Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Objective of the evaluation instruments The SchoolFan evaluations were used to assess the results of our project: the effectiveness of the teacher training and the material developed to improve it in future iterations. In addition, they were used to assess teachers’ and students’ prior knowledge to better evaluate learning. They are the tools used to prove whether the project achieved the expected results and, if not, why. The evaluations were developed solely for this purpose; none were used to grade students or teachers. All evaluations involving minors were done with parental and student consent under ethical approval (insert numbers) Who are the evaluations for? They are aimed at different audiences: the teachers, the teacher trainers, and the students. What is the purpose of each evaluation form and what can you use them for ? 1. Students’ and teachers’ pre- and post- test: this form was used before the training and the lessons, and after the end of the training and the lessons, in order to assess if the students and teachers learned and developed new knowledge about climate change, misinformation, or citizen science. This evaluation instrument was developed based on the work of Braz Sousa et al., 2024; de Graaf et al., 2023; Lutzke et al., 2019. 2. Teachers’ feedback form: this one is aimed at teachers after they implemented the citizen science activity with their students. With this form we want to get their general feedback on how it went and how they feel about the project. 3. Teachers’ capacity building: this form was designed to be conducted as a phone interview, the interviewer took notes and asked the questions in the language of the teacher they were interviewing. We wanted to assess whether the teacher felt more empowered and confident teaching about the targeted topics. 4. Sustainability and usability of the material: as for the last this one was conducted as phone interviews with the teacher trainers. They were asked to review our material and resources, and this form helped us gather their feedback on the sustainability of our project.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dufour et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: