Integrating AI Simulations and Computational Grounded Theory to Explore Biodynamic Education in Science Museums
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70232/jcsml.v2i2.37Keywords:
Science Museums, Biodynamic Agriculture, AI-Generated Simulation, Computational Grounded Theory, Informal Science EducationAbstract
This study investigates how science museums can serve as catalysts for public understanding of biodynamic agriculture by integrating AI-generated simulations and an AI-augmented grounded theory (CGT) approach. Forty-nine elementary school teachers in Taiwan participated in a workshop featuring six biodynamic-themed simulation videos created with Mootion AI, depicting insect, bird, and amphibian ecologies within biodynamic frameworks. Participants wrote reflective journals, and twelve were interviewed in focus groups. The study employed Lin et al.’s (2025) CGT model, incorporating traditional inductive coding with computational techniques such as term frequency-inverse document frequency (tf-idf) and N-gram analysis to analyze participants’ interpretive responses. Results identified eight interconnected dimensions—including cognitive clarity, affective engagement, instructional relevance, and ethical reflection—that constitute a conceptual model titled “Human-Centered Biodynamics.” Findings show that digitally mediated exhibits enhance comprehension of biodynamic principles and foster emotional and pedagogical resonance. Participants reported a shift from perceiving biodynamics as abstract to viewing it as relevant and actionable, suggesting science museums can be transformative platforms for ecological literacy when empowered by creative technologies. This study contributes to the literature on informal science education, sustainability communication, and AI-assisted qualitative research by offering a replicable framework for integrating digital storytelling and grounded theory in ecological pedagogy.
Metrics
References
Ali, M. M., Wafik, H. M. A., Mahbub, S., & Das, J. (2024). Gen Z and generative AI: Shaping the future of learning and creativity. Cognizance Journal of Creativity, 12(2), 45–67. http://doi.org/10.47760/cognizance.2024.v04i10.001
Andreea-Roxana Popescu, Alice Schut. (2023). Generative AI in creative design processes: a dive into possible cognitive biases. IASDR 2023: Life-Changing Design, 9-13 October, Milan, Italy. http://dx.doi.org/10.21606/iasdr.2023.784
Blechschmidt, E., & Gasser, R. F. (2012). Biokinetics and biodynamics of human differentiation: Principles and applications. North Atlantic Books.
Bluteau, G., Ponton, D. E., Rosabal, M., & Amyot, M. (2025). Biodynamics and environmental concentrations of the platinum group elements in freshwater systems. Environmental Science & Technology,59(12), 6203-6213. http://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.4c08750
Carpenter-Boggs, L., Reganold, J. P., & Kennedy, A. C. (2000). Effects of biodynamic preparations on compost development. Biological Agriculture & Horticulture, 17(4), 313–329. https://doi.org/10.1080/01448765.2000.9754852
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory. Sage.
Costa, S. D., Barcellos, M. P., & Falbo, R. A. (2021). Ontologies in human–computer interaction: A systematic literature review. Applied Ontology, 16(4), 379–410. https://doi.org/10.3233/AO-210255
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches, Sage.
Cutcliffe, J. R. (2000). Methodological issues in grounded theory. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 31(6), 1476–1484. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.01430.x
DePalma, M. J., & Alexander, K. P. (2018). Harnessing writers’ potential through distributed collaboration. System, 77, 1–12.
Döring, J., Frisch, M., Tittmann, S., Stoll, M., & Kauer, R. (2015). Growth, yield and fruit quality of grapevines under organic and biodynamic management. PLOS ONE, 10(10), e0138445. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138445
Finkelstein, V. (1998). The biodynamics of disablement. Disability and Rehabilitation Systems Research workshop, Harare, Zimbabwe, 29 June 1998.
Frosio, G. (2025). Should we ban generative AI or make it a medium for inclusive creativity? In A Research Agenda for EU Copyright Law. Elgar Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.4337/9781803927329.00010
Guruguntla, V., & Lal, M. (2025). A state-of-the-art review on biomechanical models and biodynamic responses. Ergonomics, 68(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2023.2288544
Hornberger, M. I. (2024). A biodynamic model predicting copper and cadmium bioaccumulation in caddisflies. PLOS ONE, 19(2), e0267890. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0297801
Ivancevic, V. G., & Ivancevic, T. T. (2005). Natural biodynamics. World Scientific.
Koepf, H. H. (2005). The biodynamic farm: Agriculture in service of the Earth and humanity. SteinerBooks.
Lin, H.-C. K., Tseng, C.-H., & Chen, N.-S. (2025). Enhancing programming education: The impact of AI-based pedagogical agents on student self-efficacy, engagement, and learning outcomes. Educational Technology & Society, 28(2). https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.202504_28(2).TP02
Lockman, J. J., & Thelen, E. (1993). Developmental biodynamics: Brain, body, behavior connections. Child Development, 64(4), 953–959. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1993.tb04181.x
Mace, M. A., & Ward, T. B. (1998). Modeling the creative process. Creativity Research Journal, 10(2), 229–241. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1402_5
Macleroy, V. (2016). Multimodal composition and creativity. In: Multilingual Digital Storytelling: Engaging creatively and critically with literacy (Jim Anderson & Vicky Macleroy ed.), Routledge (Taylor & Francis). http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315758220-9
Masserman, J. H. (1953). Psycho-analysis and biodynamics. The International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 34(2), 97–109.
Muhie, S. H. (2023). Concepts, principles, and application of biodynamic farming. Circular Economy and Sustainability, 3(1), 35–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43615-022-00184-8
Nelson, L. K. (2020). Computational grounded theory: A methodological framework. Sociological Methods & Research, 49(1), 3–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124117729703
Paull, J. (2011). Biodynamic agriculture: The journey from Koberwitz to the world, 1924–1938. Journal of Organic Systems, 6(1), 27–38.
Ramsurrun, H., Elaheebocus, R., & Chiniah, A. (2024). Digital tools in informal science education sites. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 33(1), 569–589. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10956-024-10105-z
Reganold, J. P. (1995). Soil quality and profitability of biodynamic and conventional farming systems. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, 10(1), 36–45.
Santoni, M., Ferretti, L., Migliorini, P., Vazzana, C. & Pacini , G. (2022). A review of scientific research on biodynamic agriculture. Organic Agriculture, 12(2), 373–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13165-022-00394-2
Steiner, R. (2013). Agriculture course: The birth of the biodynamic method. Rudolf Steiner Press.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Sage.
Thornberg, R., & Dunne, C. (2019). Literature review in grounded theory. In A. Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Current Developments in Grounded Theory (pp. 58–78). SAGE Publications Ltd.
Wildfeuer, S. (1995). What is biodynamics. Stella Natura.
Zaller, J.G., Köpke, U. Effects of traditional and biodynamic farmyard manure amendment on yields, soil chemical, biochemical and biological properties in a long-term field experiment. Biol Fertil Soils 40, 222–229 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-004-0772-0
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Tao-Hua Wang, Ruei-Shan Lu, Hao-Chiang Koong Lin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
