Connecting technologies and nature: Impact and opportunities for digital media use in the context of at-home family environmental learning

Abstract

Individuals increasingly rely on digital media technologies to learn about and access new information. Yet, despite the dramatic rise in electronic media use among youth and adults, our understanding of its impact, opportunities, and challenges within environmental education remains limited, especially in home contexts. Using a learning ecology framework, we conducted a two-week diary study with 58 diverse adult caretakers, asking them to engage in environmental learning moments with their children. Drawing on qualitative reports of those moments, we found that families relied heavily on digital technologies to support their child’s environmental learning, frequently to supplement other activities or spark rich discussions. Findings illustrate how the digitalization of environmental education can extend beyond passive screen time. Overall, this study reveals the critical role of family conversations and shared digital technologies in supporting environmental learning.

Keywords:

• environmental learning
• nature
• children
• families
• learning technologies
• environmental communication

Introduction

As an increasing number of policymakers, scholars, educators, and others have emphasized, our most pressing environmental challenges are, at their core, human challenges: as people face the dire consequences of concurrent biodiversity, climate, and health crises, we also hold the potential to change our current path (Ives et al., 2020). Repeated calls have encouraged humanity to collaborate to mitigate and reduce climate change’s impacts, and learning is one critical piece of the puzzle for how to do so (Reid et al., 2021). In this study, we build on research in the learning sciences, environmental education, and environmental communication to examine how technologies might be leveraged to support environmental learning within a family context.

The climate context

Our planet’s climate is changing rapidly, as documented in global scientific reports and scientists’ warnings (IPCC, 2021; Ripple et al., 2019) and evidenced by erratic climate patterns and severe weather emergencies (NASA, 2021). Despite considerable advances in raising public awareness about these shifts, persistent challenges remain: deepening understanding of the human impact, encouraging dialogue in polarized environments, and translating concern into action (Moser, 2016). The increasingly politicized nature of climate change, especially in the United States, makes it a difficult topic about which to teach, particularly in schools (Braus, 2020). A 2019 survey of U.S. parents and teachers found that, despite overwhelming support for teaching about climate change in schools (80% of parents and 86% of teachers), fewer than half of parents and teachers reported that they talk with their children and teach about climate change (Kamenetz, 2019).

Far less is known and documented about climate change education in informal settings although numerous research and policy efforts are underway to understand, develop, and improve climate change education in formal settings (National Research Council, 2012; UNESCO, 2019). This is particularly true of family contexts, even though researchers recognize everyday life as one of the most suitable entry points for engagement with environmental issues and action (Ardoin & Heimlich, 2021).

Learning and the family context

Research in psychology, learning sciences, anthropology, and other fields underscores the influence of our relationships with others on our thinking, values, and actions, including what and how we learn (Lave & Wenger, 1991). Within a sociocultural perspective, the process of learning is seen as interactive, collaborative, and participatory, leading to a collection of shared meanings, experiences, and practices (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Rogoff, 1997; Vygotsky, 1978). In addition, learning is recognized as taking place across time and settings. As Barron (2006) demonstrates in her learning ecology framework, a plethora of resources and settings facilitate the development of interest, competence, and identity. Home is one such setting where learning, whether intentional or incidental, often occurs (Ardoin & Heimlich, 2021; Falk & Dierking, 2010; Kola-Olusanya, 2005). Crowley and Jacobs (2002) describe how “islands of expertise” accumulate “from many relatively unremarkable moments” as repeated exposure, practice, conversations, and experiences comprise the social process of learning (p. 5).

In science learning, parents play a crucial role by supporting children’s scientific thinking (Crowley, et al., 2001; Luce & Callanan, 2020). Researchers find that learning talk stems, in part, from moments of joint attention during which parents and children focus on the same object (Povis & Crowley, 2015).

With regard to science learning through digital media, Takeuchi and Stevens (2011) describe the concept of “joint media engagement” (JME), defined as “experiences of people using media together,” including “viewing, playing, searching, reading, contributing, and creating” (p. 9). During productive JME, parents and caretakers provide explanations and share perspectives, thereby shaping children’s learning experiences. Parental co-use of media technologies, however, is found to be predicted by familial demographics as well as parental/caretaker availability and time spent with media (Connell et al., 2015), indicating a need to better understand how media can be designed and used to encourage effective JME for all families. Further, parent and caretaker roles as learning partners can vary and extend beyond teaching and collaborating. Barron at al. (2009) identify and define additional roles, including learning broker, resource provider, nontechnical consultant, employer, and learner.

In environmental learning, researchers have emphasized families as sources of considerable influence (Chawla, 2008; Vargas, 2008). Related to developing knowledge, dispositions, and skills related to the environment, caregivers are found to be youths’ earliest and most influential learning group (Chawla, 2007; Corner et al., 2015; Eagles & Demare, 1999). Research also demonstrates the bi-directional effect of environmental learning within the family context, with studies finding that children may also influence parents’ attitudes and behaviors (Boudet et al., 2016; Damerell et al., 2013). Although much science learning has been documented to occur in settings such as science museums, aquariums, and parks (Falk & Dierking, 2010; Peffer et al., 2013), scholars increasingly emphasize the importance of everyday-life settings for environmental learning, noting that, while such contexts may be less curated and researched, they are concurrently more frequent and relevant (Ardoin & Heimlich, 2021; Gould et al., 2019).

Digital media and environmental learning

Societally, the reliance on digital media technologies to learn about and access new information is rising (Bell et al., 2009; Ito et al., 2008). Despite the significant increase in electronic media use among youth and adults, the understanding of electronic media’s impact, opportunities, and challenges in the context of how and why people learn about the environment remains limited, especially in home environments and with user-generated content and new media sources (Ducasse, 2020; Markowitz et al., 2018). Existing research finds two primary perspectives on the increasing use of electronic media in environmental learning: (1) the negative influence of escalating screen time on outdoor time and connection to nature, particularly for girls and youth of color (Larson et al., 2019); and (2) the positive influences and potentials of technologies, seeing them as pathways to enhance connections among individuals, families, and the natural world (Livingston, 2022; McLaren, 2020).

Some studies have also considered the use and effectiveness of specific technologies in the home context, such as voice assistants and smart speakers (Garg & Sengupta, 2020; Tsourakas et al., 2021). These studies identify different use cases, benefits, and concerns; however, they primarily focus on general education (e.g., language learning, social-emotional learning). Within environmental education, research on nontraditional technologies has been limited to location-based mobile games (Bleck et al., 2012; Schneider & Schaal, 2018) and augmented and virtual reality (Ducasse, 2020; Markowitz et al., 2018). Such studies have indicated promising findings of increased awareness and engagement with nature through varied technologies. A growing body of research also examines video-based technologies for climate change communication, including the role of “edutainment” in climate change communication (Topp et al., 2019). Although certain aspects of climate change education have been widely studied, much of the research frames knowledge-and action-development resources as standalone media (Bondi et al., 2021) rather than as dynamic learning supports situated within specific cultures, contexts, and practices.

In this study, we leverage a learning ecology framework (Barron, 2006) to understand how families engage not only with a variety of digital technologies, but also with different activities, material resources, spaces, and relationships to learn about the environment in their everyday-life settings. Our work draws on the perspectives described above with a particular focus on resources, settings, and topics toward which families gravitate.

This study’s driving research questions are:

1. What resources do parents/caregivers leverage to engage in environmental learning,

2. Why do they choose to use digital technologies, or not, and

3. How might technologies enhance, rather than detract from, exploration in the world?

By identifying the resources that are available, familiar, engaging, and convenient for families, this research aims to inform the design of technologies to support environmental learning for families and youth.

Methodology and methods

To understand how families use technology to learn about the environment in their everyday life, we conducted a two-week remote diary study during which adult participants and their children engaged in several environmental learning moments.

Methodological approach

We undertook this study within a research frame that centers families as experts in their own daily-life experiences. The remote diary study structure and approach was purposefully selected to align with the learning ecology theoretical framework (Barron, 2006) as it facilitated discussion of the range of supports and structures that may be present within the families’ everyday-life context that contribute to environmental learning. Moreover, the study design emphasized participant choice and provided the children and caretakers with agency to share their perspectives with the researcher in a manner that highlighted learning moments salient to the families themselves (Green, 2015).

Context

To explore families’ everyday-life environmental learning dialogues, this study leveraged dscout (https://dscout.com/), a smartphone-based, remote research platform that allows participants to complete research tasks, such as submitting a video-recorded response to an open-ended question or answering survey-style questions. dscout allows researchers to collect real-time data about moments and processes, thereby enabling descriptive and intervention research approaches. In the current study, data was collected from February to March 2021.

Study participants

Participants were recruited through dscout, which hosts a database of over 100,000 participants throughout the United States. Interested participants completed a screener questionnaire, responding to demographic questions (e.g., race/ethnicity, income, geographic location), a series of questions about views on climate change, and two open-ended questions about their child’s experiences with weather and environmental learning. Of the 549 people who completed the questionnaire, 112 respondents fit our study criteria of (a) having at least one child in the 3rd to 8th grade, and (b) providing consent to participate in the research study. Sampling priorities included matching the United States distribution as indicated through the “Global Warming Six Americas” segments¹ (Chryst et al., 2018) and then, within the most populous groups, random selection among household income groups (USD$0–49K, $50–124 K, $125 K+). We invited 66 families to participate; 3 did not accept the invitation on dscout within 2 days, and 5 participants were unable to complete the full diary study due to personal circumstances.

In total, 58 participants from 25 U.S. states successfully completed the diary study. Most (81%) were female and 64% self-identified as white, 16% as Black or African American, 12% as Hispanic or Latinx, and 7% as Asian. With regard to political affiliation, 38% identified as Democrat, 28% as Republican, 29% as Independent, and 5% as other. 76% of adult caretakers were between the ages of 35 and 49, with 17% younger than 34. On climate change beliefs, 64% indicated that they believed climate change was primarily human-caused, 15% that it is primarily non-human-caused, and 21% that it is equally caused by both. For the Six Americas segments, the breakdown was as follows: 35% alarmed, 43% concerned, 12% cautious, 2% disengaged, 3% doubtful, and 5% dismissive (Chryst et al., 2018). For the diary study, participants were asked to identify one focal child with whom to engage in environmental learning moments during the course of the study. For this purpose, 55% of participants identified a female child, and 45% identified a male child. 57% of the children identified were in the 3rd-to-5th grades (approximately 8 to 11 years old), and 43% in the 6th-to-8th grades (approximately 11 to 14 years old). Participants were offered a $65 thank-you gift for their involvement in the study.

Measures

The two-week diary study included five parts, starting with an introduction to the family and focal child and all of their attitudes and knowledge about climate change (Part 1). In Parts 2, 3, and 4, families engaged together in environmental learning moments; in Part 3, families were asked to watch two pre-specified 5-minute educational videos chosen for their relevance to environmental issues as well as similarities and differences in video style (e.g., focused call to action, presentation of scientific facts, animated versus live, emotional evocativeness). Finally, in Part 5, participants responded to reflection prompts about the environmental learning experiences in which they engaged during the diary study as well as their opinions on climate change. This manuscript, focusing on the use of resources and specifically digital technologies to support environmental learning, reports on findings from Parts 2 and 4, in which participants were asked to engage in 10+-minute environmental learning moments with their child. In Part 2, families reported on two such moments, and in Part 4, families shared one additional learning moment that utilized a specific resource of choice (e.g., a book, video, or website).

In both parts, participants were allowed to choose the type of activity in which to engage; examples provided included “reading a book or watching a video about nature, hiking outdoors, having a discussion about animals, visiting a science museum (in person or virtually), or visiting a park.” For each moment, participants submitted an entry to dscout in which they shared a photo and verbal description of the moment; ratings of enjoyment and learning; and written descriptions of motivations, discussions, emotions, and challenges. Participants were prompted to respond to a series of questions related to each environmental learning moment. (See Table 1 for prompts.)

Table 1. Sample of prompts asked in parts 2 and 4.

Part(s)	Prompt
2, 4	Describe this learning moment for us. What did you do or talk about? How were you or others involved in the activity?
2, 4	In a sentence or two, tell us how this learning moment came about. How did you or your child decide what to do?
4	What was the resource you engaged with? If it has a link, please share the link with us here.
4	Tell us about how you chose this specific resource. Why did you choose a resource that involved or did not involve technology?

Analysis

We used an inductive approach to analyze participant responses (Saldaña, 2016; Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Throughout the analytic process, we developed memos to record emergent themes and consider connections among codes, which were determined based on relevance to the research questions and what was salient for participants (Thomas, 2006). This thematic analysis approach allowed for a representation of not only the primary trends within research questions, but also an in-depth analysis of the “how” and “why” (Saldaña, 2016).

Using iterative passes through the participants’ responses, we initially began with an open coding process to broadly identify emergent themes (Thomas, 2006). Then through pattern coding, we further refined the codes and applied them within each group of questions. Specifically, we coded each learning moment for content, type of learning resource used, and reason resource was chosen. We also coded entries for use of digital technology and, in particular, ways in which technology supported child or parent learning. We present sample responses in the following section in participants’ original language and with pseudonyms.

Findings

In this inquiry, as described above, we examine three questions about how families use technology to learn about the environment in their everyday life: (i) what resources parents/caregivers leverage, (ii) why they choose to use digital technologies (or not), and (iii) how technologies can enhance exploration in the world.

Technologies leveraged to support environmental learning

During the two-week diary study, each family engaged in at least three environmental learning moments of their choice, one of which required the use of a specific resource; a total of 185 learning moments were documented. Based on participants’ descriptions of what caregivers and children did together, we qualitatively coded each learning moment for resources used, if any. Almost half of the learning moments included “conversation” as a primary resource for learning, sometimes as a standalone, but frequently supplemented by other resources, such as videos, webpages, or books.

Table 2 indicates the highest-frequency resources with which participating families engaged and presents frequencies, descriptions, and examples of each. These findings illustrate the diverse resources families leveraged to learn about the environment. While some families turned to “traditional” learning materials like books and webpages, others found inspiration in the outdoors, entertainment-based media, and their own knowledge and curiosity.

Table 2. Highest-frequency resources used to support environmental learning moments during the diary study.

Resource	%*	Description	Illustrative example excerpts
Conversation	46.5%	Families engage in conversation together, either to debrief a specific experience (e.g., watching a video or reading an article), or to share observations, speculations, or knowledge.	We discussed all the different kinds of renewable energy and why they are better for our environment than fossil fuels. We also talked about the new technologies (some I didn’t know about like human heated buildings and energy making sidewalks).
YouTube video	31.4%	Families watch one or more YouTube videos together about topics ranging from global warming to information about deer. Videos are viewed on mobile phones, computers, tablets, or smart TVs.	We watched two short videos on YouTube that explained global warming/climate change in a way that is appropriate for kids. The videos we watched were made by “crash course kids” and “hiho” YouTube channels… When we finished the videos, we sat and talked for a few minutes about what we’d heard. We all tried to think of ideas of ways we could reduce our carbon footprint.
Webpage	18.9%	Families access, read, and engage with webpages (including online articles) to learn about various topics. Webpages are viewed on mobile phones, tablets, or computers.	Since we live near the ocean and my son loves animals, we read about how pollution affects sea life. I read some articles to him while he looked over my shoulder and we talked about what we had read.
Nature	18.4%	Families interact with various elements of nature while outdoors.	We were looking at the first signs of spring! So excited that it is warming up and we can see flowers again. I was looking at the new blossoms with all of my kids and we were noticing how much earlier spring comes to the south compared to New England.
TV show/movie	10.3%	Families watch primarily entertainment-based TV shows or movies, mostly through streaming platforms.	My son and I watched the Bear Grylls show “You vs Wild: Animals on the loose.” We enjoyed discussing the options for Bear to rescue each animal and to check the power reserve.
Book	6.5%	Families read physical books together (either owned by the families or borrowed from the library or school).	The kids heard an owl on our walk tonight and our 7-year-old happened to have brought home a library book called Owls. So we read the book together.

*Number of learning moments divided by 185, the total number of learning moments.

Rationale for resources selected

When parents were asked to share why they chose a specific resource to support learning, they reported a variety of reasons and processes. Some were driven by the perceived quality and efficacy of the resource, while others chose technologies because they were convenient and easily accessible. Many caretakers considered their child’s interests, including an interest in a specific topic, activity, or resource; some parents and children jointly engaged in the decision process.

For some caretakers, different resources exhibited distinct qualities salient to them. One parent, for example, chose to use a laptop so that the experience could double as an opportunity to help their child learn about digital safety. Other caretakers believed videos to be particularly well-suited to supporting children’s learning, and one parent appreciated the immersive nature of virtual reality because of its potential to be more “memorable.” Caretakers may be drawn to certain resources because of perceived characteristics that make them more effective in facilitating learning.

Some parents based their resource-choice decision on knowledge of their child’s interests, with regard to both a specific resource or a specific topic, such as interacting with graphs or watching videos.

“I thought my son would be interested in a more interactive website where we can look at different graphs and see different kinds of data, and it actually has to do with our own house.” - 47-year-old father with 8th-grade son; Massachusetts

In a few instances, caretakers deliberately avoided technology-enhanced resources in favor of hands-on activities, either because caretakers wished to minimize screen time or because they perceived physical resources to be more appropriately aligned with the topic. For example, one parent commented:

“I wanted to do a project which was more hands-on. My daughter loves journals so I thought it would be a natural activity that could help her think of reusing and not wasting.” - 44-year-old mother with 6th-grade daughter; New Jersey

Digital resources were also selected because of convenience. One parent shared that, although she thought her children would be more interested in doing an activity than watching a video, given her own exhaustion, she found it easier for them to watch videos. Other parents mentioned the accessibility of YouTube videos, particularly when other resources were not readily available. A parent said:

“We chose to use technology because that was the easiest thing for us at the time. We knew we wanted to learn about this dog breed and we don’t have any books about them at home, so YouTube was the easiest to access.” - 40-year-old mother with 7th-grade daughter; North Carolina

Although many parents directed the resource-selection process, some described a collaborative approach wherein parents and children played different but complementary roles. One caretaker, for example, started by asking her child about a preferred type of activity, searched online for options to meet that preference, and then encouraged her child to make the final decision. Another parent first narrowed down a resource type (e.g., YouTube videos) and a topic (e.g., how to make changes in our own lives), and then presented a curated list to her child who was allowed to make the final selection.

Connection between technology and exploration in the world

Perceptions of digital technology use for learning vary widely, especially in environmental education where “technology” and “nature” are often positioned as contrasting, rather than complementing, each other (e.g., Louv, 2005). Of the resources that families leveraged during the diary study, many were digitally enhanced, such as YouTube videos, webpages, and television shows. These resources were accessed through devices such as phones, tablets, computers, or televisions, and the resources enabled learning moments about a variety of topics, ranging from climate change related-actions to stories and facts about animals and ecosystems. Some of the resources, particularly the videos and shows, may be classified as passive screen time; in many of the environmental learning moments, however, the technology resources supported experiential activities, sparked rich conversations, and enhanced and motivated outdoor engagement. Below, we share examples that illuminate the connection between technology and exploration in the world.

Several families found the internet to be a useful resource for inspiring and guiding hands-on activities. In some cases, families used the internet to further learning about a single topic. In searching for an activity, for example, one mother-and-daughter pair stumbled on an article about tornados and were inspired to undertake a related experience: they made a tornado in a bottle.

Although videos can be used in a passive manner, where viewers watch silently as the video plays, in instances of joint media engagement (Takeuchi & Stevens, 2011), videos can spark rich conversations among parents and children. Videos can support and extend discussions by raising new topics that may not otherwise arise; they can also be paused and rewatched to facilitate deeper meaning-making (Davidson et al., 2014; Shoufan, 2019). Some of these features can be integrated into the design of the resource itself, such as the interactive survival adventure show described in the following quote. In the show, viewers are invited to make decisions that alter the content; this format not only creates moments of reflection, but also engages viewers as active participants.

“Our favorite parts were the You vs. Wild interactive videos that we participated in. They were our favorite because they were interactive. They required us to be involved and interact with the video, making decisions based on information gathered. It was exciting, suspenseful and a lot of fun. The video session left us with a great sense of achievement and we learned a lot about different environments and animals.” - 52-year-old grandmother with 4th-grade grandson; Nevada

In addition to video-based experiences, during which families might co-view content on a single device, audio-based experiences on speakers enabled joint media engagement. Smart assistants and podcasts, for example, can spark conversations; they facilitate learning experiences where children and parents occupy the same physical space and, similar to videos, can be paused or replayed to allow for additional discussion related to or beyond the audio content.

Finally, technology resources like geocaching and Pokemon Go were used to mediate and motivate outdoor engagement, particularly for families or children who may not otherwise choose to spend time outside. Using one or multiple devices, families could collaborate in these cooperative and competitive activities. Although their focus is primarily centered on the technology-enabled activity, it is significant to acknowledge that spending time outside may have other benefits (Battista et al., 2016), even if participants are not actively attending to those benefits.

Together, these learning moments illustrate that digital technologies can promote a connection with the natural world. Prior research cites concerns of escalating screen time on outdoor time and connection to nature (Larson et al., 2019), but these examples demonstrate how technologies, particularly when used in the family context, can support and extend environmental learning moments. Creative applications of digital media, including location-based games, augmented reality, and voice assistants, as well as traditional forms of digital media, such as videos and websites, can be effective in establishing joint attention, which research has linked to increased learning outcomes (Povis & Crowley, 2015). The prevalence of electronic devices facilitates individual engagement in activities, yet it is increasingly important to consider how to design technologies and experiences that help families establish joint attention and engagement, particularly in the home context.

Discussion

Although it is challenging to understand learning processes as they occur within the walls of a family’s home, this study provides qualitative insight into how and why 58 families engaged with different resources to learn about the environment based on two weeks of in-home environmental learning moments. Our findings reveal the critical role of conversations and digital technologies in supporting environmental learning and opportunities for the digitalization of the environmental learning space.

Everyday routines and conversations

This study highlights conversations as a key aspect of family environmental learning as they are often embedded in families’ everyday routines. When prompted to learn about the environment with their child, many parents engaged in rich conversations about animals, scientific phenomena, and pro-environmental actions. These discussions took place in settings ranging from driving in the car to dinnertime to bedtime and were often complemented by other resources. Conversations, though simple in concept, can support learning in many ways: they enable parents to provide explanations, share perspectives, and teach vocabulary (Crowley & Jacobs, 2002; Takeuchi & Stevens, 2011); crucially, they can also occur repeatedly and frequently, thus playing an important role in shaping children’s understanding of the broader world, as well as their role in it (Luce & Callanan, 2020).

Although some conversations were sparked by explicitly educational resources, such as videos or webpages, others were part of interactions with entertainment-based resources like location-based mobile games and smart assistants. In many learning moments, we observed that conversations were extended and supported by digital technologies. Video-, audio-, and game-based experiences on a single shared device (e.g., television, laptop, mobile phone, smart speakers) enabled productive joint media engagement among parents and children, as those devices established a common focal point and provided shared content to digest and upon which to reflect. Although technology is often criticized for driving people apart (Turkle, 2011), these findings demonstrate ways in which digital media might bring families together.

Digital technologies for environmental learning

Another key study insight is understanding why parents choose to leverage digital technologies to support environmental learning. Parents play an important role in curating resources for their children (Barron et al., 2009), and this study revealed how and why they select specific learning resources. Some caretakers perceived digital media as having benefits over physical resources, such as being more convenient and accessible, engaging and immersive, and ultimately more effective because of the combination of verbal and visual content. The goal of this research was not to evaluate which resources are superior for learning outcomes, but rather to understand which resources facilitate opportunities for joint engagement and learning.

Opportunities for the digitalization of the environmental learning space

Overall, our findings reveal several opportunities to redesign digital technologies for environmental learning. First, our findings suggest the importance of resources designed in a way that help families establish joint attention and inspire conversation both in the moment and beyond. The type of resource (e.g., video versus competitive game) is important, but so too is the platform (e.g., television versus smart speaker versus mobile phone), content, and likely contexts of use.

The inclusion of elements like novelty and actionable ways to address the issue at hand may spark conversations and drive learning, and shared technologies such as location-based games and voice assistants may encourage joint media engagement and exploration in the world. In particular, immersive technologies such as mixed reality applications (Aguayo & Eames, this issue) and augmented storying (Kumpulainen et al., this issue) may facilitate rich learning experiences for inquiry, knowledge-building, and connection to nature. Traditional technologies, however, can also be employed in creative ways to support environmental learning: video walks, for example, demonstrate how a widely accessible technology creates opportunities to evoke enchantment and “make the familiar unfamiliar” (Renshaw et al., this issue, p. 10). Instead of limiting or distorting unmediated environmental learning experiences, digital tools can enhance and extend such opportunities for engagement and learning, particularly in the home context, and connect learning experiences across a range of formal and everyday-life settings (Aguayo & Eames, this issue; Greenwood & Hougham, 2015).

Further, if conversations and learning moments are to be frequent, learning designers might consider how digital technologies might effectively integrate environmental learning into families’ everyday life. Some families may need a nudge, as this study provided for many participants; perhaps it could be an environment-themed prompt in a morning routine with a voice assistant or a recommendation for a learning activity on a new web browser tab. Given the prevalence of digital technologies within many homes and the dynamic nature of those technologies, they are uniquely positioned to play a key role in establishing and sustaining environmental learning within families’ everyday lives (Ardoin & Heimlich, 2021).

This study also illustrates the diversity of resources needed to meet and support the diversity of families — in preferences, knowledge, perceptions, and interests. Parents shared a variety of reasons for choosing specific resources, ranging from perceived qualities of technologies to avoiding screens to the convenience of digital media. The suite of resources for environmental learning should accommodate these differences in needs and preferences and the range of interests that families exhibit. Producing and providing an array and choice of high-quality environmental learning resources will help ensure all families have opportunities to discover and engage with them in ways that are meaningful, motivating, relevant, and context-specific.

This study leveraged a novel remote research tool to access participants diverse in geographic location, attitudes and beliefs about climate change, and socioeconomic status. Although it also enabled a mix of descriptive and interventional approaches to investigate environmental learning in the home context, the study, like all, has limitations, including the challenge of consistently eliciting details from participants and a sample population not fully representative of the general population. The participatory structure of the dscout platform assumes ownership of a phone, a base level of technological familiarity, and a reliable internet connection. Further considerations for accessibility and inclusion, such as language and digital fluency, would strengthen the research.

The study suggests many opportunities and avenues for future research. In addition to expanding the sample population to include families whose primary language is not English as well as those with younger and older children, future research might investigate the specific characteristics of the digital technologies that prompt joint media engagement among parents and children. Future researchers may also wish to explore the differences in quality of engagement across various types of resources and the strategies caretakers use to search for environment-related resources. In developing a deeper and more nuanced understanding of the technology landscape for environmental learning, we may uncover opportunities to better support and enhance these rich everyday-life family interactions in ways that are meaningful and motivating.

Acknowledgments

We are immensely grateful to the 58 families who generously shared their time, thoughts, and learnings with us in the midst of busy everyday lives. Thanks to those who provided insight and input throughout the research process, especially Brigid Barron, Paulo Blikstein, and Alison Bowers. Thanks to our anonymous reviewers and the special issue editor, Gregory Lowan-Trudeau, for their productive feedback.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Amir Lopatin Fellowship and by the National Geographic Society COVID-19 Grant for Research and Exploration.

Notes

1 The “Global Warming Six Americas,” an initiative of the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, has undertaken research to identify “six unique audiences within the American public that each respond to [climate change] in their own distinct way.” (climatecommunication.yale.edu; Leiserowitz et al., 2021). The segments identified within this process include alarmed, concerned, cautious, disengaged, doubtful, and dismissive.