Integrating Phenomenon-Based Learning and GIS to Improve Geo-Literacy and Student Engagement: An Action Research Approach

Integrating Phenomenon-Based Learning and GIS to Improve Geo-Literacy and Student Engagement: An Action Research Approach | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Integrating Phenomenon-Based Learning and GIS to Improve Geo-Literacy and Student Engagement: An Action Research Approach Sutthiphong Meechandee, Nattapon Meekaew This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-5410327/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 12 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Despite the individual merits of Phenomenon-Based Learning (PhenoBL) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) in improving geographic comprehension, limited research exists on their combined impact in secondary geography teaching, particularly in the Thai educational context. This study investigated the integration of PhenoBL and GIS to enhance student engagement and geo-literacy among 30 Grade 8 students in Thailand through an action research design with three iterative cycles over eight weeks. The intervention, focusing on urbanization and environmental sustainability, utilized Google Maps as a GIS tool for spatial analysis. Data collection included geo-literacy tests, student engagement surveys, and classroom observations, analyzed through paired t-tests and Pearson correlation analyses. Results demonstrated significant improvements in geo-literacy scores (from 59.5–72.5%, p < 0.01) and increases across all engagement dimensions (behavioral, emotional, and cognitive). Correlation analyses revealed a significant positive relationship between emotional engagement and geo-literacy improvement (r = 0.309, p < 0.05), while behavioral and cognitive engagement showed no significant correlations with geo-literacy gains. This suggests that emotional connection to learning activities may play a particularly important role in geographic understanding. Qualitative observations documented students’ progressive development of independence and confidence in using GIS tools. These findings provide valuable insights for educators and policymakers implementing technology-enhanced, inquiry-based learning models in geography education, while highlighting the importance of nurturing students' emotional engagement alongside structured support in GIS integration. action research Geo-literacy GIS Phenomenon-based learning Emotional engagement 1. Introduction In today’s interconnected world, traditional geographic education methods face increasing challenges in equipping students with the skills needed to understand complex spatial relationships and global issues. While the rapid advancement of geospatial technologies and the complexity of environmental challenges demand new approaches, many education systems still rely on methods emphasizing memorization over spatial reasoning and critical thinking. This approach often leaves students with limited ability to interpret geographic relationships and apply their knowledge to pressing issues like climate change, urbanization, and resource management [ 1 – 3 ]. In response, educators are increasingly recognizing geo-literacy as a critical competency, helping students develop the spatial thinking and decision-making skills necessary to navigate today’s global challenges. Geographic education in Thailand faces distinct challenges and opportunities amidst rapid socio-economic development and environmental change. The revised Thai Basic Education Core Curriculum (2017) emphasizes geographic literacy as part of social studies, aiming to enhance students’ understanding of human-environment relationships [ 4 ]. However, traditional teaching methods remain prevalent, limiting the integration of modern pedagogy and technology, especially in secondary schools where rote learning often replaces critical spatial thinking [ 5 – 6 ]. Limited access to geographic teaching tools, particularly in rural areas, creates a digital divide, while gaps in teacher professional development restrict the adoption of technology-enhanced, student-centered approaches [ 7 – 8 ]. This has led to a lag in Thai students’ spatial reasoning skills relative to international standards, highlighting the need for innovative pedagogical strategies to close these gaps [ 9 ]. Integrating PhenoBL and GIS holds considerable promise for enhancing geographic education. PhenoBL encourages students to explore real-world phenomena through interdisciplinary inquiry, fostering engagement and critical thinking by linking classroom learning with complex global issues [ 10 – 12 ]. Complementing this approach, GIS provides powerful tools for spatial analysis, allowing students to visualize and interpret geographic data, which enhances their understanding of spatial relationships [ 13 – 14 ]. Together, these methods offer a comprehensive model for developing geo-literacy, equipping students with both conceptual insights and practical skills to address contemporary geographic challenges. Integrating PhenoBL and GIS holds significant potential in the Thai educational context as the country embraces modernization through initiatives like the "Transformation of Learning" and Thailand 4.0, which promote learner-centered approaches and 21st-century skills [ 15 – 16 ]. This aligns with Panjaitan et al.’s findings [ 17 ] that integrating digital learning tools in geography education significantly enhances teaching methods and student understanding. The positive impacts include improved engagement and comprehension of geographical concepts. However, while PhenoBL has proven effective in interdisciplinary learning and critical thinking [ 18 ] and GIS fosters spatial thinking and data literacy [ 19 ], limited research examines their combined impact on geo-literacy and engagement in Thai secondary education, highlighting a gap this study seeks to address. This research aims to address this gap by investigating how the integration of PhenoBL and GIS can enhance geo-literacy and student engagement in lower secondary education. Specifically, the research focuses on the effectiveness of integrating PhenoBL and GIS to enhance geo-literacy and engagement among lower secondary students. By exploring these aspects, this study aims to contribute both theoretical insights into the synergy between PhenoBL and GIS and practical guidance for educators seeking to enhance geographic education through technology-enhanced, inquiry-based learning models. The findings have particular relevance for educational contexts where the integration of innovative pedagogical approaches with technological tools remains an emerging practice, offering a framework for implementing effective geography education that meets the demands of our increasingly complex world. 2. Theoretical Framework 2.1 Defining Geo-Literacy in Educational Contexts Geo-literacy encompasses the ability to understand spatial relationships and make informed geographic decisions through three core dimensions: interactions between human and natural systems, global interconnections, and the implications of geographic decisions [ 20 – 21 ]. As global challenges like urbanization and climate change become more complex, geo-literacy equips students with essential skills to understand and address these issues through spatial thinking and analysis [ 19 ]. This study integrates two complementary approaches to develop geo-literacy: PhenoBL and GIS. PhenoBL engages students with real-world geographic phenomena through inquiry-based learning, while GIS provides tools for spatial analysis and visualization [ 22 , 21 ]. Together, these approaches create a learning environment where students develop both conceptual understanding and practical skills in spatial analysis. However, implementing geo-literacy education presents challenges, including the need for scaffolded GIS instruction and sufficient teacher training [ 23 ]. Despite these challenges, geo-literacy remains crucial in preparing students to understand and address contemporary spatial issues through an interdisciplinary approach that combines geography, environmental science, and social studies [ 24 ]. 2.2 Integration of PhenoBL and GIS in Geography Education PhenoBL transforms geography education by engaging students with real-world geographic phenomena rather than isolated content. This approach promotes deeper understanding through analysis of geographic phenomena from multiple perspectives—physical, social, and environmental [ 10 , 25 ]. Studies show that students in PhenoBL projects demonstrate improved abilities to analyze spatial relationships and environmental interactions [ 26 ], particularly when geographic concepts connect to observable phenomena. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) complement this approach by providing tools for spatial data visualization and analysis. Research indicates that GIS usage enhances students’ spatial thinking abilities and geographic reasoning skills [ 27 – 28 ]. However, successful implementation requires carefully scaffolded instruction to help students overcome initial technical challenges [ 29 ]. The integration of PhenoBL and GIS creates a powerful synergy in geography education. When students use geographic technology to investigate real environmental issues, they develop better understanding of both technical tools and geographic concepts [ 30 – 31 ]. This combined approach enhances spatial visualization abilities through multiple representations of geographic phenomena while building analytical skills through hands-on data analysis. The connection to real-world applications makes abstract spatial relationships more concrete and meaningful for students, fostering deeper engagement with geographic concepts and more comprehensive understanding of spatial relationships. 2.3 Student Engagement in Geography Education Student engagement in geography education encompasses three key dimensions: behavioral (active participation in spatial analysis activities), emotional (interest in geographic phenomena), and cognitive (mental effort in understanding spatial relationships). These dimensions are crucial in geography education, where students interact with abstract spatial concepts, real-world phenomena, and technological tools [ 32 – 33 ]. Research demonstrates that higher engagement levels correlate with improved spatial thinking and geographic understanding. Students who are more engaged in geographic activities show enhanced spatial reasoning abilities and deeper conceptual understanding, particularly in technology-enhanced environments [ 27 – 28 ]. The integration of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) has proven especially effective in promoting engagement through interactive learning environments [ 34 – 35 ] . When combined with phenomenon-based approaches, technology integration creates a powerful learning synergy. Students demonstrate increased engagement when geographic concepts connect to real-world phenomena and local environmental issues, especially when using technological tools for analysis [ 30 , 22 ]. This integration of real-world phenomena with interactive technology not only enhances engagement but also facilitates the development of sophisticated geographic thinking skills. 3. Research Methodology 3.1 Research Design This study employed an action research design following the cyclical model of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting [ 36 ]. The focus of these cycles was to continuously refine the integration of PhenoBL and GIS within the geography curriculum to enhance student engagement and geo-literacy. Each cycle progressively built on the previous one, with Google Maps serving as the GIS tool. Integrating PhenoBL and Google Maps allowed students to engage with real-world geographic data, fostering deeper cognitive involvement and a more interactive learning experience. In the study, the targeted school is situated in northeast Thailand, within a community that combines urban and rural elements, reflecting the diverse socioeconomic landscape of the region. Although located in a relatively developed town area, the school serves a large number of students from surrounding rural communities, many of whom come from families with low economic status. This socioeconomic diversity brings a range of experiences and perspectives into the classroom, creating a unique learning environment where students face the challenges and opportunities associated with limited resources and a strong sense of community. The school offers students educational resources but has limited exposure to advanced technology and specialized learning tools. This context influenced the learning environment significantly, as it was the first time students encountered GIS, presenting both a novel experience and a valuable educational opportunity in their geography curriculum. 3.2 Participants The sample consisted of 30 Grade 8 students aged 13–14. The participants were selected using a convenience sampling method, as the study was conducted within a single geography classroom where the students were already engaged in the geography curriculum. All students had no prior experience with GIS and were introduced to GIS tools for the first time during the intervention. The class was composed of 24 female and 6 male students. Participation in the study was voluntary, and informed consent was obtained from both students and their guardians. Students participated in the study as part of their regular geography curriculum. 3.3 Intervention: PhenoBL and GIS Integration The intervention was conducted over eight weeks, focusing on urbanization and its impact on local environments. The geography lessons were designed using the PhenoBL approach, which emphasizes interdisciplinary, inquiry-based learning. Throughout the intervention, students engaged in topics such as urban growth, environmental sustainability, and land use patterns, investigating real-world geographic phenomena. The GIS, specifically Google Maps, was used as a tool for students to visualize and analyze urbanization-related geographic data. In this study, Google Maps was selected as the GIS tool for several key reasons. First, it provides a user-friendly platform accessible to students with varying levels of technological proficiency. The simplicity of its interface allows students to navigate and explore spatial data with minimal prior training, making it an ideal tool for beginners in GIS. Additionally, Google Maps offers real-time satellite imagery and historical data, enabling students to analyze geographic phenomena such as urbanization and environmental changes over time. This aligns with the inquiry-based nature of PhenoBL, where students are encouraged to explore real-world phenomena using accessible digital tools. Furthermore, Google Maps is widely available and does not require specialized software or hardware, making it a cost-effective option for schools with limited resources. Its integration into classroom activities allows students to apply geographic concepts in a practical, hands-on manner, enhancing engagement and geo-literacy. Students used Google Maps’ satellite imagery and historical views to observe how urban areas had developed over time. By examining demographic maps, infrastructure changes, and land use patterns, students could draw inferences about how urban expansion might continue and how it affects the surrounding environment. 3.4 Data Collection Data collection occurred using quantitative and qualitative methods throughout the three action research cycles. Each cycle provided opportunities to gather geo-literacy test results, student engagement survey data, and classroom observation insights, which were used to inform the subsequent cycle. Pre-tests and post-tests were conducted in the first and final cycles to measure changes in geo-literacy, while observations and engagement surveys were administered throughout each cycle. Three main instruments were used to collect data in this study including 1) the geo-literacy test, comprising 20 multiple-choice questions, was designed to assess students’ knowledge and skills in the core components of geo-literacy: interactions, interconnections, and implications. These components were embedded within questions on geographic concepts and map interpretation, aimed at evaluating students’ understanding of spatial relationships and the broader implications of geographic patterns. The test was administered as both a pre-test and a post-test to measure changes in geo-literacy resulting from the intervention. To ensure content validity, the test was reviewed by a panel of geography education experts for alignment with curriculum standards. Additionally, a pilot study with a small student sample confirmed the test’s reliability, yielding a Cronbach’s alpha score of 0.81, indicating high internal consistency. 2) The Student Engagement Survey measured three dimensions of engagement—behavioral, emotional, and cognitive—using Likert-scale questions. It was administered twice, once at the beginning and again at the end of the intervention. The survey captured students’ participation in class activities, interest in geography, and the cognitive effort they applied during lessons. The survey was adapted from previously validated engagement scales and modified to fit the study’s context. Its reliability was confirmed through a Cronbach’s alpha score of 0.74, indicating good internal consistency. 3) Classroom Observation Checklist was used to monitor key behaviors during PhenoBL and GIS activities. Observations focused on student participation, peer interaction, time on tasks, and engagement with the GIS technology. Observers noted quantitative measures (e.g., time spent on activities) and qualitative insights (e.g., student comments and reactions). The observation checklist was developed based on established classroom engagement guidelines and piloted in a similar educational context before implementation. The data collection spanned three cycles (planning, acting, observing, reflecting), with instruments applied at strategic intervals. A pre-test on geo-literacy and an initial engagement survey established baseline data, while observations during weeks 2, 5, and 8 provided real-time insights into engagement with PhenoBL and GIS activities. Post-intervention, a geo-literacy test and re-administered engagement survey measured progress and engagement changes. 3.5 Data Analysis Data analysis was conducted after each cycle to assess the interventions’ impact and inform adjustments for the next cycle. The data from the geo-literacy tests were analyzed using paired sample t-tests to determine whether there was a significant difference in students’ geo-literacy levels before and after the intervention. Student engagement survey responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics, with the mean scores for each dimension of engagement (behavioral, emotional, cognitive) compared before and after the intervention. Classroom observation notes were analyzed using thematic analysis, where student participation and interaction patterns were identified and categorized based on frequency and intensity of engagement. This allowed for a more in-depth understanding of how students interacted with the learning content and the GIS tools. 4. Results This section presents the study’s outcomes, focusing on integrating PhenoBL and GIS to improve student geo-literacy and engagement. The data were presented as follows. 4.1 Changes in the geo-literacy of students The integration of PhenoBL and GIS demonstrated a substantial positive impact on students' geo-literacy scores. To evaluate this impact, a paired-samples t-test was conducted to examine changes in students' geo-literacy scores before and after the intervention. Table 1 presents the detailed results of this analysis. Table 1 Geo-Literacy Test Scores Before and After the Intervention Time Point Mean Score (%) SD Mean Difference T df P Cohen’s d Pre-Test 59.50 2.70 2.60 7.145 29 1.31 Post-Test 72.50 2.30 p < 0.01 Analysis of the results revealed a statistically significant increase in geo-literacy scores from pre-intervention (M = 59.50%, SD = 2.70) to post-intervention (M = 72.50%, SD = 2.30), with a mean increase of 2.60 points (95% CI [1.86, 3.34]), t(29) = 7.145, p < .001, d = 1.31, 95% CI [0.81, 1.79]. The effect size (Cohen’s d = 1.31) indicates a large practical significance according to Cohen’sbguidelines [ 37 ], where d = 0.8 is considered a large effect. 4.2 Changes in Student Engagement The integration of PhenoBL and GIS showed considerable effectiveness in enhancing students’ engagement across all dimensions. To assess these changes, students’ behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement were measured before and after the intervention using a validated survey instrument. The analysis revealed substantial improvements in all engagement dimensions, with particularly notable increases in emotional and cognitive aspects. Table 2 presents the detailed results of this analysis. Table 2 Changes in Student Engagement Scores Before and After Intervention Engagement Dimension Pre-intervention Post-intervention Mean Difference T df P Cohen’s d Behavioral Engagement 3.87 4.22 Emotional Engagement 3.76 4.38 Cognitive Engagement 3.56 4.41 Total Engagement 11.19 20.82 9.63 6.790 29 p < 0.01 1.24 (0.76, 1.71) 4.3 Progressive Development Through Action Research Cycles Three action research cycles documented the development of students’ engagement and learning throughout the intervention. As detailed in the following sections, the progression through these cycles revealed distinct patterns in students’ development, from initial challenges to eventual mastery. 4.3.1 Cycle 1: Initial Implementation and Challenges The first cycle implemented PhenoBL with GIS integration in geography lessons focused on urbanization. Before starting the intervention, students completed a geo-literacy pre-test, revealing limited prior knowledge (M = 59.50%, SD = 2.70). Baseline engagement scores were established through an initial survey: behavioral engagement (M = 3.87), emotional engagement (M = 3.76), and cognitive engagement (M = 3.56). The intervention aimed to help students analyze urban growth using Google Maps’ satellite imagery and historical views. Classroom observations showed that although students were initially enthusiastic about the technology, many struggled with basic GIS operations, such as navigating map views and measuring distances. These technical difficulties led to frequent teacher assistance and visible student frustration, impacting engagement and resulting in off-task behavior. The heavy reliance on teacher support hindered independent exploration, with cognitive engagement notably low (M = 3.56), reflecting these challenges. Student feedback highlighted the difficulty of the tasks and the negative impact of needing continuous guidance on their engagement. These insights, along with the quantitative baseline data, underscored the need for more structured support. The teaching team concluded that to engage students effectively with geographic concepts, they required scaffolded instruction to build foundational GIS skills. Consequently, two modifications were planned for the second cycle: providing more detailed GIS tutorials and incorporating collaborative activities to promote peer learning. These changes aimed to address the technical challenges, enhance student independence, and improve engagement scores across all dimensions. 4.3.2. Cycle 2: Adaptation and Collaboration The second cycle introduced key modifications from Cycle 1, emphasizing explicit GIS instruction and collaborative learning. The intervention included additional tutorial time and pair-work activities while focusing on urbanization themes. Students collaborated using Google Maps to measure urban growth and analyze local environmental changes. Classroom observations recorded significant improvements in student engagement. Behavioral engagement increased from 3.87 to 4.22, emotional engagement rose from 3.76 to 4.38, and cognitive engagement improved from 3.56 to 4.41. Qualitative observations showed active participation, with students sharing insights and supporting each other in geographic problem-solving. Peer collaboration boosted students’ comfort with GIS, reducing the struggles seen in Cycle 1. Positive feedback highlighted that pair work made tasks more enjoyable and enhanced understanding. The structured guidance and collaborative environment had a notable impact, especially on emotional engagement, which increased by 0.62 points. This suggests that peer learning fostered a more positive connection to the material, with students displaying greater confidence and interest in using GIS tools. While many students became more willing to tackle complex tasks collaboratively, some still faced challenges with interpreting intricate spatial data. The peer learning environment facilitated skill development and deeper geographic understanding through dialogue and problem-solving. However, observations indicated that some students were ready for more independence. The teaching team decided to introduce more inquiry-based projects in Cycle 3, aiming to increase student autonomy while retaining the benefits of collaborative learning. 4.3.3 Cycle 3: Independence and Mastery The third cycle emphasized independent inquiry, building on the collaborative foundation from Cycle 2. Students conducted individual research projects on urbanization using Google Maps. Engagement survey results showed marked improvements: behavioral engagement rose to its peak (M = 4.22) from 3.87, emotional engagement increased from 3.76 to 4.38, and cognitive engagement showed the most significant rise from 3.56 to 4.41. The post-intervention geo-literacy assessment also indicated a significant improvement, with scores increasing from 59.50% (SD = 2.70) to 72.50% (SD = 2.30), a statistically significant gain (t(29) = 7.145, p < .001, Cohen’s d = 1.31, 95% CI [0.81, 1.79]). Classroom observations highlighted students’ advancement in independent learning. They confidently used GIS tools with minimal assistance, remained focused on tasks, and engaged in meaningful peer discussions about their research. The cognitive engagement score (M = 4.41) reflected students’ ability to independently investigate complex concepts and creatively apply GIS tools, a significant change from their initial teacher dependence. Student feedback was highly positive, with many valuing the opportunity to explore topics of personal relevance. The emotional engagement score (M = 4.38) corresponded to increased investment and enthusiasm for their projects. Students effectively analyzed urban growth patterns and environmental impacts, demonstrating mastery of previously challenging GIS skills. The combination of quantitative gains in engagement and geo-literacy, along with observed independent learning behaviors, confirmed the effectiveness of transitioning from structured support to autonomous inquiry. The significant geo-literacy improvement (mean increase of 2.60 points, 95% CI [1.86, 3.34]) validated this scaffolded approach in developing technical proficiency and deeper geographic understanding. 4.4 Correlation Between Engagement and Geo-Literacy Improvement A Pearson correlation analysis using one-tailed tests was conducted to examine the relationships among the three dimensions of engagement (behavioral, emotional, and cognitive) and post-intervention geo-literacy scores. Results revealed significant positive correlations among all engagement dimensions. Behavioral engagement demonstrated a strong positive correlation with emotional engagement (r = .641, p < .001) and a moderate positive correlation with cognitive engagement (r = .448, p = .007). Emotional engagement also showed a moderate positive correlation with cognitive engagement (r = .453, p = .006). Regarding relationships with post-intervention geo-literacy scores, only emotional engagement showed a significant positive correlation (r = .309, p = .048). Neither behavioral engagement (r = − .099, p = .302) nor cognitive engagement (r = − .117, p = .269) demonstrated significant correlations with post-intervention scores. These findings suggest that while the engagement dimensions were strongly interrelated, only emotional engagement had a significant positive relationship with students’ geo-literacy performance. Table 3 Correlation Matrix for Engagement Dimensions and Geo-literacy Improvement Variables 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. Behavioral Eng. - 2. Emotional Eng. .641 ** - 3. Cognitive Eng. .448 ** .453 ** - 4. Geo-literacy − .099 .309 * − .117 - Note: ** p < .01, * p < .05. 5. Discussion The significant improvement in geo-literacy scores from pre-test (M = 59.50%, SD = 2.70) to post-test (M = 72.50%, SD = 2.30), with a large effect size (d = 1.31), demonstrates the effectiveness of integrating GIS tools into geography education. This improvement aligns with Baker et al.’s theoretical framework of geo-literacy [ 21 ], which emphasizes three core dimensions: interactions between human and natural systems, global interconnections, and implications of geographic decisions. The study's results indicate that combining PhenoBL with GIS effectively supports students’ development across these essential dimensions. The substantial improvement also supports Yang et al.’s findings on GIS integration’s positive impact on geographic understanding [ 30 ]. However, our study extends this knowledge by showing how integrating PhenoBL with GIS creates a more comprehensive learning environment that connects abstract spatial concepts with real-world phenomena. This approach addresses a critical need identified by Symeonidis and Schwarz in geography education: bridging theoretical understanding with practical application [ 10 ]. While implementation challenges were observed, especially in the early stages, our study provides new insights into overcoming these difficulties systematically through an action research approach, offering a practical framework for progressive skill development that was previously underexplored in the literature. Regarding changes in student engagement, the progressive improvement in engagement across all dimensions reflects the theoretical understanding of engagement as a multifaceted construct in geography education [ 32 ]. Our findings extend current knowledge by demonstrating how different engagement dimensions evolve through distinct technology integration and inquiry-based learning phases. The transition from structured to independent learning revealed important patterns in student engagement. Behavioral engagement improved from 3.87 to 4.22, reflecting a phased progression from teacher dependence to collaborative and independent learning, which aligns with Wang et al.’s research [ 28 ]. Emotional engagement also increased significantly, from 3.76 to 4.38, supporting Helsel et al.’s findings [ 26 ] and highlighting how personal connections to geographic inquiry develop alongside technical skills. Cognitive engagement rose from 3.56 to 4.41, building on Kennedy and Fields’ work demonstrating how technological integration enhances complex spatial thinking [ 13 ]. These findings provide new insights into scaffolding student engagement in technology-enhanced geography education. The discovery of emotional engagement’s unique positive correlation with geo-literacy improvement (r = 0.309, p = .048) represents a novel contribution to understanding the role of affect in geographic learning. These findings challenge traditional assumptions about the primacy of cognitive engagement in technical learning environments and align with emerging theories about the importance of emotional connection in spatial thinking development [ 29 ]. The lack of significant correlations for behavioral and cognitive engagement presents an exciting contrast to existing literature. While Kim and Bednarz emphasized the importance of active participation in GIS learning [ 27 ], our findings suggest a more complex relationship between engagement types and learning outcomes. This complexity may be particularly relevant in Thai education, where Khrongchuen and Buaraphan noted unique challenges in implementing technology-enhanced geography education [ 8 ]. This study’s most notable contribution is revealing the critical role of emotional engagement in geo-literacy development within technology-enhanced geography education. While previous research has emphasized cognitive and behavioral aspects of GIS learning [ 38 , 29 ], our finding—that emotional engagement alone significantly correlated with geo-literacy improvement (r = 0.309, p = .048)—challenges these traditional views. It suggests that emotional connections to geographic content are more vital to student learning outcomes than previously recognized, especially when using GIS tools. By highlighting the importance of fostering students’ emotional bonds with spatial concepts and technology, this study expands our understanding of engagement in geography education. These findings emphasize the need for educational strategies that prioritize emotional engagement alongside technical and cognitive aspects, offering new insights for designing more effective, holistic geography education programs. The findings of this study offer significant implications for educators and curriculum developers. The integration of PhenoBL and GIS highlights the potential of interdisciplinary, technology-enhanced learning to boost student engagement and geographic understanding. Teachers should consider using similar approaches to promote deeper cognitive engagement and practical skills, while structured scaffolding and ongoing support are crucial to overcoming GIS-related challenges. Curriculum developers should also provide teachers with the necessary resources and training to design effective, inquiry-based projects that integrate GIS. However, this study has limitations. The small sample size of 30 students from a single school may restrict the generalizability of the findings. Future research should replicate the study with larger, more diverse populations to validate the effectiveness of PhenoBL and GIS across different contexts. Additionally, the eight-week intervention may not capture long-term impacts on geo-literacy and engagement. Subsequent studies should explore long-term outcomes and adapt these methods to support students with varying technological skills. Further research could also investigate how different engagement types, such as cognitive and emotional, influence learning outcomes in technology-enhanced settings. 6. Conclusion In conclusion, this study highlights the potential of integrating PhenoBL and GIS to enhance student engagement and geo-literacy in geography education. While significant improvements were observed in both engagement and geo-literacy, the correlation analysis revealed that emotional engagement, in particular, played a significant positive role in students’ geo-literacy improvement. However, the absence of significant correlations between behavioral and cognitive engagement with geo-literacy improvement suggests a complex relationship between engagement types and learning outcomes in technology-enhanced environments. These findings indicate that while emotional connection to learning activities may support geographic understanding, successful implementation of technology-enhanced geography education might require careful attention to how different forms of engagement are fostered and supported. The study offers valuable insights for educators seeking to implement interdisciplinary, inquiry-based learning models, particularly emphasizing the importance of nurturing students' emotional engagement alongside behavioral and cognitive aspects of learning. Declarations Ethic Approval and consent to participate This study received a waiver from the Khon Kaen University Ethics Committee for Human Research (KKUEC) in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and the ethical guidelines of Khon Kaen University. The study adhered to established educational research protocols to ensure participant well-being, informed consent, and confidentiality in alignment with institutional guidelines for ethical research practices. Competing interests All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript. Funding The researchers funded this study independently, without external financial support. Author Contribution S.M. conceptualized the study, collected data, and drafted the manuscript. N.M. designed the research, validated the methodology, analyzed the data, contributed to manuscript drafting, and revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Acknowledgement We express our deepest gratitude to the Faculty of Education at Khon Kaen University for providing the resources and facilities to carry out this study. Special thanks go to the students and teachers at a school located in northeast Thailand for their enthusiastic participation and cooperation throughout the research process. We also appreciate the technical assistance for using Google Maps in the classroom. Finally, thanks to our colleagues, mentors, and families for their continuous encouragement. Data Availability The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. References López MS, Kratochvíl O, De Miguel González R. Geographic education and spatial citizenship: Collaborative mapping for learning the local environment in a global context. In: Klonari A, De Lázaro y Torres ML, Kizos A, editors. Re-visioning geography: Key challenges in geography. Springer; 2023. p. 177–191. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40747-5_10 . Juergens C, Redecker A. Basic geo-spatial data literacy education for economic applications. KN J Cartogr Geogr Inf. 2023;73:147–159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-023-00135-9 . Chang CH, Kidman G. Connections in a changing world – reflections from international research in geographical and environmental education. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ. 2021;30(4):279–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2021.1981037 . Bureau of Academic Affairs and Educational Standards. Basic education core curriculum B.E. 2560 (2017) [in Thai]. Ministry of Education Thailand; 2017. Available from: http://academic.obec.go.th/web/news/view/75 . Singkorn S, Klinbumrung K, Akatimagool S. Development of innovation-based learning and teaching model for technology education in Thailand 4.0 era. In: 2022 7th International STEM Education Conference (iSTEM-Ed). IEEE; 2022. p. 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/iSTEM-Ed55321.2022.9920794 . Teemuangsai S, Meesook C. Thailand’s classroom learning practices in secondary level: Are we ready for learning in the 21st-century? Int J Sci Technol Educ Res. 2017;8(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.5897/IJSTER2017.0403 . International Telecommunication Union (ITU). E-learning in Thailand: Mapping the digital divide. ITU Development Sector; 2022. Available from: https://thailand.un.org/sites/default/files/2022-09/21-00630_E-learning-Thailand-Mapping-digital-divide%5B74%5D.pdf . Khrongchuen P, Buaraphan K. Developing geo-literacy situation-based learning in social studies for promoting geo-literacy in grade 11 students. J Phys Conf Ser. 2023;2582:012060. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2582/1/012060 . Singtuen V, Vivitkul N, Junjuer T. Geoeducational assessments in Khon Kaen National Geopark, Thailand: Implication for geoconservation and geotourism development. Heliyon. 2022;8(12). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12464 . Symeonidis V, Schwarz JF. Phenomenon-based teaching and learning through the pedagogical lenses of phenomenology: The recent curriculum reform in Finland. Forum Oświatowe. 2016;28(2):31–47. Available from: http://forumoswiatowe.pl/index.php/czasopismo/article/view/458 . Kadarisman I, Pursitasari ID, Jaenudin D. Ecoliteracy of junior high school students through phenomenon-based learning on the interaction of living things with the environment. J Penelit Pend IPA. 2023;9(11):9075–9086. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i11.5180 . Akkas E, Eker C. The effect of phenomenon-based learning approach on students’ metacognitive awareness. Educ Res Rev. 2021;16(5):181–188. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2021.4139 . Kennedy TJ, Fields DL. Augmenting upper and early-learning STEM lessons through phenomenon-based learning projects. J High Educ Theory Pract. 2023;23(18):171–183. https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v23i18.6630 . De Klerk ED, Palmer JM, Modise AMM. A phenomenon-based learning enquiry: University students’ self-leadership actions on the social impact of COVID-19. Int J Learn Teach Educ Res. 2022;21(7):1–23. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.21.7.1 . Office of the Education Council, Ministry of Education. Education in Thailand 2022. Prigwhan Graphic; 2023. Buasuwan P, Suebnusorn W, Butkatunyoo O, Manowaluilou N, Kaewchinda M, Lalitpasan U, et al. Re-envisioning a “skills framework” to meet 21st century demands: What do young people need? Front Educ. 2022;7:1004748. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.1004748 . Panjaitan BR, Ningrum E, Waluya B. Digital learning tools in geography education: A systematic literature review. Eurasia Proc Educ Soc Sci. 2024. https://doi.org/10.55549/epess.1413355 . Zwartjes L, de Lazaro y Torres ML. Geospatial thinking learning lines in secondary education: The GI learner project. In: de Miguel Gonzalez R, Donert K, Koutsopoulos K, editors. Geospatial technologies in geography education. Springer; 2019. p. 41–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17783-6_3 . Bearman N, Jones N, André I, Cachinho HA, DeMers M. The future role of GIS education in creating critical spatial thinkers. J Geogr High Educ. 2016;40(3):394–408. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2016.1144729 . Edelson DC. Geo-education: Preparation for 21st-century decisions. National Geographic Education. 2013 Feb 11. Available from: http://education.nationalgeographic.com . Baker TR, Battersby S, Bednarz SW, Bodzin AM, Kolvoord B, Moore S, Uttal D. A research agenda for geospatial technologies and learning. J Geogr. 2015;114(3):118–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2014.950684 . Kerski JJ. Understanding our changing world through geospatial technologies. J Geogr High Educ. 2021;45(1):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2020.1864084 . Curtis MD. Professional technologies in schools: The role of pedagogical knowledge in teaching with geospatial technologies. J Geogr. 2019;118(3):130–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2018.1544267 . Schultz RB, Kerski JJ, Patterson TC. The use of virtual globes as a spatial teaching tool with suggestions for metadata standards. J Geogr. 2008;107(1):27–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221340802049844 . Adipat S. Transcending traditional paradigms: The multifaceted realm of phenomenon-based learning. Front Educ. 2024;9:1346403. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1346403 . Helsel RT, Lambert S, Dickerson L, Strelich J, Woods V, Feldwinn D. Design of a phenomenon-based science outreach program and its effects on elementary students’ epistemological understanding of, and attitudes toward, science. Sch Sci Math. 2022;122(2):74–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12515 . Kim M, Bednarz R. Development of critical spatial thinking through GIS learning. J Geogr High Educ. 2013;37(3):350–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2013.769091 . Wang C, Yang D, Xu H. Engaging students in learning the relations of geographical elements through GIS-enabled property price visualization. Educ Sci. 2022;12(10):727. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100727 . Jo I, Hong-Dwyer JJ. GIS learning and college students’ acquisition and understanding of spatial concepts. J Geogr High Educ. 2023;1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2023.2263748 . Yang D, Wang C, Qian L. Does the use of GIS in geographical education yield better learning outcomes? Evidence from a quasi-experimental study on air pollution teaching. Trans GIS. 2024;28(4):433–454. https://doi.org/10.1111/tgis.13142 . Li Y, Laxman K. GIS enabled PBL pedagogy: The effects on students’ learning in the classroom. i-manager’s J Sch Educ Technol. 2009;5(2):15–27. https://doi.org/10.26634/jsch.5.2.1028 . Jiang C, Liu D. Investigating online behavioral learning engagement and performance based on LMS data amid COVID-19: Does gender really matter? Front Educ Res. 2022;5(19):47–59. https://doi.org/10.25236/FER.2022.051910 . Xu X, Shi Z, Bos NA, Wu H. Student engagement and learning outcomes: An empirical study applying a four-dimensional framework. Med Educ Online. 2023;28(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2023.2268347 . Veiga-Pires C, Oliveira S, Pereira L, Moura D. Engaging for geosite awareness based on GIS information. In: EGU General Assembly 2023; Vienna, Austria. 2023 Apr 24–28. https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-14013 . Egiebor EE, Foster EJ. Students’ perceptions of their engagement using GIS-Story Maps. J Geogr. 2018;118(2):51–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2018.1515975 . Kemmis S, McTaggart R. The action research planner. 3rd ed. Deakin University Press; 1988. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Routledge; 1988. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587 . Hickman J. Spatial thinking and GIS: developing and assessing student competencies. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ. 2022;32(2):140–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2022.2138172 . Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files Rawdatageoliteracyandengagementsurvey.xlsx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 26 Dec, 2024 Reviews received at journal 19 Dec, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 09 Dec, 2024 Reviews received at journal 08 Dec, 2024 Reviews received at journal 07 Dec, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 04 Dec, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 02 Dec, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 24 Nov, 2024 Reviewers invited by journal 23 Nov, 2024 Editor assigned by journal 22 Nov, 2024 Submission checks completed at journal 21 Nov, 2024 First submitted to journal 07 Nov, 2024 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-5410327","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":385202365,"identity":"7151df15-c57f-4f9b-abbd-19f459d69c49","order_by":0,"name":"Sutthiphong Meechandee","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Khon Kaen University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Sutthiphong","middleName":"","lastName":"Meechandee","suffix":""},{"id":385202366,"identity":"e92cd6d0-833b-4a5a-9532-cc04a23acc7c","order_by":1,"name":"Nattapon Meekaew","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Khon Kaen University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Nattapon","middleName":"","lastName":"Meekaew","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-11-07 13:38:14","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5410327/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5410327/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":70470091,"identity":"aed338dd-d4a9-4d2e-8da3-a3fbeb6d6ece","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-12-03 13:09:58","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":622916,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5410327/v1/cba41830-f395-4e2d-801c-9b312c98230a.pdf"},{"id":70468965,"identity":"2cd8d1e9-bcdf-4e0e-a381-4bfdde92a8db","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-12-03 13:01:58","extension":"xlsx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":14430,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Rawdatageoliteracyandengagementsurvey.xlsx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5410327/v1/b0e8c279050ccdee2c1f6542.xlsx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Integrating Phenomenon-Based Learning and GIS to Improve Geo-Literacy and Student Engagement: An Action Research Approach","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn today\u0026rsquo;s interconnected world, traditional geographic education methods face increasing challenges in equipping students with the skills needed to understand complex spatial relationships and global issues. While the rapid advancement of geospatial technologies and the complexity of environmental challenges demand new approaches, many education systems still rely on methods emphasizing memorization over spatial reasoning and critical thinking. This approach often leaves students with limited ability to interpret geographic relationships and apply their knowledge to pressing issues like climate change, urbanization, and resource management [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR2\" citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e]. In response, educators are increasingly recognizing geo-literacy as a critical competency, helping students develop the spatial thinking and decision-making skills necessary to navigate today\u0026rsquo;s global challenges.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGeographic education in Thailand faces distinct challenges and opportunities amidst rapid socio-economic development and environmental change. The revised Thai Basic Education Core Curriculum (2017) emphasizes geographic literacy as part of social studies, aiming to enhance students\u0026rsquo; understanding of human-environment relationships [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e]. However, traditional teaching methods remain prevalent, limiting the integration of modern pedagogy and technology, especially in secondary schools where rote learning often replaces critical spatial thinking [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e]. Limited access to geographic teaching tools, particularly in rural areas, creates a digital divide, while gaps in teacher professional development restrict the adoption of technology-enhanced, student-centered approaches [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e]. This has led to a lag in Thai students\u0026rsquo; spatial reasoning skills relative to international standards, highlighting the need for innovative pedagogical strategies to close these gaps [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntegrating PhenoBL and GIS holds considerable promise for enhancing geographic education. PhenoBL encourages students to explore real-world phenomena through interdisciplinary inquiry, fostering engagement and critical thinking by linking classroom learning with complex global issues [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR11\" citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e]. Complementing this approach, GIS provides powerful tools for spatial analysis, allowing students to visualize and interpret geographic data, which enhances their understanding of spatial relationships [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e]. Together, these methods offer a comprehensive model for developing geo-literacy, equipping students with both conceptual insights and practical skills to address contemporary geographic challenges.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntegrating PhenoBL and GIS holds significant potential in the Thai educational context as the country embraces modernization through initiatives like the \"Transformation of Learning\" and Thailand 4.0, which promote learner-centered approaches and 21st-century skills [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e]. This aligns with Panjaitan et al.\u0026rsquo;s findings [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e] that integrating digital learning tools in geography education significantly enhances teaching methods and student understanding. The positive impacts include improved engagement and comprehension of geographical concepts. However, while PhenoBL has proven effective in interdisciplinary learning and critical thinking [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e] and GIS fosters spatial thinking and data literacy [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e], limited research examines their combined impact on geo-literacy and engagement in Thai secondary education, highlighting a gap this study seeks to address.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis research aims to address this gap by investigating how the integration of PhenoBL and GIS can enhance geo-literacy and student engagement in lower secondary education. Specifically, the research focuses on the effectiveness of integrating PhenoBL and GIS to enhance geo-literacy and engagement among lower secondary students. By exploring these aspects, this study aims to contribute both theoretical insights into the synergy between PhenoBL and GIS and practical guidance for educators seeking to enhance geographic education through technology-enhanced, inquiry-based learning models. The findings have particular relevance for educational contexts where the integration of innovative pedagogical approaches with technological tools remains an emerging practice, offering a framework for implementing effective geography education that meets the demands of our increasingly complex world.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Theoretical Framework","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1 Defining Geo-Literacy in Educational Contexts\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eGeo-literacy encompasses the ability to understand spatial relationships and make informed geographic decisions through three core dimensions: interactions between human and natural systems, global interconnections, and the implications of geographic decisions [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e]. As global challenges like urbanization and climate change become more complex, geo-literacy equips students with essential skills to understand and address these issues through spatial thinking and analysis [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study integrates two complementary approaches to develop geo-literacy: PhenoBL and GIS. PhenoBL engages students with real-world geographic phenomena through inquiry-based learning, while GIS provides tools for spatial analysis and visualization [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e]. Together, these approaches create a learning environment where students develop both conceptual understanding and practical skills in spatial analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, implementing geo-literacy education presents challenges, including the need for scaffolded GIS instruction and sufficient teacher training [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e]. Despite these challenges, geo-literacy remains crucial in preparing students to understand and address contemporary spatial issues through an interdisciplinary approach that combines geography, environmental science, and social studies [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2 Integration of PhenoBL and GIS in Geography Education\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003ePhenoBL transforms geography education by engaging students with real-world geographic phenomena rather than isolated content. This approach promotes deeper understanding through analysis of geographic phenomena from multiple perspectives\u0026mdash;physical, social, and environmental [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e]. Studies show that students in PhenoBL projects demonstrate improved abilities to analyze spatial relationships and environmental interactions [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e], particularly when geographic concepts connect to observable phenomena.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGeographic Information Systems (GIS) complement this approach by providing tools for spatial data visualization and analysis. Research indicates that GIS usage enhances students\u0026rsquo; spatial thinking abilities and geographic reasoning skills [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e]. However, successful implementation requires carefully scaffolded instruction to help students overcome initial technical challenges [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe integration of PhenoBL and GIS creates a powerful synergy in geography education. When students use geographic technology to investigate real environmental issues, they develop better understanding of both technical tools and geographic concepts [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e]. This combined approach enhances spatial visualization abilities through multiple representations of geographic phenomena while building analytical skills through hands-on data analysis. The connection to real-world applications makes abstract spatial relationships more concrete and meaningful for students, fostering deeper engagement with geographic concepts and more comprehensive understanding of spatial relationships.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3 Student Engagement in Geography Education\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudent engagement in geography education encompasses three key dimensions: behavioral (active participation in spatial analysis activities), emotional (interest in geographic phenomena), and cognitive (mental effort in understanding spatial relationships). These dimensions are crucial in geography education, where students interact with abstract spatial concepts, real-world phenomena, and technological tools [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearch demonstrates that higher engagement levels correlate with improved spatial thinking and geographic understanding. Students who are more engaged in geographic activities show enhanced spatial reasoning abilities and deeper conceptual understanding, particularly in technology-enhanced environments [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e]. The integration of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) has proven especially effective in promoting engagement through interactive learning environments [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e] .\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhen combined with phenomenon-based approaches, technology integration creates a powerful learning synergy. Students demonstrate increased engagement when geographic concepts connect to real-world phenomena and local environmental issues, especially when using technological tools for analysis [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e]. This integration of real-world phenomena with interactive technology not only enhances engagement but also facilitates the development of sophisticated geographic thinking skills.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Research Methodology","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1 Research Design\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study employed an action research design following the cyclical model of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e]. The focus of these cycles was to continuously refine the integration of PhenoBL and GIS within the geography curriculum to enhance student engagement and geo-literacy. Each cycle progressively built on the previous one, with Google Maps serving as the GIS tool. Integrating PhenoBL and Google Maps allowed students to engage with real-world geographic data, fostering deeper cognitive involvement and a more interactive learning experience.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the study, the targeted school is situated in northeast Thailand, within a community that combines urban and rural elements, reflecting the diverse socioeconomic landscape of the region. Although located in a relatively developed town area, the school serves a large number of students from surrounding rural communities, many of whom come from families with low economic status. This socioeconomic diversity brings a range of experiences and perspectives into the classroom, creating a unique learning environment where students face the challenges and opportunities associated with limited resources and a strong sense of community.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe school offers students educational resources but has limited exposure to advanced technology and specialized learning tools. This context influenced the learning environment significantly, as it was the first time students encountered GIS, presenting both a novel experience and a valuable educational opportunity in their geography curriculum.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2 Participants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe sample consisted of 30 Grade 8 students aged 13\u0026ndash;14. The participants were selected using a convenience sampling method, as the study was conducted within a single geography classroom where the students were already engaged in the geography curriculum. All students had no prior experience with GIS and were introduced to GIS tools for the first time during the intervention.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe class was composed of 24 female and 6 male students. Participation in the study was voluntary, and informed consent was obtained from both students and their guardians. Students participated in the study as part of their regular geography curriculum.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3 Intervention: PhenoBL and GIS Integration\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe intervention was conducted over eight weeks, focusing on urbanization and its impact on local environments. The geography lessons were designed using the PhenoBL approach, which emphasizes interdisciplinary, inquiry-based learning. Throughout the intervention, students engaged in topics such as urban growth, environmental sustainability, and land use patterns, investigating real-world geographic phenomena.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe GIS, specifically Google Maps, was used as a tool for students to visualize and analyze urbanization-related geographic data. In this study, Google Maps was selected as the GIS tool for several key reasons. First, it provides a user-friendly platform accessible to students with varying levels of technological proficiency. The simplicity of its interface allows students to navigate and explore spatial data with minimal prior training, making it an ideal tool for beginners in GIS. Additionally, Google Maps offers real-time satellite imagery and historical data, enabling students to analyze geographic phenomena such as urbanization and environmental changes over time. This aligns with the inquiry-based nature of PhenoBL, where students are encouraged to explore real-world phenomena using accessible digital tools. Furthermore, Google Maps is widely available and does not require specialized software or hardware, making it a cost-effective option for schools with limited resources. Its integration into classroom activities allows students to apply geographic concepts in a practical, hands-on manner, enhancing engagement and geo-literacy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudents used Google Maps\u0026rsquo; satellite imagery and historical views to observe how urban areas had developed over time. By examining demographic maps, infrastructure changes, and land use patterns, students could draw inferences about how urban expansion might continue and how it affects the surrounding environment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.4 Data Collection\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eData collection occurred using quantitative and qualitative methods throughout the three action research cycles. Each cycle provided opportunities to gather geo-literacy test results, student engagement survey data, and classroom observation insights, which were used to inform the subsequent cycle. Pre-tests and post-tests were conducted in the first and final cycles to measure changes in geo-literacy, while observations and engagement surveys were administered throughout each cycle.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThree main instruments were used to collect data in this study including 1) the geo-literacy test, comprising 20 multiple-choice questions, was designed to assess students\u0026rsquo; knowledge and skills in the core components of geo-literacy: interactions, interconnections, and implications. These components were embedded within questions on geographic concepts and map interpretation, aimed at evaluating students\u0026rsquo; understanding of spatial relationships and the broader implications of geographic patterns. The test was administered as both a pre-test and a post-test to measure changes in geo-literacy resulting from the intervention. To ensure content validity, the test was reviewed by a panel of geography education experts for alignment with curriculum standards. Additionally, a pilot study with a small student sample confirmed the test\u0026rsquo;s reliability, yielding a Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha score of 0.81, indicating high internal consistency.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e2) The Student Engagement Survey measured three dimensions of engagement\u0026mdash;behavioral, emotional, and cognitive\u0026mdash;using Likert-scale questions. It was administered twice, once at the beginning and again at the end of the intervention. The survey captured students\u0026rsquo; participation in class activities, interest in geography, and the cognitive effort they applied during lessons. The survey was adapted from previously validated engagement scales and modified to fit the study\u0026rsquo;s context. Its reliability was confirmed through a Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha score of 0.74, indicating good internal consistency.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e3) Classroom Observation Checklist was used to monitor key behaviors during PhenoBL and GIS activities. Observations focused on student participation, peer interaction, time on tasks, and engagement with the GIS technology. Observers noted quantitative measures (e.g., time spent on activities) and qualitative insights (e.g., student comments and reactions). The observation checklist was developed based on established classroom engagement guidelines and piloted in a similar educational context before implementation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe data collection spanned three cycles (planning, acting, observing, reflecting), with instruments applied at strategic intervals. A pre-test on geo-literacy and an initial engagement survey established baseline data, while observations during weeks 2, 5, and 8 provided real-time insights into engagement with PhenoBL and GIS activities. Post-intervention, a geo-literacy test and re-administered engagement survey measured progress and engagement changes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.5 Data Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eData analysis was conducted after each cycle to assess the interventions\u0026rsquo; impact and inform adjustments for the next cycle. The data from the geo-literacy tests were analyzed using paired sample t-tests to determine whether there was a significant difference in students\u0026rsquo; geo-literacy levels before and after the intervention. Student engagement survey responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics, with the mean scores for each dimension of engagement (behavioral, emotional, cognitive) compared before and after the intervention. Classroom observation notes were analyzed using thematic analysis, where student participation and interaction patterns were identified and categorized based on frequency and intensity of engagement. This allowed for a more in-depth understanding of how students interacted with the learning content and the GIS tools.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis section presents the study\u0026rsquo;s outcomes, focusing on integrating PhenoBL and GIS to improve student geo-literacy and engagement. The data were presented as follows.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.1 Changes in the geo-literacy of students\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe integration of PhenoBL and GIS demonstrated a substantial positive impact on students' geo-literacy scores. To evaluate this impact, a paired-samples t-test was conducted to examine changes in students' geo-literacy scores before and after the intervention. Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e presents the detailed results of this analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGeo-Literacy Test Scores Before and After the Intervention\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTime Point\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean Score\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean Difference\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCohen\u0026rsquo;s d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePre-Test\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e59.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.145\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePost-Test\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e72.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ep\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnalysis of the results revealed a statistically significant increase in geo-literacy scores from pre-intervention (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;59.50%, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.70) to post-intervention (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;72.50%, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.30), with a mean increase of 2.60 points (95% CI [1.86, 3.34]), t(29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7.145, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001, d\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.31, 95% CI [0.81, 1.79]. The effect size (Cohen\u0026rsquo;s d\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.31) indicates a large practical significance according to Cohen\u0026rsquo;sbguidelines [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e], where d\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.8 is considered a large effect.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.2 Changes in Student Engagement\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe integration of PhenoBL and GIS showed considerable effectiveness in enhancing students\u0026rsquo; engagement across all dimensions. To assess these changes, students\u0026rsquo; behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement were measured before and after the intervention using a validated survey instrument. The analysis revealed substantial improvements in all engagement dimensions, with particularly notable increases in emotional and cognitive aspects. Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e presents the detailed results of this analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChanges in Student Engagement Scores Before and After Intervention\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEngagement Dimension\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePre-intervention\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePost-intervention\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean Difference\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCohen\u0026rsquo;s d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBehavioral Engagement\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.87\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmotional Engagement\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.76\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.38\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCognitive Engagement\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.56\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.41\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTotal Engagement\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20.82\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.63\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.790\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ep\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.24 (0.76, 1.71)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.3 Progressive Development Through Action Research Cycles\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThree action research cycles documented the development of students\u0026rsquo; engagement and learning throughout the intervention. As detailed in the following sections, the progression through these cycles revealed distinct patterns in students\u0026rsquo; development, from initial challenges to eventual mastery.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.3.1 Cycle 1: Initial Implementation and Challenges\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe first cycle implemented PhenoBL with GIS integration in geography lessons focused on urbanization. Before starting the intervention, students completed a geo-literacy pre-test, revealing limited prior knowledge (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;59.50%, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.70). Baseline engagement scores were established through an initial survey: behavioral engagement (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.87), emotional engagement (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.76), and cognitive engagement (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.56). The intervention aimed to help students analyze urban growth using Google Maps\u0026rsquo; satellite imagery and historical views.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eClassroom observations showed that although students were initially enthusiastic about the technology, many struggled with basic GIS operations, such as navigating map views and measuring distances. These technical difficulties led to frequent teacher assistance and visible student frustration, impacting engagement and resulting in off-task behavior. The heavy reliance on teacher support hindered independent exploration, with cognitive engagement notably low (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.56), reflecting these challenges.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudent feedback highlighted the difficulty of the tasks and the negative impact of needing continuous guidance on their engagement. These insights, along with the quantitative baseline data, underscored the need for more structured support. The teaching team concluded that to engage students effectively with geographic concepts, they required scaffolded instruction to build foundational GIS skills.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsequently, two modifications were planned for the second cycle: providing more detailed GIS tutorials and incorporating collaborative activities to promote peer learning. These changes aimed to address the technical challenges, enhance student independence, and improve engagement scores across all dimensions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.3.2. Cycle 2: Adaptation and Collaboration\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe second cycle introduced key modifications from Cycle 1, emphasizing explicit GIS instruction and collaborative learning. The intervention included additional tutorial time and pair-work activities while focusing on urbanization themes. Students collaborated using Google Maps to measure urban growth and analyze local environmental changes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eClassroom observations recorded significant improvements in student engagement. Behavioral engagement increased from 3.87 to 4.22, emotional engagement rose from 3.76 to 4.38, and cognitive engagement improved from 3.56 to 4.41. Qualitative observations showed active participation, with students sharing insights and supporting each other in geographic problem-solving. Peer collaboration boosted students\u0026rsquo; comfort with GIS, reducing the struggles seen in Cycle 1. Positive feedback highlighted that pair work made tasks more enjoyable and enhanced understanding.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe structured guidance and collaborative environment had a notable impact, especially on emotional engagement, which increased by 0.62 points. This suggests that peer learning fostered a more positive connection to the material, with students displaying greater confidence and interest in using GIS tools. While many students became more willing to tackle complex tasks collaboratively, some still faced challenges with interpreting intricate spatial data.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe peer learning environment facilitated skill development and deeper geographic understanding through dialogue and problem-solving. However, observations indicated that some students were ready for more independence. The teaching team decided to introduce more inquiry-based projects in Cycle 3, aiming to increase student autonomy while retaining the benefits of collaborative learning.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.3.3 Cycle 3: Independence and Mastery\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe third cycle emphasized independent inquiry, building on the collaborative foundation from Cycle 2. Students conducted individual research projects on urbanization using Google Maps. Engagement survey results showed marked improvements: behavioral engagement rose to its peak (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.22) from 3.87, emotional engagement increased from 3.76 to 4.38, and cognitive engagement showed the most significant rise from 3.56 to 4.41. The post-intervention geo-literacy assessment also indicated a significant improvement, with scores increasing from 59.50% (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.70) to 72.50% (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.30), a statistically significant gain (t(29)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7.145, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001, Cohen\u0026rsquo;s d\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.31, 95% CI [0.81, 1.79]).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eClassroom observations highlighted students\u0026rsquo; advancement in independent learning. They confidently used GIS tools with minimal assistance, remained focused on tasks, and engaged in meaningful peer discussions about their research. The cognitive engagement score (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.41) reflected students\u0026rsquo; ability to independently investigate complex concepts and creatively apply GIS tools, a significant change from their initial teacher dependence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudent feedback was highly positive, with many valuing the opportunity to explore topics of personal relevance. The emotional engagement score (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.38) corresponded to increased investment and enthusiasm for their projects. Students effectively analyzed urban growth patterns and environmental impacts, demonstrating mastery of previously challenging GIS skills.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe combination of quantitative gains in engagement and geo-literacy, along with observed independent learning behaviors, confirmed the effectiveness of transitioning from structured support to autonomous inquiry. The significant geo-literacy improvement (mean increase of 2.60 points, 95% CI [1.86, 3.34]) validated this scaffolded approach in developing technical proficiency and deeper geographic understanding.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.4 Correlation Between Engagement and Geo-Literacy Improvement\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA Pearson correlation analysis using one-tailed tests was conducted to examine the relationships among the three dimensions of engagement (behavioral, emotional, and cognitive) and post-intervention geo-literacy scores. Results revealed significant positive correlations among all engagement dimensions. Behavioral engagement demonstrated a strong positive correlation with emotional engagement (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.641, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001) and a moderate positive correlation with cognitive engagement (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.448, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.007). Emotional engagement also showed a moderate positive correlation with cognitive engagement (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.453, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.006).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding relationships with post-intervention geo-literacy scores, only emotional engagement showed a significant positive correlation (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.309, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.048). Neither behavioral engagement (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.099, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.302) nor cognitive engagement (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.117, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.269) demonstrated significant correlations with post-intervention scores. These findings suggest that while the engagement dimensions were strongly interrelated, only emotional engagement had a significant positive relationship with students\u0026rsquo; geo-literacy performance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCorrelation Matrix for Engagement Dimensions and Geo-literacy Improvement\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariables\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1. Behavioral Eng.\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e2. Emotional Eng.\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.641\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e3. Cognitive Eng.\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.448\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.453\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e4. Geo-literacy\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.099\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.309\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.117\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003eNote: \u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.01, \u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.05.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe significant improvement in geo-literacy scores from pre-test (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;59.50%, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.70) to post-test (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;72.50%, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.30), with a large effect size (d\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.31), demonstrates the effectiveness of integrating GIS tools into geography education. This improvement aligns with Baker et al.\u0026rsquo;s theoretical framework of geo-literacy [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e], which emphasizes three core dimensions: interactions between human and natural systems, global interconnections, and implications of geographic decisions. The study's results indicate that combining PhenoBL with GIS effectively supports students\u0026rsquo; development across these essential dimensions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe substantial improvement also supports Yang et al.\u0026rsquo;s findings on GIS integration\u0026rsquo;s positive impact on geographic understanding [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e]. However, our study extends this knowledge by showing how integrating PhenoBL with GIS creates a more comprehensive learning environment that connects abstract spatial concepts with real-world phenomena. This approach addresses a critical need identified by Symeonidis and Schwarz in geography education: bridging theoretical understanding with practical application [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e]. While implementation challenges were observed, especially in the early stages, our study provides new insights into overcoming these difficulties systematically through an action research approach, offering a practical framework for progressive skill development that was previously underexplored in the literature.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding changes in student engagement, the progressive improvement in engagement across all dimensions reflects the theoretical understanding of engagement as a multifaceted construct in geography education [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e]. Our findings extend current knowledge by demonstrating how different engagement dimensions evolve through distinct technology integration and inquiry-based learning phases.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe transition from structured to independent learning revealed important patterns in student engagement. Behavioral engagement improved from 3.87 to 4.22, reflecting a phased progression from teacher dependence to collaborative and independent learning, which aligns with Wang et al.\u0026rsquo;s research [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e]. Emotional engagement also increased significantly, from 3.76 to 4.38, supporting Helsel et al.\u0026rsquo;s findings [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e] and highlighting how personal connections to geographic inquiry develop alongside technical skills. Cognitive engagement rose from 3.56 to 4.41, building on Kennedy and Fields\u0026rsquo; work demonstrating how technological integration enhances complex spatial thinking [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e]. These findings provide new insights into scaffolding student engagement in technology-enhanced geography education.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe discovery of emotional engagement\u0026rsquo;s unique positive correlation with geo-literacy improvement (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.309, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.048) represents a novel contribution to understanding the role of affect in geographic learning. These findings challenge traditional assumptions about the primacy of cognitive engagement in technical learning environments and align with emerging theories about the importance of emotional connection in spatial thinking development [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe lack of significant correlations for behavioral and cognitive engagement presents an exciting contrast to existing literature. While Kim and Bednarz emphasized the importance of active participation in GIS learning [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e], our findings suggest a more complex relationship between engagement types and learning outcomes. This complexity may be particularly relevant in Thai education, where Khrongchuen and Buaraphan noted unique challenges in implementing technology-enhanced geography education [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study\u0026rsquo;s most notable contribution is revealing the critical role of emotional engagement in geo-literacy development within technology-enhanced geography education. While previous research has emphasized cognitive and behavioral aspects of GIS learning [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e], our finding\u0026mdash;that emotional engagement alone significantly correlated with geo-literacy improvement (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.309, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.048)\u0026mdash;challenges these traditional views. It suggests that emotional connections to geographic content are more vital to student learning outcomes than previously recognized, especially when using GIS tools. By highlighting the importance of fostering students\u0026rsquo; emotional bonds with spatial concepts and technology, this study expands our understanding of engagement in geography education. These findings emphasize the need for educational strategies that prioritize emotional engagement alongside technical and cognitive aspects, offering new insights for designing more effective, holistic geography education programs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study offer significant implications for educators and curriculum developers. The integration of PhenoBL and GIS highlights the potential of interdisciplinary, technology-enhanced learning to boost student engagement and geographic understanding. Teachers should consider using similar approaches to promote deeper cognitive engagement and practical skills, while structured scaffolding and ongoing support are crucial to overcoming GIS-related challenges. Curriculum developers should also provide teachers with the necessary resources and training to design effective, inquiry-based projects that integrate GIS.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, this study has limitations. The small sample size of 30 students from a single school may restrict the generalizability of the findings. Future research should replicate the study with larger, more diverse populations to validate the effectiveness of PhenoBL and GIS across different contexts. Additionally, the eight-week intervention may not capture long-term impacts on geo-literacy and engagement. Subsequent studies should explore long-term outcomes and adapt these methods to support students with varying technological skills. Further research could also investigate how different engagement types, such as cognitive and emotional, influence learning outcomes in technology-enhanced settings.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"6. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn conclusion, this study highlights the potential of integrating PhenoBL and GIS to enhance student engagement and geo-literacy in geography education. While significant improvements were observed in both engagement and geo-literacy, the correlation analysis revealed that emotional engagement, in particular, played a significant positive role in students\u0026rsquo; geo-literacy improvement. However, the absence of significant correlations between behavioral and cognitive engagement with geo-literacy improvement suggests a complex relationship between engagement types and learning outcomes in technology-enhanced environments. These findings indicate that while emotional connection to learning activities may support geographic understanding, successful implementation of technology-enhanced geography education might require careful attention to how different forms of engagement are fostered and supported. The study offers valuable insights for educators seeking to implement interdisciplinary, inquiry-based learning models, particularly emphasizing the importance of nurturing students' emotional engagement alongside behavioral and cognitive aspects of learning.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003ch2\u003eEthic Approval and consent to participate\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e This study received a waiver from the Khon Kaen University Ethics Committee for Human Research (KKUEC) in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and the ethical guidelines of Khon Kaen University. The study adhered to established educational research protocols to ensure participant well-being, informed consent, and confidentiality in alignment with institutional guidelines for ethical research practices.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003ch2\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe researchers funded this study independently, without external financial support.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eS.M. conceptualized the study, collected data, and drafted the manuscript. N.M. designed the research, validated the methodology, analyzed the data, contributed to manuscript drafting, and revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe express our deepest gratitude to the Faculty of Education at Khon Kaen University for providing the resources and facilities to carry out this study. Special thanks go to the students and teachers at a school located in northeast Thailand for their enthusiastic participation and cooperation throughout the research process. We also appreciate the technical assistance for using Google Maps in the classroom. Finally, thanks to our colleagues, mentors, and families for their continuous encouragement.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eL\u0026oacute;pez MS, Kratochv\u0026iacute;l O, De Miguel Gonz\u0026aacute;lez R. Geographic education and spatial citizenship: Collaborative mapping for learning the local environment in a global context. In: Klonari A, De L\u0026aacute;zaro y Torres ML, Kizos A, editors. Re-visioning geography: Key challenges in geography. Springer; 2023. p. 177\u0026ndash;191. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40747-5_10\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/978-3-031-40747-5_10\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJuergens C, Redecker A. Basic geo-spatial data literacy education for economic applications. KN J Cartogr Geogr Inf. 2023;73:147\u0026ndash;159. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s42489-023-00135-9\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s42489-023-00135-9\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChang CH, Kidman G. Connections in a changing world \u0026ndash; reflections from international research in geographical and environmental education. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ. 2021;30(4):279\u0026ndash;282. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2021.1981037\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10382046.2021.1981037\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBureau of Academic Affairs and Educational Standards. Basic education core curriculum B.E. 2560 (2017) [in Thai]. Ministry of Education Thailand; 2017. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://academic.obec.go.th/web/news/view/75\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://academic.obec.go.th/web/news/view/75\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSingkorn S, Klinbumrung K, Akatimagool S. Development of innovation-based learning and teaching model for technology education in Thailand 4.0 era. In: 2022 7th International STEM Education Conference (iSTEM-Ed). IEEE; 2022. p. 1\u0026ndash;4. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1109/iSTEM-Ed55321.2022.9920794\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1109/iSTEM-Ed55321.2022.9920794\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTeemuangsai S, Meesook C. Thailand\u0026rsquo;s classroom learning practices in secondary level: Are we ready for learning in the 21st-century? Int J Sci Technol Educ Res. 2017;8(1):1\u0026ndash;12. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5897/IJSTER2017.0403\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5897/IJSTER2017.0403\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eInternational Telecommunication Union (ITU). E-learning in Thailand: Mapping the digital divide. ITU Development Sector; 2022. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://thailand.un.org/sites/default/files/2022-09/21-00630_E-learning-Thailand-Mapping-digital-divide%5B74%5D.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://thailand.un.org/sites/default/files/2022-09/21-00630_E-learning-Thailand-Mapping-digital-divide%5B74%5D.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKhrongchuen P, Buaraphan K. Developing geo-literacy situation-based learning in social studies for promoting geo-literacy in grade 11 students. J Phys Conf Ser. 2023;2582:012060. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2582/1/012060\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1088/1742-6596/2582/1/012060\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSingtuen V, Vivitkul N, Junjuer T. Geoeducational assessments in Khon Kaen National Geopark, Thailand: Implication for geoconservation and geotourism development. Heliyon. 2022;8(12). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12464\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12464\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSymeonidis V, Schwarz JF. Phenomenon-based teaching and learning through the pedagogical lenses of phenomenology: The recent curriculum reform in Finland. Forum Oświatowe. 2016;28(2):31\u0026ndash;47. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://forumoswiatowe.pl/index.php/czasopismo/article/view/458\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://forumoswiatowe.pl/index.php/czasopismo/article/view/458\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKadarisman I, Pursitasari ID, Jaenudin D. Ecoliteracy of junior high school students through phenomenon-based learning on the interaction of living things with the environment. J Penelit Pend IPA. 2023;9(11):9075\u0026ndash;9086. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i11.5180\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.29303/jppipa.v9i11.5180\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAkkas E, Eker C. The effect of phenomenon-based learning approach on students\u0026rsquo; metacognitive awareness. Educ Res Rev. 2021;16(5):181\u0026ndash;188. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2021.4139\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5897/ERR2021.4139\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKennedy TJ, Fields DL. Augmenting upper and early-learning STEM lessons through phenomenon-based learning projects. J High Educ Theory Pract. 2023;23(18):171\u0026ndash;183. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v23i18.6630\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.33423/jhetp.v23i18.6630\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDe Klerk ED, Palmer JM, Modise AMM. A phenomenon-based learning enquiry: University students\u0026rsquo; self-leadership actions on the social impact of COVID-19. Int J Learn Teach Educ Res. 2022;21(7):1\u0026ndash;23. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.21.7.1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.26803/ijlter.21.7.1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOffice of the Education Council, Ministry of Education. Education in Thailand 2022. Prigwhan Graphic; 2023.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBuasuwan P, Suebnusorn W, Butkatunyoo O, Manowaluilou N, Kaewchinda M, Lalitpasan U, et al. Re-envisioning a \u0026ldquo;skills framework\u0026rdquo; to meet 21st century demands: What do young people need? Front Educ. 2022;7:1004748. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.1004748\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/feduc.2022.1004748\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePanjaitan BR, Ningrum E, Waluya B. Digital learning tools in geography education: A systematic literature review. Eurasia Proc Educ Soc Sci. 2024. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.55549/epess.1413355\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.55549/epess.1413355\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZwartjes L, de Lazaro y Torres ML. Geospatial thinking learning lines in secondary education: The GI learner project. In: de Miguel Gonzalez R, Donert K, Koutsopoulos K, editors. Geospatial technologies in geography education. Springer; 2019. p. 41\u0026ndash;61. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17783-6_3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/978-3-030-17783-6_3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBearman N, Jones N, Andr\u0026eacute; I, Cachinho HA, DeMers M. The future role of GIS education in creating critical spatial thinkers. J Geogr High Educ. 2016;40(3):394\u0026ndash;408. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2016.1144729\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/03098265.2016.1144729\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEdelson DC. Geo-education: Preparation for 21st-century decisions. National Geographic Education. 2013 Feb 11. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://education.nationalgeographic.com\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://education.nationalgeographic.com\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBaker TR, Battersby S, Bednarz SW, Bodzin AM, Kolvoord B, Moore S, Uttal D. A research agenda for geospatial technologies and learning. J Geogr. 2015;114(3):118\u0026ndash;130. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2014.950684\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00221341.2014.950684\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKerski JJ. Understanding our changing world through geospatial technologies. J Geogr High Educ. 2021;45(1):1\u0026ndash;14. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2020.1864084\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/03098265.2020.1864084\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCurtis MD. Professional technologies in schools: The role of pedagogical knowledge in teaching with geospatial technologies. J Geogr. 2019;118(3):130\u0026ndash;142. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2018.1544267\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00221341.2018.1544267\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchultz RB, Kerski JJ, Patterson TC. The use of virtual globes as a spatial teaching tool with suggestions for metadata standards. J Geogr. 2008;107(1):27\u0026ndash;34. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00221340802049844\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00221340802049844\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAdipat S. Transcending traditional paradigms: The multifaceted realm of phenomenon-based learning. Front Educ. 2024;9:1346403. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1346403\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/feduc.2024.1346403\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHelsel RT, Lambert S, Dickerson L, Strelich J, Woods V, Feldwinn D. Design of a phenomenon-based science outreach program and its effects on elementary students\u0026rsquo; epistemological understanding of, and attitudes toward, science. Sch Sci Math. 2022;122(2):74\u0026ndash;85. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12515\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/ssm.12515\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKim M, Bednarz R. Development of critical spatial thinking through GIS learning. J Geogr High Educ. 2013;37(3):350\u0026ndash;366. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2013.769091\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/03098265.2013.769091\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang C, Yang D, Xu H. Engaging students in learning the relations of geographical elements through GIS-enabled property price visualization. Educ Sci. 2022;12(10):727. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100727\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/educsci12100727\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJo I, Hong-Dwyer JJ. GIS learning and college students\u0026rsquo; acquisition and understanding of spatial concepts. J Geogr High Educ. 2023;1\u0026ndash;12. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2023.2263748\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/03098265.2023.2263748\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYang D, Wang C, Qian L. Does the use of GIS in geographical education yield better learning outcomes? Evidence from a quasi-experimental study on air pollution teaching. Trans GIS. 2024;28(4):433\u0026ndash;454. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/tgis.13142\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/tgis.13142\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi Y, Laxman K. GIS enabled PBL pedagogy: The effects on students\u0026rsquo; learning in the classroom. i-manager\u0026rsquo;s J Sch Educ Technol. 2009;5(2):15\u0026ndash;27. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.26634/jsch.5.2.1028\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.26634/jsch.5.2.1028\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJiang C, Liu D. Investigating online behavioral learning engagement and performance based on LMS data amid COVID-19: Does gender really matter? Front Educ Res. 2022;5(19):47\u0026ndash;59. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.25236/FER.2022.051910\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.25236/FER.2022.051910\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eXu X, Shi Z, Bos NA, Wu H. Student engagement and learning outcomes: An empirical study applying a four-dimensional framework. Med Educ Online. 2023;28(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2023.2268347\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10872981.2023.2268347\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVeiga-Pires C, Oliveira S, Pereira L, Moura D. Engaging for geosite awareness based on GIS information. In: EGU General Assembly 2023; Vienna, Austria. 2023 Apr 24\u0026ndash;28. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-14013\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5194/egusphere-egu23-14013\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEgiebor EE, Foster EJ. Students\u0026rsquo; perceptions of their engagement using GIS-Story Maps. J Geogr. 2018;118(2):51\u0026ndash;65. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2018.1515975\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00221341.2018.1515975\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKemmis S, McTaggart R. The action research planner. 3rd ed. Deakin University Press; 1988.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Routledge; 1988. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4324/9780203771587\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHickman J. Spatial thinking and GIS: developing and assessing student competencies. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ. 2022;32(2):140\u0026ndash;158. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2022.2138172\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10382046.2022.2138172\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-education","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"diedu","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Education](https://www.springer.com/journal/44217)","snPcode":"44217","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/44217/3","title":"Discover Education","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"action research, Geo-literacy, GIS, Phenomenon-based learning, Emotional engagement","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5410327/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5410327/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eDespite the individual merits of Phenomenon-Based Learning (PhenoBL) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) in improving geographic comprehension, limited research exists on their combined impact in secondary geography teaching, particularly in the Thai educational context. This study investigated the integration of PhenoBL and GIS to enhance student engagement and geo-literacy among 30 Grade 8 students in Thailand through an action research design with three iterative cycles over eight weeks. The intervention, focusing on urbanization and environmental sustainability, utilized Google Maps as a GIS tool for spatial analysis. Data collection included geo-literacy tests, student engagement surveys, and classroom observations, analyzed through paired t-tests and Pearson correlation analyses. Results demonstrated significant improvements in geo-literacy scores (from 59.5\u0026ndash;72.5%, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01) and increases across all engagement dimensions (behavioral, emotional, and cognitive). Correlation analyses revealed a significant positive relationship between emotional engagement and geo-literacy improvement (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.309, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), while behavioral and cognitive engagement showed no significant correlations with geo-literacy gains. This suggests that emotional connection to learning activities may play a particularly important role in geographic understanding. Qualitative observations documented students\u0026rsquo; progressive development of independence and confidence in using GIS tools. These findings provide valuable insights for educators and policymakers implementing technology-enhanced, inquiry-based learning models in geography education, while highlighting the importance of nurturing students' emotional engagement alongside structured support in GIS integration.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Integrating Phenomenon-Based Learning and GIS to Improve Geo-Literacy and Student Engagement: An Action Research Approach","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-12-03 13:01:53","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5410327/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2024-12-26T19:12:30+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-12-19T12:01:24+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"191557860671622821138830412756439778385","date":"2024-12-09T05:32:59+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-12-08T18:40:05+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-12-07T22:40:59+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"51151138034741332519408498233577903629","date":"2024-12-04T07:20:00+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"125992200290562045997540534982479343485","date":"2024-12-02T08:53:28+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"230289755537674145118407307205155356459","date":"2024-11-24T06:30:31+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2024-11-23T13:29:19+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2024-11-22T17:33:27+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2024-11-21T12:36:52+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Discover Education","date":"2024-11-07T13:27:03+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-education","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"diedu","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Education](https://www.springer.com/journal/44217)","snPcode":"44217","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/44217/3","title":"Discover Education","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"4664f386-ecb4-4427-bf31-77604f9cc5e2","owner":[],"postedDate":"December 3rd, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-03-18T13:53:33+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-12-03 13:01:53","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-5410327","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-5410327","identity":"rs-5410327","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}