CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

This chapter contains documents which includes research reports, journals articles books and

abstracts. The purpose of this study is to investigate “ the correlation between historical field

trip and students understanding of historical events. The review of related literature in research

work serves as a critical analysis and synthesis of existing scholarly articles, books, and other

sources relevant to the research topic. It aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the current

state of knowledge on the research area, identify gaps in existing literature, and establish the

theoretical framework for the study.

Meaning of

Overview of Experiential Learning Theories

Experiential learning theories emphasize the importance of direct, hands-on experiences

in the learning process. These theories suggest that individuals learn best when they are actively

engaged in experiences, reflecting on those experiences, and applying the acquired knowledge

and skills to new situations (Kolb, 2014). Several influential theorists have contributed to the

development and understanding of experiential learning.

 One of the most widely recognized models is Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory

(Kolb, 2014). This theory proposes a four-stage cyclical process: concrete experience, reflective

observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation. Learners progress through

these stages, engaging in experiences

reflecting on them, forming abstract concepts, and then testing those concepts in new

situations, leading to further concrete experiences (Coulson & Harvey, 2013).

Dewey’s work on progressive education and the role of experience in learning also laid a

foundation for experiential learning theories (Dewey, 1986). He emphasized the importance of

connecting learning experiences to real-life situations and fostering continuous growth through

problem-solving and inquiry (Roberts, 2012).

Lewin’s work on action research and group dynamics contributed to the understanding of

experiential learning, particularly in the context of social and organizational settings (Kolb,

2014). His model of action research involves cycles of planning, action, observation, and

reflection, which align with the principles of experiential learning (Coghlan & Shani, 2005).

Piaget’s theory of cognitive development also influenced the understanding of

experiential learning, particularly in the context of constructivism (Ertmer & Newby, 2013).

Piaget emphasized the role of active exploration and discovery in the learning process, where

learners construct their own understanding through interactions with their environment

(Ackermann, 2001).

More recently, social constructivist perspectives, such as Vygotsky’s sociocultural

theory, have further shaped the understanding of experiential learning (Vygotsky, 1978). These
perspectives highlight the importance of social interactions, cultural contexts, and collaborative

learning in the construction of knowledge and meaning-making (Wertsch, 1991).

In the context of historical field trips, experiential learning theories provide a theoretical

foundation for the potential benefits of these experiences. By engaging in immersive and hands-

on activities, students can connect abstract historical concepts to concrete experiences, fostering

deeper understanding, critical thinking, and the development of transferable skills (Marcus et al.,

2019; Nance, 2020).

Historical Field Trips as Pedagogical Tools

Historical field trips have long been recognized as valuable pedagogical tools for

enhancing students’ understanding and engagement with historical narratives (Marcus et al.,

2019; Nance, 2020). These immersive experiences provide opportunities for experiential

learning, allowing students to connect abstract concepts with concrete experiences and contexts

(Behrendt & Franklin, 2014).

Numerous studies have highlighted the potential benefits of historical field trips in

fostering students’ comprehension and retention of historical information. Research by Nabors et

al. (2003) found that museum-based instruction significantly improved students’ critical thinking

skills and historical understanding. Similarly, a study by Stern et al. (2014) demonstrated that

field trips to cultural heritage sites could promote environmental literacy and an appreciation for

cultural diversity.

Historical field trips have also been linked to increased student engagement and

motivation (Greene et al., 2014). By providing a break from traditional classroom settings, these

experiences can stimulate students’ curiosity and interest in historical topics (Rebar, 2012).
Furthermore, the multisensory nature of field trips, involving sight, sound, and touch, can create

vivid and memorable learning experiences (Storksdieck, 2001).

However, the effectiveness of historical field trips in enhancing students’ understanding

of historical events may depend on various factors. Proper planning, preparation, and follow-up

activities are crucial to maximizing the educational value of these experiences (Rennie, 2007).

Additionally, the quality of the field trip experience, including the expertise of guides, the design

of activities, and the alignment with curricular goals, can impact the learning outcomes (Tal &

Steiner, 2006).

It is important to note that historical field trips can take various forms, including visits to

museums, historical sites, living history museums, or reenactments. Each type of experience may

offer unique opportunities and challenges in terms of fostering historical understanding (Marcus

et al., 2019; Nance, 2020). For example, museum visits may provide access to primary sources

and artifacts, while historical site visits can offer a sense of place and context (Rennie, 2007).

Despite the potential benefits, some researchers have raised concerns about the logistical

challenges and resource constraints associated with organizing historical field trips (Rebar,

2012). Additionally, there is a need for more research to understand the long-term impacts of

these experiences on students’ historical understanding and to develop effective strategies for

integrating field trips into the curriculum (Greene et al., 2014).

In précis, the literature suggests that historical field trips can be powerful pedagogical

tools for enhancing students’ understanding of historical events when implemented effectively

and in conjunction with supportive classroom instruction and activities.

Previous Research on Field Trips and Learning Outcomes

 Numerous studies have explored the relationship between field trips and various learning

outcomes across different subject areas and educational contexts. While the specific focus and

methodologies vary, the existing literature provides valuable insights into the potential impacts

of field trips on student learning.

In the context of science education, researchers have investigated the effects of field trips

on students’ knowledge acquisition, conceptual understanding, and attitudes towards science. For

example, a study by Behrendt and Franklin (2014) found that science field trips had a positive

impact on students’ content knowledge and motivation to learn. Similarly, Farmer et al. (2007)

reported that environmental education field trips led to improvements in students’ ecological

knowledge and pro-environmental attitudes.

In the realm of social studies and history education, several studies have examined the

role of field trips in enhancing students’ understanding of historical and cultural concepts. Nance

(2020) conducted a case study on a field trip to a historical site and found that the immersive

experience fostered students’ historical knowledge and engagement. Marcus et al. (2019)

explored the use of museum artifacts during field trips and their potential to enhance the

coherence and relevance of the history curriculum.

The impact of field trips on cognitive skills, such as critical thinking and problem-

solving, has also been investigated. Nabors et al. (2003) reported that museum-based instruction

improved students’ critical thinking skills in the context of history education. Similarly, Stern et

al. (2014) found that field trips focused on cultural heritage sites promoted critical thinking and

environmental literacy among diverse student populations.

 While many studies have reported positive outcomes, some researchers have highlighted

the importance of considering various factors that can influence the effectiveness of field trips.

Rennie (2007) emphasized the need for proper planning, preparation, and follow-up activities to

maximize the educational value of field trips. Rebar (2012) explored teachers’ sources of

knowledge and practices related to field trips, highlighting the importance of professional

development and access to resources.

Additionally, researchers have examined the role of field trips in promoting affective

outcomes, such as engagement, motivation, and attitudes towards learning. Greene et al. (2014)

found that field trips had a positive impact on students’ engagement and interest in the subject

matter. Storksdieck (2001) explored differences in teachers’ and students’ perceptions of

museum field trips, highlighting the importance of considering diverse perspectives.

While the existing literature provides valuable insights, there is a need for continued

research to further understand the complex interplay between field trips and various learning

outcomes. Factors such as the type of field trip, the subject area, the age and background of

students, and the integration with classroom instruction may influence the effectiveness of these

experiences.

Cognitive and Affective Benefits of Historical Field Trips

Historical field trips have the potential to provide both cognitive and affective benefits to

students, enhancing their understanding and engagement with historical narratives. The existing

literature highlights the various ways in which these immersive experiences can contribute to

student learning and development.

Cognitive Benefits
 Numerous studies have demonstrated the cognitive benefits of historical field trips in

terms of knowledge acquisition, comprehension, and critical thinking skills. Marcus et al. (2019)

found that the use of museum artifacts during field trips can enhance the coherence and

relevance of the history curriculum, enabling students to make meaningful connections between

historical events and their contexts. Similarly, Nance (2020) reported that a field trip to a

historical site fostered students’ historical knowledge and their ability to contextualize historical

narratives.

Nabors et al. (2003) explored the impact of museum-based instruction on critical thinking

skills, revealing significant improvements in students’ ability to analyze and interpret historical

information. This aligns with the findings of Stern et al. (2014), who demonstrated that field trips

focused on cultural heritage sites can promote critical thinking and environmental literacy among

diverse student populations.

The multisensory and experiential nature of historical field trips can contribute to deeper

learning and long-term retention of information (Storksdieck, 2001). By providing opportunities

for hands-on exploration, students can engage multiple senses and create vivid memories

associated with historical events and concepts (Rennie, 2007).

Affective Benefits

In addition to cognitive benefits, historical field trips can also foster affective outcomes,

such as increased engagement, motivation, and positive attitudes towards history and learning.

Greene et al. (2014) found that field trips had a positive impact on students’ engagement and

interest in the subject matter, as these experiences provided a welcome break from traditional

classroom settings.
 Field trips can stimulate students’ curiosity and emotional connections to historical

narratives by allowing them to physically interact with artifacts, sites, and reenactments (Rebar,

2012). This immersive experience can create a sense of authenticity and personal relevance,

enhancing students’ appreciation for history and its significance (Marcus et al., 2019).

Furthermore, historical field trips can promote socio-emotional development by

providing opportunities for collaborative learning, teamwork, and exposure to diverse

perspectives (Stern et al., 2010). These experiences can foster empathy, cultural awareness, and

an understanding of different historical narratives and interpretations.

It is important to note that while the literature highlights the potential cognitive and

affective benefits of historical field trips, the effectiveness of these experiences may depend on

various factors, such as proper planning, integration with classroom instruction, and the quality

of the field trip design and implementation (Rennie, 2007; Tal & Steiner, 2006).

Challenges of Historical Field Trips

While historical field trips offer numerous potential benefits for enhancing students’

understanding and engagement with historical narratives, the literature also highlights various

challenges associated with these experiences.

Logistical and Resource Constraints

One of the significant challenges in implementing historical field trips is the logistical

and resource constraints faced by schools and educators. Rebar (2012) explored teachers’

sources of knowledge and practices related to field trips, highlighting the importance of

access to resources, funding, and administrative support. Additionally, factors such as

transportation costs, scheduling conflicts, and the need for chaperones can pose practical

obstacles to organizing field trips (Greene et al., 2014).

Alignment with Curriculum and Learning Objectives

Ensuring that historical field trips align with curricular goals and learning objectives

can be a challenge. Tal and Steiner (2006) examined patterns of teacher-museum staff

relationships and found that effective collaboration and communication are crucial for

aligning field trip experiences with classroom instruction. Rennie (2007) emphasized the

need for proper planning, preparation, and follow-up activities to maximize the educational

value of field trips and reinforce the connections between the field trip experience and the

curriculum.

Quality and Effectiveness of Field Trip Design

The quality and effectiveness of historical field trip design can significantly impact

the learning outcomes for students. Factors such as the expertise of guides, the structure and

organization of activities, and the level of engagement and interactivity can influence the

educational value of these experiences (Storksdieck, 2001). Ineffective or poorly designed

field trips may fail to capture students’ interest or provide meaningful learning opportunities

(Rebar, 2012).

Student Preparedness and Prior Knowledge

The effectiveness of historical field trips can also be influenced by students’

preparedness and prior knowledge. If students lack the necessary background information or
 context, they may struggle to make meaningful connections or fully appreciate the

significance of the historical sites or artifacts they encounter (Rennie, 2007). Adequate

preparation and scaffolding are crucial to ensure that students are ready to engage with and

benefit from the field trip experience.

Assessment and Evaluation Challenges

Assessing and evaluating the impact of historical field trips on students’

understanding and learning outcomes can be a complex task. Traditional assessment

methods, such as standardized tests or written assignments, may not fully capture the

multifaceted benefits of these experiences (Marcus et al., 2019). Developing appropriate and

authentic assessment strategies that align with the experiential nature of field trips remains a

challenge for educators and researchers.

While these challenges and limitations should be addressed and mitigated through

careful planning and implementation, the potential benefits of historical field trips in

enhancing students’ understanding and engagement with historical narratives make them a

valuable pedagogical tool worthy of further exploration and research.

Gaps in the Existing Literature

While the existing literature provides valuable insights into the potential benefits and challenges

of historical field trips, below are several gaps that warrant further investigation and research:

Need for More Empirical Studies on Historical Understanding

 Although numerous studies have explored the impact of field trips on various learning

outcomes, such as content knowledge, critical thinking skills, and affective outcomes

(Nabors et al., 2003; Stern et al., 2010), there is a need for more empirical research

specifically focused on the relationship between historical field trips and students’

understanding of historical events and narratives (Marcus et al., 2019; Nance, 2020). Many

existing studies have examined field trips in other subject areas, such as science and

environmental education, but the specific context of history education requires further

investigation.

Longitudinal Studies on Long-Term Impact

Most research on historical field trips has focused on short-term or immediate

outcomes, leaving a gap in understanding the long-term impact of these experiences on

students’ retention and comprehension of historical information (Rennie, 2007). Longitudinal

studies that track students over an extended period could provide valuable insights into the

lasting effects of historical field trips on their understanding and engagement with historical

narratives.

Comparative Studies of Different Field Trip Types

While some studies have explored specific types of historical field trips, such as

museum visits or site explorations (Marcus et al., 2019; Nance, 2020), there is a need for

comparative research that examines the relative effectiveness of different field trip

experiences in enhancing students’ understanding of historical events. This could include

 comparisons between visits to museums, historical sites, living history museums, or

reenactments, among others.

Influence of Student Characteristics and Backgrounds

The existing literature has not extensively investigated how student characteristics

and backgrounds, such as age, socioeconomic status, cultural background, or prior

knowledge, may influence the impact of historical field trips on their understanding of

historical events (Rebar, 2012). Understanding these factors could help educators tailor field

trip experiences to better meet the diverse needs and interests of their students.

Integration with Classroom Instruction and Curriculum

While some studies have highlighted the importance of proper planning, preparation,

and follow-up activities for effective field trips (Rennie, 2007; Tal & Steiner, 2006), there is

a need for further research on how historical field trips can be seamlessly integrated with

classroom instruction and the existing curriculum. This could include exploring strategies for

aligning field trip experiences with curricular goals and reinforcing the connections between

the field trip and classroom-based learning activities.

REFERENCES

Ackermann, E. (2001). Piaget’s constructivism, Papert’s constructionism: What’s the difference. Future
of learning group publication, 5(3), 438.

Behrendt, M., & Franklin, T. (2014). A review of research on school field trips and their value in
education. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 9(3), 235-245.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in
psychology, 3(2), 77-101.

Coghlan, D., & Shani, A. R. (2005). Roles, politics, and ethics in action research design. Systemic Practice
and Action Research, 18, 533-546.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd edn Lawrence Erlbaum:
Hillsdale.

Coulson, D., & Harvey, M. (2013). Scaffolding student reflection for experience-based learning: A
framework. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(4), 401-413.

Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Mixed methods research. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(3), 305-306.

Dewey, J. (1986, September). Experience and education. In The educational forum (Vol. 50, No. 3, pp.
241-252). Taylor & Francis Group.

Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys:
The tailored design method. John Wiley & Sons.

Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical
features from an instructional design perspective. Performance improvement quarterly, 26(2), 43-71.

Farmer, J., Knapp, D., & Benton, G. M. (2007). An elementary school environmental education field trip:
Long-term effects on ecological and environmental knowledge and attitude development. The journal of
environmental education, 38(3), 33-42.

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1:
Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior research methods, 41(4), 1149-1160.

Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage.

Fowler Jr, F. J. (2013). Survey research methods. Sage publications.

Greene, J. P., Kisida, B., & Bowen, D. H. (2014). The educational value of field trips. Education Next,
14(1), 78-86.

Jablonski, D. (2020). Macroevolutionary theory. The Theory of Evolution: Principles, Concepts, and
Assumptions, 338.

Kawulich, B. B. (2005, May). Participant observation as a data collection method. In Forum qualitative
sozialforschung/forum: Qualitative social research (Vol. 6, No. 2).

Kolb, D. A. (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. FT press.
Marcus, A. S., Levine, T. H., & Grenier, R. S. (2019). Examining the coherence and relevance of U.S.
history curriculum using museum artifacts. Theory & Research in Social Education, 47(2), 240-270.

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John
Wiley & Sons.

Nabors, M. L., Edwards, L. C., & Murray, R. K. (2003). Enhancing students’ critical thinking skills through
museum-based instruction. Journal of Museum Education, 28(2), 22-26.

Nance, E. A. (2020). Fostering historical knowledge through immersive experiences: A case study of a
field trip to Fort Frederica National Monument. The Georgia Social Studies Journal, 10(1), 27-44.

Rebar, B. M. (2012). Teachers’ sources of knowledge for field trip practices. Learning Environments
Research, 15, 81-102.

Rennie, L. J. (2007). Learning science outside of school. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook
of research on science education (pp. 125-167). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Rennie, L. J. (2014). Learning science outside of school. In Handbook of research on science education,
Volume II (pp. 134-158). Routledge.

Roberts, J. W. (2012). Beyond learning by doing: Theoretical currents in experiential education.

Routledge.

Sieber, J. E., & Tolich, M. B. (2012). Planning ethically responsible research (Vol. 31). Sage Publications.

Stern, M. J., Powell, R. B., & Ardoin, N. M. (2010). Evaluating a constructivist and culturally responsive
approach to environmental education for diverse audiences. The Journal of Environmental
Education, 42(2), 109-122.

Stern, M. J., Powell, R. B., & Ardoin, N. M. (2010). Evaluating a constructivist and culturally responsive
approach to environmental education for diverse audiences. The Journal of Environmental
Education, 42(2), 109-122.

Storksdieck, M. (2001). Differences in teachers’ and students’ museum field-trip experiences. Visitor
Studies Today, 4(1), 8-12.

Tal, T., & Steiner, L. (2006). Patterns of teacher‐museum staff relationships: School visits to the
educational centre of a science museum. Canadian Journal of Math, Science & Technology
Education, 6(1), 25-46.

Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes.
Harvard university press.

Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: Sociocultural approach to mediated action. Harvard University
Press.

Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (Vol. 5). Sage.