-W., & Li, P.-I. Creation, sharing and accumulation of knowledge using Web 2.0 technology for ubiquitous learning. Paper presented at the

Technology Enhanced Learning Conference 2008 (TELearn 2008), 2008.Chen, T.-S., Chang, C.-S., Lin, J.-S., & Yu, H.-L. (2009). Context-awarewriting in ubiquitous learning environments. Research and Practice inTechnology Enhanced Learning, 4(1), 61–82.Chen, Y.-S., Kao, T.-C., & Sheu, J.-P. (2003). A mobile learning system for scaffolding bird watching learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19, 347–359.Chu, H. C., Hwang, G. J., Huang, S. X., & Wu, T. T. (2008). A knowledge engineering approach to developing e-Libraries for mobile learning. Electronic Library, 26(3), 303–317.Chuo, T.-W. I. (2007). The effects of the WebQuest writing instruction program on EFL learners’ writing performance, writing apprehension, and perception. Teaching English

as a Second or Foreign Language, 11(3). Retrieved from http://tesl-ej.org/ej43/a3.pdf.Dale, E. (1969). Audio–visual methods in teaching (3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winsto.Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Macmillan.Dodge, B. (1995). Some thoughts about WebQuests. The Distance Educator, 1(3), 12–15.Dodge, B. (May 5, 1997). Some thoughts about WebQuests. Retrieved September 15, 2009, from http://webquest.sdsu.edu/about_webquests.html.Dodge, B. (2001). Five rules for writing a great WebQuest. Learning & Learning with Technology, 28(8), 6–9.Fido, S. H., & Gayford, G. C. (1982). Field work and the biology teacher: a survey in secondary schools in England and Wales. Journal of Biological Education, 16, 27–34.Gaskill, M., McNulty, A., & Brooks, D. W. (2006). Learning from WebQuests. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(2), 133–136.Greenwald, R., & Hedges, L. V. (1996). The effect of school resources on student achievement. Review of Educational Research, 66(3), 361–396.Gwo-Jen, H., Wan-Ling, K., Po-Han, W., Yueh-Min, H., & Ya-Yan, Z. An investigation on students’ cognitive load and learning achievements for participating in a local culture

mobile learning activity. Paper presented at the Wireless, Mobile and Ubiquitous Technologies in Education (WMUTE), 2010 6th IEEE International Conference on 12–16April 2010.

Higgins, P., & Nicol, R. (2002)Outdoor education: Authentic learning in the context of landscapes, Vol. 2. Kisa, Sweden.Huang, Y. M., Lin, Y. T., & Cheng, S. C. (2010). Effectiveness of a mobile plant learning system in a science curriculum in Taiwanese elementary education. Computers &

Education, 54(1), 47–58.Kaagan, S. S. (1999). Leadership games: Experiential learning for organizational development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Kanuka, H., Rourke, L., & Laflamme, E. (2007). The influence of instructional methods on the quality of online discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 260–271.Kelly, R. (2000). Working with WebQuests. Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(6), 4–13.Klopfer, E., Squire, K., & Jenkins, H. Environmental detectives: PDAs as a window into a virtual simulated world. Paper presented at the IEEE International Workshop on

Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE’02), 2002.Knapp, C. E. (1996). Just beyond the classroom: Community adventures for interdisciplinary learning. Charleston, WV: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools.Kundu, R., & Bain, C. (2006). Webquests: utilizing technology in a constructivist manner to facilitate meaningful preservice learning. Art Education, 59(2), 6–11.Laborda, J. G. (2010). Fostering face to face oral interaction through webquests: a case study in ESP for tourism. Trabalhos em Linguística Aplicada, 49, 275–292.Lai, C.-H., Yang, J.-C., Chen, F.-C., Ho, C.-W., & Chan, T.-W. (2007). Affordances of mobile technologies for experiential learning: the interplay of technology and pedagogical

practices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 326–337.Leite, L., Vieira, P., Silva, R.-M., & Neves, T. (2007). The role of WebQuests in science education for citizenship. Interactive Educational Multimedia, 15, 18–36.Liaw, S.-S., Hatala, M., & Huang, H.-M. (2010). Investigating acceptance toward mobile learning to assist individual knowledge management: based on activity theory

approach. Computers & Education, 54(2), 446–454.Liu, T.-Y., & Chu, Y.-L. (2010). Using ubiquitous games in an English listening and speaking course: impact on learning outcomes and motivation. Computers & Education, 55(2),

630–643.Liu, T.-Y., Tan, T.-H., & Chu, Y.-L. (2009). Outdoor natural science learning with an RFID-supported immersive ubiquitous learning environment. Educational Technology &

Society, 12(4), 161–175.Lowry, R. B. (1999). Electronic presentation of lectures – effect upon student performance. University Chemistry Education, 3(1), 18–21.Lugg, A. (2007). Developing sustainability-literate citizens through outdoor learning: possibilities for outdoor education in higher education. Journal of Adventure Education

and Outdoor Learning, 7(2), 97–112.MacGregor, S. K., & Lou, Y. WebQuesting: influence of task structure and web site design on learning. Paper presented at the National Educational Computing Conference

(NECC), New Orleans, 2004.Milson, A. J., & Downey, P. (2001). WebQuest: using Internet resources for cooperative inquiry. Social Education, 65(3), 144–146.Orion, N., & Hofstein, A. (1994). Factors that influence learning during a scientific field trip in a natural environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(10), 1097–1119.Pelliccione, D. L., & Craggs, G. J. WebQuests: an online learning strategy to promote cooperative learning and higher-level thinking. Paper presented at the AARE Conference,

2007.

C.-S. Chang et al. / Computers & Education 57 (2011) 1228–1239 1239

Perrone, C., Clark, D., & Repenning, A. (1996). WebQuest: substantiating education in edutainment through interactive learning games. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems,28, 1307–1319.

Ramsey, J. M. (1993). The effects of issue investigation and action training on eighth-grade students’ environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Education, 24(3), 21–36.Ramsey, J. M., & Hungerford, H. R. (1989). The effects of issue investigation and action training on environmental behaviors in seventh grade students. Journal of Environmental

Education, 20(4), 29–34.Rogers, Y., Price, S., Randell, C., Fraser, D. S., Weal, M., & Fitzpatrick, G. (2005). Ubi-learning integrates indoor and outdoor experiences. Communications of the ACM, 48(1), 55–59.Ruchter, M., Klar, B., & Geiger, W. (2010). Comparing the effects of mobile computers and traditional approaches in environmental education. Computers & Education, 54(4),

1054–1067.Schell, J. W., & Black, R. S. (1997). Situated learning: an inductive case study of a collaborative learning experience. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 34(4), 5–28.Souers, C., Kauffman, L., McManus, C., & Parker, V. (2007). Collaborative learning: a focused partnership. Nurse Education in Practice, 7(6), 392–398.Tilling, S. (2004). Fieldwork in UK secondary schools: influences and provision. Journal of Biological Education, 38(2), 54–58.Uzunboylu, H., Cavus, N., & Ercag, E. (2009). Using mobile learning to increase environmental awareness. Computers & Education, 52, 381–389.Vidoni, K. L., & Maddux, C. D. (2002). WebQuests. Computers in the Schools, 19(1), 101–117.Wang, Y.-S. (2003). Assessment of learner satisfaction with asynchronous electronic learning systems. Information & Management, 41, 75–86.Warters, B. (2000). Using WebQuests to promote integrative thinking in conflict studies.Watson, K. L. (1999).WebQuests in themiddle school curriculum: promoting technological literacy in the classroom.Meridian: AMiddle School Computer Technologies Journal, 2(2).Wishart, J., & Triggs, P. (2010). MuseumScouts: exploring how schools, museums and interactive technologies can work together to support learning. Computers & Education,

54(3), 669–678.Woodhouse, J. L., & Knapp, C. E. (2000). Place-based curriculum and instruction: outdoor and environmental education approaches (Publication no. ERIC digest – EDO-RC-00-

6). From ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools.Yang, J. C., & Lin, Y. L. (2010). Development and evaluation of an interactive mobile learning environment with shared display groupware. Educational Technology &

Society, 13(1), 195–207.Yatani, K., Onuma, M., Sugimoto, M., & Kusunoki, F. (2004). Musex: a system for supporting children’s collaborative learning in a museumwith PDAs. Systems and Computers in

Japan, 35(14), 54–63.Yi-Ju, P. (2000). Effect of web-based learning on six-grade students’ 3Rs education. Hsinchu: National Hsinchu University of Education.Yoder, M. B. (1999). The student WebQuest: a productive and thought-provoking use of the Internet. Learning & Leading with Technology, 26(7), 6–9, & 52.Young, M. F. (1993). Instructional design for situated learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41(1), 43–58.