The Case for Bee-Focused Citizen Science Projects on the College Campus
Link to the JSE December 2024 CECR Issue Table of Contents
Witzke JSE Dec 2024 CECR Issue PDF
Abstract: Many species of bees are threatened. An accurate assessment of their distribution, abundance, and phenology drives conservation efforts. Citizen science invites the public to participate in large-scale data collection on bees, assisting professional researchers in making recommendations to remediate anthropogenic causes of species decline. Citizen scientists commonly collect data in public and private gardens and within managed bee populations, but rarely in educational settings. A handful of bee-focused citizen science projects have been administered in the K-12 sector, but such projects are lacking in higher education. With college campuses open during the summer months, correlating with bees’ most active period, college students are ideal citizen scientists. Citizen science research can be built into college curricula, allowing students to participate in co-creating projects and managing them online. College campuses, many of which are certified Bee Campuses, are also well equipped to implement meaningful conservation efforts based on the findings of citizen science student projects.
Keywords: Citizen science, bees, pollinator habitats, sustainability education, conservation
Introduction
Citizen science (CS) involves volunteers, often non-scientists or non-specialists, in scientific data collection (Domroese & Johnson, 2017). CS is steadily increasing in popularity as a research methodology (Flaminio et al., 2021; Ganzevoort & van den Born, 2021; Mason & Harathi, 2019), particularly in the biodiversity field (Appenfeller et al., 2020; Griffin et al., 2021). Engaging the public in local biodiversity conservation may be a critical step in developing a more sustainable society (Persson et al., 2023). In particular, bees are essential to pollination ecosystem services. Their small size and familiarity make them ideal subjects for CS approaches (Ganzevoort & van den Born, 2021; Koffler et al., 2021). Thankfully, CS provides promising and reliable data for monitoring bees (Appenfeller et al., 2020; Ganzevoort & van den Born, 2021; Leocadio, 2021; Matechou et al., 2018) and serves as an outlet for engaging the public in conservation efforts (Persson et al., 2023). Given the potential to address research questions whose investigation would otherwise be too resource intensive (Hill et al., 2016; Richardson et al., 2019; Satyshur et al., 2023), CS is a critical tool to realize key bee conservation goals. This literature review seeks to demonstrate the efficacy of bee-focused CS projects on college campuses to expand knowledge about pollinator conservation goals.
Citizen Science and Bees
Citizens have a genuine interest in and concern for bees, whose diversity is threatened by anthropogenic causes (Christ et al., 2022; Flaminio et al., 2021; Griffin et al., 2021; Matechou et al., 2018). Disrupted temperature and precipitation patterns, which lead to a mismatch in flowering schedules that support pollinators and vice versa (Kehrberger & Holzschuh, 2019), along with pesticide use and habitat loss, are among these causes (Beckham & Atkinson, 2017; Blasi et al., 2023). Many pollinator species are declining (Blasi et al., 2023; Matechou et al., 2018; Persson et al., 2023), presenting significant concerns for future food security and environmental resilience (Maderson & Wynne-Jones, 2016). The collapse of honeybee colonies, for example, will result in significant economic and ecological problems (Pandiscia et al., 2024). To make matters worse, global food production is focused on exports and shareholder profits, driven by practices that do not prioritize pollinator health (Maderson & Wynne-Jones, 2016). Overcoming these obstacles and determining how to enact effective conservation practices depends on collecting and analyzing robust data on species distribution, habitat association, and phenology (Satyshur et al., 2023).
This has resulted in a plethora of bee-focused CS projects worldwide. These projects can provide insights into species distribution and ecological interactions (Vereecken et al., 2023). Barbiéri et al. (2023), in their evaluation of a CS training program, found that participants were most motivated by opportunities to learn, assist in conservation, and contribute knowledge about bees. Gratzer and Brodschneider (2021) echoed this sentiment, indicating that participants in their beekeeper CS project, INSIGNIA, also expressed a desire to contribute to scientific knowledge and help the environment. In a study examining the abundance and distribution of the squash bee (Peponapis pruinosa), Appenfeller et al. (2020) found that participants are eager to be involved in CS data collection efforts and contribute important information to science. Citizen scientists also reap the benefits of participating in bee-focused projects. In an evaluation of Dutch National Bee Survey (DNBS) participants’ demographics, motivation, and learning, Ganzevoort and van den Born (2021) reported “significant gains in knowledge and appreciation of wild bees” (p. 1). The desire to participate in bee-focused CS projects is evident, with the ultimate goal to engage in meaningful conservation practices.
As part of a growing conservation movement, citizen scientists are contributing to data collection just about anywhere bees are foraging: in their backyards, in public spaces, on farms, and within managed bee populations. The majority of participants in the DNBS, for instance, counted wild bees in their private gardens (Ganzevoort & van den Born, 2021). Participants in Nature in Your Backyard (NIYB) documented biodiversity in urban and rural gardens (Scheuch et al., 2018). INSIGNIA participants sampled their own honeybee colonies across ten countries (Gratzer and Brodschneider, 2021). One space where bee-focused CS projects are lacking, however, is in the classroom. A better understanding of how educational spaces can be designed to facilitate desired CS outcomes is needed (Bueddefeld et al., 2022). As outdoor learning during school hours is critical to achieving environmental education goals (Scheuch et al., 2018), this signifies a significant gap in conservation efforts.
Barbiéri et al. (2023) determined that volunteers with more basic educational backgrounds achieved the greatest learning in participating in a CS project, filling gaps that were not addressed in previous schooling. Bueddefeld et al. (2022), found, for example, that participants in a contributory bee box project increased their understanding of the plight of native bees and how to conserve them. Despite this, although there have been a number of bee-focused CS projects conducted at the elementary and secondary levels, these are few and far between. NIYB called on biology teachers to observe wild bees and identify butterflies. Participating teachers were able to combine project and curriculum goals, allowing students to focus on a specific organism and support their appreciation of biodiversity (Scheuch et al., 2018). Teachers who implemented NIYB expressed conveying the importance of biodiversity as a central goal (Scheuch et al., 2018). Johnson et al. (2014) introduced a five-day bee unit to elementary school students, requiring them to tally the number of bees visiting flowers each morning and afternoon. These projects represent first steps in including bee-focused CS projects in educational settings.
A small number of additional projects speak to the potential long-term viability of CS projects in schools. Griffin et al. (2021) of the Great Georgia Pollinator Consensus (GGaPC), in an effort to include students in the project, moved bee counting dates for school groups to late August to avoid breaks and potential inclement weather. On their website, they also created an educator page with resources for schools with pollinator gardens, concluding that increasing pollinator habitats is important to bee conservation (Griffin et al., 2021). These resources allow schools to maintain participation in bee-focused CS projects. Another project required twenty French agricultural high school teachers to collect bees for expert identification (Le Féon et al., 2016). Le Féon et al. (2016) found that a CS project of this paradigm could provide relevant data to guide national conservation efforts, highlighting the impact of CS in the school setting and beyond.
Challenges to Implementing Citizen Science Projects in Education
There are a number of barriers impeding implementation of bee-focused CS projects in educational institutions. For one, students are not among the primary demographics recruited for such projects. Persson et al. (2023) call for a more diverse participant group, including men and younger people, as most bee-focused CS projects include female volunteers that are forty years of age and above (Barbiéri et al., 2023; Domroese & Johnson, 2017). This makes the contributions of young students, or even traditionally aged college students, less frequent. One reason for this might be that the common United States K-12 school calendar does not necessarily align with prime bee activity. In their study on the motivations of volunteers in the Great Pollinator Project, Domroese and Johnson (2017) found that cool, wet weather that negatively impacted bloom times and observation opportunities was the second largest challenge to participants. Furthermore, bumblebees and solitary bees increase in abundance from late spring into summer (Bishop et al., 2024) and climate change’s rising temperatures are expected to delay the emergence of queens over time (Blasi et al., 2023). With bees busy when the weather is warm and sunny, and many college campuses buzzing with activity over the summer, there is an opportunity for more bee-focused CS projects on college campuses.
In addition, it is only on college campuses that programs like Bee Campus USA exist. Bee Campus USA is an affiliate of Bee City USA, an initiative of the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation. This organization works to educate college communities about native pollinators, as many people imagine just the honeybee (Apis mellifera) when they hear the common name “bee” (Flaminio et al., 2021). The reality, however, is that nature conservation and environmental protection issues are a constant in the lives of young people (Christ et al., 2022). With Bee Campus USA certification requirements including advocating for pollinators, creating and enhancing pollinator habitats, and offering educational opportunities that incorporate pollinator conservation, ongoing research and education on bees in college communities is integral to achieving conservation goals. Furthermore, developing bee monitoring programs that allow non-professionals to collect data is becoming increasingly urgent, and CS projects are a significant way to achieve this goal (Flaminio et al., 2021; Maderson & Wynne-Jones, 2016). While K-12 schools may not always be ideal spaces for these projects, college campuses can be.
Benefits of Bee-Focused Citizen Science in Education Spaces
Research promoting the value of CS for education and learning is abundant. CS is gaining importance in education (Ganzevoort & van den Born, 2021; Scheuch et al., 2018), with public education and outreach vital to bee conservation (Beckham & Atkinson, 2017). Christ et al. (2022) advocated specifically for CS in the school context as a way of building public interest in science and current scientific topics. In their CS project, where students monitored bumblebees and common wild bees in their schoolyard, they found that students’ knowledge increased and they positively changed their attitudes toward wild bees (Christ et al., 2022). In fact, CS projects can serve as a unique access point for very particular forms of knowledge (Bieszczad et al., 2023). Targeted educational programming can provide information to learners about how to connect with nature and engage in appropriate behaviors for living sustainably (Bueddefeld et al., 2022). Volunteering for CS projects results in valuable learning leading to continued volunteering (Shilubane et al., 2024). CS projects also facilitate conversations and invite feedback, resulting in positive outcomes for organizations (Shilubane et al., 2024).
Foundational to myriad pedagogical practices is experiential learning, which grounds the continuous process of learning in experience (Kolb, 2014). CS projects facilitate hands-on engagement, allowing learners to grasp and transform experiences (Kolb, 2014). Maderson & Wynne-Jones’s (2016) study on beekeeper knowledge found that beekeepers regard many scientific studies as too narrow and irrelevant to their practice, preferring a more holistic engagement with bees through experiential learning. Such hands-on experiences yield “more impactful education that can enhance learning and inspire continued action” (Schuttler et al., 2018 as cited in Appenfeller et al., 2020, p. 2). CS projects help raise student awareness of conservation issues and equip them to manage these outside of the classroom (Christ et al., 2022). Given these objectives, Christ et al. (2022) stressed that CS projects in schools should be more focused on educational benefits and less on data quality.
Despite this, few existing studies evaluate CS as a pedagogical tool. Christ et al. (2022) concluded that hands-on nature experiences and wild bee encounters resulted in “learning-efficient classes” (p. 12), but did not define this concept. Barbiéri et al. (2023) suggested that training and evaluation are important to the pedagogical effectiveness of CS projects, but did not reach this conclusion in an educational setting specifically. Bueddefeld et al. (2022, p. 561) demonstrated that incorporating CS projects “has promising pedagogical potential for encouraging action-oriented behaviour change” (as cited in Dunkley, 2017; Haywood et al., 2016), but they, too, determined this outside of the classroom. The Scheuch et al. (2018) NIYB study, by contrast, assessed biology teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge, noting their desire to participate in CS to cover concepts rarely addressed in regular lessons and to convey the importance of biodiversity. Similar outcomes are possible on the college campus as well, especially if students are more involved in the process of developing the CS project (Scheuch et al., 2018).
College Students as Citizen Scientists
There is lacking evidence for co-created, bee-focused CS projects due to the effort and difficulty of executing or participating in a project (Koffler et al., 2021). Most of these projects are contributory in nature; participants collect and submit data, but do not take part in designing the project. Gratzer and Brodschneide (2021), however, encouraged the involvement of citizen scientists in identifying research questions and experimental design. Given their age and experience, and robust learning objectives across the curriculum, college students would be ideal citizens for co-creation, and there are a number of benefits gained from involving them in the co-production of bee-focused CS projects. Phillips et al. (2016) suggested incorporating Open Design into CS projects to enable participants to contribute to solving local and global issues through personal activities. Furthermore, they argued if participants are advocates for the project, they will be more influential in their communities than external researchers (Phillips et al., 2016). As a starting point, involving participants in developing research questions that speak to their interests could lead to higher-quality data (Leocadio et al., 2021). Taking ownership over the project will increase students’ knowledge of and passion for the plight of bees.
College students also have the necessary skills to engage with and promote their projects online. Social media, which is frequently used in CS projects, can increase the participation of young adults, a target demographic (Shilubane et al., 2024). Social media platforms allow for the dissemination of information to large groups of people, which is essential to an effective CS project (Flaminio et al., 2021). A number of studies highlight the invaluable role of social media in bee-focused CS campaigns. Griffin et al. (2021) employed online media tools to conduct the GGaPC with limited personnel and budget, while providing participant education and project outreach. Shilubane et al. (2024), of the Jozi Bee Hotel Project, found that social media was crucial to sustaining volunteer participation. Social media also plays a prevalent role in education and conservation, particularly as relates to bees. Vereecken et al. (2023) used the social media photo repository, Flickr, to study small carder bees in the eastern Canary Islands. Similarly, Dart et al. (2022) gathered opportunistic data from social media to investigate the introduced African Carder Bee (Pseudoanthidium repetitum) in Australia. Social media is also popular for citizen scientists outside academia. Erika Thompson, The Bee Lady, for example, hosts an Instagram account @texasbeeworks where she is saving bees in the state of Texas and raising awareness worldwide.
It is platforms like these that foster greater participation in bee-focused CS projects. Internet-based platforms allow for self-participation, replacing in-person interviews and other data-collection methods (Requier et al., 2020; Le Féon et al., 2016). Requier et al. (2020), in their CS study of honey bee colony losses in Argentina, concluded that beekeepers experiencing colony loss may be prone to seek out online CS projects. The abundance of available bee-focused projects, however, does not limit participation. Rather, professionals can extract opportunistic data right from these publicly viewable platforms (Dart et al., 2022). Vereecken et al. (2023) found that online portals like Flickr and iNaturalist are an important source of bee biological records and an effective tool for engaging willing citizen scientists. With smartphone usage highest in the 18-29-year-old age group and highly represented in the college setting (Huey & Giguere, 2022), students, who are not likely beekeepers or professional scientists, can easily participate in countless CS projects from their phones. Social media platforms boast universally relevant themes with the potential to connect diverse groups (Shilubane et al., 2024).
Next Steps for Citizen Science Projects
No amount of social media can guarantee the success of a CS project alone, however, even among young college students. CS projects, like any curricular endeavor, depend on feedback and evaluation. The literature currently lacks feedback to participants in bee-focused CS projects as well as evaluations of CS impacts on volunteers (Ganzevoort & van den Born, 2021; Koffler et al., 2021). What motivates citizen scientists is not well studied or understood (Domroese & Johnson, 2017). For example, while Stafford et al. (2010) identified the benefits of incorporating social networks in the collection of bee biodiversity data, they concluded that issues of volunteer motivation still needed to be addressed. Mason and Arathi (2019) assessed the efficacy of participant data in their Native Bee Watch project, but recommend, in future research, surveying volunteers to understand their motivations. As feedback and evaluation are part of an ongoing cycle of learning for both educators and students, evaluations on the college campus can be highly instructive, allowing participants to share their experiences and lessons (Ganzevoort & van den Born, 2021). This leads to ample opportunities for revision and implementation of meaningful and effective CS projects.
A crucial aspect of impactful bee-focused CS projects is determining actionable conservation goals. Despite many citizen scientists feeling personally responsible for conserving bees and expressing a desire to help (Barbiéri et al., 2023; Domroese & Johnson, 2017; Ganzevoort & van den Born, 2021), in the body of existing bee-focused CS studies, conservation goals are not always clearly specified or deployed. For example, Domroese and Johnson (2017) promoted systematic assessments of CS projects to better target conservation outcomes, but named only broad categories for these outcomes: management, land protection, advocacy, and education. Barbiéri et al. (2023) suggested that CS could inform national conservation policies and contribute to conservation and restoration programs reliant on effective pollination, but did not provide specific recommendations for future action. Similarly, Richardson et al. (2019), in their study of bumblebees in Vermont, argued that historical changes in distribution and diversity can better inform conservation assessment and action, but that future action is unclear.
Ideally, CS experiences provide a wide range of suggested actions and resources to enhance participant motivation to adopt pro-environmental behaviors (Bueddefeld et al., 2022). For the average citizen, however, engagement in conservation practices may not be intuitive. Mason and Arathi (2019) spoke to the importance of conserving and managing natural resources, including the fruits and vegetables produced by pollinators, but needed to explain how. Pandiscia et al. (2024), in their study of apiary health in the Apulia region of Italy, encouraged “timely action” in protecting the sectors that depend on pollination services (p. 9), but also needed to describe how. Satyshur et al.’s (2023) Minnesota Bee Atlas project supported several habitat management recommendations, but needed to name those recommendations. College-age students, who may serve as novice citizen scientists, would benefit from explicit conservation suggestions.
Keeping conservation the focal point of bee-focused CS projects serves an important function on the college campus. Students are in need of educational methods that consider the practical realities of their lives and translate abstract curricular concepts accordingly (Kolb, 2014). To learn about biodiversity and conservation through a hands-on project fulfills this need. Through iNaturalist, an online platform where users can record observations and share information about biodiversity, Satyshur et al. (2023) were able to promote pollinator conservation through education and interaction. A college professor could take a similar approach, employing existing technology to engage students in CS and data collection. MacPhail et al. (2020), of the Bumble Bee Watch program, found that participants were highly motivated to further their education by learning about different local species. Zelenika et al. (2018), who established the Sustainable Communities Field School program through the University of British Columbia Botanical Garden, advocated for gardens as useful platforms for engaging the public in biodiversity and sustainability issues. College campuses, particularly those with the ability to establish pollinator habitats, are equipped to provide meaningful educational experiences.
Conclusion
The college campus is an ideal setting for bee-focused CS projects. With proper guidance, college students can cement their learning from participating in CS projects by partaking in conservation practices on campus and beyond. CS projects can educate citizen scientists about conservation issues (Flaminio et al., 2021) and are a promising way to engage in community-level conservation (Appenfeller et al., 2020; Koffler et al., 2021). Concrete action will satisfy the requirements of maintaining certification of a Bee Campus, or becoming one. Among the actions that many studies encouraged are leaving bare soil for ground-nesting bees, incorporating native flowering plants, and minimizing pesticide usage (Domroese & Johnson, 2017; Johnson et al., 2014). Beekeepers in the UK also preferred to avoid chemical treatments, placing an emphasis on wider ecosystem health (Maderson & Wynne-Jones, 2016). Flaminio et al. (2021) recommended the creation of wild bee nests and the planting of melliferous species. In alignment with goals of Bee Campus USA, Rajbhandari et al. (2023) suggested fostering native perennials and increasing landscape canopy cover to improve pollination services. Each of these measures curbs the decline of habitat loss. Beckham and Atkinson (2017) argued for conservation actions that establish, enhance, and maintain bee habitats. Reconstruction of native habitats and a more continuous supply of flowering plants can help to mitigate the reduction in plant diversity for bees (Brodschneider et al., 2021). Increased landscape complexity is an important conservation measure (Blasi et al., 2023), and a priority of Bee Campuses nationwide.
College students have an opportunity to act on these recommendations and see them through. By participating in bee-focused CS projects, students develop expertise, considering themselves more qualified to develop appropriate conservation measures (Christ et al., 2022). Furthermore, Persson et al. (2023), in the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation study, Operation: Save the Bees, found that CS projects can provide a tool for implementing conservation practices, such as cultivating flower-rich gardens. With conservation funds and labor resources limited (Beckham & Atkinson, 2017), engaging citizen scientists may help to close vital gaps. CS projects, among other non-traditional scientific methods, can provide new solutions for native pollinator conservation (Appenfeller et al. 2020), creating opportunities for non-experts to contribute. In this way, everyday people can participate in pollinator conservation advocacy. Adopting such pro-environmental behaviors depends on education that helps people to acquire knowledge and foster a positive relationship with nature (Christ et al. 2022). Facilitating CS projects on college campuses increases equitable accessibility to information on pollinators across geographic regions.
References
Appenfeller, L. R., Lloyd, S., Szendrei, Z., & Dolezal, A. G. (2020). Citizen science improves our understanding of the impact of soil management on wild pollinator abundance in agroecosystems. PLoS ONE, 15(3), e0230007. http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.gc.maricopa.edu/10.1371/journal.pone.0230007
Barbiéri, C., Koffler, S., Leocadio, J. N., Albertini, B., Francoy, T. M., Saraiva, A. M., & Ghilardi-Lopes, N. P. (2023). Evaluation of a bee-focused citizen science training process: Influence of participants’ profiles on learning. Sustainability, 15(18), NA. http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.gc.maricopa.edu/10.3390/su151813545
Beckham, J. L., & Atkinson, S. (2017). An updated understanding of Texas bumble bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) species presence and potential distributions in Texas, USA. PeerJ, 5, e3612. http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.gc.maricopa.edu/10.7717/peerj.3612
Bieszczad, S. R., Fochler, M., & Brodschneider, R. (2023). How citizen scientists see their own role and expertise: An explorative study of the perspectives of beekeepers in a citizen science project. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 8(1), NA. http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.gc.maricopa.edu/10.5334/cstp.501
Bishop, G. A., Fijen, T. P. M., Raemakers, I., van Kats, R. J. M., & Kleijn, D. (2024). Bees go up, flowers go down: Increased resource limitation from late spring to summer in agricultural landscapes. Journal of Applied Ecology, 61, 431-441. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.14576
Blasi, M., Carrié, R., Fägerström, C., Svensson, E., & Persson, A. S. (2023). Historical and citizen-reported data show shifts in bumblebee phenology over the last century in Sweden. Biodiversity & Conservation, 32(5), 1523-1547. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-023-02563-5
Brodschneider, R., Kalcher-Sommersguter, E., Kuchling, S., Dietemann, V., Gray, A., Božič, J., Briedis, A., Carreck, N. L., Chlebo, R., Crailsheim, K., Coffey, M. F., Dahle, B., González-Porto, A. V., Filipi, J., de Graaf, D.,C., Hatjina, F., Ioannidis, P., Ion, N., Jørgensen, A. S., . . . Steen, J. J. v. d. (2021). CSI pollen: Diversity of honey bee collected pollen studied by citizen scientists. Insects, 12(11), 987. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12110987
Bueddefeld, J., Ostrem, J., Murphy, M., Halpenny, E., & Orr, B. (2022). Petting bees or building bee boxes? Strategies for transformative learning. Environmental Education Research, 28(4), 560–580. https://doi-org.libproxy.gc.maricopa.edu/10.1080/13504622.2022.2045905
Christ, L., Hahn, M., Sieg, A., & Dreesmann, D. C. (2022). Be(e) engaged! How students benefit from an educational citizen science project on biodiversity in their biology classes. Sustainability, 14(21), 14524. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142114524
Dart, K., Latty, T., & Greenville, A. (2022). Citizen science reveals current distribution, predicted habitat suitability and resource requirements of the introduced African Carder Bee Pseudoanthidium (Immanthidium) repetitum in Australia. Biological invasions, 24(6), 1827-1838. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-022-02753-2
Domroese, M. C. & Johnson, E. A. (2017). Why watch bees? Motivations of citizen science volunteers in the Great Pollinator Project. Biological Conservation, 208, 40-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.08.020
Flaminio, S., Ranalli, R., Zavatta, L., Galloni, M., & Bortolotti, L. (2021). Beewatching: A project for monitoring bees through photos. Insects, 12(9), 841. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12090841
Ganzevoort, W. & van den Born, R. J. G.. (2021). Counting bees: Learning outcomes from participation in the Dutch National Bee Survey. Sustainability, 13(9), 4703. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094703
Gratzer, K., & Brodschneider, R. (2021). How and why beekeepers participate in the INSIGNIA citizen science honey bee environmental monitoring project. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(28), 37995-38006. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13379-7
Griffin, B., Braman, R., Griffin, M., & Sarieh, Y. (2021). The strategic use of multimedia in the Great Georgia Pollinator Census citizen science project. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 6(1), NA. http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.gc.maricopa.edu/10.5334/cstp.334
Hill, E. S., Smythe, A. B., & Delaney, D. A. (2016). Assessing the role of environmental conditions on efficacy rates of Heterorhabditis indica (Nematoda: Heterorhabditidae) for controlling Aethina tumida (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae) in honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) colonies: A citizen science approach. Journal of Economic Entomology, 109(1), 106-112. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/tov296
Huey, M. & Giguere, D. (2022). The impact of smartphone use on course comprehension and psychological well-being in the college classroom. Innovative Higher Education, 48(3), 527-537. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-022-09638-1
Johnson, B., Kil, J., Evans, E., & Koomen, M. H. (2014). Bee-wild about pollinators! Science and Children, 52(4), 44-48. http://libproxy.gc.maricopa.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/bee-wild-about-pollinators/docview/1630018038/se-2
Kehrberger, S., & Holzschuh, A. (2019). How does timing of flowering affect competition for pollinators, flower visitation and seed set in an early spring grassland plant? Scientific Reports, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-51916-0
Koffler, S., Barbiéri, C., Ghilardi-Lopes, N. P., Leocadio, J. N., Albertini, B., Francoy, T. M., & Saraiva, A. M. (2021). A buzz for sustainability and conservation: The growing potential of citizen science studies on bees. Sustainability, 13(2), 959. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020959
Kolb, D. A. (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (2nd ed.). Pearson Education, Inc.
Le Féon, V., Henry, M., Guilbaud, L., Coiffait-gombault, C., Dufrêne, E., Kolodziejczyk, E., Kuhlmann, M., Requier, F., & Vaissière, B.,E. (2016). An expert-assisted citizen science program involving agricultural high schools provides national patterns on bee species assemblages. Journal of Insect Conservation, 20(5), 905-918. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-016-9927-1
Leocadio, J. N., Ghilardi-Lopes, N., Koffler, S., Barbiéri, C., Francoy, T. M., Albertini, B., & Saraiva, A. M. (2021). Data reliability in a citizen science protocol for monitoring stingless bees flight activity. Insects, 12(9), 766. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12090766
MacPhail, V. J., Gibson, S. D., & Colla, S. R. (2020). Community science participants gain environmental awareness and contribute high quality data but improvements are needed: insights from Bumble Bee Watch. PeerJ, https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.9141
Maderson, S. & Wynne-Jones, S. (2016). Beekeepers’ knowledges and participation in pollinator conservation policy. Journal of Rural Studies, 45, 88-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.02.015
Mason, L & Arathi, H.S. (2019). Assessing the efficacy of citizen scientists monitoring native bees in urban areas, Global Ecology and Conservation, 17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2019.e00561
Matechou, E., Freeman, S. N., & Comont, R. (2018). Caste-specific demography and phenology in bumblebees: Modelling Bee Walk data. Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics, 23(4), 427–445. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48720292
Pandiscia, A., Lorusso, P., Manfredi, A., Bonerba, E., Bozzo, G., Tantillo, G. M., & Terio, V. (2024). Nosema apis and Nosema ceranae in beehives of the Apulian region of Italy: How citizen science can support scientific research. Agriculture, 14(4), NA. http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.gc.maricopa.edu/10.3390/agriculture14040583
Persson, A. S., Hederström, V., Ljungkvist, I., Nilsson, L., & Kendall, L. (2023). Citizen science initiatives increase pollinator activity in private gardens and green spaces. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2022.1099100
Phillips, R., Brown, M., & Baurley, S. (2016). Social responses to nature: Using Open Design to empower citizen science in the beekeeping community. Journal of Design, Business & Society (Bristol), 2(2), 197-215. https://doi.org0.1386/dbs.2.2.197_1
Rajbhandari, A., Matteson, K., Katz, E., LeBuhn, G., & Johnson, E. (2023). Bee visitation to flowers throughout New York City. Landscape and Urban Planning, 233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2023.104689
Requier, F., Andersson, G. KS., Oddi, F. J., & Garibaldi, L. A. (2020). Citizen science in developing countries: how to improve volunteer participation. Front Ecol Environ. https://doi.org/doi:10.1002/fee.2150
Richardson, L. L., McFarland, K. P., Zahendra, S., & Hardy, S. (2019). Bumble bee (Bombus) distribution and diversity in Vermont, USA: a century of change. Journal of Insect Conservation, 23(1), 45-62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-018-0113-5
Satyshur, C. D., Evans, E. C., Forsberg, B. M., Evans, T. A., & Blair, R. (2023). Determining Minnesota bee species’ distributions and phenologies with the help of participatory science. PeerJ, https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.16146
Scheuch, M., Panhuber, T., Winter, S., Kelemen-Finan, J., Bardy-Durchhalter, M., & Kapelari, S. (2018). Butterflies & wild bees: biology teachers’ PCK development through citizen science. Journal of Biological Education, 52(1), 79–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2017.1405530
Shilubane, N., Iqani, M., & Reynolds, C. (2024). The efficacy of social media communication in engaging citizen scientists: Insights from the Jozi Bee Hotel Project. Science Communication, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1177/10755470241234623
Stafford, R., Hart, A. G., Collins, L., Kirkhope, C. L., Williams, R. L., Rees, S. G., Lloyd, J. R., & Goodenough, A. E. (2010). Eu-social science: The role of internet social networks in the collection of bee biodiversity data. PLoS ONE, 5(12), e14381. http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.gc.maricopa.edu/10.1371/journal.pone.0014381
Vereecken, N. J., Ruiz, C., Marshall, L., Pérez-Gil, M., Molenberg, J., Jacobi, B., La Roche, F., & Litman, J. R. (2023). A new small carder bee species from the eastern Canary Islands (Hymenoptera, Megachilidae, Anthidiini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research, 96, 983-1015. https://doi.org/10.3897/jhr.96.111550
Zelenika, I., Moreau, T., Lane, O., & Zhao, J. (2018). Sustainability education in a botanical garden promotes environmental knowledge, attitudes and willingness to act. Environmental Education Research, 24(11), 1581–1596. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2018.1492705