English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In school-based research, isolating the potential effects of a single variable while attempting to maintain typical classroom routines is always a challenge. Unfortunately, the challenges and methodological approaches to overcoming them are often only shallowly reported, perhaps due to word limits or assumptions that those details are irrelevant to the findings. Thus, future research is unnecessarily impeded, destined to repeat the same mistakes. In this article, we reflect on the design and methodological strengths of our study of nature-based instruction (NBI) and how some strengths also created challenges with implications for interpreting the findings of our study (published in a companion paper, Faber Taylor, Butts-Wilmsmeyer, and Jordan  2022 ). In that study, we attempted to isolate the potential effects of NBI compared to classroom-based instruction on science learning and to test for potential mechanisms and moderating variables. We share insights in hopes of supporting others’ research design and nature-based educational practice.

Nature-based instruction for science learning: insights and interpretive considerations for research and practice