Cultivating Sense of Place Through Place-Based Education: An Innovative Approach to Education for Sustainability in a Thai Primary School

Abstract

This study addresses the limited integration of place-based education (PBE) into primary science learning, particularly regarding its potential to cultivate both cognitive understanding and emotional attachment to place—key dimensions of education for sustainability. Implemented in a rural Thai primary school, a ten-week (20-h) PBE program engaged Grade 6 students in locally relevant, hands-on activities grounded in Experiential Learning Theory and Social Learning Theory. Mixed-method analysis combined rubric-based scoring of a Sense of Place Assessment with qualitative content analysis of student reflections and group work. Post-intervention results showed that 84.21% of students achieved a high level of sense of place, with the strongest gains in place knowledge, followed by place dependence and place identity. Qualitative findings revealed three developmental pathways: sustained attachment through long-term experiences, growth from surface awareness to active participation, and limited emotional connection despite involvement. These patterns illustrate diverse routes through which PBE can foster environmental stewardship by linking personal meaning-making with collaborative action. Embedding PBE in authentic school contexts can enhance students’ capacity to value, care for, and improve their immediate environments, offering a transferable model for integrating sustainability-oriented learning across curricula.

1. Introduction

Sense of place refers to the cognitive understanding, emotional attachment, and value-based connections that individuals form with specific locations through lived experiences and interactions with their surroundings (Foote & Azaryahu, 2009; Rajala et al., 2020; Semken & Freeman, 2008). A strong sense of place fosters both place meaning and place attachment, encouraging environmentally responsible actions driven by intrinsic motivation rather than external enforcement (Xie & Wang, 2024). Such connections can lead to voluntary engagement in caring for and improving local environments, as well as fostering cooperation among individuals, communities, and organizations in environmental stewardship (Rajala et al., 2020; Twigger-Ross et al., 2003). Given its psychological and social significance, fostering a strong sense of place in students is critical for developing environmental responsibility and strengthening their role as active community members (Kudryavtsev et al., 2012; Soucy et al., 2024).

In this study, sense of place is conceptualized as comprising two main components—place meaning and place attachment—each with specific subcomponents that reflect both cognitive and affective relationships with the environment (Jorgensen & Stedman, 2001; Kudryavtsev et al., 2012; Raymond et al., 2010). Place meaning refers to how individuals perceive and make sense of their surroundings through two subcomponents: place knowledge, which involves identifying and understanding local features and functions, and place awareness, which reflects sensitivity to changes, values, and lived experiences within the environment. Place attachment captures the emotional and functional bonds people form with places, encompassing place dependence, or the perceived importance and utility of a place for meeting personal or collective needs, and place identity, which reflects the emotional and symbolic connection that integrates a place into one’s self-concept. These components collectively provide the analytical framework guiding this study.

Although sense of place has been widely recognized as a multidimensional construct that encompasses place meaning and place attachment—integrating both cognitive and affective connections to specific environments (Farnum et al., 2005; Semken & Freeman, 2008)—its integration into science education remains relatively underexplored. While place-based education (PBE) has been implemented across diverse disciplines such as social studies, geography, and language arts, applications in science classrooms, particularly at the primary level, are still limited globally (Yemini et al., 2023). Existing studies tend to focus on environmental content knowledge or awareness, often emphasizing conceptual instruction over authentic, experiential engagement with local places (Ketsing, 2015; Gruenewald, 2008; Sobel, 2013). This gap is significant given that PBE offers opportunities to situate science learning within meaningful local contexts, fostering both environmental literacy and community engagement through experiential, socio-cultural, and political-economic dimensions of place (Ardoin et al., 2012; Gruenewald, 2008; Woodhouse & Knapp, 2000). The scarcity of empirical research addressing how science education can simultaneously cultivate cognitive understanding and emotional attachment to place highlights the need for studies that integrate these dimensions—particularly in rural primary school settings where students’ daily lives are deeply embedded in their immediate surroundings.

Place-based education (PBE) offers a pedagogical framework to meet this need. Grounded in Experiential Learning Theory, it emphasizes direct engagement, reflection, and application, allowing students to progress through the experiential learning cycle (Conner, 2022; Kudryavtsev et al., 2012). Social Learning Theory further complements this approach by highlighting observation, modeling, and participation in social activities (Powers, 2004; Sobel, 2013). Together, these perspectives explain how PBE can cultivate sense of place through personal interactions with the environment and collaborative learning with peers, teachers, and community members.

Theoretical Foundations

This study is grounded in two complementary theoretical perspectives that explain how learning through place-based education (PBE) can cultivate students’ sense of place—Experiential Learning Theory (ELT) and Social Learning Theory (SLT). Rooted in the works of Dewey (1938) and Kolb (1984), ELT emphasizes the cyclical process of learning through concrete experience, reflection, conceptualization, and application, allowing students to construct knowledge from direct interaction with their environment. As Kolb (1984) elaborated, this cyclical process reflects Dewey’s principle that meaningful learning arises from reflection on experience. Within the PBE framework, this process enables learners to connect scientific understanding with real-world contexts and to internalize meaning through reflection on lived experiences.

Complementing this, Bandura’s (1977) Social Learning Theory posits that learning occurs through observation and modeling within social contexts, where individuals acquire knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors through reciprocal interactions among personal, behavioral, and environmental factors. This dynamic process—known as reciprocal determinism—emphasizes that learners are both influenced by and actively shape their social environment. In the context of PBE, these principles are reflected in students’ collaboration with peers, teachers, and community members, through which they observe, imitate, and adapt constructive practices, co-construct understanding, and develop shared values toward their environment. Together, these theories provide the foundation for designing the PBE intervention in this study, where experiential and social processes intertwine to promote both cognitive and affective dimensions of students’ sense of place.

This study applies PBE in a small rural primary school in northern Thailand, engaging Grade 6 students in locally relevant, hands-on activities and reflection to strengthen their sense of place and foster intrinsically motivated environmental responsibility. The guiding research question is: How does place-based education shape primary school students’ sense of place, particularly in terms of place meaning and place attachment, within their school environment?

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants and Context

This study took place at a small rural primary school in Lamphun Province, northern Thailand, serving students from kindergarten to Grade 6, with 110 students and 10 teachers. The school is located in an agricultural community where students have daily contact with nature, yet may lack deep, value-based connections to their surroundings despite their familiarity. To address this, the study implemented place-based education (PBE) within the school grounds, focusing on two core components of sense of place—place meaning and place attachment—through activities such as exploration, observation, reflection, and collaborative meaning-making.

Participants were all 19 Grade 6 students (7 boys, 12 girls) in the second semester of the 2024 academic year. Purposive sampling was used, with criteria including: (1) enrolment in Grade 6, (2) age 11–12, (3) at least three years of continuous study at the school, (4) voluntary participation, and (5) parental consent. While familiar with their school and community, students had not previously engaged in structured learning explicitly designed to deepen their sense of place. For confidentiality, pseudonyms S01–S19 were assigned.

2.2. Research Design

This qualitative study examined the development of students’ sense of place through place-based education (PBE) focused on environmental issues within the school context. Following Maxwell’s (2012) framework, the design emphasized in-depth exploration within a specific setting, integrating research objectives, contextual factors, participants’ experiences, and interpretive analysis. Consistent with PBE principles (Smith, 2002; Sobel, 2013), the intervention engaged students in authentic interaction with their environment through exploration, environmental problem analysis, planning, and on-site action. Learning activities were intentionally designed to connect students’ personal experiences with their immediate surroundings, fostering cognitive, emotional, and value-based connections to place.

2.3. Summary of the Intervention—Place-Based Education Program

The intervention applied a long-term place-based education (PBE) program to develop Grade 6 students’ sense of place within their school environment over ten weeks (20 h). The design aligned with Experiential Learning Theory (Dewey, 1938; Kolb, 1984) by engaging students in cycles of direct experience, reflection, conceptualization, and application, and with Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977) by fostering interaction, collaboration, and shared meaning-making with peers, teachers, and community members.

Activities followed five core principles of PBE (Gruenewald, 2008; Sobel, 2013): (1) using real and familiar places—the school grounds—as the central context for learning; (2) allowing students to choose places or issues of personal interest; (3) encouraging interaction with people and environmental features within the place; (4) providing multiple avenues for students to reflect and communicate their perspectives; and (5) enabling participation in tangible place improvements.

The PBE program was implemented within the Teach Less, Learn More hours, which are part of the regular primary curriculum but flexibly allocated by schools to provide enriching learning experiences. At this school, the PBE program was chosen to fill these hours, offered without grading or compulsion. Conducted as an extracurricular-style enrichment activity, it ran for 10 weeks with totaling 20 h. Activities were tailored to the school’s context, engaging students in exploring and improving local environmental features while reflecting on their connections and attachments to these places.

The seven sequential activities guided students from initial exploration and sensory observation (Activities 1–4), through envisioning and planning improvements (Activity 5), implementing changes in collaboration with stakeholders (Activity 6), and finally reflecting on and communicating the meaning of their experiences (Activity 7). Learning tasks integrated environmental investigation, mapping, systems thinking, emotional engagement, and collective action, supporting the two core components of sense of place—place meaning and place attachment (Farnum et al., 2005; Semken & Freeman, 2008). An overview of each activity, including its alignment with core principles and theoretical underpinnings, is presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Summary of the intervention, core principles, and theoretical connections.

Activity	Brief Description	Core Principles Addressed 1	Link to ELT 2	Link to SLT 3
1. Site walk	Students used all senses to explore school grounds, observing plants, animals, and environmental features, and recording observations.	Real place; Interaction with environment	Concrete experience—direct sensory engagement	Learning through shared exploration with peers
2. Mapping & analysis	Created large-scale maps of living things and their relationships in observed areas, presented findings to peers.	Real place; Reflection & communication	Reflective observation—visualizing and analyzing observations	Peer discussion and feedback
3. Food web connections	Analyzed ecological relationships and created food webs based on field data.	Real place; Interaction with environment	Abstract conceptualization—connecting observations to ecological concepts	Collaborative construction of knowledge
4. Seeing with eyes, feeling with heart	Recorded emotional responses to different places; discussed desired changes or improvements.	Real place; Reflection & communication	Reflective observation—integrating feelings with prior experience	Sharing perspectives to build collective understanding
5. Journey to the dream place	Groups selected areas for improvement, envisioned desired changes, and presented proposals.	Choice of place/issue; Reflection & communication	Abstract conceptualization—planning based on prior experience	Group decision-making and presentation to peers and stakeholders
6. Changing the world with our hands	Implemented improvement projects in collaboration with teachers, staff, parents, and community members.	Real place; Interaction with people; Participation in change	Active experimentation—applying plans to real-world action	Social participation and modeling with community
7. Lessons learned	Reflected on changes in perceptions, values, and understandings; shared outcomes with class.	Reflection & communication; Participation in change	Reflective observation & Abstract conceptualization—synthesizing learning	Collective reflection and shared narratives

¹ Core Principles: Real place as central context; Student choice of place/issue; Interaction with people/environment; Reflection and communication of meaning; Participation in place improvement. ² ELT Links: Concrete experience, reflection, conceptualization, active experimentation. ³ SLT Links: Learning through observation, modeling, interaction, and collaboration.

By situating science learning in meaningful, real-world contexts and involving both individual and collaborative processes, the intervention fostered deeper cognitive, emotional, and social connections to the school environment, promoting students’ agency and responsibility for sustaining it.

2.4. Instruments

The main data collection tool was a Sense of Place Assessment, adapted from established approaches such as photo-elicitation (Beckley et al., 2007), affective mapping (Rieh, 2020), and place-awareness questioning (Mulvaney et al., 2020), to measure Grade 6 students’ sense of place within their school after the PBE program. Supplementary tools included group activity sheets and student reflective journals, which documented learning processes during the intervention.

The assessment comprised six open-ended questions covering two main components: (1) place meaning—with subcomponents of place knowledge and place awareness, and (2) place attachment—with subcomponents of place dependence and place identity. Questions were accompanied by photo prompts of real school locations selected by students, enabling them to describe their understanding, awareness, feelings, and personal experiences freely.

Instrument quality was validated by three experts in science education and place-based research, who evaluated the clarity, relevance, and alignment of items and the analytic rubric with the construct definitions. The Index of Item–Objective Congruence (IOC) ranged from 0.67 to 1.00, indicating strong agreement. The instrument was piloted with 14 Grade 5 students to assess clarity, timing, and rubric applicability. Based on the pilot, wording of several items was simplified, and rubric descriptors were refined for greater specificity in assessing student responses. The final version was administered once, immediately after the intervention. The Sense of Place Assessment, scoring rubrics, and sample group activity sheets and reflective journals are provided in the Supplementary Materials.

2.5. Data Collection Procedures

Prior to data collection, the researchers obtained formal permission from the school principal and coordinated with the Grade 6 homeroom teacher to prepare for the intervention, explain the research objectives, and outline the learning activities and data collection procedures. Information sheets were provided to students and parents, and written parental consent was obtained in accordance with ethical research guidelines.

The ten-week (20-h) PBE program was implemented during the second semester of the 2024 academic year (February–March 2025). At the conclusion of the program, students completed the Sense of Place Assessment during the final 90-min session. Supplementary data were collected throughout the intervention via group activity sheets and individual reflective journals to capture evidence of learning processes.

2.6. Data Analysis

Data analysis integrated quantitative scoring with qualitative interpretation to address both the overall outcomes and the specific nature of students’ sense of place development. The process began with rubric-based scoring of the Sense of Place Assessment to determine individual and class-level performance after the intervention. Students’ total scores (maximum 20 points) were classified into three performance levels—Good, Fair, and Needs Improvement—based on adapted interval ranges, followed by frequency and percentage calculations (reported in Section 3.2).

To examine sense of place in greater depth, content analysis was conducted on post-intervention responses from students in the Good category to identify thematic patterns (Section 3.2). In addition, component-level analysis aggregated rubric scores for four subcomponents—place knowledge, place awareness, place dependence, and place identity—which were then normalized to a five-point scale for comparison and presented as a radar chart (Section 3.3).

Progression during the PBE program was explored by comparing qualitative evidence from two checkpoints—Week 5 and Week 9—using data from group activity sheets and individual reflective journals. This analysis traced changes in each student’s engagement and depth of connection with the school environment, resulting in the identification of developmental groups (Section 3.4). Reliability was ensured through independent scoring and consensus-building between the two researchers, as well as peer debriefing with an external reviewer familiar with sense of place research. An overview of the specific analysis procedures, data sources, and outputs is provided in Table 2.

Table 2. Overview of data analysis procedures.

Analysis Focus	Data Source	Purpose	Method	Output
Overall sense of place level (post-intervention)	Sense of Place Assessment (scores from rubric)	Determine students’ overall sense of place level after the PBE program	Rubric scoring by both researchers; inter-rater verification; level classification (Good: 14–20, Fair: 7–13, Needs Improvement: 0–6) based on Best (1977)	Frequency and percentage of students in each level
Pattern identification among Good-level students	Sense of Place Assessment (qualitative responses)	Identify characteristics of students with good sense of place	Content analysis (Miles et al., 2014); peer debriefing with graduate researcher	Categories describing distinct patterns of sense of place
Component-level analysis	Sense of Place Assessment (rubric scores by component)	Compare strengths across sense of place subcomponents	Average scores for each subcomponent (place knowledge, place awareness, place dependence, place identity); standardization to 5-point scale	Radar chart showing component-level profiles
Development during intervention	Group activity sheets; individual reflective journals (Weeks 5 & 9)	Track changes in students’ sense of place during the program	Content analysis; classification into groups; comparison between Weeks 5 and 9	Developmental trends and change trajectories

3. Results

The findings provide an overall picture of how the ten-week place-based education (PBE) program shaped Grade 6 students’ sense of place. Results cover four aspects: students’ participation in school-based environmental improvements, post-intervention levels and patterns of sense of place, component-level analysis of place meaning and attachment, and developmental trajectories during the program. Together, they reveal diverse pathways through which students formed cognitive, emotional, and functional connections with their school environment.

3.1. Environmental Improvement Activities

Over a ten-week (20-h) PBE program, 19 Grade 6 students from a small rural primary school in northern Thailand participated in seven extracurricular activities to enhance their school environment. Students initially worked in groups to design improvements for three areas: (1) the playground, (2) the space beneath a large banyan tree near the Grade 6 classroom, and (3) the road alongside the school fence. Although each group began with a specific assigned area, all students eventually collaborated to complete improvements across all three locations.

The playground group repainted and repaired equipment to create a safe and attractive space for younger children, integrating knowledge of materials, safety, and environmental care. The banyan tree group leveled the ground, improved drainage, added seating, and designed a shaded, peaceful area for relaxation and learning, fostering appreciation for green spaces and small-scale ecosystems. The road group collaborated with community members to resurface and stabilize the road, reducing dust, improving safety, and illustrating the links between infrastructure and environmental health. Across all activities, students worked alongside peers, teachers, parents, and community leaders, developing practical problem-solving skills, teamwork, and civic responsibility while deepening their connection to the school environment.

3.2. Overall Sense of Place After the Place-Based Education Program

Post-intervention assessment showed that most Grade 6 students attained a good level of sense of place, reflecting strong understanding, attachment, and value-based connections to their school environment. As presented in Table 3, more than four-fifths of the class scored in the highest category, a small proportion were in the fair range, and none fell into the needs-improvement level. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of the PBE program in strengthening students’ sense of place across the cohort.

Table 3. Levels of sense of place among Grade 6 students after the intervention.

Level of Sense of Place	Score Range	Number of Students	Percentage
Good	14–20	16	84.21%
Fair	7–13	3	15.79%
Needs Improvement	0–6	0	0.00%

The following qualitative findings are derived from the Sense of Place Assessment, administered after the completion of the PBE program. The analysis focused on 16 students who achieved a “Good” level of sense of place, aiming to identify the distinct ways in which they had developed their connection.

These qualitative findings revealed three developmental patterns—long-term engagement, active contribution, and emotional perception—that reflected how the PBE intervention fostered cognitive, emotional, and social bonds with the school environment. Grounded in Experiential Learning Theory, the program provided direct, hands-on experiences that enabled students to build meaning through repeated interaction and reflection. At the same time, Social Learning Theory informed the collaborative and community-oriented aspects, allowing students to model, share, and reinforce their connections to place. Together, these processes supported the emergence of diverse yet complementary routes to a strong sense of place.

Overall, the findings indicate that students developed a comprehensive sense of place encompassing both major components—place meaning and place attachment. Evidence of place meaning was seen in students’ increased place knowledge and place awareness of their school environment, while place attachment was reflected through place dependence and place identity, demonstrated by feelings of belonging, pride, and emotional connection.

The following subsections present each of these patterns in detail, while additional qualitative data from group activity sheets and individual reflective journals collected during the program will be presented in the Section 3.4.

3.2.1. Pattern 1: Attachment Through Long-Term Experiences and Enduring Memories

For six students (S01, S03, S04, S05, S09, S11), attachment was rooted in places where they had engaged in repeated, meaningful activities over several years. These students tended to link their emotional bonds to places that had consistently featured in their school lives. For example, S03 recalled, “The football field has been my place since kindergarten. I’ve played here for years and even used it for competitions,” revealing a sense of pride and continuity that strengthened their belonging. Similarly, S05 described the Moral Garden as “where I meet my friends every day before class,” indicating how everyday routines could turn ordinary spaces into emotionally significant ones. In another case, S11 reflected, “I’ve been planting and taking care of trees in the Agriculture Garden since I was small,” suggesting that caring for a place over time deepened emotional engagement and fostered stewardship. These accounts demonstrate how long-term participation in familiar spaces nurtured enduring memories and attachment to school environments. This development reflects a strong sense of place attachment, particularly in the subcomponents of place identity and place dependence, as students expressed pride, belonging, and emotional continuity toward meaningful places.

3.2.2. Pattern 2: Attachment Through Active Contribution and Improvement

Five students (S06, S12, S13, S14, S15) developed their sense of place by actively contributing to the improvement of school spaces. Their emotional connection emerged from the tangible results of their own effort and creativity. As S06 explained, “I made the area beside the Grade 6 classroom into a rest spot. I’m happy when I see others using it,” which reflects how shared benefits enhanced their sense of purpose and belonging. Similarly, S13 stated, “I painted the playground equipment. It’s my work, and I feel proud every time I see it,” conveying ownership and personal achievement. S14’s comment, “I want the road along the school fence to be smooth, safe, and look nice,” further illustrated how students envisioned physical improvements as a way to make the place more meaningful and livable. These examples highlight that active participation in maintaining and improving the school environment strengthened students’ place attachment through pride, ownership, and collective contribution. This pattern demonstrates the development of place attachment through place dependence—the perceived usefulness of the place shaped by their contributions—and place identity, as students integrated their work and achievements into their sense of belonging.

3.2.3. Pattern 3: Attachment Through Atmosphere and Emotional Perception

Two students (S07, S16) expressed their sense of place through the atmosphere and emotional comfort they experienced in certain locations. Their connections were shaped less by activities and more by sensory and affective responses. S16 noted, “Our Grade 6 classroom is cool because it’s surrounded by trees. It’s a good place for learning,” showing how physical comfort contributed to emotional well-being and learning satisfaction. Likewise, S07 described, “The variegated banyan tree gives shade and makes me feel comfortable,” emphasizing how sensory perceptions such as shade and calmness could evoke feelings of attachment. Together, these narratives suggest that affective comfort and environmental qualities can also play a vital role in forming emotional connections to place. This finding illustrates the cognitive–affective integration between place meaning and place attachment: students showed place awareness of environmental qualities and place identity through emotional resonance with the atmosphere.

3.3. Component Analysis of Sense of Place

Analysis of post-intervention scores by component (Figure 1) revealed that students achieved the highest possible average in place knowledge, indicating comprehensive familiarity with the school environment. Place dependence and place identity also scored highly, reflecting strong functional and emotional connections. Place awareness, while still in the upper range, was comparatively lower, suggesting potential for further growth in recognizing environmental and social values embedded in the school setting.

Figure 1. Average score by place component.

3.4. Development of Students’ Sense of Place During the PBE Program

This analysis draws on qualitative data from group activity sheets and individual reflective journals collected during the PBE program. Two key points were examined: Week 5, after Activities 4–5 that emphasized exploration, analysis, and planning for school space improvement, and Week 9, after Activity 6, which focused on implementing planned changes and reflecting on their impact. The purpose was to trace students’ developmental pathways in sense of place during the intervention and to understand how their engagement with the school environment progressed over time.

3.4.1. Pathway 1: Continuous and Stable Development of Sense of Place

This pathway comprised 13 students (S01, S03, S04, S05, S06, S09, S11, S12, S13, S14, S15, S16, and S18). Their reflections indicated strong awareness of the value and meaning of school spaces, together with a sense of ownership and pride in contributing to environmental improvements. These qualities were demonstrated through active participation in caring for and developing shared spaces with peers—for example, organizing the area under the tree beside the Grade 6 classroom, repainting and upgrading playground equipment, and improving the pathway. Students in this group exhibited notable growth in place identity and place dependence.

A distinguishing characteristic of their responses was the ability to connect meaningful past experiences—such as childhood memories—with present contributions to improving the same spaces. This connection deepened their emotional bonds and reinforced their sense of responsibility toward these places. They also expressed satisfaction in seeing others make meaningful use of the spaces they had improved, indicating a stable, enduring development of sense of place rooted in both physical engagement and emotional attachment.

Evidence from this group, summarized in Table 4, illustrates how students’ reflections and group project work reflected key components of sense of place. For example, S13 linked her pride in restoring the playground to memories of joyful play in kindergarten, while S14 described the transformation of a familiar gathering spot under a tree into a more inviting shared space. Group activity work, such as the “Playground improvement” plan, demonstrated place awareness through identifying problems and place dependence through recognizing the role of the playground in students’ social and developmental experiences.

Table 4. Evidence from pathway 1: Continued and stable development of sense of place.

Student ID(s)	Evidence Source	English Translation	Code
S13	Individual reflective journal, Activity 6	“This playground used to be where I loved to play when I was in kindergarten. Coming back as a Grade 6 student to decorate, paint, and clean it up with my friends makes me very happy. It feels like we are giving happiness back to the place that made us happy when we were little. I’m proud to have made it more fun to play in, and I hope the younger kids will feel as good as I did.”	Place identity, Place dependence, Place awareness
S14	Individual reflective journal, Activity 6	“The area under the tree beside the Grade 6 classroom was where I used to sit and play with friends since Grade 4. Sometimes we would have snacks there, sometimes just sit and chat. After we cleaned it, rearranged it, and placed marble benches, I feel it’s a much nicer place to sit. I feel like I’m not only using it but making it better, and I want younger students to use it too.”	Place identity, Place dependence, Place awareness
S02, S06, S07, S10, S16, S18	Group activity sheet, Activity 5 (Playground improvement)	“What we need: oil paint, paint brushes, thinner. What to improve: the colors of the play equipment are dull and not bright, so we want to repaint them. This way, the younger kids will feel like playing and the colors will be vibrant.”	Place dependence, Place awareness

The findings from Pathway 1 shows that continuous and stable development of sense of place was fostered when students engaged in authentic, hands-on improvements to spaces that already held personal meaning for them. This aligns with Experiential Learning Theory (Dewey, 1938; Kolb, 1984), as students moved through cycles of direct experience, reflection, and application within familiar contexts, reinforcing both cognitive and emotional bonds to place. Simultaneously, the collaborative nature of projects such as playground renovation reflects Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977), where interaction, modeling, and shared purpose among peers cultivated a collective sense of ownership. Through these intertwined processes, students strengthened place identity and place dependence, while also demonstrating place awareness by recognizing the needs of their community and envisioning improvements that would benefit others.

3.4.2. Pathway 2: Transition from Awareness to Meaningful Participation

This pathway comprised four students (S07, S08, S10, and S19). They showed a clear progression from a “Fair” level of sense of place in Week 5 to demonstrating stronger awareness, attachment, and meaningful roles toward the school environment by Week 9. During Activities 4 and 5—which focused on exploration, analysis, and designing improvements—these students mainly described what they saw or did without linking it to personal meaning or value. By Week 9, however, after participating in Activity 6 involving hands-on improvements, they expressed pride, a sense of ownership, and recognition of their roles in enhancing the school environment. This shift reflects a transition from perceiving places as purely physical spaces to valuing them as emotionally significant parts of their lives. Evidence from reflective journals and group activity sheets illustrates this development (Table 5).

Table 5. Evidence from pathway 2: Transition from awareness to meaningful participation.

Student ID(s)	Evidence Source	English Translation	Code
S08	Individual reflective journal, Activity 6	“At first, I didn’t really care about the playground. It felt old and unattractive. But after we helped paint the equipment and put rubber mats on the ground, and I saw it looking more colorful, I felt happy. The playground really became more inviting, and I loved seeing younger kids use it. It feels like we made it better, and it’s now part of us.”	Place dependence, Place awareness, Place identity
S10	Individual reflective journal, Activity 6	“I never thought that helping sweep or filling the hole by the fence with sand would make me feel this way. Seeing friends walk past without tripping like before made me so happy. I felt that we truly made the school better. It’s not just an ordinary road anymore—it’s a place we helped improve.”	Place identity, Place dependence, Place awareness
S07, S10 (group work)	Group activity sheet, Activity 5	“We want to improve the road by spreading crushed rock so parents can pick up students more easily. We need crushed rock and a tractor to level it.”	Place dependence
S07, S10 (letter)	Student letter to school board, Activity 5 (Repairing unsafe road)	“As Grade 6 students are about to graduate, we wish to improve the school environment. The road is currently rough and may cause accidents, and it also looks unattractive. We kindly request a tractor and crushed rock to improve the area and make it safer.”	Place dependence, Place awareness

Qualitative evidence from Pathway 2 (Table 5) shows a distinct shift from surface-level awareness of school spaces to deeper, emotionally grounded, and value-based participation. Initially, students perceived places mainly as functional or physical features. Through the PBE program, they engaged in hands-on improvements—such as repainting playground equipment, repairing unsafe areas, and coordinating with stakeholders to enhance the school environment—which transformed these spaces into personally and communally significant places. This transition reflects growth in both place meaning (notably place awareness) and place attachment (place dependence and place identity). The intervention design, grounded in Experiential Learning Theory, provided direct experiences and reflection cycles that enabled students to reinterpret their environment, while Social Learning Theory facilitated collaboration and collective responsibility. As a result, students moved beyond passive observation to become active contributors, developing a durable sense of ownership and responsibility for the spaces they improved.

3.4.3. Pathway 3: Limited Emotional Connection Despite Involvement

This pathway consisted of two students, S02 and S17. Throughout the PBE program, these students maintained a “Fair” level of sense of place. While they were able to respond to reflection prompts and recognized certain physical changes in the school environment, their answers remained largely descriptive of external actions or events rather than expressing personal emotions or a sense of attachment. There was no evidence of deep emotional involvement or ownership.

For example, Student S02 reflected: “I helped sweep the leaves under the banyan tree. After sweeping, it looked cleaner. I only swept in front of the classroom.” (Reflective journal, Activity 6 “Changing the world with our hands”) Similarly, Student S17 wrote: “I helped my friends paint the playground. It looked nicer than before. I only helped paint a little.” (Reflective journal, Activity 6 “Changing the world with our hands”)

These examples show that while both students could identify their actions and acknowledge physical improvements, their responses lacked personal meaning-making and emotional resonance. In terms of the sense of place framework, their reflections did not demonstrate strong indicators of place meaning (awareness or knowledge) or place attachment (dependence or identity) beyond surface-level recognition.

4. Discussion

The present study set out to investigate how a place-based education (PBE) program could enhance Grade 6 students’ sense of place within their school environment. The findings reveal that the majority of students achieved a good level of sense of place development (84.21%), with the highest mean score in place knowledge, followed by place dependence and place identity, while place awareness was the lowest. These results suggest that direct interaction with authentic school spaces, coupled with opportunities for active participation and reflection, can foster both cognitive and affective connections to place.

From the perspective of Experiential Learning Theory (Dewey, 1938; Kolb, 1984), the highest scores in knowledge about place can be attributed to learning experiences that engaged students in concrete exploration—such as school mapping, photographing meaningful sites, and documenting their observations. This aligns with Kudryavtsev et al. (2012) and Semken and Freeman (2008), who emphasized that physical, sensory-based experiences lay the groundwork for deeper forms of place attachment. By engaging multiple senses, questioning site functions, and situating learning within real school contexts, students developed a solid base of factual and spatial knowledge, which in turn supported subsequent emotional and identity-based connections.

The strong outcomes in place dependence further demonstrate how the PBE program encouraged students to perceive their school spaces as functional resources that supported daily learning, recreation, and social interaction. This was achieved through collaborative problem-solving and site improvement activities—such as creating shaded seating areas, repairing an uneven path, and repainting playground equipment—which directly addressed student-identified needs. From the lens of Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977), these activities provided social contexts for observational learning, modeling, and reinforcement. Students worked alongside peers, teachers, and community members, developing a shared sense of responsibility and ownership. This interpretation is consistent with Lee and Chiang (2016), who found that collaborative, community-linked projects cultivate stronger behavioral commitment to place.

Qualitative analysis further revealed three distinct developmental patterns in how students deepened their sense of place during the program, offering additional insight into the mechanisms behind these quantitative gains. The first pattern—sustained attachment grounded in long-term experiences and memories—aligns with Relph’s (1976) notion that place identity strengthens when individuals maintain an enduring history of interaction with a setting. This is supported by Kudryavtsev et al. (2012) and Herman et al. (2020), who highlight that repeated, meaningful engagement builds emotional and cognitive associations that PBE can amplify. The second pattern—transitional growth from surface-level awareness toward meaningful participation—mirrors findings by Lee and Chiang (2016), where structured opportunities for direct contribution to place improvements encouraged greater place dependence and ownership. From a Social Learning Theory perspective, the collaborative nature of these activities fostered modeling, peer reinforcement, and shared responsibility. The third pattern—limited emotional engagement despite active involvement—echoes Semken and Freeman’s (2008) observation that participation alone does not guarantee deep attachment; personal relevance and emotional resonance are crucial for fostering meaningful connections. These patterns illustrate the diverse developmental trajectories within PBE and suggest the need for differentiated scaffolding, personalized reflection prompts, and stronger integration of students’ lived experiences to support those starting with weaker place connections.

These findings contribute to the broader literature on PBE by supporting Yemini et al.’s (2023) synthesis that PBE strengthens student–place relationships when it allows direct participation, reflection, and authentic decision-making. Similarly, Soucy et al. (2024) argued that such approaches integrate environmental learning with students’ lived experiences, making education more relevant and transformative. In line with Ellington and Prado (2024), this study demonstrates that even in a non-graded, voluntary format, PBE can connect students’ everyday school life with broader social and environmental values.

The implications extend beyond this single school context. By embedding PBE within the flexible “Teach less, Learn more” policy space, schools can enhance cognitive, functional, and emotional dimensions of sense of place without displacing core curriculum content. This aligns with calls from Kudryavtsev et al. (2012) and Chawla and Cushing (2007) for sustained, meaningful engagement with place to promote long-term environmental stewardship. Future research could explore the longitudinal effects of such interventions and examine adaptations across diverse educational settings to ensure that PBE is accessible, relevant, and impactful for all learners.

5. Implications for Practice

The findings collectively illustrate how students developed their sense of place through participation in the place-based education program. These results provide practical insights for educators seeking to design learning experiences that cultivate meaningful relationships between learners and their environments. Guided by Experiential Learning Theory and Social Learning Theory, the recommendations highlight the importance of learning through direct experience, social interaction, and reflection—key processes that enable students to construct meaning, develop attachment, and act responsibly within their surroundings.

Students who demonstrated strong attachment rooted in familiarity and continuity benefited most from structured learning experiences that connect curricular content with familiar spaces. Designing lessons that link subject knowledge to meaningful contexts—such as exploring physics concepts on the sports field or investigating biodiversity in the school garden—can strengthen place meaning while reinforcing place attachment (Kudryavtsev et al., 2012).

For learners whose sense of place developed through active contribution and collaborative improvement, project-based and participatory learning approaches are especially effective. Activities such as creating school improvement plans, designing art installations, or engaging in community-based environmental projects can enhance both socio-emotional and behavioral learning (Gonzalez, 2023). These experiences foster agency, shared responsibility, and a sense of collective achievement, reflecting students’ growing role as contributors to their environment (Bascopé & Reiss, 2021; Gonzalez, 2023).

Meanwhile, students who formed attachments primarily through sensory and emotional experiences require opportunities to make deeper cognitive connections with place. Strategies such as storytelling, reflection journals, and sensory observation tasks can bridge affective awareness with conceptual understanding, helping students move from appreciation toward stewardship (Littrell et al., 2020).

In all cases, the key is to design learning that is both rooted in authentic, context-specific spaces and adaptable to the unique developmental trajectories of students. By combining experiential learning with social interaction and reflective practice, educators can leverage the principles of PBE to cultivate stronger place connections, foster environmental stewardship, and make learning more personally meaningful. Such approaches also provide a powerful pathway toward education for sustainability. When students learn to value, care for, and take responsibility for their immediate environments, they build transferable skills and dispositions—such as systems thinking, collaborative problem-solving, and long-term resource stewardship—that are essential for addressing sustainability challenges within and beyond the school context.