edited by
Steven J. Whitmeyer
Department of Geology and Environmental Science
James Madison University
800 S. Main Street, MSC 6903
Harrisonburg, Virginia 22807
USA
David W. Mogk
Department of Earth Sciences
200 Traphagen Hall
Montana State University
Bozeman, Montana 59717
USA
Eric J. Pyle
Department of Geology and Environmental Science
James Madison University
800 S. Main Street, MSC 6903
Harrisonburg, Virginia 22807
USA
2009
Copyright 2009, The Geological Society of America (GSA), Inc. All rights reserved. GSA grants
permission to individual scientists to make unlimited photocopies of one or more items from this volume
for noncommercial purposes advancing science or education, including classroom use. For permission to
make photocopies of any item in this volume for other noncommercial, nonprofit purposes, contact
The Geological Society of America. Written permission is required from GSA for all other forms of
capture or reproduction of any item in the volume including, but not limited to, all types of electronic
or digital scanning or other digital or manual transformation of articles or any portion thereof, such
as abstracts, into computer-readable and/or transmittable form for personal or corporate use, either
noncommercial or commercial, for-profit or otherwise. Send permission requests to GSA Copyright
Permissions, 3300 Penrose Place, P.O. Box 9140, Boulder, Colorado 80301-9140, USA. GSA provides
this and other forums for the presentation of diverse opinions and positions by scientists worldwide,
regardless of their race, citizenship, gender, religion, or political viewpoint. Opinions presented in this
publication do not reflect official positions of the Society.
Copyright is not claimed on any material prepared wholly by government employees within the scope of
their employment.
Published by The Geological Society of America, Inc.
3300 Penrose Place, P.O. Box 9140, Boulder, Colorado 80301-9140, USA
www.geosociety.org
Printed in U.S.A.
GSA Books Science Editor: Marion E. Bickford and Donald I. Siegel
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Field geology education : historical perspectives and modern approaches / edited by Steven J. Whitmeyer,
David W. Mogk, Eric J. Pyle.
p. cm. (Special paper ; 461)
Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN 978-0-8137-2461-4 (pbk.)
1. GeologyFieldworkStudy and teaching (Higher) I. Whitmeyer, Steven J. II. Mogk, David W.
III. Pyle, Eric J.
QE45.F525 2009
550.711dc22
2009034960
Cover: A student gazes east, looking for the next place to collect data from the north slope of Ben Levy,
a mountain in the Connemara region, County Galway, Ireland. The village of Clonbur is visible in the
background. Photo taken by Eric J. Pyle, James Madison University, in June 2009.
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Contents
An introduction to historical perspectives on and modern approaches to field geology education . . .vii
Steven J. Whitmeyer, David W. Mogk, and Eric J. Pyle
Historical to Modern Perspectives of Geoscience Field Education
1. Indiana University geologic field programs based in Montana: G429 and other field courses,
a balance of traditions and innovations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
B.J. Douglas, L.J. Suttner, and E. Ripley
2. The Yellowstone-Bighorn Research Association (YBRA): Maintaining a leadership role
in field-course education for 79 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Virginia B. Sisson, Marv Kauffman, Yvette Bordeaux, Robert C. Thomas, and Robert Giegengack
3. Field camp: Using traditional methods to train the next generation of petroleum geologists . . . 25
James O. Puckette and Neil H. Suneson
4. Introductory field geology at the University of New Mexico, 1984 to today: What a long,
strange trip it continues to be . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
John W. Geissman and Grant Meyer
5. Innovation and obsolescence in geoscience field courses: Past experiences and proposals
for the future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Declan G. De Paor and Steven J. Whitmeyer
6. Integration of field experiences in a project-based geoscience curriculum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Paul R. Kelso and Lewis M. Brown
7. Experience One: Teaching the geoscience curriculum in the field using experiential
immersion learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Robert C. Thomas and Sheila Roberts
8. International geosciences field research with undergraduate students: Three models
for experiential learning projects investigating active tectonics of the Nicoya Peninsula,
Costa Rica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Jeffrey S. Marshall, Thomas W. Gardner, Marino Protti, and Jonathan A. Nourse
9. International field trips in undergraduate geology curriculum: Philosophy and perspectives . . . 99
Nelson R. Ham and Timothy P. Flood
iii
iv
Contents
Modern Field Equipment and Use of New Technologies in the Field
10. Visualization techniques in field geology education: A case study from western Ireland . . . . . . 105
Steven Whitmeyer, Martin Feely, Declan De Paor, Ronan Hennessy, Shelley Whitmeyer,
Jeremy Nicoletti, Bethany Santangelo, Jillian Daniels, and Michael Rivera
11. Integrated digital mapping in geologic field research: An adventure-based approach to
teaching new geospatial technologies in an REU Site Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
Mark T. Swanson and Matthew Bampton
12. Integrating hydrology and geophysics into a traditional geology field course: The use of
advanced project options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
Robert L. Bauer, Donald I. Siegel, Eric A. Sandvol, and Laura K. Lautz
13. Integrating ground-penetrating radar and traditional stratigraphic study in
an undergraduate field methods course . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
R.K. Vance, C.H. Trupe, and F.J. Rich
Original Research in Field Education
14. Twenty-two years of undergraduate research in the geosciencesThe Keck experience . . . . . . 163
Andrew de Wet, Cathy Manduca, Reinhard A. Wobus, and Lori Bettison-Varga
15. Field glaciology and earth systems science: The Juneau Icefield Research Program (JIRP),
19462008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
Cathy Connor
16. Long-term field-based studies in geoscience teaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
Noel Potter Jr., Jeffrey W. Niemitz, and Peter B. Sak
17. Integrating student-led research in fluvial geomorphology into traditional field courses:
A case study from James Madison Universitys field course in Ireland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
C.L. May, L.S. Eaton, and S.J. Whitmeyer
18. A comparative study of field inquiry in an undergraduate petrology course . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
David Gonzales and Steven Semken
Field Experiences for Teachers
19. Evolution of geology field education for K12 teachers from field education for geology
majors at Georgia Southern University: Historical perspectives and modern approaches . . . . . 223
Gale A. Bishop, R. Kelly Vance, Fredrick J. Rich, Brian K. Meyer, E.J. Davis, R.H. Hayes,
and N.B. Marsh
20. Water education (WET) for Alabamas black belt: A hands-on field experience for
middle school students and teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253
Ming-Kuo Lee, Lorraine Wolf, Kelli Hardesty, Lee Beasley, Jena Smith, Lara Adams,
Kay Stone, and Dennis Block
21. The Integrated Ocean Drilling Program School of Rock: Lessons learned
from an ocean-going research expedition for earth and ocean science educators . . . . . . . . . . . 261
Kristen St. John, R. Mark Leckie, Scott Slough, Leslie Peart, Matthew Niemitz, and Ann Klaus
Contents
22. Geological field experiences in Mexico: An effective and efficient model for enabling middle
and high school science teachers to connect with their burgeoning Hispanic populations . . . . 275
K. Kitts, Eugene Perry Jr., Rosa Maria Leal-Bautista, and Guadalupe Velazquez-Oliman
Field Education Pedagogy and Assessment
23. The undergraduate geoscience fieldwork experience: Influencing factors and implications
for learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
Alison Stokes and Alan P. Boyle
24. External drivers for changing fieldwork practices and provision in the UK and Ireland . . . . . . 313
Alan P. Boyle, Paul Ryan, and Alison Stokes
25. Effectiveness in problem solving during geologic field examinations: Insights from
analysis of GPS tracks at variable time scales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323
Eric M. Riggs, Russell Balliet, and Christopher C. Lieder
26. The evaluation of field course experiences: A framework for development, improvement,
and reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341
Eric J. Pyle
Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., 2009, An introduction to historical perspectives on and modern approaches to field geology education, in Whitmeyer, S.J.,
Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. viiix,
doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(00). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
vii
viii
Whitmeyer et al.
Figure 1. Total U.S. field camp attendance during the period from 1998
to 2008, as compiled in a survey by Penny Morton, University of MinnesotaDuluth (AGI Geoscience Workforce Program; AGI, 2009).
Introduction
I. Historical to Modern Perspectives of Geoscience Field
Education
This group of papers begins with overviews of wellestablished field camps and how they have evolved through
the years (Douglas et al., Sisson et al., Puckette and Suneson,
Geissman and Meyer). The latter papers in the section broadly
address changes to traditional field course curricula in light of
modern developments in our discipline (De Paor and Whitmeyer, Kelso and Brown, Thomas and Roberts, Marshall et al.,
Ham and Flood).
II. Modern Field Equipment and Use of New Technologies
in the Field
This section includes papers that highlight new equipment
and technologies that have revolutionized data collection and
mapping in the field (Whitmeyer et al., Swanson and Bampton,
Bauer et al.) and suggest ways in which these technologies have
supplemented as well as supplanted traditional field geology
skills (Vance et al.).
III. Original Research in Field Education
A welcome recent trend in field education is the inclusion of
projects where students collect and interpret data as part of a longterm original research project. These papers illustrate approaches
to immersing students in active field research (deWet et al., Connor, Potter et al., May et al.) and suggest an alternative approach
that more fully empowers students to use the information learned
in a field course experience (Gonzales and Semken).
IV. Field Experiences for Teachers
Several field courses have been designed to target audiences
beyond the undergraduate geoscience population. This section
highlights a broad range of field experiences for precollege teachers though college instructors (Bishop et al., Lee et al., St. John et
al., Kitts et al.), which strongly support the transformation of field
course experiences into pedagogical content knowledge experiences that can be adapted in original ways to different audiences.
V. Field Education Pedagogy and Assessment
A common thread throughout all of the papers in this volume is a need for in-depth assessment of field-based learning and
educational approaches. This final section includes papers that
document and/or present assessment and evaluation vehicles for
field-based education (Stokes and Boyle, Boyle et al., Riggs et al.,
Pyle), underscoring the value of such information, not just internally to students, but also externally to policy-makers and financial
decision-makers at institutions that offer field course experiences.
ix
With this volume, we hope to foster discussion among geoscientists on the continuing relevance of field-based education while
highlighting new initiatives that address the needs of the modern,
diverse geoscience community. The papers that follow document
the past importance of field courses in providing a solid foundation
of experience and knowledge to up-and-coming geoscientists, and
they also stress the fact that field education has expanded beyond
traditional mapping to include modern subdisciplines, methods,
and techniques. Finally, we hope this volume will serve as a strong
voice to emphasize the need for qualitative and, particularly, quantitative evaluation and assessment of field-based learning and education. We as a discipline need compelling and abundant data on
the importance of field education to our profession if we have any
hope of convincing skeptical administrators and other members of
the academic and professional geoscience community.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The editors of this volume would like to thank the following reviewers who helped improve the quality of this volume:
Alan Boyle, Brendan Bream, Phil Brown, Ilya Buynevich,
Chris Condit, Cathy Connor, Peter Crowley, Steve Custer, Don
Duggan-Haas, L. Scott Eaton, Joseph Elkins, John Field, Bob
Giegengack, Allen Glazner, David Gonzales, Frank Granshaw,
Laura Guertin, Ed Hanson, John Haynes, Debra Hemler, Darrell Henry, Steve Hovan, Jackie Huntoon, Tom Kalakay, Kim
Kastens, Cindy Kearns, Kathleen Kitts, Mark Leckie, Stephen
Leslie, Adam Lewis, William Locke III, Michael May, Beth
McMillan, Nathan Niemi, Mark Noll, Heather Petcovic, Mike
Piburn, Noel Potter, Federica Raia, Tom Repine, David Rodgers, Jim Schmitt, Joshua Schwartz, Steve Semken, Colin Shaw,
Jeff Snyder, Allison Stokes, Neil Suneson, Mark Swanson, Mike
Taber, Rob Thomas, Kelly Vance, Fred Webb, and Lorraine Wolf.
Cathy Manduca (Science Education Resource Center at Carleton
College) provided technical support in the form of a project Web
site and listserv that greatly facilitated communications between
and among the editors, authors, and reviewers.
REFERENCES CITED
American Geological Institute (AGI), 2006, Status Report on Geoscience Summer Field Camps: http://www.agiweb.org/workforce/fieldcamps_report
_final.pdf (accessed 17 July 2009).
American Geological Institute (AGI), 2009, Status of the Geoscience
Workforce
2009:
http://www.agiweb.org/workforce/reports/2009
-StatusReportSummary.pdf (accessed 17 July 2009).
Drummond, C.N., 2001, Can field camps survive?: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 49, p. 336.
Keane, C.M., and Martinez, C.M., eds., 2008, Directory of Geoscience Departments (46th ed.): Alexandria, Virginia, American Geological Institute
(AGI), 415 p.
King, H.M., 2009, Geology field campsComprehensive listing: http://geology
.com/field-camp.shtml (accessed 17 July 2009).
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY 5 MAY 2009
ABSTRACT
The uniqueness of the Indiana University geologic field programs is a consequence
of the remarkable diversity in the geologic setting of the Judson Mead Geologic Field
Station, and programmatic decisions that emphasize a fully integrated curriculum and
individual student work. A simple summary of the attributes developed by the courses
includes the following key components: sense of scale, self-confidence, independence,
integration, and problem solving. These core principles have resulted in a program that
prepares students for any of the challenges that they might encounter as professionals.
Over time, courses offered through the field station have evolved to reflect the needs of
the students and available technologies. The present array includes courses that address
environmental geology, applied economic geology, and introductory environmental science; additional courses include those designed for both high school students and teachers and others that provide professional development enhancement.
tained. This mixture of the old with the new reflects the general
debate taking place within the geosciences community in general
as to the necessary and appropriate types of courses and field
experiences for the present generation of students (Day-Lewis,
2003; Drummond, 2001).
INTRODUCTION
The success of the Indiana University geologic field programs, offered at the Judson Mead Geologic Field Station, stems
from the physical setting and a number of critical early decisions about the teaching philosophy used in the courses. Over
the years, the collective efforts by the directors and faculty members who have been involved in these field courses over the years
have built upon these two underpinnings. The combination of a
physical setting that offers a range in teaching sites and programmatic decisions that emphasize a fully integrated curriculum and
individual student work has resulted in a program that prepares
students for any of the challenges that they might encounter as
professionals. Over time, courses offered through the field station have evolved to reflect the needs of the students and have
been updated to include new technologies, while methods and
exercises that have been proven to be successful have been main-
BACKGROUND
The Judson Mead Geologic Field Station of Indiana University was established at its present location in the Tobacco Root
Mountains, Montana, in 1949. During the ensuing 60 yr, well
over 3500 undergraduate and graduate geology students have
received their geologic field training through this field station,
making it the largest program of its kind in the country. The list of
field station alumni includes persons of distinction in the oil and
gas industry, in mineral exploration, in academia, and in government agencies at all levels.
Douglas, B.J., Suttner, L.J., and Ripley, E., 2009, Indiana University geologic field programs based in Montana: G429 and other field courses, a balance of traditions and innovations, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 114, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(01). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological
Society of America. All rights reserved.
Douglas et al.
The site for the field station was selected by Charles Deiss,
a faculty member recruited by Indiana University specifically to
develop a field program. This effort was carried out with the support of Herman B. Wells, the president of Indiana University at
this time, whose vision and energies proved to be instrumental
for the development of Indiana University in general and its geologic field programs in particular.
The geologic diversity available within a 100 km radius of
the field station is of primary importance to the success of the
program. Three other components are critical for the success
of our programs: first and foremost, the faculty members who
commit to teach for the entire duration of the courses; second, a
112W
North Bou
lder
Basin
113W
Butte
46N
Whitehall
Three Forks
Boulder Batholith
ar
Basi
cC
Fa
u
lt
ee F
ork
sB
Zo
asin
Jeffe
ey
Thr
rson
tn
JMGFS
ne
Melrose
Bi
sm
Pioneer
Batholith
Tobacco
Root
Batholith
k
fa
ul
t
ar
Ha
rris
on
Norris
Ba
sin
Be
av
erh
ea
dB
asi
Twin Bridges
Sp
an
Ennis
ish
Virginia City
ak
sf
au
lt
Madison
Basin
Pe
Dillon
Bl
ac
kt
ail
fa
u
lt
Tertiary deposits
10
20
30
40
50 km
45N
zo
ne
10
20
30 miles
Cretaceous intrusives
Archean, Paleozoic and
Mesozoic rocks
Figure 1. Geologic map showing the location of the Judson Mead Geologic Field Station (JMGFS). Inset photograph
is the view of the main lodge, which has served as the heart of the Indiana University field programs since the inception of the field station. The location of the map is shown in the inset of the state of Montana (top right).
Faculty Involvement
Until about 10 yr ago, all faculty members involved in the
courses offered through the field station committed to teach for
the entire course. With recent expansion of the breadth of subject matter being offered, we have modified this policy slightly;
in a few cases, we have brought in faculty members for part of
a course, but they still interact with all of the students and are
expected to participate in all activities for the time they are present. These short-term faculty members typically are present for ~2
wk, and they bring critical specialties to supplement the skills of
the full-time faculty members. Faculty involvement for an entire
course ensures that the faculty know exactly what has been taught
and where and how it has been presented, so they can reinforce
the concepts and tie new projects and learning to what has been
covered previously. The students know that the faculty members,
in addition to hiking up and down every ridge, have been involved
in every phase of the course with them. This understanding creates
a sense of shared responsibility and commitment to the learning
process that is clear to all those involved. In addition to senior
faculty members, a staff of associate instructors, often former students selected to return to serve in these positions, provides additional contact for the students with a perspective closer to their
own. A student to staff ratio of 6:1 is maintained for all courses.
At any given time, the students are all working on the same
project; each small field group of students is led by a faculty member and an associate instructor. As the course progresses, the students are assigned to different faculty members so that by the end
of the course, all of the students have been exposed to all of the
faculty as well as the associate instructors and to the other students. This gives the students opportunities to interact with faculty
members with diverse backgrounds, training, and research interests. For a particular project, a single faculty member, typically
with expertise in the topic, serves as the lead instructor. This lead
instructor ensures coherency of the materials and large group presentations, while all of the individual faculty members are responsible for leading small field groups where hourly teaching and
interaction is taking place. This practice ensures that students are
exposed to a variety of teaching styles and expertise so they can
learn in ways that complement their own abilities and interests.
Faculty members from more than 25 academic institutions
and government agencies have been involved in teaching at the
field station. In some cases, these faculty members have been
permanent members of the field station faculty. In other cases,
faculty members have come both to observe and to provide additional expertise. By having these external faculty members participate in the courses, the program has been able to effectively
implement a continuous review of the materials and teaching procedures being employed in our courses.
Curriculum and Teaching Philosophy
Currently, six formal courses, as well as graduate seminars,
professional-development courses, and programs for high school
Douglas et al.
students, are taught at the field station (Table 1). Some of these
courses are taught on an annual basis, and others are taught when
student enrollment is sufficient to meet minimum enrollment criteria. The G103/S103/G111 and G104/S104/G112 introductory
course sequence has been offered for more than 25 yr, and it has
been highly successful in recruitment of geology majors. The
flagship course, G429, has been offered every year since Indiana
University first offered field courses in 1947.
In general, all of the courses offered (Table 1) are organized
around a common format that is designed to require students to
address field problems of a steadily increasing level of complexity as the courses progress. Initial work is kept simple and general to ensure that all of the students start with a basic level of
geologic knowledge and field techniques. In a typical summer,
20 or 30 universities and colleges from across the country have
students attending these courses. In order to accommodate such a
diverse student population, we have developed a curriculum that
rapidly builds a base level of both information and field experience. In the case of G429, this portion of the teaching is conducted while traveling from the Black Hills to the field station.
The 6 d caravan route has been designed to utilize key localities
in the Archean-cored ranges and intervening basins of Wyoming
and particularly well-exposed examples of stratigraphic sections
or structural styles. The caravan trip also provides a regional
foundation for later work at the field station. A second caravan
trip to northwest Montana is added toward the end of the course
to broaden this regional perspective.
Like most courses at the field station, G429 is organized
around a weekly schedule. This weekly schedule builds toward
an all-day independent exercise on the last day of the work week.
The students are required to work alone and independently for
the entire field-based evaluation exercise, putting into practice
the skills and knowledge that they learned during the week.
This experience builds over the summer, so that by the end of
the course, the students are working at a high skill level with a
broad information base that is the accumulation of all previous
Introductory courses
TABLE 1. COURSES OFFERED THROUGH THE JUDSON MEAD GEOLOGIC FIELD STATION
G103/S103 Earth Science: Materials and Processes (G111 Physical Geology) (3 cr)
G104/S104 Evolution of the Earth (G112 Historical Geology) (3 cr)
G321 Field Geology for Business Students (3 cr)
Advanced courses
Professional courses
Local outreach
Topical sessions for local interest groups (e.g., Boy Scouts, high school science clubs,
summer courses)
Location
Black Hills, South Dakota, to Judson Mead Field
Station via Wyoming
Week
1
Comments
Designed to provide mental and physical acclimation and
remedial instruction
Douglas et al.
B
Figure 3. (A) Topographic map of the Mt. Doherty teaching exercise area (45 53.903N, 111 53.403W). (B) Stereographic photo
pair for the Mt. Doherty area. The extreme topographic relief readily visible in the photos expresses both the interbedded carbonateshale stratigraphy of the lower Paleozoic and the overturned plunging folds that have been developed. The identification numbers on
the air photos indicate the north direction and the eastwest dimension is approximately 5.6 km (3.5 miles).
Douglas et al.
logistical concerns such as dangerous terrain to be avoided. Additional personal considerations such as traverse pacing (when the
big hills will be encountered), rest-break options, and the expectations for individual versus group activities are also given to the
students, as appropriate.
During subsequent weeks, there is an increase in the level
of sophistication in the nature of the problems and approaches
introduced to and implemented by the students. At the same
time, the amount of closely supervised teaching is reduced, and
time intervals between group and individual check points are
longer. Intervals of 1 to 3 h of independent work by the students
are concluded with a group rendezvous. This provides a safety
check and permits a group discussion of the problems and discoveries made by the students. During this same time interval,
the faculty will visit with each of the students individually to
provide opportunity for one-on-one instruction. This allows for
greater independence and also permits individualized teaching
for those students needing more instruction, thus ensuring that
the range of abilities and prior experience is not a determining
factor for a students long-term learning.
The final portion of the course consists of student selfdirected work. During the Final Study Area project, the students
are expected to put into practice what they have learned to date.
The Final Study Areas have been selected to provide a range of
challenges for the students so that they can gain confidence and
a sense of being in control of their path throughout the project,
in both a physical and literal sense.
Decades of accumulated geological and logistical experience influence the teaching and learning process that is at the
heart of the field instruction at the Judson Mead Geologic Field
Station of Indiana University. The decision to use the same
areas year after year is based on the fact that the concepts being
presented to the students are difficult to master; by having the
students work in a physical setting that is advantageous for the
learning process, chaotic and frustrating experiences that could
impede the advancement of the student are avoided. Arriving at
a new locality for the first time with students can be a wonderful exercise in exploration and discovery, or it can be one of
frustration and chaos, should the access or the quality of the
exposures prove to be less than anticipated. Several recent studies of introductory-level students involved in field-based learning have demonstrated that learning is more effective when the
students are comfortable in their learning environment (Elkins
and Elkins, 2007; Orion, 1993; Orion and Hofstein, 1994).
Repeated use of a particular area also makes it possible
to evaluate the students work with a minimal amount of corrections for those uncontrollable parameters involved in field
teaching, such as inclement weather, flat tires, locked gates,
etc. This is not intended to imply that the curriculum is fixed
and unchanging, but to reinforce the notion that a substantial
amount of thought and planning is part of every field experience the students encounter. The curriculum itself is constantly
being revised and updated to include new information, techniques, and teaching and/or research methods. The issues of
Figure 4. (A) Students using stereoboards in the field. The design allows students to be able to plot station and contact information on both
a topographic map and aerial photograph in the field, even while on
steep slopes or under windy conditions. Use of plastic bags as a cover permits the stereoboards to be used in the rain. (B) Close-up view
of a stereoboard designed by Judson Mead for use with topographic
maps and stereophotographic pairs while mapping in the field. The
components are nonmagnetic, so the stereoboard will not affect measurements made with a Brunton compass. The dimensions of a closed
stereoboard are 37 cm 23.5 cm 3 cm (14.5 in. 9.25 in. 1.25 in.).
10
Douglas et al.
Figure 5. Examples of pages from a students stratigraphic notebook. The creation of a standardized page format, along with an extensive key and
legend, allows students without any formal training in stratigraphic section measurement to effectively observe and record appropriate information with little prior training. The information shown was recorded by a student while traversing a portion of the Paleozoic and Mesozoic sections
for the first time. The page size is 15.3 23 cm (6 9 in.) and is bound in a stiff covered binder that can be opened to change the relative position
of these pages as well as summary pages and legend pages.
Water budget for the reservoir; relationship between surface waters in wetland
and lake and groundwater; vertical and horizontal groundwater gradients
pH, SpC, T probes; Brunton compass; autolevel (with tripod and stadia
rod); electric tape for water-depth determination; miniature
piezometer tubes; seepage meters; evaporation trays; soil augers;
topographic map
Willow Creek Reservoir
Project
Carmichael Watershed
11
site form the primary data collection points for the watershed
(Table 3; Fig. 6). Data sets derived from the portable equipment,
collected by the students during the course (Fig. 7), are building
a database for future students to use in their interpretations. An
ever-expanding library of data (e.g., local meteorological measurements, vegetation surveys, aquatic indices, stream indexing,
soil and water chemistry) along with surficial and bedrock geological mapping has been compiled. Both G429e and G329 make
extensive use of the WCDW instrumented sites and data sets; a
number of undergraduate research projects and graduate M.S.
theses have been completed that provide additional information
that has been incorporated into the teaching exercises (Elliott,
1998a, 1998b; Elliott et al., 1998, 2003; Krothe, 1999; Letsinger,
2001; Letsinger and Olyphant, 2001; Osterloo, 2002). A complete list of the permanent instrumentation and a general overview of the materials and data generated within the WCDW may
be found at http://www.indiana.edu/~iugfs/newgeneral.html.
Other teaching exercises initially developed for use in the
environmental courses were deemed of such high value for all
students that they were incorporated into the general curriculum.
Examples of these sorts of projects are related to mining and
mine waste and neotectonics and earthquake-hazard assessment.
In both examples, projects developed in these teaching exercises
include a range of activities and skill development (Table 5) that
are new and outside the scope of traditional field geology education. We have been fortunate to be able to establish a good working relationship with Montana Resources, Inc., the private company presently operating the Continental Pit in Butte. Montana
Resources has provided G429 and G429e students with access
to their mine and milling operations, and it has provided staff to
work with the students. An abandoned gold mine, the Bullion
Mine, located near Basin, Montana, which was operational from
the early 1900s to the 1950s, serves as the teaching site for the
counterpart to the modern ongoing mining operation. At the Bullion Mine, aspects of mine reclamation and the treatment of acid
mine drainage are explored.
G329 represents an entirely new direction in curriculum
development. This course fully integrates all of the scientific
disciplines that are part of environmental science (e.g., atmospheric science, biology, chemistry, geology, and physics, as well
as instrumentation and technology). The field sites and teaching
exercises are designed to provide physical and intellectual overlap, so that the students can begin to appreciate the multidisciplinary nature of many scientific investigations (Douglas et al.,
2002). The same stepwise development of skill sets and complexity of intellectual activity used in the traditional field station
courses is employed in these new courses. G329 makes extensive use of equipment (Fig. 8) and requires the use of computers for handling the large and complex data sets obtained during
the course. The WCDW instrumentation and data sets are used
extensively by this course. Special opportunities, such as sampling the hydrothermal systems in Yellowstone National Park,
provide unique experiences for these G329 students. Data collected by G329 students documented a shift in one hydrothermal
9000
8000
Cataract
Creek
7000
SG
Potosi Pk
(USFS)
JMGFS
Watershed
boundary
7000
6000
S. Willow
Creek
South Fork
Willow Creek
SG
Pony
Willow Creek
SG North Fork
N. Willow
Creek
Alluvial
Harrison
MM
5 km
Meteorological station
SNOTEL site
5 miles
Groundwater-monitoring site
GW
5000
Stream-gauging station
SG
Harrison
Lake
SG
Norwegian
Creek
Dry Hollow
Creek
GW Pediment
GW
GW
Harrison Lake SG
Weather Station MM
USGS
T3S
Willow
Creek
Figure 6. Map of the Willow Creek Demonstration Watershed, associated with Judson Mead Geologic Field Station (JMGFS), showing the location of the permanent instrumentation
sites. Insets provide a sense of the site settings and instruments deployed within the watershed. One meteorological station is located in an alpine zone, while the other is located in an
agricultural field. A pump test of the deep well of the nested well pair at the Jackson Ranch set is being carried out by students in G329. Water levels in both wells are being monitored
by electric tapes. USGSU.S. Geological Survey.
10000
Hollowtop
8000
MM
Ridgetop
Weather
Station
S. Boulder
River
12
13
Figure 7. (A) View of the South Willow Creek gauging station looking downstream. The catwalk allows the gauging station to be used during high
flow intervals and also provides safe access to the far side of the stream for local fisherman, a small thing that helps maintain goodwill between the
field station and the local land owners. (B) Students from G429e using a Marsh-McBirney flow meter to measure the discharge of South Willow
Creek just downstream from the South Willow Creek gauging station. The students can compare their calculated discharge with that from the rating
curve for the gauging station. The boulders on the shore behind the students may be seen looking beneath the catwalk in Figure 7A.
Igneous mapping
Whole-rock geochemical analyses; stable isotope values; petrographic images of thin sections
Metamorphic mapping
Whole-rock geochemical analyses; pressure (P), temperature (T), and time determinations using mineral phases
Mine reclamation
Team-based fieldwork and data collection providing students with experience in igneous mapping and surface
and groundwater hydrologic investigations; aqueous chemical analyses (pH, Specific Conductance [SpC],
temperature); two-component mixing model calculations
Scale drawing of fault scarps; use of paleocurrent indicators to determine timing of fault movement;
use of gravity models to determine basin subsidence and displacement rates; evaluation of seismicity plots
Figure 8. (A) A calibration and cross correlation exercise using the portable micrometeorological towers by G329 students. These portable towers
are designed for easy deployment in a variety of sites, allowing for the generation of site-specific meteorological data to be used in concert with
other data sets, such as site slope and orientation, soil type, vegetative cover, and land use. (B) An example of the type of data generated by fixed
and deployed portable equipment. Left two panels show annual trends in solar radiation and temperature (top) and wind speed and vapor pressure for alpine and high-plains settings (lower) within the Willow Creek Demonstration Watershed (WCDW) for 2000 from the two permanent
weather stations. Right two panels show the topographic control on the diurnal cycle of net allowave radiation (solid lines) and ground heat flux
(dashed lines) at four locations in Carmichael Valley, 2122 June 2001. The role of south- versus north-facing controls on the surface radiation
budget and ground heat flux is clearly evident.
14
Douglas et al.
REFERENCES CITED
Day-Lewis, F.D., 2003, Editors Message: The role of field camp in an evolving
geoscience curriculum in the United States: Hydrogeology Journal, v. 11,
p. 203204.
Douglas, B.J., Olyphant, G.A., Suttner, L.J., Boone, W., and Carlson, C., 1996,
Integrating skills and techniques of environmental geoscience into an
existing field geology program: Geological Society of America Abstracts
with Programs, v. 28, no. 7, p. A-267.
Douglas, B.J., Olyphant, G.A., Elliott, W., Letsinger, S.L., and Suttner, L.J.,
1997, Importance of bedrock geology to the geoecology of a northern
Rocky Mountain watershed: Geological Society of America Abstracts
with Programs, v. 29, no. 6, p. A-22.
Douglas, B.J., Brabson, B., Brophy, J., Cotton, C., Dahlstrom, D., Elswick, E.,
Gibson, D., Letsinger, S., Oliphant, A., Olyphant, G., Person, M., and
Suttner, L., 2002, Using data today: Data in a field classroom, in Using
Data in Undergraduate Science Classrooms, Final Report on an Interdisciplinary Workshop at Carleton College, April 2002: Northfield, Minnesota,
Science Education Resource Center, Carleton College, 16 p.
Drummond, C.N., 2001, Can field camps survive?: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 49, no. 4, p. 336.
Elkins, J.T., and Elkins, N.M.L., 2007, Teaching geology in the field: Significant geosciences concept gains in entirely field-based introductory geology courses: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 55, no. 2, p. 126132.
Elliott, W.S., Jr., 1998a, Tectono-Stratigraphic Control of Quaternary and Tertiary Sediments and Structures along the Northeast Flank of the Tobacco
Root Mountains, Madison County, Montana [M.S. thesis]: Bloomington,
Indiana, Indiana University, 121 p.
Elliott, W.S., Jr., 1998b, Geologic Map of the Harrison 7.5 Quadrangle, Madison County, Montana (Part 1): Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology
Open-File Report MBMG 375, scale 1:24,000, 2 sheets.
Elliott, W.S., Jr., Suttner, L.J., and Douglas, B.J., 1998, Structural control of
Tertiary and Quaternary sediment dispersal along the northeast flank of
the Tobacco Root Mountains, Madison County, Montana: Geological
Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 30, no. 7, p. A-192.
Elliott, W.S., Jr., Douglas, B.J., and Suttner, L.J., 2003, Structural control on
Quaternary and Tertiary sedimentation in the Harrison Basin, Madison
County, Montana: The Mountain Geologist, v. 40, no. 1, p. 118.
Krothe, J., 1999, Groundwater Flow through Metamorphic Bedrock [B.S. thesis]: Bloomington, Indiana, Indiana University, 18 p.
Letsinger, S.L., 2001, Simulating the Evolution of Seasonal Snowcover and
Snowmelt Runoff Using a Distributed Energy Balance Model: Application to an Alpine Watershed in the Tobacco Root Mountains, Montana
[Ph.D. diss.]: Bloomington, Indiana, Indiana University, 216 p.
Letsinger, S.L., and Olyphant, G.A., 2001, Assessing the heterogeneity of
snow-water equivalent during the snowmelt season: Spatial variability
and its controlling factors in an alpine setting: Eos (Transactions, American Geophysical Union), v. 82, no. 47, Fall Meeting supplement, abstract
IP51A-0737.
Orion, N., 1993, A model for the development and implementation of field trips
as an integral part of the science curriculum: School Science and Mathematics, v. 93, p. 325331.
Orion, N., and Hofstein, A., 1994, Factors that influence learning during a scientific field trip in a natural environment: Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, v. 31, p. 10971119, doi: 10.1002/tea.3660311005.
Osterloo, M., 2002, The Growing Season Water Balance for a Watershed
Located in Southwestern Montana [B.S. thesis]: Bloomington, Indiana,
Indiana University, 23 p., http://www.indiana.edu/~bses/osterloo.html.
ABSTRACT
The Yellowstone-Bighorn Research Association (YBRA) is a nonprofit research and
teaching organization chartered in the state of Montana in 1936. YBRA maintains a field
station south of Red Lodge, Montana, at the foot of the Beartooth Mountains at the NW
corner of the Bighorn Basin. The YBRA Field Station has been host to a wide variety of
primarily geological field courses and research exercises, including a YBRA-sponsored
Summer Course in Geologic Field Methods, offered initially by Princeton University and
subsequently by the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Houston. Enrollments in that course vary from year to year, an experience shared by other field-course
programs. The YBRA field station does not depend exclusively on field-course enrollment; by diversifying its client base, YBRA has been able to operate effectively through
high-amplitude variations in enrollment in traditional courses in field geology.
INTRODUCTION
young geologists have passed on their way to productive professional careers in resource exploration, research, and teaching.
HISTORY OF YBRA
The colorful history of YBRA was described by William
Bonini et al. (1986) on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of
the establishment of YBRA. We summarize that description here:
Sisson, V.B., Kauffman, M., Bordeaux, Y., Thomas, R.C., and Giegengack, R., 2009, The Yellowstone-Bighorn Research Association (YBRA): Maintaining a
leadership role in field-course education for 79 years, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives
and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 1523, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(02). For permission to copy, contact editing@
geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
15
16
Sisson et al.
Prof. Taylor Thom and Richard Field of Princetons
Geology Department initiated the Red Lodge Project
in 1930 for the furthering of fundamental geological
science and the training of students under exceptionally
favorable conditions. There were 19 active participants
in the Red Lodge Project that first year.
Red Lodge, Montana, at the NW corner of the Bighorn
Basin at the foot of the Beartooth Mountains, was chosen
because of its superb immediate geologic setting and its
proximity to a variety of geologic terrains. At that time,
although the region was already established as a source
of hydrocarbon fuels and had already yielded important
vertebrate fossils, it had not been mapped in detail.
Dr. J.C. Fred Siegfriedt, a Red Lodge doctor who was
mayor of Red Lodge in 1930, was also an active amateur
paleontologist. Siegfriedt owned land near Piney Dell,
about 8 km southwest of Red Lodge, which he rented as
a field station to Taylor Thom in 1931. That year, 35 participants, and the following year, 42 participants, together
with family members, occupied the one old house, small
cabins, and tents at Piney Dell (see Fig. 1).
In 1931 and for the next 30 years, Roy Wadsworth, a
giant of a coal minercarpenter, served as caretaker and
repairman, and his wife Florence served as the cook.
To Billings, 100 km
Red Lodge
YBRA
Camp Senia
Elk Basin
10 km
to Yellowstone National Park
NE Entrance, 90 km
17
18
Sisson et al.
that column include banded iron formation, amphibolites, calcsilicates, marble, quartzite, schists, gneisses, diabase, pegmatite,
serpentinite, and basalts. We have added exercises that include
mapping and interpretation of a thin-skinned overthrust belt near
Block Mountain, and a complex of Tertiary normal faults near
Timber Hill (see following). In some years, we have included an
exercise in assessment of hydrologic hazards.
In addition to these three major mapping exercises, students
at YBRA are assigned one-day exercises in section measurement,
economic geology and mineralogy (via a visit to the Stillwater
Complex), Cenozoic paleontology, glacial stratigraphy and geomorphology, high-mountain ecology, etc.
FIELD INSTRUCTION IN GEOLOGY AT THE
UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON
The Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences (formerly the Geosciences Department) at the University of Houston
has offered a department-sponsored field course to its students
for over 40 years. That course has been taught as a capstone
course that most students have taken after all their required and
elective courses have been fulfilled. Thus, the field course has
served mostly senior geology majors who have received their
undergraduate degrees after completion of that course.
During most of those 40 years, the field course has been
based at Western New Mexico State University in Silver City,
New Mexico, in the midst of a primarily Paleozoic terrain, with
side field trips through New Mexico, Arizona, and the Guadalupe
Mountains of Texas. In some years, students in the course have
also studied igneous rocks, glacial deposits, and Precambrian
basement at Durango, Colorado.
The faculty for the course has been drawn exclusively from
University of Houston staff, including Max Carmen, Carl Norman, Hank Chafetz, Bill Dupre, Peter Copeland, Mike Murphy,
Tom Lapen, and Janok Bhattacharya. Graduate students have
also been engaged as teaching assistants. Typically, two faculty members have taught the entire five- to six-week course.
This class has only included students enrolled at University of
Houston; the entire group has driven to the field sites in rented
vehicles driven in caravan from the University of Houston campus. Prior to field camp, all students in the field course have
been required to take a semester-long on-campus field-methods
course in preparation for the summer program. In recent years,
the field-geology course has been used to fulfill electives for
undergraduate majors in geophysics.
The field camp moved to north-central New Mexico near
Abiquiu in 2005. This move shifted the emphasis of the course
to Rio Grande Rift geology and the geology of the Henry Mountains in south-central Utah.
UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTONYBRA FIELD COURSE
In December 2007, the University of Houston Department of Geosciences decided to assume responsibility for
19
they address and the elegance of the solutions that prior generations have developed.
On the other hand, we also know that life is short, that most
of us will not have more than a few good ideas in our productive
lifetimes, and that repeating the mistakes of prior generations,
however graphic that experience may prove to be, is not an efficient way to learn about Earth, or anything else. The instructional
model whereby a mature investigator, who has spent a piece of
her/his life studying a specific process, region, or material, distills the essence of that experience into 40 one-hour lectures over
the course of 14 weeks before an audience that may range from
a handful to many hundreds of younger aspirants to the same
understanding, has been shown to be both effective and efficient.
Its practice long predates the establishment of formal schooling
in classical human societies, and, no doubt, is a model employed
by other animals to instruct their young in the business of life.
In our earth science curricula, we concern ourselves more
with experiential education than do many of our colleagues in
other disciplines: our programs typically include exposure to
geologic materials through laboratory study, collection of statistically rigorous data via empiric analysis, and collection of
field data through vigorous transects of complex terrain. While
we seek strategies to achieve our teaching objectives in ways
that capture the interest and excitement of our students, we do
not indulge that need for excitement at the expense of the rigor
of the substance we present. In the earth sciences, in addition,
we respond to a predisposition that brings many of our geology
majors into our classrooms: the attraction of physical work outdoors, the appeal of wild and scenic places, and the satisfaction
of solving complex four-dimensional problems that may not have
been solved before. Each new piece of terrain is a story waiting
to be deciphered, and it offers rewards not likely to be realized by
those who undertake to solve an artificial problem manufactured
by someone else (e.g., a crossword puzzle).
So, our task of earth science education, and particularly our
task of offering that instruction in the field, presents challenges
different from those addressed by our colleagues in some other
disciplines. We embrace the rare opportunity to develop a curricular approach that offers the most efficient way for young
people, already strongly predisposed to learning what we have to
offer, to learn both the principles and the practical skills that will
enable them to spend productive careers reconstructing Earth history from the empiric data in which that history is written: the
language of the rocks.
In our experience, the most effective teachers at YBRA have
been active professional geologists, across a range of ages, who
use fieldwork as a means to collect data not available by other
strategies, who revel in the task of solving vast four-dimensional
puzzles with fragmentary evidence, who strive to share the
excitement they feel with others, and have developed, or came
fully equipped with, a natural predisposition to be effective storytellers. Given that particular combination of background and proclivity, it matters little how each teacher goes about communicating his/her conviction to the next generation. We seek excellent
20
Sisson et al.
21
22
Sisson et al.
(2) we recognize that the present cost of acquiring, maintaining, and replacing individual laptop units and differential GPS
technology is so high that it will price our program well above
our competition.
We realize that several other undergraduate courses in field
geology routinely train their students in modern electronic survey techniques; we may introduce aspects of that technology as
costs decline.
In the past 25 years, we have seen a steady growth in the
number of female students who enroll in the YBRA field course;
since the 1990s, the female:male ratio has often exceeded 1:1.
This trend has not only changed the physical layout of the camp,
but it has impacted the social environment of the program in a
strongly positive way. In years in which the student body has been
overwhelmingly male, our students have sought leisure-time recreation in the friendly bar culture in Red Lodge. With the recent
change in gender ratio, our young males have learned that plenty
of social stimulation is available right in camp, and they are better behaved as a consequence. The addition of a strong cohort
of competent, highly motivated young women has improved the
learning environment of the program and, perhaps only incidentally, reduced the incidence of cases of substance abuse.
YBRA TODAY
YBRA is operated by a 12-member, self-perpetuating Board
of Trustees, known as the YBRA Council. The field station is
run by a seasonal staff of three to five kitchen and maintenance
employees. YBRA is supported by user charges, membership
fees, publication sales, and individual and corporate contributions to its operating budget and endowment.
The field station in 2008 consists of 32 buildings (see
Fig. 3). The station can accommodate 90 people in dormitories and smaller cabins scattered across a wooded mountainside
overlooking the town of Red Lodge, Montana. Five of the larger
cabins include indoor plumbing; two strategically placed washhouses serve the dormitories and smaller cabins. The modern
kitchen in Fanshawe Lodge can serve as many as 125 people.
Classes and other meetings are held in two study halls and a
library, which is well stocked with publications on the geology and natural history of the northern Rocky Mountains. Since
1936, YBRA has taken its drinking water from the headwaters
of Howell Gulch, a first-order stream on the property; that water
is now filtered and chlorinated to meet health requirements of
the state of Montana.
In an annual three-month season, YBRA is host to three to
five field courses, a number of large field parties, traveling earth
science field excursions, individual investigators, alumni/ae seminars and reunions, visiting alumni/ae of programs at YBRA, local
topical seminars, and the occasional wedding or family reunion.
Ashes of at least one former YBRA faculty member are sparsely
distributed across the site.
Although YBRA was acquired and constructed to accommodate courses in geologic field methods, it now serves such a
23
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES CITED
YBRA is the oldest university-sponsored field-geology
facility in continuous operation in the United States today. This
facility, in an annual three-month season (JuneAugust), accommodates undergraduate and graduate field courses in geology,
ecology and botany; visits by geologic field trips passing through
the Bighorn Basin; individual scientists and research teams conducting field research in proximity to YBRA; university alumni/ae
colleges and reunions; various topical conferences; and visiting
YBRA alumni/ae. This diversity of users enables YBRA to meet
the costs of annual operation and maintenance without relying
exclusively on patronage by undergraduate field courses.
In its 79-year history, YBRA and the programs it hosts have
made a major contribution to the study of geology in the United
States, and have introduced ~2000 young geologists to the physi-
Bonini, W.E., Fox, S.K., and Judson, S., 1986, The Red Lodge Project and the
YBRA: The early years, 19321942: Billings, Montana Geological Society, YBRA Field Conference, p. 19.
Sears, J.W., and Thomas, R.C., 2007, Extraordinary middle Miocene crustal
disturbance in southwest Montana: Birth record of the Yellowstone hot
spot?: Northwest Geology, v. 36, p. 133142.
Stickney, M., 2007, Historic earthquakes and seismicity in southwestern Montana: Northwest Geology, v. 36, p. 167186.
Thomas, R.C., and Roberts, S., 2009, this volume, Experience one: Teaching
geoscience curriculum in the field, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and
Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and
Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461,
doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(07).
ABSTRACT
The summer field camp experience provides many students with their best opportunity to learn the scientific process by making observations and collecting, recording,
evaluating, and interpreting geologic data. Field school projects enhance student professional development by requiring cooperation and interpersonal interaction, report
writing to communicate interpretations, and the development of project management skills to achieve a common goal. The field school setting provides students with
the opportunity to observe geologic features and their spatial distribution, size, and
shape that will impact the students future careers as geoscientists. The Les Huston
Geology Field Camp (a.k.a. Oklahoma Geology Camp) near Caon City, Colorado,
focuses on time-tested traditional methods of geological mapping and fieldwork to
accomplish these goals. The curriculum consists of an introduction to field techniques
(pacing, orienteering, measuring strike and dip, and using a Jacobs staff), sketching
outcrops, section measuring (one illustrating facies changes), three mapping exercises
(of increasing complexity), and a field geophysics project. Accurate rock and contact descriptions are emphasized, and attitudes and contacts are mapped in the field.
Mapping is done on topographic maps at 1:12,000 and 1:6000 scales; air photos are
provided. Global positioning system (GPS)assisted mapping is allowed, but we insist
that locations be recorded in the field and confirmed using visual observations. The
course includes field trips to the Cripple Creek and Leadville mining districts, Florissant/Guffey volcano area, Pikes Peak batholith, and the Denver Basin. Each field trip
is designed to emphasize aspects of geology that are not stressed in the field exercises.
Students are strongly encouraged to accurately describe geologic features
and gather evidence to support their interpretations of the geologic history. Concise reports are a part of each major exercise. Students are grouped into teams to
(1) introduce the team concept and develop interpersonal skills that are fundamental
components of many professions, (2) ensure safety, and (3) mix students with varying
academic backgrounds and physical strengths. This approach has advantages and
disadvantages. Students with academic strengths in specific areas assist those with
less experience, thereby becoming engaged in the teaching process. However, some
Puckette, J.O., and Suneson, N.H., 2009, Field camp: Using traditional methods to train the next generation of petroleum geologists, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk,
D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 2534,
doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(03). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
25
26
27
10500W
3830N
3830N
0 1 2 3 4 5
0
10 Miles
10 Kilometers
10500W
Figure 2. View looking north-northeast across part of the Caon City Embayment. Caon City is visible among the trees in the upper right, and the
south-plunging Rampart Range forms the skyline in the background. The
Oklahoma Geology Camp is located in a gap in the nearer tree-covered
hogback in the upper right. The southeast-dipping Dakota Group forms a
prominent hogback and overlies the slope-forming Morrison Formation
and underlies a thick section of Cretaceous shales and limestones. This
area (Grape Creek) is the students first major mapping project.
QUATERNARY
28
Terrace Gravels
PROTEROZOIC
PRECAMBRIAN
Niobrara Formation
Carlile Shale
Greenhorn Limestone
Graneros Shale
Dakota Group
CRETACEOUS
ORDOVICIAN
DEVONIAN
PENNSYLPERMIAN
VANIAN
JURASSIC
MESOZOIC
PALEOZOIC
PHANEROZOIC
Pierre Shale
Muddy Sandstone
Glen Cairn Shale
Plainview Sandstone
Morrison Formation
Ralston Creek Formation
Lykins Formation
Fountain Formation
Fremont Dolomite
Harding Sandstone
Manitou Dolomite
About half the students who enroll in the OGC course are
from Oklahoma State University (OSU) in Stillwater (Fig. 4). A
significant number of students are from the University of Oklahoma (OU) in Norman. Universities that have regularly sent students to the OGC in the recent past include Texas Tech, Texas
Christian, Midwestern State, ArkansasLittle Rock, and Arkansas Tech. Because most students come from southern mid-continent schools, and the overwhelming majority from OSU and OU,
most will graduate and get jobs in the petroleum industry. This is
particularly true during boom times. Not surprisingly, much of
Event
Source
60
Total
Number of students
50
40
30
Out of state
20
OSU
OU
10
0
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Year
29
30
31
The first takes two days and involves measuring and describing the entire stratigraphic section from the Fountain Formation
(Pennsylvanian) through the Smoky Hill Marl (Late Cretaceous).
Following the fieldwork, the section is drafted using a provided
template and following some strict guidelines. The first major
mapping project (Grape Creek) takes place in the same area as
the measured section; thus, the students are relatively familiar
with the geology. The area consists of monoclinally tilted and
locally faulted strata and is the most simple of the three project areas to map (Fig. 2). The second major mapping project
is known as the Mixing Bowl. It is more complex than Grape
Creek, and the students have to recognize and map several major
faults and unconformities. The final mapping project is on Twin
Mountain, about 6 mi (9.5 km) northwest of Caon City. The
geology is complex, and the terrain is rugged. The final product
for all the mapping projects consists of a neatly drafted and colored geologic map with cross section(s), explanation, correlation
of units, and description of units; the students are supplied with
templates (with decreasing amount of provided information) that
generally follow the format used for USGS geologic maps.
The major field projects have three principal goals. (1) They
test and continue to develop the students observational skills,
from accurately describing the strata to correctly determining
thicknesses and locating themselves, and they develop interpretative abilities. The faculty emphasize that these skills are similar
to describing and interpreting core and cuttings in dipping strata
or in subhorizontal strata in a deviated well. (2) They require
carefully completed written products (maps, measured sections,
reports) done in a timely manner. (3) Perhaps most important, the
major projects require working in the field and in the office as
part of a team, and this requires good leadership, good planning,
good time management, and good cooperation amongst the team
members. Goals 2 and 3 are skills most geologists will recognize
as key to their professional development and success.
A hands-on experience with geophysical equipment as part
of a real research project is a key component of the OGC. The
goal of this exercise is to demonstrate that geophysics is a useful
and understandable tool for geological studies, and many of our
students who choose to pursue careers in the petroleum industry will work with geophysicists. In recent years, the emphasis
has been on gravity and magnetic measurements, which have
significantly complemented ongoing research on the structure
and tectonics of the area. The students have responded very well
to the fact that what they are doing has a significant scientific
impact. This approach means that the exercise is not structured
as one that would be repeated the same way each year, but this is
offset by the message sent that the work they are doing is of professional quality, will be used in the M.S. thesis of the graduate
assistant who is helping run the exercise, and will be presented at
a Geological Society of America meeting.
We have been able to gain access to three Worden gravimeters and one LaCoste-Romberg gravimeter each year, and
together with three proton precession magnetometers and geodetic-grade GPS units, the value of this equipment is ~$200,000.
32
The University of Texas at El Paso, New Mexico Tech, and Missouri State University have each loaned us equipment to make
this possible. The students are divided into two groups that spend
three days on their geophysical project. We have enough equipment to form six teams within each group. Each team spends one
day in the field making gravity measurements, another day making magnetic measurements, and a third day making traditional
corrections to the raw data to produce useful anomaly values,
and writing a report. The students also take a GPS reading with
a handheld unit at each gravity and magnetic station and take
notes about the rocks that crop out nearby (if present). The report
must include a discussion of their survey results and a subjective interpretation of the anomalies that they observed. In order
to make their interpretations, they must think through the density and magnetic susceptibility values appropriate for the rather
exotic rock types that are present. Thus, they must think through
the various permutations of positive and negative anomaly parings between gravity and magnetic observations to arrive at an
interpretation. Only a handful of our students have taken a geophysics course, so this exercise is an eye-opening experience in
which they learn that these measurements are straightforward to
make, reduce to anomaly values, and subjectively interpret. In
fact, each team must write its own spreadsheet program using
reduction formulas that are provided.
An additional lesson that is stressed is that high-precision
elevations ( a few centimeters) can only be obtained with geodetic-grade instruments and postprocessing. This is demonstrated
easily to doubting students as they reoccupy the base station and
some of their gravity and magnetic stations in order to keep track
of drift and earth tides. They are usually surprised when the GPS
readings show a variation in elevation that is as much as 10 m,
which is considerably more than the manufacturers claim. On
the other hand, they learn that their gravity readings are very consistent and that Earths magnetic field is quite dynamic due to the
diurnal variation. They also learn that the diurnal variations are
noise that must be removed via the drift correction. We usually
have some equipment problems that have never been permanent,
so they also learn that most problems are due to factors such as
dead batteries and loose connections. Thus, we are ultimately
able to demonstrate that geophysics is not beyond their grasp and
that the field procedures involve many of the same principles as
geological observations.
Field trips are an important part of the OGC and (sometimes) provide a welcome respite from the grind of mapping
and measuring (Fig. 7). Some trips are to parts of Colorado that
many of our students have never visited, and all (except the first)
focus on aspects of geology that are not covered in the rest of the
course. A final written exam tests the students understanding of
the geology of the field-trip areas. Although most of our students
will enter the petroleum industry, some will go into minerals
exploration, environmental geology, or other fields, and the field
trips broaden all the students exposure to a wide variety of subdisciplines. Depending on student interest, optional trips on the
weekend to collect minerals are run by individual faculty mem-
Figure 7. Students looking for Eocene leaf and insect fossils at privately
owned Florissant Fossil Quarry outside of Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument. The field trips not only are a welcome break from the normal routine of field camp, but they expose the students to geology they do
not see at their home universities or during the course of project mapping.
bers. A key trip is held on the first day of camp, and it provides
the students with an overview of the stratigraphy and structure
of the Caon City area (Figs. 1, 3, and 8). (Many of the stops on
this first field trip, as well as some later trips, are described in an
excellent guidebook by Henry et al., 2004.) In 2008, two field
33
camp attendees who remark how valuable the team concept was
in teaching them to work with others in the professional setting.
ISSUES AND CHALLENGES
At the end of field camp, the students complete evaluations
of the course, faculty, and TAs as required by OSU and OU. In
addition, the faculty ask students to rank and comment on the
field trips. These evaluations are seriously considered when
changes are made to the curriculum. An example of a recent
change (and one made at the recommendation of the students)
was the addition of a final individual mapping exam. Although
the core field projects at camp have remained the same for many
years, the faculty are constantly striving to improve the course.
Despite these efforts, challenges remain, and the faculty are open
to suggestions from colleagues, other field-camp faculty, and students. Some of our more salient issues and challenges include:
1. Separating students from the same schools and selecting
team leaders. We strongly favor the team concept and assigning
team leaders; we also believe in separating students from the same
schools as much as possible. However, the physical abilities, academic backgrounds (including field experience), and work ethic
of the team members can vary greatly, and how to account for
this when grading the teams final product is difficult. We ask
individual team members to give us a written evaluation of the
teams effectiveness; this is an opportunity for the students to
let us know who may not have contributed as much as the others.
2. Differing work ethic between students who take the course
for a letter grade and those who receive a pass/fail grade. Most
of the students take the course for a letter grade; some, however,
take the course pass/fail. This can lead to significantly different
work efforts among different team members, particularly toward
the end of camp. We have tried to lessen this problem by not putting letter-grade and pass/fail students on the same teams for the
final mapping project.
3. Differing biological clocks. Some students like going to
bed early; others are night owls. The cabins at camp are relatively close to each other; none are sound-proofed; and so noise
can be a problem, despite 10:00 p.m. weekday and 12:00 a.m.
weekend noise curfews. Next year, we plan to ask students
about their social habits (much like the freshmen-dormitory
questionnaires many universities distribute) in an effort to house
students with similar living styles together.
4. Student attitude toward a required field course. The 2008
camp presented the faculty with some unique issues. Many of
the students planned to work for the petroleum industry following camp, either permanently, as full-time summer interns, and/
or part-time as graduate students in the fall. Most starting annual
salaries exceeded $50,000 and, in some cases, exceeded $80,000.
Some of these students carried an air of superiority into camp,
some believed fieldwork was a waste of their time, and others
simply had too much money to spend on diversions. As faculty,
we continue to struggle with wanting to treat our students as
adults, while realizing that they are, in fact, young adults.
34
ABSTRACT
The Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences (EPS) at the University of
New Mexico offers two field geology courses (EPS 319L, Introductory Field Geology, and EPS420L, Advanced Field Geology). Prior to summer 1986, these courses
were taught during the academic year, on the weekends. Over a two year time span,
despite some faculty consternation, the department converted both classes into fullblown summer field geology courses. These continue to be offered as two separate,
independent classes for several reasons. Introductory Field Geology is required of all
EPS geoscience majors and has attracted numerous students from institutions outside
New Mexico. All mapping is done using a paper topographic map and/or an air photograph base, with, eventually, the aid of a handheld global positioning system (GPS)
device. Given that topographic map skills remain essential for effective computer- and
GPS-based mapping, we emphasize these traditional techniques within the limited
time span (three weeks) of the course. Despite the fact that all students are expected
(required) to have passed the standard array of core undergraduate courses in the
geosciences, the backgrounds of the students, including level of previous field experience, vary considerably. Consequently, the approach taken in EPS 319L is one in
which strong emphasis is placed on providing rapid feedback and focusing maximum
instructor attention on the students who need it the most. As one means of providing
rapid feedback to all of our students, we utilize a postage stamp map exercise as an
essential component of each mapping project. After at least one day of introduction
to the project, the entire class focuses on a morning of mapping in a small, yet very
revealing project area. The maps are turned in after a group discussion of the postage
stamp area, and detailed feedback, using several rubrics, is provided to all students
by the end of the day (but these maps are not graded). In field geology courses, where
the goal is to maximize student field learning within a limited time frame, the postage
stamp exercises have proven to be an effective way to provide timely instructor input
and reinforcement of burgeoning student skills. Student evaluations of the course
support the use of the postage stamp exercises for each map project; these exercises
improve the instructors ability to assess final map products in an even more rigorous
and consistent fashion.
Geissman, J.W., and Meyer, G., 2009, Introductory field geology at the University of New Mexico, 1984 to today: What a long, strange trip it continues to be,
in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America
Special Paper 461, p. 3544, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(04). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All
rights reserved.
35
36
37
Huerfano Park
P rk
Colorado
do
do
37N
w Mexico
New
San
S
Ysidro
Y
A buq
Albuquerque
Bac
ca Canyon
Can
Ca
nyon
Baca
100 km
107W
38
39
1052230W
24
433 m
2433
3745N
4 km
437
43
4372
72
2m
B anca Peak
Blanca
Peak
Figure 2. Digital elevation model (DEM) shaded-relief map of the Huerfano River area, Colorado, showing (A) the Point of Rocks mapping area,
where folded and faulted Mesozoic rocks are exposed around the eastern and southern margins of Early to Middle Pleistocene fluvial terraces
preserved by stream capture; and (B) last-glacial lateral moraines in the upper Huerfano River valley, part of the Quaternary and surficial geologic
mapping focus in this project.
40
41
Financial Support
Here, we provide a brief discussion of the current means
by which support is provided to our Introductory Field Geology course, as well as other summer field courses offered by
the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, given that we
attempt to provide the highest quality level of instruction to our
students with limited financial means. The summer field geology courses are supported by the Summer Instructional Program at the University of New Mexico, through the Provosts
Office, not the College of Arts and Sciences. Each year the
department submits a request for the support of our summer
courses and waits to hear if our request has been granted. For
example, in summer 2008, the department received a total of
$25,500 to support both EPS 319L and EPS 420L; all of these
funds went to pay for instructors (1.5 faculty in EPS 319L and
two graduate teaching assistants; 1.5 faculty in EPS 420L and
two graduate teaching assistants). EPS 319L had a total of 32
students in the course in summer 2008; EPS 420L had a total
of 15 students. The tuition charged by the institution (about
$800/course) is not returned directly to the college or to the
department. This level of support is insufficient to pay for all
instructional costs and the operational expenses of each field
course, which are in large part absorbed by students through
42
fees for each course. For EPS 319L, the current student fees
are $375.00.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
As two long-standing instructors for the Department of
Earth and Planetary Sciences Introductory Field Geology course,
we annually look forward to the day in mid-May when we meet
with a new group of EPS 319L students, many of whom come
from different institutions and have never been to New Mexico,
or even west of the Mississippi River, and many of whom have
never slept outside. Our approach to teaching Introductory Field
Geology is based on experiences over several decades, beginning
with our own personal experiences as students in undergraduate
field geology courses (University of Michigan and University of
Idaho) to our interaction with numerous colleagues, notably our
graduate student teaching assistants and those involved in field
geology instruction at other institutions. Our approach to instruction of Introductory Field Geology at the University of New
Mexico is firmly rooted in the importance of building the field
observational and documentation skills of each and every one of
our students (e.g., Kali and Orion, 1996; Kastens and Ishikawa,
2006; Liben et al., 2008; Kastens et al., 2009). In terms of learning goals, we expect that all students completing EPS 319L have
obtained and have repetitively utilized basic field skills, including locating themselves on a topographic map, without and with
the aid of a handheld GPS; identifying geologic materials in the
43
Figure 5. Example of instructor comments on one postage stamp map prepared by a summer 2008 student, Point
of Rocks mapping project, Huerfano
Park, Colorado.
Colorado School of Mines, a summer as a postdoctoral research scientist at the University of Toronto, and several summers as a graduate
student teaching assistant at Michigans field geology station, the concept of teaching capstone field geology courses on the weekends during the academic year seemed a bit odd, if not just wrong. I expressed
this feeling and emphasized that the current approach was especially
odd for a location like Albuquerque, where nearby geology abounds
(Fig. 1) and the weather is excellent. The end result of our first encounter was an agreement to cooperate to move UNMs field courses to the
summer and mold them into full-fledged field-camplike field geology
courses. As a postscript, one of our very loyal (and generous) alumni
recently talked with me about his experience in the late 1970s taking
Geology 420 on the weekends while trying to compete on the UNM
rugby club team. When I explained how the department was now
REFERENCES CITED
Anderson, O.J., and Lucas, S.G., 1996, Stratigraphy and depositional environments
of Middle and Upper Jurassic rocks, southeastern San Juan Basin, New
Mexico, in Goff, F., Kues, B.S., Rogers, M.A., McFadden, L.D., and Gardner, J.N., eds., 47th Field Conference Guidebook, Jemez Mountains Region:
Socorro, New Mexico, New Mexico Geological Society, p. 205211.
Blake, D.B., and Kues, B.S., 2002, Homeomorphy in the Asteroidea (Echinodermata); a new Late Cretaceous genus and species from Colorado:
Journal of Paleontology, v. 76, p. 10071013, doi: 10.1666/0022-3360
(2002)076<1007:HITAEA>2.0.CO;2.
44
Burbank, W.S., and Goddard, E.N., 1937, Thrusting in Huerfano Park, Colorado, and related problems of orogeny in the Sangre de Cristo Mountains:
Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 48, p. 931976.
Cather, S.M., and Chapin, C.E., 1989, Day 2: Field guide to Upper Eocene and
Lower Oligocene volcaniclastic rocks of the northern Mogollon-Datil volcanic field, in Chapin, C.E., and Zidek, J., eds., Field Excursions to Volcanic Terranes in the Western United States, Volume I: Southern Rocky
Mountain Region: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources
Memoir 46, p. 6087.
Condon, S.M., and Peterson, F., 1986, Stratigraphy of Middle and Upper Jurassic rocks of the San Juan Basin; historical perspective, current ideas,
remaining problems, in Turner-Peterson, C.E., Santos, E.S., and Fishman,
N.S., eds., A Basin Analysis Case Study; the Morrison Formation, Grants
Uranium Region, New Mexico: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Studies in Geology, v. 22, p. 726.
Connell, S.D., 2004, Geology of the Albuquerque Basin and tectonic development of the Rio Grande rift in north-central New Mexico, in Mack, G.H.,
and Giles, K.A., eds., The Geology of New Mexico: A Geologic History:
New Mexico Geological Society Special Publication 11, p. 359388.
Dethier, D.P., Birkeland, P., and Shroba, R.R., 2003, Quaternary stratigraphy,
geomorphology, soils, and alpine archaeology in an alpine-to-plains transect, Colorado Front Range, in Easterbrook, D.J., ed., Quaternary Geology of the United States, International Union for Quaternary Research
Field Guide Volume: Reno, Desert Research Institute, p. 81104.
Drummond, C.N., 2001, Can field camps survive?: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 49, p. 336337.
Englebrecht, A.C., Mintzes, J.J., Brown, L.M., and Kelso, P.R., 2005, Probing
understanding in physical geology using concept maps and clinical interviews: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53, p. 263270.
Field, J., 2003, A two-week guided inquiry project for an undergraduate geomorphology course: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 51, p. 255261.
Ingersoll, R.V., 2001, Structural and stratigraphic evolution of the Rio Grande
rift, northern New Mexico and southern Colorado: International Geology
Review, v. 43, p. 867891, doi: 10.1080/00206810109465053.
Johnson, J.K., and Reynolds, S.J., 2005, Concept sketches using studentand instructor-generated annotated sketches for learning, teaching, and
assessment in geology courses: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53,
p. 8595.
Kali, Y., and Orion, N., 1996, Spatial abilities of high-school students in the perception of geologic structures: Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
v. 33, p. 369391, doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199604)33:4<369::AID
-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-Q.
Kastens, K.A., and Ishikawa, T., 2006, Spatial thinking in the geosciences and
cognitive sciences, in Manduca, C., and Mogk, D., eds., Earth and Mind:
How Geoscientists Think and Learn about the Complex Earth: Geological
Society of America Special Paper 413, p. 5376.
Kastens, K.A., Manduca, C.A., Cervato, C., Frodeman, R., Goodwin, C., Liben,
L.S., Mogk, D.W., Spangler, T.C., Stilllings, T.C., and Titus, S., 2009,
Geoscientists and cognitive scientists collaborate to improve thinking
and learning about the Earth: Eos (Transactions, American Geophysical
Union), v. 90, no. 31, p. 265266.
Kauffman, E.G., 1977, Geological and biological overview: Western Interior
Cretaceous Basin, in Kauffman, E.G., ed., Cretaceous Facies, Faunas, and
Paleoenvironments across the Western Interior Basin: Mountain Geologist (Laramie), v. 14, p. 7599.
Laferriere, A.P., Hattin, D.E., and Archer, A.W., 1987, Effects of climate, tectonics, and sea level changes on rhythmic bedding patterns in the Niobrara
Formation (Upper Cretaceous), U.S. Western Interior: Geology, v. 15,
p. 233236, doi: 10.1130/0091-7613(1987)15<233:EOCTAS>2.0.CO;2.
Lewis, C.J., and Baldridge, W.S., 1994, Crustal extension in the Rio Grande rift,
New Mexico: Half-grabens, accommodation zones, and shoulder uplifts
in the Ladron PeakSierra Lucero area, in Keller, G.R., and Cather, S.M.,
eds., Basins of the Rio Grande Rift: Structure, Stratigraphy, and Tectonic
Setting: Geological Society of America Special Paper 291, p. 135156.
Libarkin, J.C., and Kurdziel, J.P., 2001, Research methodologies in science
education: Strategies for productive assessment: Journal of Geoscience
Education, v. 49, p. 300304.
Liben, L.S., Myers, L.J., and Kastens, K.A., 2008, Locating oneself on a map:
Relation to person qualities and map characteristics, in Freska, C., Newcombe, N.S., Gaerdenfors, P., and Wolfl, S., eds., Spatial Cognition VI:
Learning, Reasoning, and Talking about Space, Proceedings from Spacial
Cognition 2008, 1519 September 2008: Freiburg, Germany, SpringerVerlag, p. 171187.
Lindsey, D.A., 1998, Laramide structure of the central Sangre de Cristo Mountains and adjacent Raton Basin, southern Colorado: The Mountain Geologist, v. 35, p. 5570.
Lindsey, D.A., Johnson, B.R., and Andriessen, P.A.M., 1983, Laramide and
Neogene structure of the northern Sangre de Cristo Range, south-central
Colorado, in Lowell, J.D., ed., Rocky Mountain Foreland Basins and
Uplifts: Denver, Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists, p. 219228.
Lucas, S.G., Kietzke, K.K., and Hunt, A.P., 1985, The Jurassic System in
east-central New Mexico, in Lucas, S.G., and Zidek, J., eds., Santa Rosa
Tucumcari Region: New Mexico Geological Society, 36th Field Conference Guidebook, p. 213242.
Mackin, J.H., 1937, Erosional history of the Big Horn Basin, Wyoming: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 48, p. 813894.
Obradovich, J.D., 1993, A Cretaceous time scale, in Caldewell, W.G.E., and
Kauffman, E.G., eds., Evolution of the Western Interior Basin: Geological
Association of Canada Special Publication 39, p. 379396.
Osburn, G.R., and Chapin, C.E., 1983, Nomenclature for Cenozoic Rocks of
Northeast Mogollon-Datil Volcanic Field, New Mexico: Socorro, New
Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, 10 p.
Owen, D.E., 1982, Correlation and paleoenvironments of the Jackpile Sandstone (Upper Jurassic) and intertongued Dakota SandstoneLower Mancos Shale (Upper Cretaceous) in west-central New Mexico, in Grambling,
J.A., and Wells, S.G., eds., Albuquerque Country II: Socorro, New Mexico
Geological Society, 33rd Fall Field Conference Guidebook, p. 267270.
Sageman, B.B., 1996, Lowstand tempestites: Depositional model for Cretaceous skeletal limestones, Western Interior Basin: Geology, v. 24, p. 888
892, doi: 10.1130/0091-7613(1996)024<0888:LTDMFC>2.3.CO;2.
Wawrzyniec, T.F., Geissman, J.W., Melker, M.D., and Hubbard, M., 2002, Dextral shear along the eastern margin of the Colorado PlateauA kinematic
link between the Laramide orogeny and Rio Grande rifting (ca. 80 Ma to
13 Ma): The Journal of Geology, v. 110, p. 305324, doi: 10.1086/339534.
Woodward, L.A., comp., 1984, Tectonic Map of the Rocky Mountain Region of
the United States: Boulder, in Sloss, L.L., ed., Sedimentary CoverNorth
American Craton: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America,
Decade of North American Geology, v. D-2, plate 2, scale 1:2,500,000.
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY 5 MAY 2009
ABSTRACT
Like many similar courses across the United States, traditional geology field
camps run by Boston University (BU) and James Madison University (JMU) faced
a crisis at the turn of the twenty-first century. Student enrollment was declining, and
many geoscience professionals questioned the continued relevance of field camps to
modern undergraduate geoscience programs. A reassessment of field course content,
along with changes to management styles and attitudes, was required for survival.
In our case, the combination of relocation, managerial improvements, curriculum
innovations, and elimination of redundant exercises resulted in a vibrant course with
a strong student demand. We believe that our reforms may serve as a guide to success
for other courses that are facing similar difficulties. The current JMU field course in
western Ireland is the product of reforms and modernizations to the previous BU and
JMU traditional field camps. To create time for new course content, we had to consider whether long-established exercises were still essential. Caution is needed in both
adding and deleting course content, as the curriculum may suffer from inclusion of
new technologies that turn out to be short-lived and from discontinuation of exercises
that develop students core field expertise. Nevertheless, we have implemented major
changes in the ways students are taught to work in the field, and we question the continued relevance of some existing procedures. Our criteria include level of pedagogical engagement and transferability of skills to nongeoscience professions.
A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO FIELD GEOLOGY
whitmesj@jmu.edu
De Paor, D.G., and Whitmeyer, S.J., 2009, Innovation and obsolescence in geoscience field courses: Past experiences and proposals for the future, in Whitmeyer,
S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461,
p. 4556, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(05). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
45
46
geological surveys sprouted (Socolow, 1988). However, residential field geology courses did not enter college curricula until
the early twentieth century (AGI, 1985). Given the absence of
halls of residence in proximity to the best geological exposures,
these courses soon became known as field camps. Founded in
1911, the University of Missouris Branson Field Laboratory is
reputed to be the oldest continuously running geology field camp
in the United States (Anonymous, 2007a). Boston Universitys
camp in Maine followed a generation later (1949), and James
Madison University initiated their original Appalachian-based
field camp around 1978, joining the growing movement. In the
1960s and 1970s, as a testament to the pedagogical success of the
camp classroom model, field camp was required for graduation
by many college geoscience departments (Lonergan and Andresen, 1988). Despite closures in recent years, there are still over
70 field camps offered by accredited American universities and
colleges (Anonymous, 2007b).
Field Camps in CrisisThe BU Perspective
Less than a decade ago, Boston Universitys (BU) Field
Camp was in trouble and, like many others, it faced the real
prospect of closure. The course had been held in northern Maine
for over 50 years, during which generations of BU professors
and graduate student instructors had dedicated six weeks of the
summer session to training students in classical field methods.
As with most field camps, students reported learning more effectively at the outcrop than they had done in the laboratory, and
camaraderie around the campfire created a level of personal contact among faculty and students that was the envy of nonfield sciences. With the coming of the plate-tectonic revolution in the late
1960s, Appalachian tectonics was a vibrant academic research
field, and the Maine field camp was appropriately located.
However, while tectonic interpretations of the Appalachians
had changed radically since the heyday of the plate-tectonic
revolution, the field skills being taught to the Maine field camp
students had barely evolved. An alumnus from the class of 1949
would have been familiar with almost all of the equipment and
methods in use in 1998: finding ones location by pace and compass; identifying minerals by hand lens, scratch plate, and acid
bottle; classifying subtly different fine-grained gray rocks into
laboriously named stratigraphic formations and members; measuring dip and strike or plunge and trend using the compass-clinometer; stereographic projection of structural data onto tracing
paper overlays; and finally inking-in and compilation of a fair
copy map using colored pencils.
Students of BUs last Maine camp in 1998 did not seem
to mind that most of the skills they were learning were verging on obsolescence in the professional workplacehow would
they have known? Their professors did not work for, or interact
with, the exploration companies, environmental management
consultants, geotechnical contractors, or geological surveys that
employed most students. Longitudinal assessment studies were
not carried out, so professors did not know how their course con-
Innovation and obsolescence in geoscience field courses: Past experiences and proposals for the future
facilities significantly, so the relationship was (and continues to
be) symbiotic. In 2006, career moves involving field camp faculty led to a transfer of administration from Boston University to
James Madison University (JMU), where a summer field geology
course had not been offered since 2003. Thanks to faculty continuity, the new philosophy and curriculum of the Ireland field
course continues to develop at JMU.
Despite the extra expenses involved with an overseas location, relocating the camp to western Ireland had several benefits.
We were able to market potential financial savings to parents
who could use one course to fulfill their childrens desire for a
study-abroad experience in addition to learning modern geoscience field methods. The location was remote and decidedly foreign, but nevertheless very friendly toward the United Statesa
significant factor in the era of parental security concerns following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. It was located on the edge of the
Connemara Gaeltacht, one of the Irish-speaking regions of Ireland where the local accent is so strong that it can be difficult to
understand the people even when they speak English. In addition
to U.S. faculty and teaching assistants, Irish faculty were hired
from the Department of Earth and Ocean Sciences at the nearby
campus of the National University of Ireland, Galway. Students
appreciated the Irish faculty for their detailed knowledge of the
local region (and liked their accents).
Faculty Quality and Undergraduate Research
Opportunities
We believe that an important factor in the success of the new
approach was faculty quality. All facultyboth U.S. and Irish
were active scholars with funded research programs and strong
publication records, and many were keenly interested in pedagogical research (Johnston et al., 2005). The revitalized course
attracted a diverse faculty (including several female instructors
and one African American instructor) and an equally diverse student population from universities from across the United States.
Students recognized the research opportunities available in conjunction with the course. Some field course alumni and alumnae
were recruited by faculty for other National Science Foundation
(NSF)funded research opportunities in the United States, Ireland, and other locations (e.g., Antarctica), and many students
went on to graduate programs in the geosciences in first-rank
research universities.
One key to our long-term success was the support of our
departmental chairs and higher-level administrators, who recognized the importance of field camp service when evaluating
untenured faculty. Our experience suggests that such support
and recognition are more easily obtained if the field camp produces sustained scholarship and publication-worthy research
for the faculty. A modern field course cannot flourish if administrators see it as a job for adjuncts or nonresearch faculty. Both
authors were fortunate to have department chairs that not only
supported faculty participation in the Ireland field camp, but
actively taught at the camp.
47
48
R and R
A common issue with residential field courses is the provision of appropriate social activities, to ensure that R-and-R does
not translate into rowdy and rambunctious rather than rest and
relaxation. Our policies follow university guidelines banning
binge drinking, and we have had only a few isolated incidents.
The 6 km roundtrip walk to the local village presumably dampens (literally) the enthusiasm of potential revelers, but perhaps
the more important factor is the availability of alternative leisuretime activities. Approved student drivers are permitted to take
classmates to events such as horse-racing meets and nearby concerts in Galway City by visiting celebrities such as Bob Dylan
and U2. Many students seem happier when they have opportunities to rejoin (nongeology) civilization on occasional evenings
and at weekends. Those that prefer outdoor activities, such as leisure hiking/hill-walking, kayaking, or campfires under star-filled
skies also have those options.
One unanticipated problem was the desire on the part of
some helicopter parents to take the opportunity to visit their
offspring in the field. We allow visits only grudgingly and outside
of class hours. We also receive visits from field camp alumnae
and alumni who return to the region for vacation with their fiances, spouses, and children. Undoubtedly, field camp in the west
of Ireland is a positive memory and character-forming experience
for many.
When the international cell phone and iPod generation came
to camp, our first reaction was to shun the intrusive gadgetry,
following the lead of others that advocate a formal approach to
the use of travel time (Elkins and Elkins, 2006). However, we
soon recognized the benefits of accommodation and assimilation.
Of course, we would prefer if students spent bus time between
outcrops pondering regional tectonics, but, in truth, students in
previous years mainly slept. If they opted to listen to music or call
their parents at enormous expense on their cell phones in order to
say Hi, Im on the bus, then they might work more attentively
at field stops. On the way home from the last outcrop, students
would appoint a DJ to hook their music players up to the bus
speakers and face their peers evaluation of their music taste.
Of course, iPods and smart cell phones like the iPhone can
also be used as mobile reference sources. Early on, we experimented with use of photo and video iPods as teaching devices by
uploading sample images of rocks, minerals, and structures for
use by students as a digital reference library on location. However, before this effort reached maturity, technological advances
overtook it. The latest devices such as the iPod Touch and iPhone
include a fully zoomable web browser, giving students access to
vast resources of reference information without need for custom
software. Traditional, pocket-sized paper field manuals such as
Innovation and obsolescence in geoscience field courses: Past experiences and proposals for the future
49
regional tectonic context and arrive at a more complete explanation of the uplift and exposure of Caledonian rocks in western Ireland resulting from regional extension associated with
the opening of the Atlantic Ocean (Coxon, 2005a). Students
also must relate their local mapping areas and outcrop-scale
details, such as kinematic indicators, to regional tectonic problems, such as the position of Connemara in relation to other
Dalradian terranes of Ireland and Scotland, mechanisms of
terrane transport, and possible docking events. The key is that
students must learn to view their individual projects in a larger
framework that has relevance to the outside world. Like most
field camps, our projects incorporate igneous, sedimentary, and
metamorphic rock identifications, but these are now undertaken
with tectonic synthesis in mind. We do not teach students to
distinguish granodiorite from adamellite or paragneiss from
orthogneiss for its own sake.
Glacial Geomorphology
The second area of emphasis focuses on the glacial geomorphology of western Ireland (e.g., Coxon, 2001, 2005b).
Again, students are taught to map locally while thinking globally. Students usually notice without prompting that the western seaboards vegetation, including palm trees and Versaillesstyle formal gardens, differs from that of Maritime Canada or
Moscow at the same 55N latitude. Historic records of local
climate document the rarity of freezing weather (data from the
Irish National Meteorological Service: www.met.ie), with snow
flurries no more than once or twice a year at sea level, yet the
landscape is dramatically glaciated (Fig. 2). Students arrive at
the field camp with a range of experience in glaciated terrains,
from little to no previous exposure (Virginia) to fairly extensive
knowledge of gradual terminal moraine retreat in New England,
or direct experience with present-day glaciers in Alaska. In each
50
Innovation and obsolescence in geoscience field courses: Past experiences and proposals for the future
produce publication-quality cartography, we encouraged students to scan their rough field slips and penciled cross-sectional
sketches into digital files for use with three-dimensional (3-D)
modeling programs such as Bryce, Carrara, and our own
block-diagram generator in order see their geological interpre-
51
52
maps of Smith, Griffith, and Geikie are seen draped over the 3-D
Google Earth digital terrain model (De Paor and Sharma, 2007;
Simpson and De Paor, 2009; Whitmeyer et al., 2007). Hard-copy
maps may be scanned and the resultant digital images draped
over the virtual globes digital terrain (Fig. 5A). Digital maps
superposed on the terrain may be rendered semitransparent for
comparative purposes (Fig. 5B; see also Simpson and De Paor,
2009). The potential for removing the time-consuming step of
hand-drawing a field map, while retaining the full fidelity of
digital data with true outcrop evidence, suggests that digital field
mapping is the method of the future for geologic map preparation. In addition, computer-based visualization of 3-D surfaces
containing geologic map information introduces new prospects
for constraining interpretations based on incomplete field data.
In our field course, we advocate an iterative approach to geologic field mapping, whereby field interpretations on sketch maps
are draped over the virtual 3-D terrain and continually evaluated
throughout the mapping process.
Obsolescence in the Traditional Curriculum
As outlined herein, our students have to learn many new
ways to collect, analyze, and present field information. They
need to learn how to use GPS for location; ArcPad, and ArcGIS
for data collection, analysis, and visualization; KML for interactive Google Earth maps; etc. Where traditionally they collected four-dimensional data regarding the geological evolution
of a region and reduced that to the two dimensions of a paper
or Mylar map, today they must create a link between the four
dimensions of field evidence (latitude, longitude, altitude, time)
and the four dimensions of the virtual globe (pan, tilt, zoom,
play). However, the price to be paid for early adoption of technology is the certainty that much of it will be redundant in a matter of years, if not months. Palm Pilots are pass, and with the
advent of virtual globe technologies such as Google Earth and
NASA World Wind, the use of modeling programs such as Bryce
and Carrara for DEM draping is now obsolete. Most recently, we
have replaced our custom Flash Actionscript block diagrams with
emergent block models created in Google SketchUp (De Paor
et al., 2008). We need to avoid the pitfalls of teaching short-lived
technological skills by emphasizing the importance of appreciating what current technology can do and being willing to experiment with it, rather than teaching rote-learning steps involved in
a particular method (Fuller et al., 2002; Niemi et al., 2002; Brodaric, 2004).
For financial and logistical reasons, it is not possible to
lengthen the duration of most field courses, and new efficiencies in teaching and learning techniques can only save a limited
amount of time. In order to make room for the new curriculum
components, we need to remove obsolete material from the traditional syllabus. At the same time, we want to retain classical
methods that have professional or pedagogical value. Inevitably, some readers will disagree with the cuts we propose, but
like those faced with the task of balancing a budget, we encour-
Innovation and obsolescence in geoscience field courses: Past experiences and proposals for the future
Figure 5. (A) Classical mapping of the Connemara region (Leake et al., 1981) viewed as a three-dimensional (3-D) Collada model in Google Earth (De Paor and Sharma, 2007). (B) Student mapping of the Knock
Kilbride area, draped over the Google Earth virtual globe (see Whitmeyer et al., this volume). Note semitransparency and time slider. Downloads for Google Earth images and models are available from the Web
site: http://www.lions.odu.edu/~ddepaor/Site/Google_Earth_Science.html.
53
54
personality clashes and petty jealousies, both with their professors and among their peers, and many let the stresses of independent mapping dominate their evaluation. In the end, a few
cheery students spreading positive vibes through the group can
be as important as project design in affecting learning outcomes.
Similarly, a few malcontents can have a disproportionately negative effect on learning. In the case of western Ireland, the vagaries
of the climate (ranging from only six wet days in one year to only
six dry days in another) can be critical to a successful course. In
this respect, when student evaluations are considered, an understanding department chair is essential.
Not all new course elements that we introduced when we
first moved to western Ireland stood the test of time. Irish faculty
initially set unreasonably high standards based on their expectation of capstone course content in the British and Irish system,
where undergraduates study geology in greater depth (especially
in the field) and have few, if any, distribution courses. After consultation, they then erred in the other direction by devising projects that lacked sufficient challenge. It took a few iterations to
reach a working curriculum, and indeed the process of reassessment and revision continues. Finally, the postcamp success of our
Ireland field camp students suggests that dropping exercises that
we identified as obsolete or redundant did not have a significant
negative effect on the students final ability to map and do geology in the field.
CONCLUSIONS
In a sense, todays students know everything. Equipped
with their field computers and iPhones, they are walking digital
encyclopedias. They do not need to memorize all the knowledge
that previous generations had to store in their heads. As a corollary, professors should stop acting as incomplete, error-prone
walking encyclopedias to their students. In contrast, professors
need to train students not to ask for information that their cell
phone already contains. Instead, professors need to help students
to evaluate, analyze, and pose the right questions. In short, we as
educators should be teaching our students to think on their feet,
as opposed to teaching the rote memorization of a field mapping
methodology or detailed information about the Jack and Jill Formation or the Humpty Dumpty fault (names from C. Simpson,
1985, personal commun.).
We all want future generations to benefit from the field experience, but if field courses are to survive (Drummond, 2001), let
alone prosper, we have to convince deans and provosts that these
courses are of value beyond the training in geologic mapping
that a handful of students will benefit from in graduate studies or
industry careers. Despite the increasing popularity of hands-on
projects, university science courses are still dominated by lectures that students listen to passively and by laboratory courses
that have little relationship to how science is practiced by professionals in academia or industry. Working scientists are not presented with apparatus and a set of instructions to follow in order to
discover something that is already known to their supervisor. The
greatest transferable skill that students learn in the field is how to
handle open-ended problems where they must pose the right questions before trying to answer them. Perhaps because they developed this vital skill, students consistently report, both verbally and
in course evaluations, that they learned more in a few hours at the
outcrop than in weeks of lectures or laboratory assignments.
At the Ireland field camp, students grasp and integrate several different fields, e.g., geology, geomorphology, and environmental geology. We are certainly not the first in any individual
aspect of this endeavor (e.g., Brown, 1998; Manone et al., 2003),
but we have assembled a unique blend of tradition and innovation, hard- and soft-rock, analog and digital, that others may
find interesting for comparison. As pointed out by Day-Lewis in
2003, some more traditional geology programs required their stu-
Innovation and obsolescence in geoscience field courses: Past experiences and proposals for the future
dents to attend pure, hard-rock mapping field courses. Six years
later, we have virtually no students complaining that our multidimensional curriculum will not fulfill their departmental requirements. It may be that field camps that adapt to changing student
needs have survived better than geology departments that stood
by time-honored standards. We should all recognize that within
our small discipline of geology, we have already achieved a level
of interdisciplinary study that deans and provosts wish other sciences would adopt.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The BU field camp in western Ireland was inaugurated by Carol
Simpson in 1996. De Paor served as director of field studies for
BU from 2000 to 2005, and Whitmeyer served as director of the
JMU field program from 2006 to the present. Faculty include or
have included: Martin Feely, Ronan Hennessy, Tiernan Henry,
Stephen Kelly, Kate Moore, and Mike Williams of National University of IrelandGalway; Dave Marchant, Carol Simpson, and
Sherilyn Williams-Stroud of BU; Scott Eaton, Mike Harris, Liz
Johnson, Steve Leslie, Eric Pyle, and Shelley Whitmeyer of JMU;
and Adam Lewis of North Dakota State University. We appreciate the years of logistical support from Trish Walsh, director of
Petersburg Outdoor Education Center. Many thanks, as well, are
due to many years of Ireland Field Course students who have
contributed to our mapping projects and taught us so much.
This manuscript was improved by reviews from Dave
Mogk, Dave Rodgers, and an anonymous reviewer. This work
was partially funded by National Science Foundation grants
EAR-IF 0711092, NSF EAR 0711077, and NSF CCLI 0837040.
Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations
expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not
necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
REFERENCES CITED
Allmendinger, R.W., 2007, StereoNet Software: http://www.geo.cornell.edu/
geology/faculty/RWA/programs.html (accessed 21 July 2009).
American Geological Institute (AGI), 1985, A pioneer in Wyoming: Earth Science, v. 38, no. 2: http://fieldcamp.missouri.edu/Camp%20History.htm
(accessed 21 July 2009).
Anonymous, 2007a, Branson Field LaboratoryLander, Wyoming. Geology
field camp of the University of Missouri, Columbia: http://fieldcamp
.missouri.edu (accessed 21 July 2009).
Anonymous, 2007b, Geology Field CampField Courses by 100+ Schools
GEOLOGY.COM: http://geology.com/field-camp.shtml (accessed 21 July
2009).
Anonymous, 2007c, Cide Fields Visitor Centre Ballycastle, County Mayo,
West of Ireland: http://www.museumsofmayo.com/ceide.htm (accessed
21 July 2009).
Bond, G., and Lotti, R., 1995, Iceberg discharges into the North Atlantic on millennial timescales during the last deglaciation: Science, v. 267, p. 1005
1010, doi: 10.1126/science.267.5200.1005.
Bowen, D.Q., Phillips, F.M., McCabe, A.M., Knutz, P.C., and Sykes, G.A.,
2002, New data for the Last Glacial Maximum in Great Britain and Ireland: Quaternary Science Reviews, v. 21, p. 89101, doi: 10.1016/S0277
-3791(01)00102-0.
Brodaric, B., 2004, The design of GSC FieldLog: Ontology-based software
for computer aided geological field mapping: Computers & Geosciences,
v. 30, p. 520, doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2003.08.009.
55
56
McConnell, D.A., Steer, D.N., Owens, K.D., and Knight, C.C., 2005, How students think: Implications for learning in introductory geoscience courses:
Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53, p. 462470.
Mies, J.W., 1996, Automated digital compilation of structural symbols: Journal
of Geoscience Education, v. 44, p. 539548.
Neumann, K., and Kutis, M., 2006, Mobile GIS in geologic mapping exercises:
Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 54, p. 153157.
Niemi, N.A., Sheehan, D.D., Akciz, S.O., Hodges, K.V., Nguyen, H.Q., Carr,
C.E., and Whipple, K.X., 2002, Incorporating handheld computers and
pocket GIS into the undergraduate and graduate field geology curriculum:
Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 34, no. 6, p. 299.
Pyle, E.J., 2009, this volume, The evaluation of field course experiences: A
framework for development, improvement, and reporting, in Whitmeyer,
S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America
Special Paper 461, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(26).
Simpson, C., and De Paor, D.G., 2009, Restoring Maps and Memoirs to FourDimensional Space Using Virtual Globe Technology: A Case Study from
the Scottish Highlands: Geological Society of London Special Publication
on Continental Tectonics & Mountain BuildingThe Legacy of Peach &
Horne (in press).
Smith, W., 1815, A Geological Map of England and Wales and Part of Scotland:
London, British Geological Survey, 16 sheets.
Socolow, A.A., 1988, The State Geological Surveys: A History: Lexington,
Kentucky, American Association of State Geologists, 499 p.
Tarbuck, E.J., and Lutgens, F.K., 2002, Earth: An Introduction to Physical
Geography: Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, 351 p.
ABSTRACT
The undergraduate geoscience curriculum at Lake Superior State University is
field based and project centered. This format provides an active learning environment to enhance student development of a meaningful geoscience knowledge base
and of complex reasoning skills in authentic contexts. Field experiences, including
data acquisition, are integrated into both lower- and upper-division coursework. Students simulate the activities of practicing geoscientists by conducting all aspects of
field projects, including planning, collecting data, analyzing and interpreting data,
incorporating background and supplemental data, and completing oral and written
reports of results. The projects stimulate interest, provide motivation for learning
new concepts, and are structured to develop teamwork and communication skills.
INTRODUCTION
The geology faculty at Lake Superior State University
(LSSU), a state-funded university in Michigans eastern Upper
Peninsula, have designed and implemented a new undergraduate
geology curriculum (Kelso et al., 2001; Kelso and Brown, 2004).
Our curricular goals model those of other educators in promoting
development of students intellectual and creative thinking skills
by engaging them in team-oriented, field-based problems. Field
activities are integrated with classroom activities to enhance
development of students abilities to solve multidisciplinary, realworld geoscience problems (e.g., Smith, 1995; Ireton et al., 1996;
National Research Council, 1996a; National Science Foundation
Advisory Board, 1996; Trop et al., 2000; Noll, 2003; Gonzales
and Semken, 2006; Knapp et al., 2006).
The LSSU curriculum is based on constructivist teaching/
learning theories that emphasize active learning. Our courses
*pkelso@lssu.edu
lbrown@lssu.edu
Kelso, P.R., and Brown, L.M., 2009, Integration of field experiences in a project-based geoscience curriculum, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds.,
Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 5764, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(06).
For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
57
58
by integrating concepts from multiple subdisciplines. We accomplished this by creating a set of courses integrating subdiscipline
concepts to replace our existing discrete subdiscipline-centered
courses. For example, we developed a carbonate systems class
that integrates core concepts from carbonate sequence stratigraphy, carbonate depositional and diagenetic environments, and
invertebrate paleontology to partially replace existing discrete
courses in invertebrate paleontology, carbonate petrology, and
stratigraphy (Brown et al., 2007.). We further created a course
in clastic systems to address clastic depositional systems, clastic sedimentary petrology, and clastic sequence stratigraphy. The
projects in both classes incorporate data from the field and from
collected samples. The curricular changes we made in order to
incorporate a field component into our sophomore-level structural geology course and the seven integrated upper-division
courses are shown in Table 1.
Field experiences by their very nature are ideal vehicles by
which to deliver an active learning program. Field-based learning helps students construct a better knowledge framework
(e.g., Loucks-Horsley et al., 1990; National Research Council,
1996b; Kirschner, 1997; Mintzes et al., 2005; Elkins and Elkins,
2007) by promoting students ability to visualize spatial relationships of rocks in three dimensions early in their academic
preparation (Kali and Orion, 1996; National Research Council,
2006; Kastens and Ishikawa, 2006; Reynolds et al., 2006). Spatial visualization provides a context for theoretical concepts and
direct observation of concrete examples of specific features and
their in situ relationships; it is a traditional area of weakness and
inhibits conceptual understandings throughout the undergraduate experience (Manduca and Mogk, 2006). Pedagogical focus
on field experiences provides an active learning environment
that enhances motivation, learning and retention, and problem
solving, (McKenzie et al., 1986; National Science Foundation
Advisory Board, 1996; Committee on Undergraduate Science Education, 1997) and further develops skills for critical
analysis, inquiry, and communication (Gonzales and Semken,
2006). Active, cooperative learning strategies, for example,
establishing teams of students working together to solve fieldbased problems, increase conceptual understanding and student
achievement and help students overcome misconceptions (e.g.,
Basili and Sanford, 1991; Johnson et al., 1991; Cuseo, 1992;
Cooper, 1995; Esiobu and Soyibo, 1995).
We implemented this field-based approach throughout our
curriculum (see Table 1) to enhance the learning process and to
better prepare geoscientists for graduate programs and careers.
Integrating fieldwork into discipline-oriented coursework provides a focus for subdiscipline content application (e.g., Kern and
Carpenter, 1986; Gonzales and Semken, 2006) and provides student motivation for learning content (Edelson et al., 2006). These
field projects require students to solve problems, think critically,
and be involved in all aspects of a geological study from project
design to data collection, to interpretation, to formal written and
oral project presentations. Where a field component is embedded
in a course, we increased scheduled laboratory hours from a more
TABLE 1. COMPARISON OF THE FIELD-BASED COURSES IN LAKE SUPERIOR STATE UNIVERSITY UNDERGRADUATE GEOLOGY PROGRAMS
New geology curriculum
Original geology curriculum
Course title
Pedagogy
Fieldwork (field days)
Course title
Pedagogy
Fieldwork (field days)
Field objectives
Lecture
Some years (1)
Project based
Structural
Structural Geology
Day Trips
Structural measurements
Laboratory
Geology and
and Tectonics
Quaternary and Precambrian (5)
Introduction to geologic
Geological
field-mapping techniques
Graphics
N.A.*
N.A.*
N.A.*
Introduction to Field
Introductory
Trip to Wisconsin and Black Hills, South Dakota Basic field mapping
Geology
mapping
Igneous, sedimentary, and metamorphic
Basic stratigraphic and
Geologic
systems (19)
structural analysis
interpretation
Lecture
Mine field trip (1)
Geochemical Systems Project based
Igneous and
Weekend and day trips
Mapping and interpretation
Metamorphic Laboratory
Igneous/metamorphic systems
of igneous, metamorphic,
Petrography
Economic mineralization (10)
and mineralized systems
Economic
Geology
Introduction to Lecture
Bedrock geology (1)
Geophysical Systems Project based
Weekend and day trips
Using geophysical
Geophysics
Problem sets
Geophysical mapping
field equipment
Near-surface applications (10)
Conducting geophysical
surveys
Geotectonics Lecture
None
Tectonic Systems
Project based
Spring break trip
Terrane analysis
Laboratory
Appalachian Mountains transect (9)
Integration of petrography,
structure, and tectonics
Stratigraphy
Lecture
None
Clastic Systems
Project based
Presemester trip and day trips
Advanced stratigraphy
and
Laboratory
Precambrian, Paleozoic, and Quaternary (11)
Depositional environment
Sedimentation
interpretations
N.A.*
N.A.*
N.A.*
Geoenvironmental
Project based
Weekend and day trips
Environmental assessment
Systems
Surficial processes
Mapping and interpretation
Environmental studies (8)
of surficial materials
Invertebrate
Lecture
Fossil collection (2)
Carbonate Systems
Project based
Data and samples collected during Introduction Observing and collecting
Paleontology Laboratory
to Field Geology course
samples, fossils, and data
from carbonate rocks
Sedimentary
Lecture
None
Geology Seminar:
Project based
Data and samples collected during Introduction Observing outcrops and
Petrography
Sequence
Laboratory
to Field Geology course
collecting samples and
Stratigraphy
data
Field Geology Mapping
Igneous, sedimentary,
Advanced Field
Advanced mapping Trip to SW United States
Advanced field mapping
Geologic
and metamorphic
Geology
Geologic
Igneous, sedimentary, and metamorphic
Detailed geologic
interpretation
systems (40)
interpretation
systems (19)
interpretation
*N.A.not applicable.
59
60
61
concepts is greater, and their ability to complete complex projects is improved over student overall performance in our previous
traditional courses.
Geophysical Systems
Our Geophysical Systems course (Kelso and Brown, 2008)
is another example of the way in which integration of fieldwork
into an academic-year offering is developed in our curriculum.
All Geophysical System course projects are field-based, requiring students to spend 13 d collecting field geologic and geophysical data and information on potential cultural anomaly
sources. Thus, students improve their observational skills and
recognize data limitations and potential sources of error through
the collection of their own data in the field.
This course, like many of our upper-division courses, is
designed to model industry practices and promote student concept acquisition and problem-solving skills. We teach key geophysical concepts, theories, and techniques in the context of real
geophysical projects. Solving the problems associated with each
field project requires students to learn relevant geoscience concepts and then apply them immediately to a particular study. The
projects include geologic mapping in poorly exposed regions,
water table and buried bedrock topographic studies (Fig. 2A),
and identification of buried objects in such places as military sites
and old cemeteries. For these and other projects, students generate and interpret a variety of geophysical maps, cross sections,
and surface and subsurface maps (Fig. 2B).
The general format of the Geophysical Systems course is
exemplified by the progression of activities incorporated into
the Camp Lucas project, summarized in Figure 3. The goal of
this project is to identify buried objects remaining at the abandon Camp Lucas military facility, which is now part of the Lake
Superior State University campus. The project site is the proposed location for a future campus building. Thus, the project
results, identifying remaining military materials, address a real
geoscience issue that is of interest to the campus community,
the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Michigan Department of
Environmental Quality.
A variety of other geophysical field problems are addressed
throughout the course, and critical background information
for each project is gathered by student research and provided
by instructor supplements. Projects progress from generally
straightforward geophysical studies to more complex problems
involving more sophisticated applications that require teams of
students to integrate multiple types of field, geologic, and geophysical information (May and Gibbons, 2004).
Following introduction of a project by the instructor, student teams each develop a written proposal for work to be
completed. All project proposals must include justification for
each geophysical instrument chosen; anticipated anomaly characteristics for each instrument, including a forward model of
anticipated anomaly magnitude and width; survey design for
each instrument including station and line location and spacing
62
Figure 2. (A) A student team collecting 24-channel seismic refraction data as part of a geophysical study to determine the water table and bedrock
depth and slope on a fall afternoon. (B) A student teams final interpretation of the bedrock geology of a glacially covered region based on results
from multiple geophysical data sets (magnetic data is included on this map).
Project Objective
Locate buried objects at an
abandoned military site on
the Lake Superior State
University campus
Forward model of
anticipated anomalies
Magnetic and
electromagnetic
background information
Field geophysics
survey designs
proposed
Project proposal:
written and oral
Magnetic and
electromagnetic theory
Conduct
electromagnetic
field survey
Conduct
magnetic
field survey
Set up field
survey lines
Written report
of processes and
interpretation
Oral presentation
of processes and
interpretation
Figure 3. Flowchart for the design of one project undertaken in the Geophysical Systems course.
The flowchart outlines the Camp Lucas geophysical project to locate buried objects remaining at
the abandoned military facility, which is now part of the Lake Superior State University Campus.
63
64
two fields, in Manduca, C.A., and Mogk, D.W., eds., Earth and Mind:
How Geologists Think and Learn about the Earth: Geological Society of
America Special Paper 413, p. 5376.
Kelso, P.R., and Brown, L.M., 2004, Strengthening an undergraduate geoscience department through a new project-centered curriculum: Geological
Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 36, no. 5, p. 352.
Kelso, P.R., and Brown, L.M., 2008, A geology curriculum for the 21st century: Leading Edge (Tulsa, Oklahoma), v. 27, p. 13341339, doi:
10.1190/1.2996544.
Kelso, P.R., Brown, L.M., Mintzes, J.J., and Englebrecht, A.C., 2001, A geology program revised: Geotimes, v. 46, p. 19.
Kern, E.L., and Carpenter, J.R., 1986, Effect of field activities on student learning: Journal of Geological Education, v. 34, p. 180183.
Kirschner, J.G., 1997, Traditional field camp: Still important: Geotimes, v. 42,
p. 5.
Knapp, E.P., Greer, L., Connors, C.D., and Harbor, D.J., 2006, Field-based
instruction as part of a balanced geoscience curriculum at Washington
and Lee University: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 54, p. 93102.
Libarkin, J.C., and Anderson, S.W., 2005, Assessment of learning in entry-level
geoscience courses: Results from the Geoscience Concept Inventory:
Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53, no. 4, p. 394401.
Loucks-Horsley, S., Clark, R.C., Kuerbis, P.J., Kapitan, R., and Carlson, M.D.,
1990, Elementary School Science for the 90s: Alexandria, Virginia,
Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development, 166 p.
Manduca, C.A., and Mogk, D.W., eds., 2006, Earth and Mind: How Geologists
Think and Learn about the Earth: Geological Society of America Special
Paper 413, 188 p.
May, M.T., and Gibbons, M.G., 2004, Introducing students to environmental
geophysics in a field setting: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 52,
p. 254259.
McKenzie, G.D., Utgard, R.O., and Lisowski, M., 1986, The importance of
field trips: Journal of College Science Teaching, v. 16, p. 1720.
Mintzes, J., Wandersee, J., and Novak, J., eds., 2005, Teaching Science for
Understanding: A Human Constructivist View: San Diego, California,
Academic Press, 360 p.
National Research Council, 1996a, From analysis to action: Undergraduate
education in science, mathematics, engineering and technology: Report
of a convocation: Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, p. 1336.
National Research Council, 1996b, National Science Education Standards:
Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, 272 p.
National Research Council, 2006, Learning to think spatially: Washington,
D.C., National Academy Press, 313 p.
National Science Foundation Advisory Board, 1996, Shaping the future: New
expectations for undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: Arlington, Virginia, National Science Foundation Publication 96-139, 76 p.
Nichols, G., 1999, Sedimentology and Stratigraphy: Malden, Massachusetts,
Blackwell Science, 355 p.
Noll, M.R., 2003, Building bridges between field and laboratory studies in an
undergraduate groundwater course: Journal of Geoscience Education,
v. 51, p. 231236.
Pettijohn, F.J., 1975, Sedimentary Rocks (3rd edition): New York, Harper and
Row, 628 p.
Reynolds, S.J., Piburn, M.D., Leedy, D.E., McAuliffe, C.M., Birk, J.P., and
Johnson, J.K., 2006, The Hidden EarthInteractive, computer-based
modules for geoscience learning, in Manduca, C.A., and Mogk, D.W.,
eds., Earth and Mind: How Geologists Think and Learn about the Earth:
Geological Society of America Special Paper 413, p. 157170.
Smith, G.L., 1995, Using field and laboratory exercises on local water bodies
to teach fundamental concepts in an introductory oceanography course:
Journal of Geological Education, v. 43, p. 480484.
Trop, J.M., Krockover, G.H., and Ridgway, K.D., 2000, Integration of field
observations with laboratory modeling for understanding hydrologic processes in an undergraduate earth-science course: Journal of Geoscience
Education, v. 48, p. 514521.
ABSTRACT
At the University of Montana Western (UMW), geoscience classes are taught
primarily through immersion in field research projects. This paper briefly describes:
(1) why and how we achieved a schedule that supports immersion learning, (2) examples
of two geoscience classes taught in the field, (3) assessment, and (4) the challenges of this
model of teaching and learning. The University of Montana Western is the first public
four-year campus to adopt immersion learning based on one-class-at-a-time scheduling. We call it Experience One because classes emphasize experiential learning and
students take only one class for 18 instructional days. The system was adopted campus
wide in the fall of 2005 after a successful pilot program funded by the U.S. Department
of Education. The geoscience curriculum has been altered to reduce lecture and focus
on field projects that provide direct experience with the salient concepts in the discipline. Students use primary literature more than textbooks, and assessment emphasizes
the quality of their projects and presentations. Many projects are collaborative with
land-management agencies and private entities and require students to use their field
data to make management decisions. Assessment shows that the immersion-learning
model improves educational quality. For example, the 2008 National Survey of Student
Engagement (NSSE) showed that UMW has high mean scores compared to other campuses participating in the survey. Of the many challenges, none is more important than
the need for faculty to change the ways in which they interact with students.
INTRODUCTION
accomplished primarily through lecture-based field trips, shortduration field exercises, and spring- or fall-break trips.
In order to engage students in authentic experiential research
projects in the field, more time is needed, and conflicts with other
courses must be eliminated. A scheduling system that provides
this kind of immersion opportunity was successfully developed
and implemented in the late 1960s by Colorado College (i.e.,
their block plan) and is still in use on that campus today. This
system immerses students in one class at a time for 18 instructional days, followed by a four day break. It provides scheduling flexibility and an opportunity to concentrate on the subject
Seeds of Change
Authentic field experiences are at the heart of the study of
Earth. However, it is difficult to incorporate extended fieldwork
into geology classes in the traditional semester system due to
time constraints and conflicts with other classes. This has long
been recognized and resulted in the inclusion of a required summer immersion field camp in most undergraduate geology programs. During the regular school year, field geology is typically
Thomas, R.C., and Roberts, S., 2009, Experience One: Teaching the geoscience curriculum in the field using experiential immersion learning, in Whitmeyer, S.J.,
Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461,
p. 6576, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(07). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
65
66
Experience One: Teaching the geoscience curriculum in the field using experiential immersion learning
67
for an average of three hours per day, but there is flexibility in the
way class time is distributed. At the end of each class, there is a
four-day break for students before the next class begins. Students
typically take four classes per semester for a total of 16 credits.
They register for all classes at the beginning of the semester, but
they can drop or add classes up to the second day of each block
without penalty.
Block classes are typically not scheduled after 3:15 p.m. to
allow students to participate in athletics and work afternoon and
evening jobs. However, flexibility in the distribution of time during each block, particularly for upper-division courses, provides
educational opportunities during class time that is not typically
available in the semester system. For example, in project-based
courses, students may be immersed in data gathering all day long
for a week or more, possibly preceded by a few days of preparatory lectures and reading and usually followed by less-structured
time to analyze data and process information. Some classes
involve extensive national and international travel that can consume several weeks of time for total immersion.
Although the majority of classes are blocked in this way,
some are scheduled for the entire semester (stringer classes), and
some are scheduled for short periods of time during the semester.
These allow flexibility, particularly for classes that require skill
development over more than 18 instructional days (e.g., some art,
music, and language classes). Many of the continuing education
courses are taught as stringer classes, since the students who take
these classes are commonly off-campus (e.g., online students) and
taking classes while working full time. Students in block classes
can add various one- or two-credit classes to a semester.
Professors at UMW meet their 24-credit annual teaching
obligation by teaching three of the four blocks per semester, and
the fourth block is utilized for research, grant writing, professional travel, and course development. Breaks between classes
provide time for grading and class preparation, although it is not
uncommon for faculty to work through the weekend of a break in
order to submit grades before the next class begins. The schedule
is intense but satisfying.
Structural Geology
68
traditional laboratory, yet the students have office days to construct structural cross sections, process field data, conduct analyses, and write reports. The class does not have a textbook, but
several copies of a structural geology text (Davis and Reynolds,
1996) are made available in the laboratory for students to look
up information as needed, and they use pertinent published literature and web resources. In addition, students have the option
to purchase a copy of the Geological Society of London handbook series on mapping geological structures (McClay, 1995),
which many students choose to do even though the book is relatively expensive.
Block Mountain
Block Mountain is an extraordinary fold-and-thrust belt
structure and a keystone mapping project for the many field
camps in the Dillon area. The project lies within an area designated by the Bureau of Land Management as a Research Natural
Area, and the structure consists of a north-plunging fold pair with
a major folded thrust fault (and many minor thrust faults) within
the stratigraphic sequence (Sears et al., 1989). Most field camps
use the project to learn the skill of mapping and cross-section
construction, but they rarely apply the data to solving geologic
problems. At UMW, the structural geology students not only
learn field skills (Fig. 1), but they also learn about the physical
and chemical processes that form the structures by conducting
descriptive, kinematic, and dynamic analyses on the data they
have collected. Most importantly, they apply their understanding
to solving geologic problems, such as interpreting the stresses that
produced the deformation or determining the logical sequence of
folding and thrust faulting.
Students also apply their structural data to making landmanagement decisions and writing reports that assess economic
resources. In the final report, they are required to include an
analysis of the potential geologic resources within the map area,
including a thorough explanation of why particular resources
might occur within the map area and the probability that they
occur at economic levels. In addition, they research the federal
and state regulations required to develop these resources and
make decisions about which resources to develop based on all
of these factors. Their findings are compiled into reports that are
modeled after the Environmental Assessment (EA) reports constructed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. The project
takes a minimum of six field days and three on-campus office
days to complete. The students get a day off after the exercise and
before they start the Timber Hill project.
Timber Hill
The Timber Hill area exposes mostly Paleogene and Neogene terrestrial sedimentary rocks that are cut by an active (but
historically dormant) normal fault called the Sweetwater fault
(Sears et al., 1995). The fault has ~700 ft (210 m) of offset and
is part of the northwest-trending normal fault system in southwest Montana that lies within the Intermountain Seismic Belt
(Stickney, 2007). The area contains a remarkable record of drain-
age systems that came off of the track of the Yellowstone hotspot (Sears and Thomas, 2007) and is an ideal environment for
students to learn about extensional structures and paleogeomorphology. A 6.0 Ma basalt flow, which can be traced for many
kilometers toward its source on the Snake River Plain, holds up
the topography in the area and provides a textbook example of
inverted topography.
The project requires the students to map a 1 mi2 (2.59 km2)
area, and heavy emphasis is placed on mapping surficial deposits and landforms like landslides, rock falls, valley-fill alluvium,
and alluvial fans. Students also identify areas of potential liquefaction and surface rupture related to the Sweetwater fault.
The students not only map the area, but they also draw several
cross sections and work out the geohistory of the area. They
also take structural data, particularly from the joints and foliation in the underlying Archean metamorphic rocks in order to
determine potential groundwater resources and flow paths. The
land-management component requires the students to use these
data to identify seismic and other geohazards associated with a
proposed (fictitious) subdivision on the property. The students
are asked to consider these natural hazards in placing a house,
Experience One: Teaching the geoscience curriculum in the field using experiential immersion learning
water well, and septic tank on 20 lots located throughout the
map area. They investigate and describe techniques used to stabilize landslides, rock falls, and other slope instabilities (e.g.,
areas of soil creep) that occur in the map area, and they are
asked to determine the appropriate state and federal regulations
for developing the property.
The results are written up in a report format that is typical of
those produced in the geotechnical consulting industry, examples
of which are provided to the students for appropriate language and
layout. This project takes a minimum of four field days and two
on-campus office days to complete. The students get a day off at
the end of the project to rest up for the final exam at Dalys spur.
Dalys Spur
This exercise serves as the final exam in structural geology.
The one-day project involves mapping a <1.0 mi2 (2.59 km2)
area composed of a sequence of Upper Paleozoic and Mesozoic
sedimentary rocks that are folded and exposed as a west-dipping
homocline in the map area. The exposure of the folded section
is due to active extensional faulting, but no normal fault occurs
within the map area. The fold limb is unconformably overlain
by Neogene gravels and basalt, which forms inverted topography
due to the resistance of the basalt cap and regional erosion by the
Beaverhead River. Several landslides, rock falls, and alluvial fans
also occur within the map area.
The students map the area independently in about three
hours, gathering structural data along with their mapping. They
are told at the drop-off point that this is their opportunity to
prove to themselves that they can gather structural data on their
own and use it to solve geologic problems. Safety is not a major
concern at this location, even though the students map alone,
because the map area lacks trees and is small enough for the
instructor to see the students at all times. When all students have
completed their mapping, they are brought to a local restaurant to
finish their projects and be rewarded with pizza for their efforts.
They are evaluated on the quality of their geologic maps (inked
and colored), cross sections, geological histories, and analyses of
the potential economic resources and geohazards on the property.
69
Week 1
Students learn general introductory geomorphological principles using the textbook, student-lead discussions, lectures, and
short laboratory exercises. The basic scientific goals of the field
project are presented to students, who then participate in defining
the actual scientific investigation, with hypotheses, methods, data
collection and fieldwork plans, expectations for analyses, and
presentation of the results. They also consider the professional
audience for whom the results are intended, including reviewing examples of similar work. The class then investigates more
specific geomorphic principles and applications that relate to the
field project and reviews published methods for studying these
landscapes in the field. Toward the end of the week, they began
to research relevant recent primary literature. With professorial
input, students then choose their individual and group segments
and produce their fieldwork plans, which may be approved or
returned for modifications.
Week 2
Students work in the field, six to eight hours most days,
supervised by the professor, often in cooperation with outside professionals (Fig. 2). Sometimes laboratory analyses are
included, and groups usually begin to create their data tables and
figures.
Week 3
Students compile and analyze their data and create reports.
They meet with the professor in the classroom or computer laboratory at the usual time to discuss progress and problems, but
otherwise students work wherever and whenever they want. Students sometimes return to the field briefly to acquire more data
or correct obvious errors. Literature searches continue, and the
professor may provide short lectures and/or suggest readings.
Surficial Processes
We use this class to integrate students understanding of the
complex processes that interact to form the dynamic surface of
Earth. The textbook emphasizes applied process geomorphology
and provides a review of essential concepts of historical geomorphology. In the course of the class, students read and discuss most
of the textbook and are tested only if participation appears to be
lagging. The textbook is used to introduce the most important
general concepts of the field and the project and as a disciplinerelated conversation backdrop during the class. The class field
project usually has a major component that engages the whole
group and supportive subunits accomplished by smaller groups.
So far, each class has had a new field research project, but they all
have a similar general dynamic:
70
Experience One: Teaching the geoscience curriculum in the field using experiential immersion learning
surficial processes class. They dug the pits, sifted for artifacts, and
mapped and described the soils, discovering four paleosols that
correlated between the two pits and with occurrences of artifacts.
The 2009 environmental geochemistry class, just completed,
worked with interpreting a 14C date acquired on charcoal collected
at the site. Results from the three classes are being compiled and
will be submitted for publication. This linking of classes, which
included many of the same students, provided a genuinely interdisciplinary field experience. Students gained a deeper understanding of interdisciplinary interaction in geoscience research,
and more significant research was completed, which is more satisfying for the professor too. Field-project linking is just another
possibility of teaching in Experience One (Roberts, 2007).
ASSESSMENT
Assessment begins with projected outcomes. Outcomes in
our geoscience classes are guided by the principal that authentic
practice in the discipline is the best possible learning experience
for our students. That is, if we can show that students are fully
and successfully participating in a variety of professional geological activities, then their learning is, by definition, authentic
and may require no further justification as an educational process. The proof of professional quality comes from the oral and
written reports, the usefulness of these projects to the public and
the land management agencies, and the peer-review publication
process. The relevant assessment question becomes, is our program producing graduates who can address important geological
problems in a professional manner?
We are collecting these types of data for the geosciences
classes, and we will eventually be able to produce this type of
assessment, but the program is young, and we have had little
support for innovation in assessment. Within a few years, there
should be enough data for statistical analysis. In addition, students success in competition for employment and graduate
school positions will provide a reality check on the quality of
their education, and these data are also being collected.
In the meantime, assessment of Experience One has been
conducted at both the campus level and at the disciplinary level. At
the campus level, a Cornell Critical Thinking Test given at UMW
in 2006 showed a marked increase in performance over an exam
given in 2002, prior to the adoption of immersion scheduling.
In addition, a 2006 Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory
(SSI) survey showed a significant increase in multiple categories of student satisfaction from a survey conducted in 1998, well
before the adoption of Experience One (UMW Accreditation and
Assessment Information, 2009). In areas such as instructional
effectiveness and student centeredness, the Noel-Levitz data
show significant improvements associated with the change to
Experience One scheduling.
Most recently (i.e., 20072008 academic year), the campus participated in the National Survey of Student Engagement
(NSSE). The survey, which was prompted by The Pew Charitable
Trusts, was designed to query undergraduates directly about their
71
educational experiences and to determine the degree of engagement in their education. The premise of NSSE is that student
persistence and subsequent success in college is directly related
to the level of challenge and time on task (NSSE, 2009). It also
contends that the educational research literature shows that the
degree to which students are engaged in their studies impacts
directly on the quality of student learning and their overall educational experience. As a result, NSSE contends that student
engagement can serve as a proxy for educational quality (NSSE,
2009). If true, the UMW survey data show that our educational
quality is very high. Unfortunately, UMW did not participate in
the survey prior to the adoption of Experience One.
The following graphs (Figs. 3, 4, and 5) are NSSE comparisons of the arithmetic average of student scores (weighted
by gender, enrollment status, and institutional size) in three
important benchmarks of student engagement. For more information about the survey and statistical analyses of the data, readers are invited to visit the NSSE Web site (www.nsse.iub.edu).
UM Western students scored higher than other institutions in our
Carnegie classification and higher than the grouped participating institutions in all three benchmarks, with moderate to high
significance in each category.
The level of academic challenge (see Fig. 3) at UMW is
slightly above both our Carnegie class and the average for all
institutions that participated in the 2008 survey. This benchmark
evaluates students perceptions of how hard they are working and,
72
Experience One: Teaching the geoscience curriculum in the field using experiential immersion learning
From 1995 to 2008, no changes were made in the assessment
tools used in this class. The assessment consisted of ten laboratory exercises, three short-answer exams, and an independent,
field-based rock project (Thomas, 2001). It is therefore the only
class for which we can compare student success in terms of final
grades. The ten-year average final grade (calculated as the percentage of the total points earned) in this course during the period
of time between 1995 and 2005 (preExperience One) was 74%.
From 2005 to 2008 (during Experience One), the average final
grade increased to 82%. The only variable that changed was the
scheduling model. Between 1995 and 2005, the students went
from juggling four to five classes at the same time to immersing themselves in just one class at a time. As a result, these data
provide evidence that Experience One improves academic performance.
Class attendance has also dramatically improved. Prior to the
adoption of Experience One, faculty reported up to 40% of the
students not attending class on a regular basis. After Experience
One, an average day has more than 90% attendance, and most
students never miss a class. When queried informally, students
list their reasons for improved attendance as (1) fear of missing
important information or activities, (2) an appreciation of their
responsibility toward other students and the professor (especially
when working on projects), (3) an understanding that what they
are learning applies to the real world, and (4) a reduced level of
apathy (even excitement) that comes with engagement in project
work. Students also quickly understand that missing one day of
Experience One scheduling can be equivalent to missing approximately a whole week in the semester system.
The environment for teaching and learning is dramatically
different when we can assume that students will not miss class.
Continuity or flow, already better because of extended hours and
the absence of interruption by other classes, is probably the biggest improvement. Continuity at least partially offsets the sacrifice of content lecture time and exams in favor of field activities.
We do not have to spend a lot of time repeating information and
directions. Fjortoft (2005) showed that one of the most important
variables motivating students to attend class was the chance that
faculty might apply information to solving real problems. Since
Experience One centers on solving real problems, it is likely that
this is a very important factor in the near-perfect attendance we
experience in geology classes at UMW.
Since students in many of the geoscience courses are now
assessed on the quality of project work, it is difficult to quantitatively compare students understanding of content in our classes
versus the lecture-based approach. Reduced lecture time means
students must take increased responsibility for learning terminology and concepts, or they simply have less exposure to those
aspects of lecture. In trade, they gain far more direct experience
with concepts, and they most likely gain a better understanding of
the scientific process through research in the geosciences (Huntoon et al., 2001; Elkins and Elkins, 2007). In addition, students
learn field and laboratory skills that can be very difficult to incorporate into traditionally scheduled classes. The practical benefits
73
for our graduates are resumes filled with experiences and skills,
and usually one or more professional presentations or papers.
Another revolution is occurring in the area of procrastinationthere simply is not any time for it. We have received positive feedback on this from internship supervisors and employers,
cooperating agencies, and even parents. Evidence of this comes
from the fact that the students actually accomplish so much work
of high quality in the three and a half weeks. As an example, a
representative from the Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks noted
the professional quality of a restoration assessment report on the
upper Big Hole River that was produced by students in an Environmental Field Studies class in the fall of 2008 (Thomas and
Roberts, 2008). He pointed out that his agency did not have the
resources to do the assessment work, so the UMW students were
providing an essential service that would otherwise not have been
completed. Several students involved in the class have gone on to
do internships with the agencies involved in the upper Big Hole
River project, and all of the students have utilized their copies of
the 150-page assessment report as a keystone document in their
portfolios for employment.
CHALLENGES
Attempting a Hybrid
Initially, science faculty imagined we could overcome the
scheduling impediment to immersion learning without involving
the entire campus. The administration approved offering some
courses with one hour of lecture and four hours of laboratory
over two days each week, but that created enormous scheduling conflicts with other classes. We also tried blocking all four
hours of single classes into one day per week, where each faculty member chose a different day and paid careful attention to
within-department conflicts. This sometimes worked for avoiding conflicts among upper-division classes, but it was impossible
with lower-division classes. There was also an unavoidable loss
of students and professors attention during the days between
classes. Of course, we tried working with professors across campus to make allowances for our students absences from their
classes, and, in some cases, we even took turns with extended
time blocks. This occasionally worked, but it was ad hoc and
lacked any institutional strength and continuity. As more environmental sciences faculty switched to field-based courses, more
scheduling conflicts arose with nonscience classes and within
the program as well. In addition, as long as professors were distracted by obligations to other classes, the idea that we might be
accomplishing immersion learning was an illusion.
We do not recommend any of the partial approaches that we
tried. For those considering a hybrid, be aware that unsuccessful
attempts at rescheduling may erode student and administrative
confidence in the entire process. We suspect that a large university might be able to create an immersion college within the university, or some students in some programs might complete their
senior year this way. However, transfer students and students who
74
have changed their majors are often making up missed classes all
the way to graduation and do not have years when they are only
taking classes in their majors. Students with double majors have
similar issues.
their fourth block to obtain overtime pay express being physically and mentally exhausted.
Availability and affordability of transportation is a continuing problem, although moderate student laboratory fees can usually accommodate vehicle rental fees, mainly because the field
locations are usually within a 50 mi (80 km) radius of campus.
The need for vans to transport students to field sites is extreme,
and our campus fleet is small, but growing. Classes that need two
vans require two state-certified van drivers. We have not found a
satisfactory solution for the costs of longer trips. So far, we have
paid for them with one-time administrative money, departmental
resources, increased student fees, one-time Student Senate funds,
and even fundraisers like raffles, especially for international trips.
Transportation
Experience One: Teaching the geoscience curriculum in the field using experiential immersion learning
sional literature online, but it is still daunting. Although students
usually have some exposure to searching out literature on their
own, we often provide much of it. A luxurious and thorough literature search is just not possible during the field classes. All students
take a geology seminar to reinforce their literature research skills.
Students have to rapidly analyze their data; produce tables,
maps, cross sections, charts, and graphs; acquire the right illustrative photographs; organize all this clearly and concisely; and
construct conclusions that are based on the data. In addition, if
chemical or other analyses are required, we must be able to do
them at UMW or contract with others to deliver results rapidly
without huge extra charges. This is the best training imaginable
for students professional lives after UMW, but it can become
hectic for the professor. It is a tribute to the flexibility of students
working in a project-based format that, after a few years of this
experience, they become proficient and some seem to actually
look forward to the challenge of scrounging resources to get the
job done. We hear from employers and graduate schools that this
is one of the greatest assets of our students.
Presentation of Project Results
In the (usually) short time left after analysis of their data,
students must produce written and oral reports for presentation.
Often, these reports are delivered to an audience that includes
members of federal, state, or county agencies or interested private parties who have supported the work and who expect a professional job because a professor supervised it. Effective PowerPoint presentations constructed and delivered in very limited
time by student groups require a major effort. Like everything
else, motivated students learn scientific and technical presentation skills experientially, but it is a bigger time commitment for
both the professors and the students than we initially realized
and also a source of great satisfaction. To help out, the geology
seminar class was designed to have the students give a minimum
of three professional (20 minute) PowerPoint presentations, so
some of them come into project-based classes with advanced presentation skills, reducing the workload on the faculty.
Students Adjustment to Experiential Immersion Learning
Most students need some time to adjust to this new way of
learning. They may resist taking more responsibility and need
a lot of assistance scheduling their time and effort. Group interactions can be messy, and it does not help that most professors have had no real training managing student group projects.
Many undergraduate students are initially quite uneasy when
they realize the professor does not already know the results of
the research or (maybe worse) that the students are going to have
to investigate and choose research methods themselves. However, students are truly motivated by doing real field research,
and most illustrate growing metacognitive skills throughout the
process. We can see incremental mastery of new equipment and
procedures improves their confidence to go on to the next level.
75
76
spot?, in Thomas, R.C., and Gibson, R.I., eds., Introduction to the Geology of the Dillon Area: Northwest Geology, v. 36, p. 133142.
Sears, J.W., Schmidt, C.J., Dresser, H.W., and Hendrix, T., 1989, A geologic
transect from the Highland Mountains foreland block, through the southwest Montana thrust belt, to the Pioneer batholith: Northeastern Geology,
v. 18, p. 120.
Sears, J.W., Hurlow, H., Fritz, W.J., and Thomas, R.C., 1995, Late Cenozoic
disruption of Miocene grabens on the shoulder of the Yellowstone hotspot
track in southwest Montana: Field guide from Lima to Alder, Montana,
in Mogk, D.W., ed., Field Guide to Geologic Excursions in Southwest
Montana: Northwest Geology, v. 24, p. 201219.
Stickney, M., 2007, Historic earthquakes and seismicity in southwestern Montana, in Thomas, R.C., and Gibson, R.I., eds., Introduction to the Geology
of the Dillon Area: Northwest Geology, v. 36, p. 167186.
Taylor, M.F., 1999, Colorado College: Memories and Reflections: Colorado
Springs, Colorado College, 325 p.
Thomas, R.C., 2001, Learning geologic time in the field: Journal of Geoscience
Education, v. 49, no. 1, p. 1821.
Thomas, R.C., and Roberts, S., 2003, One class at a time: Overcoming obstacles
to incorporating experiential learning into the undergraduate geoscience
curriculum: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs,
v. 37, no. 7, p. 194.
Thomas, R.C., and Roberts, S., 2007, A progress report on the field-based
immersion learning model at the University of Montana Western: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 39, no. 6, p. 543.
ABSTRACT
International field experiences offer exceptional opportunities for effective student
learning in the geosciences. Over the 10 yr period between 1998 and 2008, more than 40
undergraduate students from 14 institutions participated in field research investigating
active tectonics on the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica. Three different project models
were used: (1) a month-long summer research project, (2) a series of 1 to 2 wk independent field study projects, and (3) a week-long field research module. These projects
shared a common research theme (active tectonics), field area (Nicoya Peninsula), and
pedagogy (experiential learning), thus allowing for easy comparison of teaching methods, logistics, and learning outcomes. Each model has unique pedagogical benefits and
challenges, and is therefore better suited for a different group size, student to faculty
ratio, project duration, and budget. Collectively, these student research projects generated significant publishable data relevant to ongoing investigations of forearc tectonics
and earthquake hazards along the Costa Rican Pacific margin. Individual student projects were carefully designed to provide a quality field learning experience, while adding
a new piece to the larger research puzzle. Indicators of project success include levels of
student engagement; gains in technical and cognitive field skills; and productivity of student-authored publications, reports, and presentations. Students commonly described
these projects as instrumental in shaping their professional identity as geoscientists.
Blending international field research with experiential learning pedagogy creates a
powerful synergy that captures student imagination and motivates learning. By placing
students beyond the comfort of their home learning environment, international field
Marshall, J.S., Gardner, T.W., Protti, M., and Nourse, J.A., 2009, International geosciences field research with undergraduate students: Three models for experiential learning projects investigating active tectonics of the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 7798, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(08). For permission to
copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
77
78
Marshall et al.
projects pique student curiosity, sharpen awareness and comprehension, and amplify
the desire to learn. Experiential learning pedagogy encourages students to define their
own research agenda and solve problems through critical thinking, inquiry, and reflection. The potent combination of international fieldwork and experiential learning helps
students to develop the self-confidence and reasoning skills needed to solve multifaceted
real-world problems, and provides exceptional training for graduate school and professional careers in the geosciences.
INTRODUCTION
In the natural sciences, the most effective student learning
takes place during hands-on field experiences (Lonergan and
Andresen, 1988; Manduca and Mogk, 2006). While classroom
and laboratory instruction are important, students achieve greater
comprehension and self-confidence while engaged in experiential field studies aimed at solving real-world problems (e.g.,
Kern and Carpenter, 1986; Elkins and Elkins, 2007). Fieldwork
is considered an essential component of student learning in most
undergraduate geosciences programs (Manduca and Carpenter,
2006; Drummond and Markin, 2008). As a degree requirement,
geology majors are generally expected to complete a field methods course and some form of extended field camp or research
program. Geology alumni often describe these field experiences
as instrumental in preparing them for success in their careers as
professional geoscientists (e.g., Kirchner, 1994; Manduca, 1996).
The impact of natural sciences field learning is further
enhanced when students are exposed to new environments that
expand their perspective on the natural world, and broaden their
understanding of global connections. Educational research has
demonstrated that learning is most effective when students are
challenged by uncertainty, whereby moderate levels of anxiety
increase the motivation to learn (Citron and Kline, 2001). In
particular, international study programs that are guided by experiential learning pedagogy (cf. Dewey, 1938; Kolb, 1984) have
been shown to significantly increase student cognition by placing
participants beyond the comfort and predictability of their home
learning environment (Lutterman-Aguilar and Gingerich, 2002;
Montrose, 2002). With careful planning and design, study abroad
field experiences can provide exceptional opportunities for
enhanced student learning by introducing new disciplinary perspectives and challenging students to think outside the box (e.g.,
McLaughlin and Johnson, 2006; Ham and Flood, this volume).
International field projects that are rooted in research methodology and driven by student inquiry can be especially rewarding
for participating students and faculty (Bolen and Martin, 2005;
Mankiewicz, 2005).
In this paper, we evaluate three different project models for
international experiential field research with geosciences undergraduate students in Costa Rica, Central America (Figs. 1 and 2).
Each one of these project models was employed in the same field
area and had a common research theme and pedagogy, thereby
allowing easy comparison of teaching methods, learning outcomes, and logistical advantages. We begin by exploring Costa
Three models for experiential learning projects investigating active tectonics of the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica
NOAM 90 W
80oW
100oW
79
CAR
Costa
Rica
MA
T
10oN
PAN
COC
CR
PAC
CNS
PFZ
EPR
8.7
NAZ
CNS
0o
EPR
GHS
NAZ
CR2
SOAM
Figure 1. Digital elevation model (DEM) showing the tectonic setting of Costa Rica, Central America. Costa Rica is part of the Central American volcanic arc formed by northeastward subduction of
the Cocos plate (COC) beneath the Caribbean plate (CAR) at the Middle America Trench (MAT). The
Cocos plate encompasses seafloor formed along both the East Pacific Rise (EPR) and Cocos-Nazca
Spreading Center (CNS). Hotspot volcanism at the Galapagos Islands (GHS) generates a rough domain
of thickened CNS seafloor that includes the Cocos Ridge (CR1) on the Cocos plate, and the Carnegie
Ridge (CR2) on the Nazca plate (NAZ). Sharp contrasts between East Pacific Rise and CNS seafloor on
the subducting Cocos plate result in variations in upper-plate morphotectonics, seismicity, and volcanism along the Costa Rican Pacific margin. Arrow with number indicates the motion direction and rate
of the Cocos plate relative to the Caribbean plate (DeMets et al., 1990). Box outlines the area shown in
Figure 2. Additional tectonic features: PACPacific plate, NOAMNorth American plate, SOAM
South American plate, PANPanama microplate, PFZPanama fracture zone. (DEM is courtesy of the
Institut fr Meereswissenschatten [IFM-GEOMAR], Universitt Kiel, Germany.)
86W
84
84W
8
4W
4W
W
85W
11
11N
11
1N
1
CARIB
Ba
ck
Vo
lca
nic
N P
10N
1
10N
N
Fo
re
A
T
EPR
Ar
c
Fro
nt
Ar
c
CNS-2
Q
COCOS
8N
T
OP
CNS-1
S
9N
9N
PAN
F
Figure 2. Digital elevation model (DEM) of Costa Rica showing the tectonic setting of the Nicoya Peninsula (see Fig. 1 for
location). This image reveals the relationship between the morphology of the subducting Cocos plate (COCOS) and the morphotectonic structure of the overriding Caribbean plate (CARIB)
and Panama microplate (PAN). Seafloor domains of the Cocos
plate (yellow letters): EPRsmooth crust derived at East Pacific
Rise, CNS-1smooth crust derived at Cocos-Nazca spreading
center, CNS-2rough hotspot-thickened crust generated at the
Galapagos hotspot. Plate boundaries (red letters): MATMiddle America Trench, CCRDBCentral Costa Rica deformed
belt. Offshore bathymetric features (orange letters): CRCocos
Ridge, QPQuepos Plateau, FSCFisher Seamount Chain. Onshore topographic features (blue letters): NPNicoya Peninsula,
OPOsa Peninsula, GVCGuanacaste Volcanic Cordillera,
CVCCentral Volcanic Cordillera, TrCTilarn Cordillera (extinct), AgCAguacate Cordillera (extinct), TmCTalamanca
Cordillera (extinct), FCFila Costea thrust belt. (DEM courtesy of C. Ranero, Institut de Cincies del MarConsejo Superior
de Investigaciones Cientficas [ICM-CSIC], Barcelona, Spain.
Image derived from digital topographic data from the Shuttle
Radar Topography Mission [NASA-SRTM] linked to R.V. Sonne
multi-beam bathymetric data from the Institut fr Meereswissenschaften [IFM-GEOMAR], Universitt Kiel, Germany.)
80
Marshall et al.
Pacific forearc, across the mountainous cordilleras of the volcanic front, to the broad lowlands of the Caribbean backarc (Marshall, 2007). Abundant outcrops exhibit a wide range of rock
types and textbook structures. Earthquakes, landslides, and volcanic eruptions are frequent, and their impact on Costa Ricas
landscape and human history are readily apparent. In addition
to geology and natural hazards, students can also examine
environmental problems related to population growth, deforestation, water resources, and tourism. Costa Ricas two major
universities, Universidad de Costa Rica (UCR) and Universidad
Nacional (UNA), have active geosciences research and teaching
programs, with talented faculty and modern facilities. Diverse
government agencies and nongovernmental organizations also
conduct geologic and environmental studies (e.g., Ministerio de
Ambiente, Energa y Telcomunicaciones [MINAET], Instituto
Geogrfico Nacional [IGN], Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad [ICE], Refinadora Costarricense de Petrleo [RECOPE],
Fundacin Neotrpica [FN], Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad [INBio], Centro Cientfico Tropical [CCT], and Organization for Tropical Studies [OTS]). Together, these diverse
academic, government, and nonprofit entities offer many
opportunities for interaction and collaboration among visiting
undergraduate students and Costa Rican scientists.
Undergraduate Geosciences Research on Costa Ricas
Nicoya Peninsula
Over the 10 yr period between 1998 and 2008, more than 40
undergraduate students from 14 colleges and universities participated in a sequence of related field research projects investigating active tectonics on the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica
(Fig. 3). These projects were organized around three different
models (Tables 13) encompassing a range of field education
strategies. These were (1) a month-long summer research project conducted by 12 students and five faculty mentors (Keck
Geology Consortium, 1998), (2) a series of 1 to 2 wk independent field study projects conducted by one to three students,
and one or two faculty mentors (Cal Poly Pomona University
and Trinity University, 20032008), and (3) a week-long field
research module with 14 students and two faculty mentors (Cal
Poly Pomona University, 2008). During each of these projects,
the participating students engaged in hands-on field investigations utilizing techniques from multiple geoscience disciplines,
including geomorphology, stratigraphy, structural geology,
geochemistry, and geophysics. Each students fieldwork served
as the basis for a research thesis or for field study credits at his
or her home institution. Individual student projects were carefully designed to provide a quality field learning experience
while adding a new piece to a larger research puzzle on the
active tectonics of the Costa Rican Pacific margin. Collectively,
these projects generated significant new data that support ongoing investigations of forearc deformation and subduction cycle
earthquakes on the Nicoya Peninsula (e.g., Marshall, 2008;
Marshall et al., 2008a, 2008b, 2008c).
Three models for experiential learning projects investigating active tectonics of the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica
81
A
N
Puntarenas
Nicoya
Peninsula
B6
Cabo
Velas
A1-5 B1 B3
B9
B2
B3-4
C2-3 B5 B8
B7
Cabo
Blanco
Punta Guiones
Caribbean
plate
C1
Panama
block
EPR
CNS-1
CNS-2
9 cm/yr
Cocos
plate
Figure 3. (A) Digital elevation model (DEM) of the Nicoya Peninsula (NASA-SRTM) showing the location of field study sites. Letters and numbers refer to the projects listed in Table 3. (B) Oblique-view DEM of northern Costa Rica (courtesy of C.J. Petersen, German Marine Sciences
Institute, IFM-GEOMAR) showing the Nicoya Peninsula and segmented structure of the subducting Cocos plate offshore. CCRDBCentral
Costa Rica Deformed Belt. (See Figs. 1 and 2 for location and explanation of symbols.)
82
Marshall et al.
America, and the results from six of the student projects were
published as part of a peer-reviewed research article in the journal Geology (Gardner et al., 2001).
The Keck Summer Research Project consisted of five
basic phases: (1) preproject preparation, (2) summer fieldwork,
(3) independent research at home institutions, (4) abstract writing and presentations for the Keck Research Symposium, and
(5) professional conference presentations and publication of a
journal article. From the outset, the project was designed with the
ultimate goal of generating publishable research results (Gardner,
1999). Students were selected for the project through a competitive application process. During the spring prior to the field season, the project director distributed background reading on the
geology of the study area, and provided logistical information to
prepare students for fieldwork in Costa Rica.
In Costa Rica, the project began with several days of field
trips to key localities designed to introduce the students to the
field area and the research questions. Following this introduction,
the students were asked to write project proposals outlining their
research plan. These proposals were reviewed by project faculty
and revised by the students following one-on-one discussion.
Together, the group developed a set of major hypotheses to be
tested through field research. The first hypothesis was that coastal
uplift and faulting within the field area was controlled by seamount
subduction beneath the Nicoya Peninsulas southern tip. The second hypothesis was that the local stream networks were responding to the same deformation mechanism. The third hypothesis was
that oceanic basement rocks in the field area shared a similar tectonic origin with those beneath mainland Costa Rica.
To address these questions, the students and faculty spent
the next 3 wk engaged in fieldwork (Figs. 4A4F), utilizing techniques of geomorphology, stratigraphy, structural geology, geochemistry, paleomagnetism, and geodesy (Gardner et al., 1999a).
Five students investigated uplifted Quaternary marine terraces by
mapping and surveying terrace deposits and collecting samples
for radiometric dating (Figs. 4D4F; project A1; Table 3). These
five students each worked in different, but contiguous field areas
along the coastline. A sixth student examined stream channel
morphology within all five of these areas, characterizing patterns
02
14
12 wk
4 mo1 yr
14
2
7:1
4
2
2
1 wk
1 mo
*Amherst College, Carleton College, Colorado College, Franklin and Marshall College, Pomona College, Trinity University, Washington and Lee
University, Whitman College, Mississippi State University, Pennsylvania State University, and Universidad Nacional de Costa Rica.
Cal Poly Pomona University, Trinity University, Universidad de Costa Rica, and Universidad Nacional de Costa Rica.
Total project cost includes airfare, ground transportation, lodging, meals, and field supplies for all participants (students, faculty, teaching assistants). These costs do not include
participant stipends, contract services (e.g., radiometric dating), purchase of major field equipment, or donated equipment, vehicles, and services from host-country institutions.
Total cost per person equals the total project cost for all participants (students, faculty, teaching assistants) divided by the total number of participants.
#
Total cost per student equals the total project cost for all participants (students, faculty, teaching assistants) divided by the total number of students.
**Total daily cost per student equals the total project cost per student divided by the project duration in days.
$0
$0
2040
6080
$400
$800
$60$80
$160$230
$1800
$3200
$1400
$2200
$4500
$6500
B. Independent Field Study Projects (20032008)
Individual
SUV 44:
Ecolodge:
Restaurant
flights
12 rental 2 per room
& grocery
$5000
$1200
0
100
$650
$30
$100
$2800
$2000
$34,000
A. Keck Summer Research Project (1998)
Individual
Ecolodge:
Group
SUV 44:
2 per room
buffet
flights
4 rental
and
2 donated
Air travel
Proje ct logistics
Field
Lodging
vehicles
type
Meal
plan
person
person
student
per student** meals per
cost
person
% paid by
project
grant
% paid by
students
Student
stipend
Faculty
stipend
Three models for experiential learning projects investigating active tectonics of the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica
83
14
N.A.
14
14
N.A.
14
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
N.A.
0
[1]
1
[1]
0
0
0
0
[1]
10
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
12
14
0
8
7
1
0
5
5
0
4
[2]
[1]
[1]
[1]
[1]
[1]
[1]
[1]
[1]
[1]
See above
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
See above
ff
q, r, s, t, u, aa, bb, cc, gg
v, w, y, z, aa, bb, cc, gg
x, gg
ff
y, z, aa, bb, cc, gg
y, z, aa, bb, cc, gg
ff
aa, bb, cc, dd, gg
See above
f, k
j, l, p
a, b, c, e, g, m, n, o, ee
h, ee
d, i
References
Numbers in brackets (e.g., [1]) indicate report or publication incomplete or in preparation; N.A.not applicable.
Letters refer to the following publications (see reference section for complete citations): Symposium short papers: (a) Bee (1999); (b) Burgette (1999); (c) Burton (1999); (d) Claypool
(1999); (e) Cooke (1999); (f) Hernndez (1999); (g) Kehrwald (1999); (h) Kraal (1999); (i) Krull (1999); (j) Reeves (1999); (k) Shearer (1999); (l) Stamski (1999). Conference abstracts:
(m) Burgette et al. (1999); (n) Cooke et al. (1999); (o) Gardner et al. (1999c); (p) Stamski et al. (1999); (q) Khaw et al. (2003); (r) Marshall et al. (2003b); (s) Khaw and Marshall (2004);
(t) Marshall et al. (2004a); (u) Marshall et al. (2004b); (v) Marshall et al. (2005b); (w) LaFromboise et al. (2006); (x) Utick et al. (2006); (y) Marshall et al. (2007a); (z) Marshall et al.
(2007b); (aa) Marshall et al. (2008a); (bb) Marshall et al. (2008b); (cc) Marshall et al. (2008c); (dd) Morrish and Marshall (2008). Journal articles (cited as personal commun. if not yet
accepted): (ee) Gardner et al. (2001); (ff) T.W. Gardner (2009, personal commun.); (gg) J.S. Marshall (2009, personal commun.). N.A.not applicable.
#
The totals reported here are the total number of student co-authored reports and publications from each field project. These totals do not necessarily equal the sum of the numbers
listed in the columns above because some of the reports and publications may incorporate the results of more than one research topic or student project.
TABLE 3. COSTA RICA FIELD PROJECTS: RESEARCH TOPICS, REPORTS, AND PUBLICATIONS
84
Three models for experiential learning projects investigating active tectonics of the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica
85
Figure 4. Students of the 1998 Keck Summer Research Project, Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica. (A) Alix Krull (Pomona College), Natalie Kehrwald (Colorado College), and project faculty member Dr. Ed Beutner (Franklin and Marshall College) recording structural data from a tidal
platform outcrop of the Miocene Malpas Formation at Santa Teresa. (B) Natalie Kehrwald (Colorado College) and project director Dr. Tom
Gardner (Trinity University) discussing field data on the outdoor patio of Nature Lodge Finca los Caballos near Cobano. (C) Erin Kraal (Washington and Lee University) and faculty sponsor Dr. Dave Harbor surveying a channel longitudinal profile for a knickpoint study along the Ro
Lajas. (D) Bhavani Bee (Franklin and Marshall College) collecting shell samples for radiocarbon dating on an outcrop of uplifted Holocene
beach gravels at Cabo Blanco. (E) Emily Burton (Carleton College) describing a soil profile on uplifted Holocene beach deposits at Santa Teresa.
(F) Reed Burgette (Whitman College) surveying a topographic profile across uplifted Holocene beach ridges at Malpas.
86
Marshall et al.
the Universidad de Costa Rica participated in a series of independent geosciences research projects on the Nicoya Peninsula
(Fig. 3) directed by authors Marshall and Gardner (Table 1).
These projects, hereafter referred to as the independent field
study projects, served as the basis for either a required geology
senior thesis, or for independent study credits at the students
home institution. These projects were funded by a combination of small campus research grants, faculty travel funds, and
existing National Science Foundation (NSF) grants for related
regional investigations (Table 2). In some cases, students contributed their own funds to cover some costs, such as airfare or food.
Fieldwork for the independent field study projects generally lasted between 1 and 2 wk (Table 1) and involved one to
three students per trip (Figs. 5A5G). These field projects were
carefully designed to generate new data that would contribute
to the broader collaborative research efforts of the two faculty
advisors. The overall focus of these research projects (projects
B1B9; Fig. 3; Table 3) was to investigate variations in tectonic
deformation patterns along the Nicoya Peninsula segment of
the Middle America Trench (e.g., Marshall et al., 2008a, 2008b,
2008c). The students utilized field techniques of geomorphology,
stratigraphy, structural geology, and geochronology to investigate
the uplift and depositional history of Quaternary marine terraces
(Figs. 5A5B), coastal sediments (Fig. 5D), and fluvial deposits
(Figs. 5E5G). The participating students also had opportunities
for professional interaction with Costa Rican scientists working
on related problems (Fig. 5C). Project results have been presented in senior theses, independent studies reports, and studentcoauthored abstracts, posters, and talks, presented at regional,
national, and international professional meetings (projects B1
B9; Table 3).
The field areas for the independent field study projects
included four principal locations on the Nicoya Peninsula, three
along the coast and one in the peninsulas interior (projects B1
B9; Fig. 3; Table 3). Four of the projects focused on the Cabo
Blanco area, site of the 1998 Keck Summer Research Project
and the 2008 field research module. This location lies inboard
of a chain of subducting seamounts (Fig. 2) that generates rapid
coastal uplift and the formation of a prominent flight of marine
terraces. The students working on independent field study projects in this area focused their research on the geomorphology and
stratigraphy of uplifted Pleistocene terraces (projects B1, B3, B5,
and B8; Fig. 3; Table 3). This work expanded on the results of
earlier investigations in this area, which had focused primarily
on emergent Holocene terraces (Marshall and Anderson, 1995;
Gardner et al., 2001). Together, these studies assembled a comprehensive picture of the late Quaternary uplift history at the
Nicoya Peninsulas southern tip. New age constraints (14C and
optically stimulated luminescence [OSL]) on the Cabo Blanco
coastal terraces established a framework for terrace correlation
to other sites along the Nicoya coast (e.g., Marshall et al., 2008a,
2008b, 2008c).
During other field seasons, students examined marine
terraces and beach sediments along the northern and central
Three models for experiential learning projects investigating active tectonics of the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica
87
Figure 5. Students of the 20032008 independent field study projects, Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica. (A) Fookgiin Khaw and Julie Parra (Cal Poly
Pomona) near an uplifted Holocene beachrock horizon on Playa Pochotes. (B) Fookgiin Khaw, Julie Parra, and Lauren Annis inspecting an outcrop
of Nicoya Complex oceanic basement at Playa Junquillal. (C) Eli LaFromboise and John Utick (Cal Poly Pomona) with project director Dr. Jeff
Marshall and Costa Rican seismologist Dr. Marino Protti at the Observatorio Volcanolgico y Sismolgico de Costa Rica, Universidad Nacional
(OVSICORI-UNA), Heredia. (D) Eli LaFromboise and John Utick (Cal Poly Pomona) collecting beach sand samples on Playa Negra. (E) Shawn
Morrish (Cal Poly Pomona) describing soil profile on uplifted river terrace deposits along the Ro Ora. (F) Shawn Morrish (Cal Poly Pomona) generating river terrace topographic profiles on a laptop at Hotel Villas Kalimba, Playa Smara. (G) Shawn Morrish (Cal Poly Pomona) recording global
positioning system (GPS) coordinates of a marine breccia outcrop at Puerto Carrillo.
88
Marshall et al.
Three models for experiential learning projects investigating active tectonics of the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica
Figure 6. Students of the 2008 field research module, Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica. (A) Brian Oliver and Travis Avant
(Cal Poly Pomona) recording field data during a mapping exercise near Delicias. (B) Cristo Ramrez (Cal State Northridge) and project faculty member Dr. Jon Nourse (Cal Poly Pomona) checking map location near Delicias. (C) Andrew
Keita and Azad Khalighi (Cal Poly Pomona) discussing field strategy during structural geology exercise on Cabuya tidal
platform. (D) Azad Khalighi (Cal Poly Pomona) measuring strike and dip of Delicias thrust fault. (E) Jessica Bruns and
Shawn Morrish (Cal Poly Pomona) taking field notes at the crater of Pos Volcano. (F) Students and faculty during morning field briefing on the patio of Nature Lodge Finca los Caballos near Cobano. (G) Julie Brown and Daniel Heaton (Cal
Poly Pomona) reading research articles on the Paquera ferry, Golfo de Nicoya.
89
90
Marshall et al.
Three models for experiential learning projects investigating active tectonics of the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica
for fieldwork. In contrast, the shorter research-based learning
course (field research module) bypassed the formulation of
hypotheses and jumped straight to focused inquiry on the nature
of field data and data collection techniques needed to answer
specific research questions. For example, the Keck Summer
Research Project and independent field study projects both began
with students exploring their entire field area, and thinking about
the impact of tectonics, climate, and sea-level change on the
landscape. Through group discussion, the students then developed a set of hypotheses that could be investigated during their
fieldwork. The students then worked on identifying the type of
field evidence that could be used to address their hypotheses and
determining appropriate techniques of data collection and analysis. They formulated a research plan and field strategy, and then
they engaged in fieldwork and data evaluation. The field research
module, on the other hand, was based on a strategy of visiting
previously known outcrops that exposed useful geologic information (e.g., a road cut through a dated marine terrace) and asking students about the type of data that could be collected at the
site to answer a specific research question (e.g., the terrace uplift
rate). Through faculty-guided inquiry, the students then learned
how to collect a particular data set (e.g., terrace topographic profile and inner-edge elevation). The fieldwork, therefore, was more
cookbook in nature and involved less big picture inquiry. In
all three projects, however, the students were challenged to interpret the significance of the data they collected. For the field module students, this was limited to relatively simple, localized interpretations, whereas the Keck and independent study students had
more latitude and time to integrate their interpretations within the
broader research context.
Student Mentoring
The ratio of students to faculty (Table 1) was an important
factor influencing the teaching methods and intensity of student
mentoring in the field. The Keck Summer Research Project had
a ratio of 12 students to 5 faculty members (<3:1), and for most
of its duration, additional faculty sponsors visited the field area.
For most of the project, therefore, the student to faculty ratio
was maintained at near 2:1. This allowed for significant facultystudent mentoring in the field and also facilitated the overall
project structure of students working simultaneously at separate field sites, with rotating field partners and faculty mentors.
Students and faculty were able to devote entire days to tackling
specific problems at individual field sites, and the students were
able to benefit from the varied input of different faculty on different days. This approach, however, involved significant logistical complexity and required careful planning and forethought.
The independent field study projects also had low student to
faculty ratios (3:11:1), allowing for individualized field mentoring guided by the particular needs of students and their research
goals. This project model offered the most consistent, and likely
the most effective mentoring, because of the smaller group size
and simpler logistics. It is important to consider, however, that
there may be a trade-off between the perceived learning benefits
91
92
Marshall et al.
is also important to consider that the average daily cost of international projects is strongly influenced by two factors, the cost
of airfare and the impact of group rates for lodging and meals.
Regardless of project duration, the cost of air travel for a particular project will be the same. Therefore, with air travel included
in the total cost, shorter projects have a higher average daily cost
per person than longer projects (Table 2). While larger groups
introduce more logistical challenges, group rates for lodging and
meals can significantly lower the daily cost per person. In addition, travel costs can vary widely depending on the season, travel
days, type of facilities used, and longer-term fluctuations in currency exchange rates and the global economy.
The complex logistics of organizing and executing the
month-long Keck Summer Research Project required strong
leadership by the project director (Gardner), and careful teamwork among the project faculty, the students, and the respective
staffs of the Keck Geology Consortium, host-country institution
(OVSICORI-UNA), and project lodging facilities. To achieve
success, this type of large multi-institutional project required the
administrative and financial support of an experienced undergraduate research organization like the Keck Geology Consortium (Manduca, 1997; de Wet et al., this volume). It would be
difficult to organize a project of this magnitude through a single
geology department. In addition to logistical and clerical support,
the Keck Consortium provided full project funding, including
student and faculty stipends. The total cost of the project was
high (Table 2), but because of its long duration (1 mo), and the
impact of group discounts, the average daily cost per student was
low compared to the other two projects. Considering the project outcomes (Table 3), learning benefits, and average daily cost
per student, it is clear that the 1998 Costa Rica Keck Summer
Research Project was an exceptionally good investment. This
was an investment, however, that could only be afforded by a
well-funded institution/organization, or by faculty supported by a
substantial external grant.
The logistics of the independent field study projects were
much simpler than the two large-group projects. Travel arrangements and planning for fieldwork are generally much easier for
small groups of four or less people. A more open time frame for
these projects allowed for greater flexibility. In general, the students and faculty had more time for interaction and one-on-one
mentoring. The students took great pride in their projects, and
self-confidence clearly increased. One particular flaw, however,
is that without clear project boundaries and the group competition typical of larger projects, independent research students
often become overwhelmed and face challenges in bringing
their projects to completion. This is especially true for public
university senior thesis students faced with heavy course loads,
work responsibilities, and family demands. Overcoming these
issues often requires careful mentoring by the faculty advisor.
In general, these projects were relatively inexpensive (Table 2)
and were funded through a combination of small research grants,
travel funds, and student contributions. However, due to the lack
of group discounts, and the low student to faculty ratio, the aver-
age daily project cost per student was highest for the independent
field study projects compared to the other two models.
The daily logistics of the field research module were easier to manage than the other large-group project (Keck Summer Research Project), but they were still more complex than
the small-group projects (independent field study projects).
Orchestrating the travel logistics for 18 participants required
a significant investment of time and energy by the project
director (Marshall). Because of its short duration, this project
required careful advance planning and knowledge of the field
area to ensure efficient use of time. A short field course of this
type is more affordable and manageable for a small geology
department in a financially limited public university. However,
without the support of an undergraduate research consortium or
university study abroad program, the project logistics, financial
management, and liability issues became the sole responsibility of the project faculty. In this case, the prior Keck Summer
Research Project provided a useful model for project design
and planning. In addition, the project director had also led two
prior large-group field trips in this area, a study trip in 2000 for
students of Franklin and Marshall College, and a preconference
field trip for the 2001 National Science Foundation MARGINS
Program Central America workshop (Marshall et al., 2001).
One advantage of a short-duration project like the field research
module is that it requires less time commitment by students.
This is especially important for a public commuter university
like Cal Poly Pomona, where many students have jobs and families. This project was particularly attractive to students because
the bulk of costs were covered by a college grant to the project
director. With careful budgeting and project planning, the total
costs were low (Table 2), while the student learning benefits
were high. The average daily cost per student for this project
was nearly double that of the Keck Summer Research Project
but less than the independent field study projects.
Student Learning Outcomes
While no formal assessments of student learning outcomes
were conducted for the three Costa Rica field projects, their
overall success can be evaluated using several qualitative indicators. These include: (1) student enthusiasm and engagement,
(2) advances in technical and cognitive field skills, (3) productivity and quality of student-authored publications, reports, and
presentations, and (4) impacts on student self-confidence and
professional identity.
Student Enthusiasm and Engagement
The high level of student enthusiasm and commitment during each of these projects provides a first-order indication of their
success in engaging participants in the field learning process.
Based on faculty observations and interactions with participating students, all three of the Costa Rica field projects generated
an exceptional level of student enthusiasm relative to traditional
field activities at their home institutions. A fundamental difference
Three models for experiential learning projects investigating active tectonics of the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica
between international field experiences and typical fieldwork in
the United States is the excitement of total immersion in a new
physical and cultural environment, including unique landscapes,
climate, wildlife, language, food, and culture. Costa Rica is especially attractive to undergraduate students because of its global
reputation as a premiere destination for ecotourism and adventure travel. The heightened excitement of a study abroad experience tended to amplify student enthusiasm for fieldwork and
scientific inquiry. Their research engagement was also piqued by
interaction with Costa Rican scientists, and by the obvious implications of their studies toward understanding the natural hazards
threatening the local people they encountered during fieldwork.
Technical and Cognitive Field Skills
Another indication of student learning during these projects
was the observed advances made in technical field skills and
higher-order integrative thinking. In nearly all cases, the students
participating in these projects had prior field experience through
regular coursework, field methods courses, field modules, summer field camps, and other research experiences. This preparation allowed most of the students to quickly engage in project
activities without need for remedial field training. Less prepared students generally had the opportunity to learn from those
with more experience. The daily intensity of living and working together in a rural Costa Rican landscape engendered strong
group camaraderie and peer mentoring relationships. In most
cases, the students quickly recognized that the quality of their
own learning experience was dependent on the success of the
entire group. This led to a situation in which few students were
ever left behind, and the students worked cohesively to develop
the skills and thought processes needed to tackle their common
research problems. Unfortunately, we did not have the foresight
to conduct pre and postfieldwork learning assessments. However, the authors all agree that we observed an exceptional level
of student advancement in technical skills and critical thinking
during these international field projects compared to similar
domestic projects in the United States. Other faculty mentors
have reported similar benefits associated with international fieldwork (e.g., Mankiewicz, 2005; McLaughlin and Johnson, 2006).
Research on learning indicates that the unfamiliar setting of study
abroad experiences stimulates student awareness and cognition,
and motivates them to engage in their studies with exceptional
focus and intensity (e.g., Citron and Kline, 2001).
During each of the three Costa Rica projects, the students
learned practical field skills, new applications of field instruments,
and valuable lessons in project design, teamwork, and time management. The Keck Summer Research Project and independent
field study projects immersed students in a high-intensity integrated research experience that mimicked the reality of graduate
school and academia. The students participated in every aspect of
research, from initial formation of ideas and hypotheses, to planning and execution of fieldwork, to data analysis and synthesis,
and finally, communication of results through writing, presentations, and publication. The independent field study projects,
93
94
Marshall et al.
choice and reinforced their motivation to pursue graduate studies and professional geosciences careers. Nine of the 12 students
from the Keck Summer Research Project went on to graduate
schools for M.S. and/or Ph.D. degrees. At least four are currently
university faculty members or postdoctoral researchers, three are
employed as geoscientists for government agencies or energy
companies, and one is a schoolteacher. Half of the 14 students
from the field research module have recently graduated, and five
are now in graduate school, while three have accepted consulting jobs. Of the 12 students who completed independent field
study projects, four continued on to graduate studies, and at least
three are working as geoscientists for consulting firms. One of
the independent study students who entered graduate school has
continued researching Nicoya Peninsula tectonics for his M.S.
thesis. This same student served as a teaching assistant for the
field research module and as a field advisor for a current independent study student. Such mentoring relationships are one of the
benefits of the independent field study projects as new students
build on the research of prior participants.
CONCLUSION
International field experiences offer exceptional opportunities for effective student learning in the geosciences. This paper
examined three project models for undergraduate field research
in Costa Rica, Central America: (1) a month-long summer
research project (Keck Geology Consortium, 1998), (2) a series
of 1 to 2 wk independent field study projects (Cal Poly Pomona
University and Trinity University, 20032008), and (3) a weeklong field research module (Cal Poly Pomona University, 2008).
These three project models shared a common research theme
(active tectonics), field area (Nicoya Peninsula), and overarching
pedagogy (experiential learning), allowing for easy comparison
of teaching methods, logistics, and learning outcomes. Each project model has unique pedagogical benefits and challenges and is
therefore better suited for a different range of group size, student
to faculty ratio, duration of fieldwork, and project budget. With
thoughtful consideration of these factors and careful project planning, each of these teaching models can have substantial positive
impacts on student learning.
The Keck Summer Research Project classifies as a research
apprenticeship (Seymour et al., 2004), in which the primary goal
was to engage students in a comprehensive field research experience, including postfieldwork analysis, interpretation, report
writing, and conference presentations. With 12 students, five project faculty members, and four visiting faculty sponsors (Table 1),
this project maintained a low student to faculty ratio (~2:1). The
teaching strategy consisted of the faculty mentoring individual
students who were working at multiple field sites on a range of
related research problems. This strategy required careful logistical planning to integrate all of the research efforts and to manage
rotating teams of field partners and faculty mentors. This project generated multiple student-authored publications (Table 3),
including symposium short papers, conference abstracts, senior
Three models for experiential learning projects investigating active tectonics of the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica
theses, and a major journal article. Of the three project models,
the Keck Summer Research Project had the highest total cost
(Table 2), but it also had the lowest average daily cost per student
because of its longer duration and large group size. The success
of this complex project was largely dependent on five factors:
(1) the low student to faculty ratio, (2) the extended duration of
fieldwork (1 mo), (3) careful planning and management by the
project director and faculty, (4) postfieldwork advising by faculty sponsors, and (5) substantial funding and logistical support
provided by the Keck Geology Consortium and the host-country
institution, OVSICORI-UNA.
Like the Keck project, the Cal Poly Pomona and Trinity independent field study projects classify as research apprenticeships
(Seymour et al., 2004). The primary goal of these projects was to
engage individual students in comprehensive research leading to
the completion of a research report, thesis, and/or professional
conference presentations. The teaching strategy consisted of
intensive inquiry-based field mentoring of small student groups
(13). A distinct advantage of this model was the flexibility to tailor projects to the specific academic needs and interests of individual students. Because these projects involved only a few participants (Table 1) and short field seasons (12 wk), the logistics
were relatively simple, and project plans could be easily adjusted
at any time if needed. These projects generated a large number
of student co-authored professional presentations and abstracts
(Table 3), and two major journal articles are planned. The total
cost per field season was significantly lower than the large group
projects (Table 2), allowing for funding through small university
travel grants. The average daily cost per student, however, was
the highest among the three project models because of the short
duration of fieldwork and lack of group discounts.
The Cal Poly Pomona field research module classifies as a
research-based learning course (Seymour et al., 2004), in which
the primary goal was to develop specific technical and cognitive
field skills within a narrower research context. The teaching strategy for this project differed significantly from the other largegroup (Keck) project due to its shorter duration (1 wk) and higher
student to faculty ratio (7:1) (Table 1). This project was based
around a series of short group exercises in which all 14 students,
two faculty, and two field assistants worked together in the same
field area. Publications were not one of the project goals, but students were required to present their results and interpretations
in a final field report (Table 3). While field logistics were less
complex, the success of this short-duration large-group project
required substantial advance planning and knowledge of the field
area to ensure efficient use of time. The total project cost was less
than the Keck project (Table 2), but the average daily cost per
student was nearly twice as high, due to the short duration. This
project was funded by a moderate university grant to the project
director supplemented by student contributions.
The learning outcomes of the three Costa Rica field projects
were substantial, as indicated by high levels of student engagement and enthusiasm, observed gains in technical and cognitive
field skills, and exceptional productivity of student-authored
95
publications, reports, and presentations. Anecdotal evidence suggests that many students viewed these projects as instrumental
in shaping their professional identity as geoscientists. By placing students beyond the comfort of their home learning environment, the Costa Rica field projects piqued student curiosity,
sharpened awareness and comprehension, and amplified the
desire to learn. The intensity of living and working in an exotic
international field setting engendered strong group camaraderie
and productive mentoring relationships among students and faculty. Throughout these projects, experiential learning pedagogy
played a critical role in enhancing the learning effectiveness of
fieldwork. The students were encouraged to define their own
research agenda, and to engage in hands-on problem solving
through critical thinking, inquiry, and reflection. Through this
approach, students developed the self-confidence and reasoning
skills needed to solve multifaceted geologic problems. This blend
of international field research and experiential learning pedagogy
creates a powerful synergy that captures student imagination and
motivates learning. This potent combination of field education
strategies provides exceptional training for graduate school and
professional careers in the geosciences.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Funding for our Costa Rica field projects was provided by
the Keck Geology Consortium, National Science Foundation
(Tectonics Program), Trinity University (Tinker Fund), and Cal
Poly Pomona University (Research, Scholarship, and Creative
Activity Program, College of Science Quality Learning Fund,
and Provosts Teacher-Scholar Program). We greatly appreciate
the fieldwork and student advising of Keck Geology Consortium Project Faculty D. Merritts and E. Beutner, and Faculty
Sponsors D. Bice, D. Harbor, T. Harms, E. Leonard, B. Panuska, K. Pogue, and L. Reinen. We thank the field module teaching assistants, R. Ellis and E. LaFromboise, for their efforts.
We also acknowledge the contributions of D. Fisher, P. Sak,
K. Morrell, M. Cupper, and G. Simila. We especially thank the
Costa Rican Volcanologic and Seismologic Observatory, Universidad Nacional (OVSICORI-UNA), and the Central American School of Geology, Universidad de Costa Rica (ECG-UCR)
for their continued support of our field projects. We are grateful
to the kindhearted residents of the Nicoya Peninsula who have
welcomed us onto their properties and into their homes. We
also appreciate the hard work and critical support of the owners
and employees of Costa Rican hotels and restaurants, including Nature Lodge Finca los Caballos (Cobano), Villas Kalimba
(Playa Smara), Hotel Giada (Playa Smara), Hotel Iguanazul
(Playa Junquillal), Hotel Ro Tempisque (Nicoya), and Apartotel La Sabana (San Jos). We especially thank Barbara MacGregor and Christian Klein of Nature Lodge Finca los Caballos
for providing a comfortable and safe home base for our two
large-group projects. We thank M. Swanson, S. Whitmeyer, and
an anonymous reviewer for helpful comments on an earlier version of this manuscript.
96
Marshall et al.
REFERENCES CITED
Barckhausen, U., Ranero, C.R., von Huene, R., Cande, S.C., and Roeser, H.A.,
2001, Revised tectonic boundaries in the Cocos plate off Costa Rica:
Implications for segmentation of the convergent margin and for plate tectonic models: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 106, p. 19,20719,220,
doi: 10.1029/2001JB000238.
Baumgartner, P.O., Mora, C.R., Butterlin, J., Sigal, J., Glacon, G., Azma, J.,
and Burgois, J., 1984, Sedimentacin y paleogeografa del Cretcico
y Cenozoico del litoral pacfico de Costa Rica: Revista Geolgica de
Amrica Central, v. 1, p. 57136.
Bee, B., 1999, Rapid Quaternary uplift of marine terraces: Cabo Blanco to
Montezuma area, Pennsula de Nicoya, Costa Rica, in Mendelson, C.V.,
and Mankiewicz, C., eds., Twelfth Keck Research Symposium in Geology Proceedings: Northfield, Minnesota, Keck Geology Consortium,
p. 168171.
Bolen, M.C., and Martin, P.C., 2005, Undergraduate research abroad: Challenges and rewards: Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study
Abroad, v. 12, p. xixvi.
Boza, M.A., 1993, Conservation in action: Past, present, and future of the
national park system of Costa Rica: Conservation Biology, v. 7, no. 2,
p. 239247, doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1993.07020239.x.
Bundschuh, J., and Alvarado, G., eds., 2007, Central America: Geology, Hazards, and Resources: London, Taylor and Francis, 1340 p.
Burgette, R.J., 1999, Rate and style of Holocene uplift in response to subducting seamounts, Malpas area, Pennsula de Nicoya, Costa Rica, in
Mendelson, C.V., and Mankiewicz, C., eds., Twelfth Keck Research Symposium in Geology Proceedings: Northfield, Minnesota, Keck Geology
Consortium, p. 172175.
Burgette, R.J., Shearer, M.T., Gardner, T.W., Protti, M., Marshall, J.S., and
Merritts, D.J., 1999, Holocene deformation in response to subducting seamounts, southern Peninsula de Nicoya, Costa Rica: Geological Society of
America Abstracts with Programs, v. 31, no. 4, p. A-6.
Burton, E.O., 1999, The marine terrace record of Holocene uplift, Pennsula
de Nicoya, Costa Rica, in Mendelson, C.V., and Mankiewicz, C., eds.,
Twelfth Keck Research Symposium in Geology Proceedings: Northfield,
Minnesota, Keck Geology Consortium, p. 176179.
Citron, J.L., and Kline, R., 2001, From experience to experiential education:
Taking study abroad outside the comfort zone: International Educator,
v. 10, no. 4, p. 1826.
Clark, D.B., 1985, Ecological field studies in the tropics: Geographical origin
of reports: Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, v. 66, p. 69.
Claypool, A., 1999, Faults and folds in the Cabo Blanco Formation, Pennsula
de Nicoya, Costa Rica, in Mendelson, C.V., and Mankiewicz, C., eds.,
Twelfth Keck Research Symposium in Geology Proceedings: Northfield,
Minnesota, Keck Geology Consortium, p. 196199.
Cooke, J., 1999, Forearc deformation in response to subducting seamounts,
Pennsula de Nicoya, Costa Rica, in Mendelson, C.V., and Mankiewicz,
C., eds., Twelfth Keck Research Symposium in Geology Proceedings:
Northfield, Minnesota, Keck Geology Consortium, p. 180183.
Cooke, M.J., Gardner, T.W., Marshall, J.S., and Merritts, D.J., 1999, Forearc
deformation in response to subducting seamounts, Pennsula de Nicoya,
Costa Rica: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs,
v. 31, no. 1, p. A-5.
DeMets, C., Gordon, R.G., Argus, D.F., and Stein, S., 1990, Current plate motions:
Geophysical Journal International, v. 101, p. 425478, doi: 10.1111/
j.1365-246X.1990.tb06579.x.
Dengo, G., 1962, Estudio Geolgico de la Regin de Guanacaste, Costa Rica:
San Jos, Costa Rica, Instituto Geogrfico Nacional, 112 p.
DeShon, H.R., Schwartz, S.Y., Newman, A.V., Gonzlez, V., Protti, M., Dorman,
L.M., Dixon, T.H., Sampson, D.E., and Flueh, E.R., 2006, Seismogenic
zone structure beneath the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica, from three-dimensional local earthquake P- and S-wave tomography: Geophysical Journal
International, v. 164, p. 109124, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2005.02809.x.
de Wet, A., Manduca, C., Wobus, R.A., and Bettison-Varga, L., 2009, this volume, Twenty-two years of undergraduate research in the geosciences
The Keck Experience, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J.,
eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern
Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, doi:
10.1130/2009.2461(14).
Dewey, J., 1938, Experience and Education: New York, MacMillan Company,
116 p.
Drummond, C.N., and Markin, J.M., 2008, An analysis of the bachelor of science in geology degree as offered in the United States: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 56, no. 2, p. 113119.
Elkins, J.T., and Elkins, N.M.L., 2007, Teaching geology in the field: Significant geoscience concept gains in entirely field-based introductory geology courses: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 55, p. 126132.
Fennell, D.A., and Eagles, P.F.J., 1990, Ecotourism in Costa Rica: A conceptual
framework: Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, v. 8, no. 1,
p. 2334.
Fisher, A.T., Stein, C.A., Harris, R.N., Wang, K., Silver, E.A., Pfender, M.,
Hutnak, M., Cherkaoui, A., Bodzin, R., and Villinger, H., 2003, Abrupt
thermal transition reveals hydrothermal boundary and role of seamounts
within the Cocos plate: Geophysical Research Letters, v. 30, p. 1550, doi:
10.1029/2002GL016766.
Fisher, D.M., Gardner, T.W., Marshall, J.S., Sak, P.B., and Protti, M., 1998,
Effect of subducting sea-floor roughness on forearc kinematics, Pacific
coast, Costa Rica: Geology, v. 26, p. 467470, doi: 10.1130/0091-7613
(1998)026<0467:EOSSFR>2.3.CO;2.
Fisher, D.M., Gardner, T.W., Sak, P.B., Sanchez, J.D., Murphy, K., and Vannuchi,
P., 2004, Active thrusting in the inner forearc of an erosive margin, Pacific
coast, Costa Rica: Tectonics, v. 23, p. TC2007, doi: 10.1029/2002TC001464.
Flood, T.P., and Ham, N.R., 2005, Undergraduate geology field trip to Costa
Rica: Logistics, challenges, and successes: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 37, no. 7, p. 193.
Gardner, T.W., 1999, Multi-institutional, senior-level research in a foreign
country: A strategy for the design and integration of individual theses into
a publishable whole: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 31, no. 7, p. A-386.
Gardner, T.W., Verdonck, D., Pinter, N.M., Slingerland, R., Furlong, K.P., Bullard, T.F., and Wells, S.G., 1992, Quaternary uplift astride the aseismic
Cocos Ridge, Pacific coast, Costa Rica: Geological Society of America
Bulletin, v. 104, p. 219232, doi: 10.1130/0016-7606(1992)104<0219
:QUATAC>2.3.CO;2.
Gardner, T.W., Beutner, E.C., Marshall, J.S., Merritts, D.J., and Protti, M.,
1999a, Effects of seamount subduction on forearc kinematics and origin
of the Nicoya Complex, Costa Rica, in Mendelson, C.V., and Mankiewicz, C., eds., Twelfth Keck Research Symposium in Geology Proceedings: Northfield, Minnesota, Keck Geology Consortium, p. 161167.
Gardner, T.W., Beutner, E.C., Marshall, J.S., Merritts, D.J., and Protti, M.,
1999b, Costa Rica project workshop, in Mendelson, C.V., and Mankiewicz, C., eds., Twelfth Keck Research Symposium in Geology Proceedings: Northfield, Minnesota, Keck Geology Consortium, p. 1921.
Gardner, T.W., Marshall, J., Merritts, D., Bee, B., Burgette, R., Burton, E.,
Cooke, J., Kehrwald, N., and Protti, M., 1999c, Holocene, inner forearc
deformation in response to seamount subduction, Peninsula de Nicoya,
Costa Rica: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs,
v. 31, no. 7, p. A-48.
Gardner, T., Marshall, J., Merritts, D., Protti, M., Bee, B., Burgette, R., Burton, E., Cooke, J., Kehrwald, N., Fisher, D., and Sak, P., 2001, Holocene forearc block rotation in response to seamount subduction, Nicoya
Peninsula, Costa Rica: Geology, v. 29, p. 151154, doi: 10.1130/0091
-7613(2001)029<0151:HFBRIR>2.0.CO;2.
Ham, N.R., and Flood, T.P., 2009, this volume, International field trips in the
undergraduate geology curriculum: Philosophy and perspectives, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education:
Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of
America Special Paper 461, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(09).
Hare, P.W., and Gardner, T.W., 1985, Geomorphic indicators of vertical neotectonism along converging plate margins, Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica,
in Morisawa, M., and Hack, J.T., eds., Tectonic Geomorphology: Proceedings of the 15th Annual Binghamton Geomorphology Symposium:
Boston, Allen and Unwin, p. 76104.
Hernndez, E., 1999, Leveling techniques applied to the southern part of the
Nicoya Peninsula in northern Costa Rica, in Mendelson, C.V., and Mankiewicz, C., eds., Twelfth Keck Research Symposium in Geology Proceedings:
Northfield, Minnesota, Keck Geology Consortium, p. 212214.
Hey, R., 1977, Tectonic evolution of the Cocos-Nazca spreading center:
Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 88, p. 14041420, doi:
10.1130/0016-7606(1977)88<1404:TEOTCS>2.0.CO;2.
Kehrwald, N.M., 1999, A tale of eight terraces: Landscape response to active
tectonic of the southern Pennsula de Nicoya, Costa Rica, in Mendelson,
C.V., and Mankiewicz, C., eds., Twelfth Keck Research Symposium in
Three models for experiential learning projects investigating active tectonics of the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica
Geology Proceedings: Northfield, Minnesota, Keck Geology Consortium,
p. 184187.
Kern, E.L., and Carpenter, J.R., 1986, Effect of field activities on student learning: Journal of Geological Education, v. 34, no. 3, p. 180183.
Khaw, F., and Marshall, J.S., 2004, Active tectonics and Quaternary marine terraces along a convergent plate margin, Pennsula de Nicoya, Costa Rica:
Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 36, no. 4,
p. 91, abs. 42-11.
Khaw, F., Parra, J.G., Annis, L.K., and Marshall, J.S., 2003, Marine terraces,
subduction earthquakes, and Quaternary uplift of the Nicoya Peninsula,
Costa Rica, Central America, in Shokair, S.M., ed., Building a Culture of
Undergraduate Research: Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Southern
California Conference on Undergraduate Research: Irvine, California,
University of California, p. 158.
Kirchner, J.G., 1994, Results of an alumni survey on professional and personal
growth at field camp: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 42, p. 125128.
Kolb, D.A., 1984, Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development: Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice Hall Inc.,
256 p.
Kraal, E.R., 1999, Bedrock incision and knickpoint processes in streams along
an uplifting coast, southern Pennsula de Nicoya, Costa Rica, in Mendelson, C.V., and Mankiewicz, C., eds., Twelfth Keck Research Symposium
in Geology Proceedings: Northfield, Minnesota, Keck Geology Consortium, p. 188191.
Krull, A.E., 1999, Fault kinematics in the Malpas sandstones of the Pennsula
de Nicoya, Costa Rica, in Mendelson, C.V., and Mankiewicz, C., eds.,
Twelfth Keck Research Symposium in Geology Proceedings: Northfield,
Minnesota, Keck Geology Consortium, p. 192195.
Laarman, J.G., and Perdue, R.R., 1989, Tropical science and tourism: The case
of OTS in Costa Rica: Tourism Management, v. 10, no. 1, p. 2938, doi:
10.1016/0261-5177(89)90032-0.
LaFromboise, E.J., Marshall, J.S., and Utick, J.D., 2006, Differential upper
plate deformation in response to contrasts in subducting seafloor roughness, Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica: Geological Society of America
Abstracts with Programs, v. 38, no. 5, p. 8, abs. 6-1.
Len, P.E., and Hartshorn, G.S., 2003, eds., Tropical science for the 21st century: Where science and nature converge, in Organization for Tropical
Studies (OTS) 40th Anniversary Symposium Volume: San Jos, Costa
Rica, University of Costa Rica, p. 4.
Lonergan, N., and Andresen, L.W., 1988, Field-based education: Some theoretical considerations: Higher Education Research & Development, v. 7,
p. 6377, doi: 10.1080/0729436880070106.
Lumsdon, L.M., and Swift, J.S., 1998, Ecotourism at a crossroads: The case of
Costa Rica: Journal of Sustainable Tourism, v. 6, no. 2, p. 155172, doi:
10.1080/09669589808667308.
Lundberg, N., 1982, Evolution of the slope landward of the Middle America
Trench, Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica, in Legget, J.K., ed., TrenchForearc Geology: Geological Society of London Special Publication 10,
p. 131147, doi: 10.1144/GSL.SP.1982.010.01.9.
Lutterman-Aguilar, A., and Gingerich, O., 2002, Experiential pedagogy for
study abroad: Educating for global citizenship: Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, v. 8, p. 4182.
Manduca, C.A., 1996, The value of undergraduate research experiences: Reflections from Keck Geology Consortium alumni: Council on Undergraduate
Research Quarterly, v. 16, no. 3, p. 176178.
Manduca, C.A., 1997, Learning science through research: The Keck Geology Consortium undergraduate research program: Geotimes, v. 42, no. 10, p. 2730.
Manduca, C.A., 1999, The Keck Geology Consortium, in Mendelson, C.V., and
Mankiewicz, C., eds., Twelfth Keck Research Symposium in Geology
Proceedings: Northfield, Minnesota, Keck Geology Consortium, p. 13.
Manduca, C.A., and Carpenter, J.R., eds., 2006, Teaching in the field: Special
issue of the Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 54, no. 2, 178 p.
Manduca, C.A., and Mogk, D.W., eds., 2006, Earth and Mind: How Geologists
Think and Learn about the Earth: Geological Society of America Special
Paper 413, 188 p.
Mango, H., 2003, Costa Rica as ideal geology field trip: Geological Society of
America Abstracts with Programs, v. 35, no. 6, p. 359.
Mankiewicz, C., 2005, Student science research in education abroad: Frontiers:
The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, v. 12, p. 123125.
Marshall, J.S., 2005, Costa Rica, Central America: A prime destination for
international earth science field experience: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 37, no. 7, p. 191.
97
98
Marshall et al.
Tectonic geomorphology and forearc deformation along the Nicoya Peninsula seismic gap, Costa Rica, in Gamboa, E., Alvarado, G.E., Denyer,
P., Lcke, D., Mora, R., Bolaos, K., and Arredondo, S., eds., IX Congreso Geolgico de Amrica Central, 24 Julio 2008, San Jos, Costa
Rica, p. 122123.
Marshall, J.S., LaFromboise, E.J., Utick, J.D., Khaw, F., Morrish, S.C., Piestrzeniewicz, P., Protti, M., Gardner, T.W., Sak, P.B., Fisher, D.M., and
Spotila, J.A., 2008c, Coastal tectonics of the Nicoya Peninsula seismic
gap, Costa Rica: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs,
v. 40, no. 6, p. 191.
McLaughlin, J., 2005, Classrooms without walls: A banana plantation, a turtle nest, and the random fallen tree: International Educator, v. 14, no. 1,
p. 5254.
McLaughlin, J., and Johnson, K., 2006, Assessing the field course experiential
learning model: Transforming collegiate short-term study abroad experiences into rich learning environments: Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary
Journal of Study Abroad, v. 13, p. 6585.
Montrose, L., 2002, International study and experiential learning: The academic context: Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad,
v. 8, p. 115.
Morell, K.D., Fisher, D.M., and Gardner, T.W., 2008, Inner forearc response
to subduction of the Panama fracture zone, southern Central America:
Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 265, p. 8295, doi: 10.1016/j
.epsl.2007.09.039.
Morrish, S., and Marshall, J., 2008, Neotectonics and geomorphology of uplifted
Quaternary marine and fluvial terraces at Puerto Carrillo and Ro Ora,
Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica, in Leong, J.M., Yamada, S., and Ewers, F.W.,
eds., Growing Student Success across Disciplines: Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Southern California Conference on Undergraduate Research:
Pomona, California, Cal Poly Pomona University, p. 148.
Norabuena, E., Dixon, T.H., Schwartz, S., DeShon, H., Newman, A., Protti,
A., Gonzlez, V., Dorman, L., Flueh, E.R., Lundgren, P., Pollitz, F., and
Sampson, D., 2004, Geodetic and seismic constraints on some seismogenic zone processes in Costa Rica: Journal of Geophysical Research,
v. 109, p. B11403, doi: 10.1029/2003JB002931.
Over, D.J., Sheldon, A.L., Farthing, D., Giorgis, S., Hatheway, R., Young, R.A.,
and Brennan, W., 2005, Costa Rica, New Zealand, Puerto Rico, and Trinidad and Tobago: Capstone experiences for geology majors: Geological
Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 37, no. 7, p. 192.
Parrott, W., 2005, Classroom in the clouds: Connecting people and biology:
International Educator, v. 14, no. 2, p. 5657.
Protti, M., Gendel, F., and McNally, K., 1995, Correlation between the age
of the subducting Cocos plate and the geometry of the Wadati-Benioff
zone under Nicaragua and Costa Rica, in Mann, P., ed., Geologic and Tectonic Development of the Caribbean Plate Boundary in Southern Central
America: Geological Society of America Special Paper 295, p. 309326.
Protti, M., Gendel, F., and Malavassi, E., 2001, Evaluacin del Potencial Ssmico de la Pennsula de Nicoya: Heredia, Costa Rica, Editorial Fundacin
UNA, 144 p.
Ranero, C., and von Huene, R., 2000, Subduction erosion along the Middle America convergent margin: Nature, v. 404, p. 748752, doi: 10.1038/35008046.
Reeves, A., 1999, A study of paleomagnetism of the Nicoya terrane, Costa Rica,
in Mendelson, C.V., and Mankiewicz, C., eds., Twelfth Keck Research
ABSTRACT
Field experiences form the core of the undergraduate geology program at St.
Norbert College and provide learning opportunities that cannot be duplicated in the
classroom. The field is vital for developing in students a life-long diligent curiosity
for geologywhich we define as a persistent inquisitiveness toward our science. We
regularly offer an international trip of about 2 wk in length. The trip serves as a capstone experience for our students in several ways: it provides focused time to develop
and synthesize their geological knowledge and field skills; it is a setting for mini
research projects; it challenges students to commit to geology as a career; it offers a
multicultural experience; and it develops their emotional maturity.
The international trip need not be logistically daunting or expensive. Most geoscience educators are willing to share their specific experiences and logistical information from leading trips to other countries, but several general recommendations follow. Behavior contracts signed by students emphasize the importance of good conduct
and should clearly outline the consequences of poor behavior, especially if a student
needs to be removed from a trip. A briefing by a health-care professional well versed
in international travel should be required well in advance of a trip, and a medical
inventory of each participant, focusing on medications, preexisting health conditions, and potential emergency procedures, should be done by the trip leaders. Trip
leaders need to work closely with the home institutions risk management office in
drafting a comprehensive liability waiver. Finally, we recommend working with an incountry expeditor, especially for travel. In many countries, utilizing a local driver can
be cost effective and may save legal problems in the event of automobile accidents.
INTRODUCTION
Ham, N.R., and Flood, T.P., 2009, International field trips in undergraduate geology curriculum: Philosophy and perspectives, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W.,
and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 99104, doi:
10.1130/2009.2461(09). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
99
100
Figure 1. The field is the best place to instill passion and diligent curiosity for our science. A former St. Norbert College student contemplates
the volcanic landscape of the international locale of Maui, Hawaii.
101
Figure 2. A student takes a few moments to write field notes after a day
of outcrop stops and a concluding lecture in Costa Rica.
102
Figure 3. Students collect sand and bedrock samples along the Pacific
coast of Costa Rica as part of a provenance study.
103
104
ABSTRACT
Geoscience students often have difficulty interpreting real-world spatial relationships from traditional two-dimensional geologic maps. This can be partly addressed
with direct, tactile field experiences, although three-dimensional (3-D) cognition can
still be hampered by incomplete exposure of all spatial dimensions. Many of these
barriers can be overcome by incorporating computer-based, virtual 3-D visualizations within undergraduate field-oriented curricula. Digital field equipment is fast
becoming a standard tool in environmental, engineering, and geoscience industries,
in part because of the increased accessibility of ruggedized computers equipped with
global positioning system (GPS) receivers. Handheld computers with geographic
information systems (GIS) software record and display data in real time, which
Whitmeyer, S., Feely, M., De Paor, D., Hennessy, R., Whitmeyer, S., Nicoletti, J., Santangelo, B., Daniels, J., and Rivera, M., 2009, Visualization techniques in
field geology education: A case study from western Ireland, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives
and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 105115, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(10). For permission to copy, contact editing@
geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
105
106
Whitmeyer et al.
increases the accuracy and utility of draft field maps. New techniques and software
allow digital field data to be displayed and interpreted within virtual 3-D platforms,
such as Google Earth. The James Madison University Field Course provides a field
geology curriculum that incorporates digital field mapping and computer-based visualizations to enhance 3-D interpretative skills. Students use mobile, handheld computers to collect field data, such as lithologic and structural information, and analyze
and interpret their digital data to prepare professional-quality geologic maps of their
field areas. Student data and maps are incorporated into virtual 3-D terrain models,
from which partly inferred map features, such as contacts and faults, can be evaluated relative to topography to better constrain map interpretations. This approach
familiarizes students with modern tools that can improve their interpretation of field
geology and provides an example of the way in which digital technologies are revolutionizing traditional field methods. Initial student feedback suggests strong support
for this curriculum integrating digital field data collection, map preparation, and 3-D
visualization and interpretation to enhance student learning in the field.
INTRODUCTION
Fieldwork has been the backbone of geologic investigation
and presentation since William Smith produced the first recognized geologic map of England and Wales (Smith, 1815). Traditional geologic maps show three-dimensional (3-D) features on
a two dimensional (2-D) surface, which requires observers to
mentally visualize the vertical dimension of geologic structures
and landforms depicted on maps. Smith displayed interpretations of geology in the vertical dimension by including cross
sections on his map, a style of presentation that became standard on all geologic maps. More recent illustrative methods that
expand on the basic map and cross-section depiction of geology include sequential cross sections (e.g., Dewey and Bird,
1970), block diagrams (e.g., Argand, 1922; Love et al., 1972),
and balanced cross sections (e.g., Dahlstrom, 1969; Elliott,
1983; Suppe, 1985; De Paor, 1988), among others. To a large
extent, the basic methods of field data collection and map-based
presentation of geologic interpretations have remained largely
unchanged from Smiths day through the twentieth century.
However, recent advances in computer hardware and software
have revolutionized the collection, interpretation, and presentation of geologic field data, with direct applicability to field
education and pedagogy.
An ongoing challenge for geoscience educators is to ensure
that students are able to recognize and interpret real-world geologic structures from a range of perspectives. Many students have
difficulty visualizing the 3-D geometries of geologic structures
and landforms when presented with traditional paper maps and
cross sections. In addition, classroom instruction often lacks the
hands-on experience of working with real materials in their natural setting. As a result, field-based education is still viewed by
many geoscience educators as a core component in the development of 3-D visual acuity (Butler, 2007). Our experience of
teaching geology in field environments, both in Europe and the
United States, suggests that the majority of undergraduate students have three main conceptual difficulties when visualizing
landscape and its geologic influences:
Visualization techniques in field geology education: A case study from western Ireland
107
108
Whitmeyer et al.
Visualization techniques in field geology education: A case study from western Ireland
109
Figure 3. Generalized geologic map of the South Mayo and Connemara regions of western Ireland (modified from Chew et al., 2007); the
Knock Kilbride field area is indicated by the white arrow. Inset shows
map location on an outline of Ireland.
of mostly planar, moderately southeast-dipping Silurian sedimentary strata (Graham et al., 1989) that unconformably overlie Early
Ordovician arc-related volcanic rocks (Chew et al., 2007). Tilting
of the strata was likely the product of Caledonian oblique collisions (Dewey and Ryan, 1990; Williams, 1990) that sutured the
Dalradian Connemara terrane to the southern margin of the South
Mayo Trough (Williams and Harper, 1991). This suture zone can
be seen just a few kilometers south of the field area along the
north face of the mountain of Ben Levy (Williams and Rice, 1989;
Whitmeyer and De Paor, 2008). Later deformation consists of
decimeter- to decameter-scale offsets along crosscutting, oblique
normal faults, which may have occurred during late Caledonian
(Late SilurianEarly Devonian) transpressional terrane adjustment (Williams and Harper, 1991; Smethurst et al., 1994).
An interesting aspect of the field area is that homoclinal
Silurian strata dip to the south-southeast at ~60, more steeply
than the topographic slope. Students are faced with a situation
where a northward uphill walk from the lakeshore takes them
down-section stratigraphically. Many students find this inversion
of stratigraphy with respect to elevation challenging to visualize
and interpret correctly.
110
Whitmeyer et al.
Visualization techniques in field geology education: A case study from western Ireland
Figure 4. Student map of field area produced within ArcGIS with data collected from handheld computers.
Figure 5. Students geologic map of the Knock Kilbride field area, draped over a digital elevation model (DEM)
of the mountain of Knock Kilbride (view to the northeast). By using a virtual 3-D model that incorporates highresolution aerial photos, students can reevaluate their initial field interpretations to better constrain contacts and
faults across the terrain.
111
112
Whitmeyer et al.
Figure 6. (A) Google Earth image of the Galway Granite batholith. The emplacement stages of the granite units
are controlled through the time-slider function visible at the top of the image (from Hennessy and Feely, 2008).
(B) Google Earth image of the composite Knock Kilbride geologic map, compiled from 4 yr of student data from
the Ireland field course. View is to the northeast, similar to Figure 5. Data points, line work (faults and contacts),
and each unit (as polygons) can be turned on or off for viewing. Resolution of terrain underlying the geologic map
has been enhanced by overlaying aerial photos on the standard (poor-resolution) Google Earth terrain.
Visualization techniques in field geology education: A case study from western Ireland
The collective Google Earth geologic map incorporated
more advanced features than the students had included in their
individual Google Earth maps, such as selectable layers of lithologic units, contacts, faults, or point data that the user could turn
on or off. Our map used high-resolution aerial photos of the field
area as overlays on the native Google Earth terrain images to
overcome Google Earths poor image resolution of this region.
By editing the Image Overlay tag to make the colors of the unit
layers slightly transparent, we demonstrated how field researchers could evaluate mapped geology against a high-resolution 3-D
topographic base map. This is correlative with the map evaluation exercise that the students had recently completed using their
GIS maps of the field area and ArcScene, which allowed students
to compare digital, interactive geologic maps assembled in two
different software platforms.
We concluded our Google Earth Day by demonstrating
future components of Google Earthbased interactive geologic
maps that were not yet fully developed. These included 3-D
strike and dip symbols as Collada models (www.collada.org)
positioned in the proper spatial orientation above the outcrop
location where the data were collected. The current complexities
involved in properly displaying orientation symbols in Google
Earth were apparent to students after we explained that, in order
to transfer the relevant location and orientation data from ArcGIS
point shapefiles into Google Earth Collada models, it was necessary to write a Linux-based bash script (see Appendix 1). We
also demonstrated vertical cross sections that users can pull up
from the Google Earth ground surface (Whitmeyer and De Paor,
2008), and superoverlays of the geologic maps that allow users
to zoom to outcrop-scale details without using large, high-resolution files that cause Google Earth to dramatically slow down
(Whitmeyer et al., 2008).
Preliminary Feedback of the Digital Mapping Exercise
Student feedback of the continually developing digital mapping and visualization exercise indicates a strongly positive
113
TABLE 1. STUDENT EVALUATION DATA FOR THE DIGITAL MAPPING EXERCISE FROM THE PAST FOUR YEARS OF THE IRELAND FIELD COURSE
2005 (n = 35)
2006 (n = 25)
2007 (n = 32)
2008 (n = 29)
Students with previous full-semester GIS* class
3%
21%
44%
41%
How much did you learn from this exercise?
n/a
4.4
3.4
3.1
(1 = nothing, 5 = a lot)
How valuable was the field component?
n/a
4.7
4.0
4.0
(1 = not at all, 5 = very)
n/a
4.8
3.7
3.4
How valuable was the laboratory component?
(1 = not at all, 5 = very)
% agree
% agree
n/a
n/a
Background knowledge and skills were
85%
96%
appropriate to the level of the course
Content of the course would be of value to my
91%
88%
n/a
n/a
own research / career path
n/a
n/a
Would recommend this GIS experience to other
100%
100%
geology students
Note: Note that the evaluation format changed in 2006 (with a year of overlap).
*GISgeographic information systems.
114
Whitmeyer et al.
REFERENCES CITED
Argand, E., 1922, La tectonique de lAsie, in Congrs Gologique International, Belgique: Lige, Belgium, Comptes Rendus, p. 171372.
Brimhall, G., 1999, Evaluation of digital mapping in introductory and advanced
field classes at UC Berkeley: Geological Society of America Abstracts
with Programs, v. 31, no. 7, p. A-191.
Visualization techniques in field geology education: A case study from western Ireland
Butler, R., 2007, Teaching Geoscience through Field Work: Plymouth, UK,
Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences Learning and Teaching
Guide, 56 p.
Chew, D.M., Graham, J.R., and Whithouse, M.J., 2007, U-Pb zircon geochronology of plagiogranites from the Lough Nafooey (= Midland Valley) arc
in western Ireland: Constraints on the onset of the Grampian orogeny:
Journal of the Geological Society of London, v. 164, p. 747750, doi:
10.1144/0016-76492007-025.
Condit, C.D., 1999, Components of dynamic digital maps: Computers & Geosciences, v. 25, p. 511522, doi: 10.1016/S0098-3004(98)00156-3.
Dahlstrom, C.D., 1969, Balanced cross sections: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 6, p. 743757.
De Paor, D.G., 1988, Balanced sections in thrust belts: Part I. Construction:
American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 72, p. 7391.
De Paor, D.G., and Whitmeyer, S.J., 2009, this volume, Innovation and obsolescence in geoscience field courses: Past experiences and proposals for the
future, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(05).
De Paor, D.G., Feely, M., Kelly, S., and Williams-Stroud, S.C., 2004, Digital
maps of students data as an integral component of geology field camp:
Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 36, no. 5,
p. 157.
Dewey, J.F., and Bird, J.M., 1970, Mountain belts and the new global tectonics: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 75, p. 26252647, doi: 10.1029/
JB075i014p02625.
Dewey, J.F., and Ryan, P.D., 1990, The Ordovician evolution of the South
Mayo trough, western Ireland: Tectonics, v. 9, p. 887903, doi: 10.1029/
TC009i004p00887.
Edmundo, G.P., 2002, Digital geologic field mapping using ArcPad, in Soller,
D.R., ed., Digital Mapping Techniques 02Workshop Proceedings:
U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 02-370, p. 129134.
Elliott, D., 1983, The construction of balanced cross-sections: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 5, p. 101, doi: 10.1016/0191-8141(83)90035-4.
Graham, J.R., Leake, B.E., and Ryan, P.D., 1989, The Geology of South Mayo,
Western Ireland: Edinburgh, Scottish Academic Press, 75 p.
Hennessy, R., and Feely, M., 2005, Galway County in stone: The geological
heritage of Connemara. Series 1: Twelve Bens: Galway, Galway County
Council and the Heritage Council (Ireland), CD-ROM.
Hennessy, R., and Feely, M., 2008, Visualization of magmatic emplacement
sequences and radioelement distribution patterns in a granite batholith:
An innovative approach using Google Earth, in De Paor, D., ed., Google
Earth Science, Journal of the Virtual Explorer, Electronic Edition, vol.
29, paper 100.
Hughes, P., and Boyle, A., 2005, Assessment in the Earth Sciences, Environmental Sciences and Environmental Studies: Plymouth, UK, Geography,
Earth and Environmental Sciences Learning and Teaching Guide, 41 p.
Jackson, I., and Asch, K., 2002, The status of digital geological mapping
in Europe: The results of a census of the digital mapping coverage,
approaches and standards of 29 European geological survey organizations in the year 2000: Computers & Geosciences, v. 28, p. 783788, doi:
10.1016/S0098-3004(01)00103-0.
Johnston, S., Whitmeyer, S.J., and De Paor, D., 2005, New developments in digital mapping and visualization as part of a capstone field geology course:
Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 37, no. 7, p. 145.
Karlstrom, K.E., Whitmeyer, S.J., Dueker, K., Williams, M.L., Levander, A.,
Humphreys, E.D., Keller, G.R., and the CD-ROM Working Group, 2005,
Synthesis of results from the CD-ROM experiment: 4-D image of the lithosphere beneath the Rocky Mountains and implications for understanding
the evolution of continental lithosphere, in Karlstrom, K.E., and Keller,
G.R., eds., The Rocky Mountain RegionAn Evolving Lithosphere:
Tectonics, Geochemistry, and Geophysics: American Geophysical Union
Geophysical Monograph 154, p. 421442.
115
Knoop, P.A., and van der Pluijm, B., 2003, GeoPad: Innovative applications
of information technology in field science education: Eos (Transactions,
American Geophysical Union), v. 84, no. 46, p. ED32B1199.
Knoop, P.A., and van der Pluijm, B., 2006, GeoPad: Tablet PC-enabled field science education, in Berque, D., Prey, J., and Reed, R., eds., The Impact of
Pen-Based Technology on Education: Vignettes, Evaluations, and Future
Directions: West Lafayette, Indiana, Purdue University Press, p. 103113.
Kramer, J.H., 2000, Digital mapping systems for field data collection, in Soller,
D.R., ed., Digital Mapping Techniques 00Workshop Proceedings: U.S.
Geological Survey Open-File Report 00-325, p. 1319.
Longley, P.A., Goodchild, M., Maguire, D.J., Rhind, D.W., and Lobley, J.,
2001, Geographic Information Systems and Science: Hoboken, New Jersey, John Wiley & Sons, 454 p.
Love, J.D., Reed, J.C., Jr., Christiansen, R.L., and Stacy, J.R., 1972, Geologic
Block Diagram and Tectonic History of the Teton Region, WyomingIdaho: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Geologic Investigations
Map I-730, scale.
McCaffrey, K.J.W., Feely, M., Hennessy, R., and Thompson, J., 2008, Visualization of folding in marble outcrops, Connemara, western Ireland: An
application of virtual outcrop technology: Geosphere, v. 4, p. 588599,
doi: 10.1130/GES00147.1.
Mies, J.W., 1996, Automated digital compilation of structural symbols: Journal
of Geoscience Education, v. 44, p. 539548.
Pyle, E.J., 2009, this volume, A framework for the evaluation of field camp experiences, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(26).
Smethurst, M.A., MacNiocaill, C., and Ryan, P.D., 1994, Oroclinal bending in
the Caledonides of western Ireland: Journal of the Geological Society of
London, v. 151, p. 315328, doi: 10.1144/gsjgs.151.2.0315.
Smith, W., 1815, A Geological Map of England and Wales and Part of Scotland:
London, British Geological Survey, 16 sheets.
Suppe, J., 1985, Principles of Structural Geology: Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, 537 p.
Swanson, M.T., and Bampton, M., 2009, this volume, Integrated digital mapping in geologic field research: An adventure-based approach to teaching
new geospatial technologies in an REU Site program, in Whitmeyer, S.J.,
Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical
Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America
Special Paper 461, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(11).
Walsh, G.J., Reddy, J.E., Armstrong, T.R., and Burton, W.C., 1999, Geologic
mapping with a GPS receiver and a personal digital assistant computer
streamlines production of geologic maps: Geological Society of America
Abstracts with Programs, v. 31, no. 7, p. A-192.
Whitmeyer, S.J., and De Paor, D.G., 2008, Large-scale emergent cross sections of crustal structures in Google Earth: Geological Society of America
Abstracts with Programs, v. 40, no. 6, p. 189.
Whitmeyer, S.J., De Paor, D.G., Daniels, J., Nicoletti, J., Rivera, M., and Santangelo, B., 2008, A pyramid scheme for constructing geologic maps on
geobrowsers: Eos (Transactions, American Geophysical Union), v. 89,
no. 53, p. IN41B1140.
Williams, D.M., 1990, Evolution of Ordovician terranes in western Ireland and
their possible Scottish equivalents: Transactions of the Royal Society of
EdinburghEarth Sciences, v. 81, p. 2329.
Williams, D.M., and Harper, D.A.T., 1991, End-Silurian modifications of Ordovician terranes in western Ireland: Journal of the Geological Society of
London, v. 148, p. 165171, doi: 10.1144/gsjgs.148.1.0165.
Williams, D.M., and Rice, A.H.N., 1989, Low-angle extensional faulting and
the emplacement of the Connemara Dalradian, Ireland: Tectonics, v. 8,
p. 417428, doi: 10.1029/TC008i002p00417.
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY 5 MAY 2009
ABSTRACT
Adapting geologic field education and research training to new geospatial technologies requires considerable investment of time and money in acquiring new instruments,
mastering new techniques, and developing new curriculum in return for dramatically
increased mapping capabilities. The University of Southern Maines Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) Program has developed an integrated system of
digital mapping specifically designed for geologic work that involves satellite and optical digital survey instruments, digital imagery, and a variety of mapping techniques.
These new digital tools, techniques, and resources are used to explore the nature of
crustal deformation in an adventure-based undergraduate field research program that
employs sea kayaks for coastal access to island bedrock exposures. This new generation
of digital mapping tools enabled the development of new techniques for outcrop surface
mapping where we are able to delineate 1100-m-range mesoscale geologic features
that are often overlooked in traditional quadrangle-scale geologic mapping. Maps of
extensive exposures in coastal Maine created using these digital techniques continue
to reveal new and never-before-seen geologic structures and relationships. Because of
this, undergraduate students are able to make meaningful contributions to our base of
geologic knowledge and acquire essential geospatial skills, while learning these digital mapping techniques in a research setting. The emphasis we place on teamwork,
risk taking, exploration, and discovery as part of the adventure programming aspect of
the field component builds a confidence and enthusiasm that extends into the research
component of the project, where students are able to develop new analytical methods,
applications, and approaches to our field and laboratory work.
INTRODUCTION
Since 1993, we have run an annual summer field school in
geography and geology traveling through the islands of coastal
Maine by sea kayak and making detailed topographic and geo-
Swanson, M.T., and Bampton, M., 2009, Integrated digital mapping in geologic field research: An adventure-based approach to teaching new geospatial technologies in an REU Site Program, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches:
Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 117133, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(11). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The
Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
117
118
Figure 1. Mapping tool kits: (A) traditional geologic mapping tools, including the map clipboard, field book, Brunton compass, protractor, and scale; and (B) digital mapping
tools, including handheld global positioning system (GPS),
rod-mounted RTK (Real Time Kinematic) GPS with field
base station, tripod-mounted total stations, field laptop
computers, as well as the traditional Brunton compass.
119
bega fault and shear zone system (Fig. 3). Late-stage syntectonic
granites have been involved in this regional shearing and developed unique deformed geometries that could only be seen in
these large coastal exposures. Documentation of these deformed
geometries is greatly facilitated by the use of new digital mapping techniques. These mapped deformed geometries act as kinematic indicators and record the strain history of oblique convergence during Devonian Acadian collision, an important tectonic
process during mountain building in the northern Appalachians.
Geologic Questions Being Addressed
Geologic interpretations for faults in coastal Maine have
evolved significantly in the past 20 yr from a series of discontinuous postmetamorphic and post-tectonic minor brittle faults
(Hussey, 1988) to a narrow through-going Norumbega fault zone
of right-lateral postmetamorphic displacement coupled to a much
broader, 100-km-wide zone of earlier regional ductile shear
(Swanson, 1999b, 2007). Strain associated with the Norumbega
fault and shear zone system dominates the rocks of the area, and
the focus of the current research project concerns unraveling
the details of this regional pattern. This research grew out of the
development of new interpretational skills in shear zone geology
during the 1980s involving kinematic indicators (Swanson, 1992,
1994, 1999a) that allowed the recognition of basic strain types
(pure shear versus simple shear) and shear senses (left-lateral
versus right-lateral) in these rocks. Training students, not only
in geospatial technologies, but in the kinematic interpretational
skills of the modern-day structural geologist as well, allows us to
assess, document, and quantify deformation strain patterns found
anywhere in the region. The team research approach allows us
to apply these kinematic tools over wider geographic areas at
greater structural detail than previously possible, since a larger
team of researchers using more advanced digital tools is engaged
in yearly mapping, analysis, and writing. By carefully delineating the outcrop strain patterns for syntectonic granite dike intrusions throughout the area, we are able to see for the first time
the broader strain pattern associated with the development of this
major crustal shear zone and the way in which oblique convergence in mountain building can work. The use of digital mapping
techniques allows us to focus on detail outcrop surface mapping
as the preferred way to delineate complex structure, and, in that
way, we are changing the nature of geologic mapping itself.
RESEARCH EXPERIENCES FOR UNDERGRADUATES
The National Science Foundations Research Experiences for Undergraduates Program provides funds for hands-on
research training of undergraduate students in appropriate STEM
(science, technology, engineering, and math) majors as a way to
develop the next generation of researchers. The REU Site Program is designed for multiple student training programs that
allow students to be mentored by, and collaborate with, working
scientists from across the country on relevant research projects.
120
Figure 3. The University of Southern Maine (USM) Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) Site project field
area consists of coastal Maine exposures from Casco Bay to Muscongus Bay on the SE side of the Norumbega fault
and shear zone (SZ) system. White arrowed lines show the stretching directions along oblique-to-fault folds related to
regional right-lateral shear, the block arrows highlight areas of layer-normal shortening with no lateral shear, and the
largest block arrow shows the lateral extrusion of the midcoast section where squeezed between left-lateral and rightlateral shear zones. Background geology base map is from Osberg et al. (1985).
121
gear and personnel are transported to the field sites by sea kayak
(Fig. 2). Students get to experience (and be challenged by) the
rugged and strenuous conditions of cold-water kayaking and
remote-island camping throughout coastal Maine while conducting field research. While we initially used sea kayaks as a logistical and economic necessity, we quickly discovered unanticipated
benefits to this method of transport to the field sites. Group bonding and a sense of personal responsibility through the physical
and intellectual challenges of sea kayaking lead to enhanced self
image and personal growth. Extensive practice on assisted rescues with frequent all-in capsize drills stresses the potential life
and death consequences of the everyday logistics of travel associated with fieldwork in this coastal ocean environment. Rotation
of student leaders for group kayak travel ensures that all students
become involved in navigation decisions, route planning and
the work of flank and sweep boats to keep the group tight during ocean crossings. This constantly reinforces the importance
of team work, cooperation, and group dynamics in everything
we do. By assigning students the responsibility for all aspects of
daily field life, including tasks as diverse as work management,
group meal preparation, menu planning, camp chores, and waste
disposal, we emphasize the need for leadership, cooperation, and
group cohesion. This experience carries over from the tasks of
daily field life to the daily research planning and logistics that are
involved in mapping and survey work.
The intent of the adventure-programming component of
the REU is for personal successes to overcome the physical and
environmental challenges, and for the team spirit fostered by the
day-to-day cooperation in all aspects of the field experience to
carry over to the personal and intellectual challenges the students
face as the program develops toward computer laboratory work,
analysis, abstract writing, and poster design. The greatest challenge in this program is, ultimately, to assemble the acquired field
data into a coherent and meaningful project that contributes to a
better understanding of the research questions involved.
The REU Site Research Project
REU Site Programs need to have a solid scientific focus to
give the participating undergraduate students firsthand experience working in a relevant research project. Our program of field
research centers on the rocky coast of Maine as a unique geologic
resource with a rich and complex geologic history where storm
waves have created extensive coastal exposures. Syntectonic
granite intrusions, quartz veins, brittle strike-slip faults, and the
structural analysis and tectonic interpretation of those mapped
features as they appear throughout Casco Bay and midcoast
Maine are interpreted in terms of regional strain accommodation
associated with transpressional deformation on the SE flank of
the Norumbega fault and shear zone system (Fig. 3).
The Norumbega fault and shear zone system of the northern
Appalachians is an orogen-parallel intracontinental fault boundary
that displays a lengthy and complex structural history and possibly several hundred kilometers of right-lateral, or dextral, strikeslip displacement. Geological Society of America (GSA) Special
122
Paper 331, Norumbega Fault System of the Northern Appalachians (Ludman and West, 1999), established the Norumbega as
a major strike-slip fault boundary active from the Mid-Devonian
into the early Mesozoic having a complex history of dominantly
dextral strike-slip deformation for over 100 m.y. Much of the early
deformation associated with the Norumbega was in the form of
regional shearing (Swanson, 1999a, 1999b) about the main fault
trace as part of an even wider zone of orogen-parallel shearing that
has affected much of the northern Appalachians (Hubbard, 1999).
Regional ductile shearing is thought to have localized into higher
strain zones and eventually into a few narrow brittle fault zones
(Hussey, 1988; Bothner and Hussey, 1999) as the system evolved
through exhumation and cooling during the later stages of orogenic activity. Earlier field studies developed an initial orthogonal-to-layer (and normal to regional fold hinge-parallel lineation)
emplacement model for deformed quartz and granite intrusions
(Swanson, 1992, 1994). An array of kinematic indicators for ductile dextral shear parallel to foliation and lineation was observed
(Swanson, 1999a) and used to constrain a tectonic model that used
transpression at a restraining section of the fault to account for
the observed structural patterns (Swanson, 1999b). For the SE
side of the main fault zone, this regional shearing model (Swanson, 1999b) includes an early history of regional oblique-to-fault
folding and reorientation of the steeply dipping fold limbs into
a 12 km inner zone of high dextral shear strain along the main
trace of the NE-striking Norumbega fault.
Our REU Site Program (20022007) expanded coverage
across northern Casco Bay (Fig. 3) (Jansyn et al., 2003; OKane
et al., 2003) and east to Muscongus Bay (Castle et al., 2004;
Doyle et al., 2004; Olson et al., 2005; Betka et al., 2006) within
the SE side of, and at progressively greater distances from, the
main Norumbega fault zone (for regional geology, see Osberg et
al., 1985; Hussey and Berry, 2002). Elongation and shear along
steep limb layers in oblique-to-fault upright folds throughout the
area can be interpreted from kinematic indicators such as symmetric to asymmetric boudinage, asymmetric folds, shear band
fabrics, and the geometry of initially orthogonal quartz veins
and granite intrusions (Swanson, 1992, 1999a). The work of the
REU research teams has documented zones of both right- and
left-lateral shear that have been used in a lateral extrusion model
of a midcoast structural block that is dominated by pure shear
layer-normal flattening (Fig. 3).
maps using simple hand tools and map and landscape reading
skills, a sophisticated analytical interpretation can be produced.
Various techniques are employed to address structures over a
variety of scale ranges (Fig. 4), and regional, local, outcrop, and
feature observations are compiled.
Outcrop Surface Mapping
Outcrop surface mapping techniques are designed to delineate an intermediate or mesoscale range of geologic structure
somewhere between the ~10 km scale of the topographic map
and the ~1 m scale of an individual small outcrop (Fig. 4).
Outcrop surface mapping is a detailed depiction of specific
structural features such as folds, faults, or intrusions found
within single large outcrop exposures. These laterally extensive
exposures are found in glaciated environments, river channels,
above tree line, road cuts, and in wave-washed coastal settings.
The latter types are common along Maines rocky shoreline.
This birds-eye perspective allows the representation of features
that are typically overlooked in traditional quadrangle geologic
mapping because they are too small to be recognized in traditional aerial photographs yet are too large to be seen while
standing on the outcrop. Outcrop surface mapping techniques,
therefore, are capable of delineating new, never-before-seen
geologic features and relationships.
The importance of outcrop surface mapping has long been
recognized in geology. While early workers sketched map views
of outcrop features freehand (see Jackson [1838] for the first dike
intrusion maps of Maine exposures), more recent outcrop surface
maps have been prepared using detailed grid mapping techniques
(e.g., Swanson, 1983, 2006; DiToro and Pennacchioni, 2005)
123
Instrument Precision
Instrument precisions used in this report refer to the diameter of multiple same-point position clusters when plotted in GIS
(Fig. 5), which reflect the error in determining coordinate positions for each instrument. Handheld mapping-grade instruments
provide adequate meter-scale precision for plotting positions on
topographic maps, whereas rod and tripod-mounted survey-grade
instruments provide centimeter-scale precision for delineation of
finer-scale features.
Tools and Resources
The equipment, supporting imagery, and software required
for USMs REU Site Program in integrated digital mapping (Box
1) are designed to take the researcher from data collection in the
field to final map presentation in the computer laboratory. The
mapping- and survey-grade instruments include handheld GPS
receivers, a GPS field base station, RTK (Real Time Kinematic)
GPS rovers, and optical total stations. Supporting digital imagery
includes high-resolution digital aerial imagery currently available
124
Figure 5. Precision for mapping and survey instrumentation is reported as the diameter of a cluster of multiple, same-point, position coordinates when plotted in
geographic information systems (GIS). Mapping-grade
handheld global positioning system (GPS) is capable
of meter-scale precisions, while (A) survey-grade RTK
(Real Time Kinematic) GPS and (B) optical total stations are capable of centimeter-scale precisions.
125
Figure 6. (A) Handheld mapping-grade global positioning system (GPS) (Trimble GeoXT) with its touch screen and
built-in antenna is used for (B) logging position and descriptive attribute information (orientation, lithology, etc.) pertaining to mapped features (points, lines, and areas). (C) Broadcasting field base station for RTK GPS setup consists of a
tripod-mounted geodetic antenna with ground plane (to eliminate multipath errors from satellite signals reflected off of the
ground), a Trimble 5700 base receiver, and a 225 W broadcasting radio and whip antenna for communication with (D)
survey-grade RTK GPS (Trimble 5700) and rover receivers with rod-mounted antenna and radio link to broadcasting base
station for real-time corrections to position data.
positions are measured in meters to three decimal places, representing distances to the nearest millimeter.
Datum coordinates. The initial datum coordinates for the
field base station can be acquired by several different methods
depending on the accuracy needed for the survey. Here, the term
accuracy refers to how well the precision survey will fit into
the coordinate system. For a postprocessed datum, 2 hour static
data runs using the GPS base receiver and geodetic antenna with
ground plane can be postprocessed automatically using National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrations (NOAA) Web-based
Online Position User Service (OPUS), which compares the base
receiver satellite data to several nearby Continuously Operating
Receiver Stations (CORS) to apply position corrections. GPS
receiver files in RINEX format are uploaded, and postprocessed
results are emailed to the users usually within several minutes.
These postprocessed positions can be calculated using three different levels of satellite orbital model precisions. Postprocessed
126
Figure 7. (A) Optical tripod-mounted total stations (SpectraPrecision 608 Series Geodimeter) require a rod-mounted prism
and line-of-sight to map features. (B) Autolock function allows the station to automatically track the target prism mounted
on a short rod for increased precision. (C) Laptop computers in the field are used for downloading and processing survey
data into a geographic information system (GIS). (D) Use of a computer harness allows on-site editing of GIS shape files.
Figure 8. Camera-pole imagery offers a low-elevation aerial view of the outcrop surface utilizing (A) a bracket and plumb tube
for holding, triggering, and aligning the camera on top of a telescoping aluminum pole, adjustable to 14 m in height. RTK (Real
Time Kinematic) global positioning system (GPS) is used to measure the position of georeferencing control points within each
image. (B) Visible geologic features are digitized on-screen to produce shape files in a geographic information system (GIS).
(C) Seamless photomosaics are georeferenced into the correct position, size, and orientation.
127
128
Figure 9. Thematic digital atlas structure for syntectonic granite intrusions linking (A) regional geology; (B) area structure; (C) local
features; (D) outcrop maps; (E) camera-pole imagery; and (F) handheld feature photos through a spatial database structure in a geographic information system (GIS). BBFBloody Bluff Fault; CCFCobequid-Chedabucto Fault; CNFClinton-Newberry Fault;
FZFundy Zone; NFNorumbega Fault; N.H.New Hampshire.
129
Figure 10. (A) Increasing number of files generated and (B) increasing size of the digital work space for successive years of the Research
Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) Program are typical for digital
mapping, where an ever-increasing work space volume requires special data management strategies.
Student Research
Research topics explored by student participants and presented as abstracts and posters have focused on three aspects of
our work: (1) the use and application of digital mapping tools
and development of new digital mapping techniques; (2) new
geologic features and relationships revealed in the targeted field
exposures; and (3) the use of GIS in new ways for the compilation and analysis of the collected field data.
Use of digital mapping tools and development of new digital mapping techniques. A main thrust of our research efforts
is focused on developing novel applications for the new digital
mapping tools and new digital mapping techniques that can be
applied to geologic and environmental field projects. These studies have included:
(1) integrated digital techniques for outcrop surface mapping
in structural geology (Berry et al., 2003; McBride et al., 2004;
Swanson and Bampton, 2004) to describe applications to geologic field problems;
(2) aerial camera-pole techniques for generating outcrop
surface imagery (Verhave et al., 2005; Duwe et al., 2006; Mayhew et al., 2007; Swanson and Bampton, 2008) as a new way to
create low-elevation images for detailed mapping; and
(3) a database structure for digital outcrop surface mapping
(Millard et al., 2005; Spaulding et al., 2006; Sigrist et al., 2008)
to keep track of an increasing number of project data files generated each year.
New geologic features and relationships. The geologic
questions addressed by the detailed outcrop surface mapping
evolved as our exploratory work progressed. Specific focus has
been maintained on delineating the nature of the syntectonic granite intrusions found throughout the coastal field areas. Research
has focused specifically on:
(1) the nature of syntectonic granite intrusion (Jansyn et al.,
2003; Doyle et al., 2004; Olson et al., 2005; Betka et al., 2006;
Waters et al., 2008; Saunders et al., 2008) in relation to initially
orthogonal emplacement as dikes and the subsequent strain partitioning into the shear and flattening components of the deformation; and
(2) the structure of pseudotachylyte fault veins (Bates et al.,
2006; Swanson, 2005) in left-lateral strike-slip faults that were
discovered in several Muscongus Bay area locations.
Use of GIS for compilation and analysis. This aspect of the
research focused on the application of GIS and its compilation
and spatial analysis capabilities to the geologic and environmental issues at hand. The majority of this work has revolved around
using digital measurement techniques (angles, line lengths, and
surface areas) in GIS for accurate strain analysis (elongation and
130
131
OUTDOOR
Low-impact camping
Cooking for large groups
Kayak paddling strokes
Rescue techniques
Navigation and charts
Leadership, group work
STRUCTURE
Brunton compass; quadrants
Planar data, right-hand rule, azimuth compass
Linear data as trend and plunge
Stereonet program for digital orientation data
Strain analysis using line length or surface area reconstruction
DIGITAL MAPPING
Geo XT
Custom Data Dictionary
5700 RTK Measure Points
Continuous Topo Mode
RTK base station setup
Total Station
Station establishment
Design survey strategy
Trimble data transfer utility
Trimble export as shape files utility
Download procedure for imagery from MeOGIS
Upload procedure to OPUS for static GPS
GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM
Arc GIS 9
Download, format, display, and convert to shape routine for digital
survey data
Georeference preexisting maps
Merge shape files
Use ET Wizard to connect data points
Plot, rotate, and label map symbols
Areas of polygons
Lengths of line segments
Measure angles
Produce TIN contours from elevation data
Run Arc Scene
Export as video clip
Create new shape file and digitize new features in Edit
Export MXD layouts as tiffs, jpegs & pdfs
Personal geodatabase
SOFTWARE
Excel
Manage and edit coordinates
Adobe Photoshop for camera-pole mosaics
Adobe Illustrator for poster layouts
POSTER
Hypothesis generation and testing
Write scientific abstract
Design and create scientific poster
05
05
132
Figure 11. Skills assessment results for the 2007 Research Experiences
for Undergraduates (REU) Program showing the pre- and post-REU
estimated skill levels (on a scale of 05) as an evaluation of learning.
Student responses are grouped by category to include outdoor skills,
structural geology, digital mapping, geographic information systems
(GIS), supporting software, and abstract/poster development.
Arnold, T., Bampton, M., and Swanson, M.T., 2007, A 3D approach: Application of detailed topography for enhanced visualization: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 39, no. 1, p. 44.
Bates, A., Byars, H., McCurdy, K., Swanson, M., and Bampton, M., 2006,
Digital mapping of pseudotachylyte in the Harbor Island fault zone, East
Muscongus Bay, Maine: Geological Society of America Abstracts with
Programs, v. 38, no. 2, p. 2425.
Benford, B., Burd, A., Mason-Barton, K., Millard, M., Swanson, M., and Bampton, M., 2005, Digital strain analysis of syntectonic veins and intrusions,
eastern contact of the Waldoboro pluton, Muscongus Bay, Maine: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 37, no. 1, p. 59.
Berry, L., Cooper, J., Weiss, H., Bampton, M., and Swanson, M., 2003, Integrated precision digital mapping techniques for structural geology in
Casco Bay, Maine: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 35, no. 3, p. 94.
Betka, P., Swanson, M., and Bampton, M., 2006, Digital mapping techniques
used to correlate left-lateral shear with the emplacement of the Waldoboro
pluton, Muscongus Bay, Maine: Geological Society of America Abstracts
with Programs, v. 38, no. 2, p. 9293.
Bothner, W., and Hussey, A.M., II, 1999, Norumbega connections: Casco
Bay, Maine to Massachusetts?, in Ludman, A., and West, D.P., Jr., eds.,
Norumbega Fault System of the Northern Appalachians: Geological Society of America Special Paper 331, p. 5972.
Castle, N., Heffron, E., McCoog, M., Swanson, M., and Bampton, M., 2004,
Strain analysis of syntectonic granite intrusions east of the Norumbega
fault zone at Pemaquid Point, Maine: Geological Society of America
Abstracts with Programs, v. 36, no. 2, p. 101.
Di Toro, G., and Pennacchioni, G., 2005, Fault plane processes and mesoscopic
structure of a strong-type earthquake fault in tonalites (Adamello batholith, Southern Alps): Tectonophysics, v. 402, p. 5580, doi: 10.1016/j
.tecto.2004.12.036.
Doyle, J., Kiser, B., Newton, M., Swanson, M., and Bampton, M., 2004, Syntectonic granites and transpressional deformation Muscongus Bay, coastal
Maine: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 36,
no. 2, p. 101.
Duwe, J., Rich, J., Robinson, T., Bampton, M., and Swanson, M., 2006, 3D
virtual outcrop: Conception, construction and application: Geological
Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 38, no. 2, p. 25.
Gilbert, A., Tragert, C., Bampton, M., and Swanson, M., 2007, Seguin Island:
The use of digital mapping techniques in environmental analysis: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 39, no. 1, p. 100.
Guertin, L.A., 2006, Integrating handheld technology with field investigations
in introductory-level geoscience courses: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 54, p. 143146.
Hubbard, M., 1999, Norumbega fault zone: Part of an orogen-parallel strikeslip system, northern Appalachians, in Ludman, A., and West, D.P., Jr.,
eds., Norumbega Fault System of the Northern Appalachians: Geological
Society of America Special Paper 331, p. 155166.
Hussey, A.M., II, 1988, Lithotectonic stratigraphy, deformation, plutonism
and metamorphism, greater Casco Bay region, southwestern Maine, in
Tucker, R.D., and Marvinney, R.G., eds., Studies in Maine Geology: Volume 1. Structure and Stratigraphy: Augusta, Maine Geological Survey,
p. 1734.
Hussey, A.M., II, and Berry, H., 2002, Bedrock Geology of the Bath 1:100,000
Quadrangle, Maine: Maine Geological Survey Geologic Map 02-152 and
Bulletin 42, scale 1:100,000.
133
Plitzuweit, S., Rajter, D., Swanson, M., and Bampton, M., 2007, Using digital
techniques to study complex folding on Seguin and Salter Islands, Maine:
Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 39, no. 1, p. 77.
Priest, S., and Gass, M.A., 2005, Effective Leadership in Adventure Programming: Champaign, Illinois, Human Kinetics Publishers, 344 p.
Saunders, R., Swanson, M., and Bampton, M., 2008, The post-emplacement
deformational history of granite intrusions: The quarries of Damariscove
Island, Maine: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs,
v. 40, no. 2, p. 2324.
Sigrist, B., Mueller, P., Joyner, A., Mosher, R., Bampton, M., and Swanson,
M.T., 2008, Design and implementation of a NADM compliant data
model for regional to outcrop scale geologic mapping projects: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 40, no. 2, p. 71.
Spaulding, A., Ofsevit, A., Byars, H.E., Bampton, M., and Swanson, M.T.,
2006, Geodatabase: The next step in data management?: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 38, no. 2, p. 25.
Swanson, M.T., 1983, Continuous outcrop mapping within the Mesozoic eastern New England dike swarm of southern coastal Maine: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 15, no. 6, p. 703.
Swanson, M.T., 1992, Late AcadianAlleghenian transpressional deformation:
Evidence from asymmetric boudinage in the Casco Bay area: Journal of
Structural Geology, v. 14, p. 323341, doi: 10.1016/0191-8141(92)90090-J.
Swanson, M.T., 1994, Minimum dextral shear strain estimates in the Casco Bay
area of coastal Maine from vein reorientation and elongation: Geological
Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 26, no. 3, p. 75.
Swanson, M.T., 1999a, Kinematic indicators for dextral shearing along the Casco
Bay section of the Norumbega fault zone, coastal Maine, in Ludman, A.,
and West, D.P., Jr., eds., Norumbega Fault System of the Northern Appalachians: Geological Society of America Special Paper 331, p. 124.
Swanson, M.T., 1999b, Dextral transpression at the Casco Bay restraining
bend, Norumbega fault zone, coastal Maine, in Ludman, A., and West,
D.P., Jr., eds., Norumbega Fault System of the Northern Appalachians:
Geological Society of America Special Paper 331, p. 85104.
Swanson, M.T., 2005, Digital mapping in a new pseudotachylyte locality from
the Harbor Island fault zone, Muscongus Bay, Maine: Geological Society
of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 37, no. 1, p. 59.
Swanson, M.T., 2006, Late Paleozoic strike-slip faults and related vein arrays of
Cape Elizabeth, Maine: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 28, p. 456473,
doi: 10.1016/j.jsg.2005.12.009.
Swanson, M.T., 2007, Strain partitioning during transpressional deformation:
Evidence from boudin partings, quartz veins, and granite intrusions: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 39, no. 1, p. 97.
Swanson, M.T., and Bampton, M., 2004, Precision digital mapping techniques
used to study multi-scale crustal processes: An integrated GIS-based
approach: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 36,
no. 2, p. 49.
Swanson, M.T., and Bampton, M., 2008, Digital camera-pole photography: A
useful research tool for outcrop surface mapping of mesoscale structures:
Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 40, no. 2, p. 71.
Swanson, M.T., Francis, B., Cooper, J., and Bampton, M., 2002, All-digital
outcrop mapping at Hiram Falls, Saco River, Maine: Geological Society
of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 34, no. 1, p. A-68.
Vanderberg, J., Joyner, A., Bampton, M., and Swanson, M., 2008, High-resolution GIS analysis of palimpsest glacial features in a marginal glacial
environment: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs,
v. 40, no. 2, p. 68.
Verhave, A., Wanless, S., Swanson, M., and Bampton, M., 2005, Applications of
georeferenced precision photography to digital outcrop surface mapping:
Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 37, p. 1, p. 58.
Waters, L., Young, K., Swanson, M., and Bampton, M., 2008, Digital mapping
of the syntectonic Damariscove granitic dike intrusion complex of midcoast Maine: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs,
v. 40, no. 2, p. 23.
Winchester, S., 2001, The Map That Changed the World: William Smith and the
Birth of Modern Geology: New York, Harper Collins, 329 p.
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY 5 MAY 2009
ABSTRACT
The incorporation of increasingly multidisciplinary aspects of geoscience curricula into a traditional geology field camp requires compromises. Among these, decisions about projects to reduce or eliminate and course prerequisites are two of the
most challenging. Over the past 10 yr, the University of Missouris geology field camp
has completed a two-stage plan to expand our projects in hydrology and geophysics
while maintaining traditional aspects of our course and our standard prerequisites.
The first stage added projects in surface and groundwater hydrology, seismic refraction, and surficial mapping during the fifth week of our six-week course, replacing
an existing mapping project. The second stage added advanced project options that
students can select to complete during the last week of the course. Advanced projects
in hydrology and geophysics were added as alternatives to the existing hard-rock
structural analysis project that had been the sixth-week project for all students. This
staged addition has allowed us to: (1) integrate these projects into a curriculum that
maintains a strong emphasis on historical bedrock geology, geologic mapping, and
three-dimensional visualization; and (2) accommodate differences in the coursework
that students have completed prior to beginning the field camp. Rather than requiring
students to have prerequisite courses in hydrogeology or geophysics in order to select
these advanced project options, we include sufficient instruction during the fifth and
sixth weeks that builds upon previous projects to provide the required background.
To set up the context for our expanded hydrology and geophysics projects, this
paper briefly describes our traditional field projects and our instructional philosophies. We describe the expanded projects that have been implemented during the fifth
and sixth weeks of our course, project objectives, and the ways that these projects
Bauer, R.L., Siegel, D.I., Sandvol, E.A., and Lautz, L.K., 2009, Integrating hydrology and geophysics into a traditional geology field course: The use of advanced
project options, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological
Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 135154, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(12). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological
Society of America. All rights reserved.
135
136
Bauer et al.
reinforce lessons learned during traditional field projects. We present the results of
student surveys that have been used to evaluate the success of these efforts, and we
discuss the personnel and equipment expenses required.
INTRODUCTION
Geology summer field camps give upper-division undergraduate geoscience students intensive instruction and field
experience and integrate standard coursework into a field setting. Historically, this integration has involved geologic mapping
and three-dimensional subsurface interpretations in a wide range
of geologic terrains. However, todays geoscience curricula are
more multidisciplinary, and many programs commonly incorporate hydrology, aqueous geochemistry, and geophysics. Although
the majority of geology field camps continue to place strong
emphasis on traditional field mapping, increasing numbers of
field programs now offer projects in hydrology, geophysics, and
environmental geology (e.g., McKay and Kammer, 1999; Baker,
2006), and some programs integrate various new technologies
into these projects or the field mapping process (e.g., Knoop et
al., 2007; Swanson and Bampton, this volume; Whitmeyer et al.,
this volume). Two of the principal challenges when adding such
components are: (1) to achieve a balanced curriculum that provides sufficiently broad field instruction while integrating new
topics and techniques, and (2) to accommodate differences in
the coursework that students have completed prior to beginning
the field camp. Some field camps accommodate the second challenge by specializing in hydrology, geophysics, or environmental
geologyavoiding any pretense of a broad field curriculum
and requiring that students have the prerequisite courses in the
specialty subject. However, we asked: how and to what degree
can both of these challenges be met?
Over the past 10 yr, the University of Missouri has introduced a series of hydrology, aqueous geochemistry, and geophysics exercises into our six-week course in an effort to broaden our
curriculum and overcome both of these challenges. Our course
continues to emphasize traditional aspects of field geology and
regional geology during the first four weeks. However, we have
also developed instructional modules for the last two weeks that
serve the interests and abilities of students that have little or no
previous course work in hydrology and geophysics, as well as
students who have previous background courses in these subjects
and/or who have advanced interests in hydrology or geophysics.
The fifth week of the course includes instruction and projects in surface and groundwater hydrology, seismic refraction,
stream terrace mapping, and hard-rock structural analysis.
Although structural geology is a course prerequisite, courses in
hydrogeology, geophysics, and geomorphology are not required.
As a result, the instruction during the fifth week provides considerable fundamental background for the projects. During the
sixth week of the course, we offer a series of advanced options:
students have the choice of completing advanced projects in
hard-rock structural analysis, seismic reflection, refraction, and
tomography studies, or groundwater and surface water hydrology. This paper describes our fifth- and sixth-week projects with
emphasis on the hydrology and geophysics projects. To provide a
course context for the addition of this new material, we describe
our instructional philosophy, our basic course curriculum, and
the ways in which we have integrated geophysics and hydrology
into a traditional geology field course.
As a basis for general comparison with other field courses,
our course operates from a permanent residential base camp
that includes a laboratory where students complete their project
reports, and computer facilities that include satellite broadband
access. We accept a maximum of 40 students for our six-week
course, which has prerequisites of structural geology, historical
geology, sedimentology, and mineralogy. Typically, less than one
third of the students are from our department, and the remainder
of participants come from other departments across the country
and the state of Missouri. All students pay the same fees. The
students work 6 d per week. Faculty members generally rotate
into the course for two-week periods to teach projects in their
research specialties. Most field projects are completed at sites
within a 45 min drive from the camp, but the curriculum also
includes a 4 d instructional trip through Teton and Yellowstone
National Parks, and adjacent areas of the Snake River Plain and
Beartooth Mountains.
FIELD SETTING FOR OUR PROJECTS
The Branson Field Station is located in Sinks Canyon in the
foothills of the Wind River Mountains near Lander, Wyoming,
~200 km southeast of Yellowstone National Park (Fig. 1). The
immediate field areas provide a wide variety of rock units and
deformation features that form the basis for our field instruction and projects. The rock section includes exposures ranging
from Precambrian granite-greenstone belts through most of the
Paleozoic (not including Silurian), Mesozoic, and Tertiary stratigraphic sections (Fig. 2).
The Wind River Mountains were deformed by basementinvolved uplift during the Laramide orogeny (ca. 7551 Ma in
Wyoming), which exposed the Precambrian core of the range and
tilted the overlying Paleozoic and Mesozoic strata to the northeast, dipping into the adjacent Wind River basin (e.g., Keefer,
1970). Our field station is located near the Precambrian-Paleozoic contact within the steep-walled Pleistocene glacial valley
containing the Middle Fork of the Popo Agie River. Several
doubly plunging, en echelon anticlines, which formed during the
Laramide uplift of the range, occur along the southwestern margin of the Wind River basin within ~25 km of our camp. These
anticlines fold Paleozoic and Mesozoic strata and trend subparallel to the northwest-southeast trend of the Wind River Mountains
Integrating hydrology and geophysics into a traditional geology field course: The use of advanced project options
110 W
104 W
137
45 N
41 N
Age in millions
of years
Map Explanation
100 km
Absaroka Mountains
ind
Upper Cretaceous
ve
Pinedale
rM
1,400
2,500
Major
unconformity
Middle Proterozoic intrusive rocks
ain
Wind River
thrust
Lander
Camp
Dallas dome
Branson
Derby dome
nt
Paleozoic
Permian and Pennsylvanian;
some Mississippian and Triassic
Cambrian, Ordovician, Devonian,
and Mississippian
ou
Triassic
245
Riverton
Ri
66.4
100 km
Sheep
mountain
Red
Canyon
South Pass
greenstone
belt
Figure 1. (A) Geologic index map of the state of Wyoming showing the outline of the area containing the Wind River Mountains (after
Roberts, 1989). (B) Geologic map of the Wind River Mountains and adjacent areas of the Wind River basin. (C) Map overlay of B showing
the location of the major features discussed in the text.
P
P
P
M
M
M
M
Figure 2. Stratigraphic section exposed in the Wind River Mountains and adjacent parts of the Wind River basin. Munits that are included in major mapping projects; Punits that
are studied during major sedimentation and stratigraphy projects; Sunits that are examined in the field for their stratigraphic and regional historical significance. Pleistocene units not
shown in the section were also included in a mapping exercise.
138
Integrating hydrology and geophysics into a traditional geology field course: The use of advanced project options
(e.g., Willis and Groshong, 1993). The folds range from 8 to
15 km long and contain numerous normal and reverse faults produced during the Laramide folding. Two of these folds, Dallas
dome and Derby dome (Fig. 1C), have well-exposed faulted and
folded Mesozoic sections, and serve as field sites for several of
our stratigraphy, sedimentation, geologic mapping, and advanced
geophysics projects. Exposures of deformed and metamorphosed
rocks of the South Pass greenstone belt (cf. Figs. 1B and 1C)
occur in the uplifted Precambrian core of the range, and these
exposures provide field sites for our hard-rock projects in structural analysis and mapping of igneous and metamorphic rocks.
By the end of the Tertiary, the Wind River basin was filled
with Tertiary sediment eroded from the adjacent uplifted mountain ranges and with interlayers of volcanic ash from the Eocene
Absaroka volcanic field to the north-northwest of the basin
(Fig. 1). The result was a landscape of relatively low relief (e.g.,
Mears, 1993). Subsequently, late Cenozoic regional uplift or
regional climate change (cf. Epis and Chapin, 1975; Gregory and
Chase, 1994; Riihimaki et al., 2007) resulted in exhumation of
much of the Wind River basin by the Wind River and its tributary
streams. This process produced the current relief between the
basins and adjacent ranges and also exposed numerous angular
unconformities between the relatively flat-lying Tertiary strata
and the underlying Paleozoic and Mesozoic strata dipping off of
the uplifted core of the Wind River Mountains. Our instruction
and projects in sedimentology, stream terrace mapping, hydrology, and geophysics take advantage of these exposed relationships and/or the associated stream systems.
Although our project settings are primarily geologic, we
also take advantage of our location near the towns of Lander and
Riverton, Wyoming, and nearby mining operations in Fremont
County to help our students appreciate the societal implications
of field geology. For instance, our groundwater and geophysics
projects have examined the relationship of municipal water quality and waste disposal to the local geology. Students also learn
how field geologists working for the Wyoming Department of
Environmental Quality in Lander oversee mine reclamation in
abandoned iron and gold mines in the area.
INSTRUCTIONAL PHILOSOPHY
Geoscience students have a fairly broad spectrum of geology
field courses from which to choose. These range from courses
that concentrate primarily on traditional field mapping, to specialty courses in hydrology, geophysics, or environmental geology, and courses that broadly integrate field computers and geographic information system (GIS) technologies into the mapping
process. Our basic course philosophy has been to give students
a broad diversity of field problem-solving experiences while still
providing thorough training in field geologic mapping. We have
continued this philosophy with the addition of our advanced
course options by working to integrate mapping and subsurface
interpretation techniques into the more instrumented data gathering and analysis that are associated with the advanced projects.
139
Beyond this general philosophy, we have developed our own philosophies about field and laboratory instruction, field mapping,
and technology integration.
Field and Laboratory Instruction
Our primary instructional goal is to teach field-oriented
problem solving that reinforces critical work skills. We emphasize five-dimensional problem solvingunderstanding the three
physical dimensions of geological features, the way these features
have developed with time, and the processes responsible for the
observed features over time. We emphasize this approach in all
of our projects, and students are asked to address each dimension
in their project reports. The general work skills that we promote
include cooperative group work, effective time management,
report writing skills, and dealing with uncertainty by considering
interpretations with incomplete data.
All of our projects are conducted in groups that usually
include three students. Groups change with each project to allow
students to work with other students of varying interests, expertise, and abilities. This approach promotes cooperative learning
among the students, provides for field safety, and allows us to
group students with different academic and physical strengths. As
in any work situation, group dynamics and abilities will vary, but
we do find that collaborative learning increases students involvement in the learning process. When students share and discuss
their ideas, their thinking about the projects is enhanced and their
understanding deepens. Group projects make up 50% of the students grade, and three individual exams make up the remaining
50%. The diversity of students within a group may lead to uneven
work efforts (reflecting a real-world work environment), but the
grading system rewards those who are the active learners.
Most of our projects include full field days (6 d/wk) combined with evening data analysis or report writing in a laboratory
setting using group laptop computers for project completion. Longer projects may include an entire day in the laboratory preparing
reports. Strict time constraints for project completion require that
the groups develop effective group time management.
Geologists, probably more than other scientists and engineers, are commonly called upon to make interpretations based
on incomplete data. This is particularly true in the development
of structural cross sections and three-dimensional (3-D) interpretations of the subsurface from geologic maps (e.g., Groshong,
2006), but it is also common in hydrologic and geophysical interpretations. We discuss techniques for making subsurface interpretations and cross sections from geologic maps, and instructors
work individually with student groups to help them understand
the process of making reasoned interpretations when faced with
limited data.
Part of our instructional philosophy includes hiring instructors to teach projects in their areas of specialization. For the 40
students that we instruct during our course, we typically hire a
cadre of eight to ten faculty members and three teaching assistants. Faculty members and teaching assistants come from a
140
Bauer et al.
Field Mapping
Traditional field geologic mapping continues to be a prominent component of our field course. Our students use paper
topographic maps and registered paper orthophotos as base
maps. The mapped areas are well exposed and allow students
to draw map-unit contacts on the topographic maps as contacts
are viewed either from a distance or along traverses. Each project group also has a handheld global positioning system (GPS)
receiver to record UTM coordinates of specific station locations
or to reinforce location decisions, but we strongly emphasize the
reading of topographic maps, the use of the Brunton compass,
and the integration of orthophotos as the primary mapping tools.
We believe that this is the best approach to help students develop
the three-dimensional perspective that is so critical to geologists, geophysicists, and hydrogeologists. We emphasize that the
geologic map is an interpretation of field data and observations,
and it serves as the basis for subsurface interpretations and fivedimensional hypothesis testing.
Integrating Technology
We have embraced the use of various technologies to enhance
our data collection, analysis, and report writing for various projects. Each project group has a notebook computer available for
compilation and analysis of field data in the laboratory. Programs
available on these computers and several desktop computers in
our laboratory include commonly available software such as
spreadsheet, word-processing, and photo editor programs. We
have satellite broadband access and a local wireless network that
allows students to download remote data sets and print to networked printers. We also use project-specific equipment and several specialty programs in our advanced geophysics, hydrology,
and structural analysis projects.
Nevertheless, we have not attempted to integrate technologies for recording general project notes or data in the field (e.g.,
using tablet or handheld computers), or for the field mapping
or the map preparation process. The principal factor that influenced this decision is the time required to instruct students in
Week 1
Integrating hydrology and geophysics into a traditional geology field course: The use of advanced project options
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF THE TRADITIONAL FIELD CAMP PROJECTS AND INSTRUCTION INCLUDED DURING
THE FIRST FOUR WEEKS OF THE COURSE
Projects
Objectives
Units/features/location
Pace and compass methods
Become familiar with field methods
Section reconnaissance
Learn stratigraphic sections
All Paleozoic and Mesozoic units
Sedimentary structures
Recognize/interpret structures
Mesa Verde Formation
Sedimentary facies
Interpret sedimentary facies
Mesa Verde Formation
Tertiary unconformity
Week 3
Week 2
Section measurement
Week 4
141
Paleocurrent analysis
Mapping folded and faulted
sedimentary rocks
Map evaluation
Mapping folded and faulted
sedimentary rocks
Review of the map area
Field exam
Mine reclamation tour
Wyoming geotour (4 d)
Camp laboratory
Week 6 (new)
Week 6 (old)
Week 5 (new)
Week 5 (old)
142
Bauer et al.
TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF THE NEW FIFTH- AND SIXTH-WEEK PROJECTS AND THE PROJECTS THAT THEY REPLACED
Projects (old vs. new)
Objectives
Units/features/location
Mapping folded and faulted sedimentary
Provide more mapping experience
Paleozoic section that includes different
rocks
Exposure to mapping different rock units and
faulting and folding mechanisms than the
different fault and fold geometries
previous map areasSheep Mountain
Analysis of deformation fabrics in igneous
and metamorphic rocks
Surface-water hydrology
Groundwater hydrology
creek mixes with groundwater, leading to biogeochemical reactions and mixing relationships down the hydraulic gradient either
in the creek or in the subsurface adjacent to the creek. Different
segments of the creek both receive and lose water to the water
table (Lautz and Siegel, 2006). The Nature Conservancy is interested in determining whether complex hydraulics associated with
meanders and dams effectively add moisture to the unsaturated
soils of the prairie and thereby increase biodiversity. Our field
projects focus on this local interface between surface water and
groundwater, the hyporheic zone, allowing us to easily expose
our students to both surface and groundwater techniques. In a
broader sense, the hyporheic zone is widely consider to be the
richest and most accessible hydrogeologic setting for multidisciplinary 3-D field investigations (Triska et al., 1993; Winter et al.,
1998; Jones et al., 2000).
We began our integrated hydrologic and geophysical studies in 1999 (Bauer et al., 2003). Subsequently, we have incrementally installed 35 shallow wells using a Geoprobe and have
added other small amounts of instrumentation, including several
in-stream mini-piezometers and a Parshall flume, to progres-
sively expand our project area (Fig. 4). The projects that we have
developed are designed to give students a broad understanding
of surface watergroundwater interactions in arid mountain
environments, and they are often linked to large-scale research
projects (Lautz et al., 2006; Lautz and Siegel, 2006; Lautz and
Siegel, 2007; Fanelli and Lautz, 2008; Lautz and Fanelli, 2008).
The three days of surface water, groundwater, and geophysics
projects include: water-table mapping, water-quality sampling,
shallow seismic-refraction imaging, single-aquifer testing techniques and data analysis, stream gauging, and tracer tests. We
are able to logistically compress these experiences within a short
time frame because the diversity of stream-groundwater interaction at our site occurs over a relatively restricted area.
Students measure water level elevations in the 35 monitoring
wells and mini-piezometers installed in an ~2-acre meadow adjacent to a meander of Red Canyon Creek. From these water levels,
students construct a water-table map, focusing on the way that
contours change as they cross the creek under different groundwatersurface-water settings, which change from year to year.
Students use water-height differences between the stream and
Integrating hydrology and geophysics into a traditional geology field course: The use of advanced project options
Red Canyon
project
proj
o ect ar
area
ea
Nugget
Sandstone
Nugg
Nu
gg
gett San
S
nds
dsto
tone
one
ne
Phosphoria
Formation
C
Ch
hugwa
ug
gwa
w te
er Gr
G
rou
up
Chugwater
Group
Red
Canyon
Creek
R
Re
d Ca
C
any
yon
o C
Cre
rre
eek
ek
143
Nugget Sandstone
Chugwater Group and Dinwoody Formation
Phosphoria Formation
Tensleep Sandstone and Amsden Formation
Parshall flume
Madison Limestone
Flathead Ss, Gros Ventre Fm, Gallatin Ls, Bighorn Dolomite
Field Site
k
dC
an
re
ek
e
Cre
nC
rett
yo
Re
er
ee
Bar
Ch
r
yC
Red
Can
Sn
ow
Cr
ee
De
ep
Cr
ee
yon
Cree
8 kilometers
In-stream feature
Wells and piezometers
20
40
60
80
meters
Streams
144
Bauer et al.
electromagnetics for velocity measurements. For dilution gauging, we purchased an Opti-Sciences GFL-1 Flow-through Field
Fluorometer to continuously measure the concentration of Rhodamine WT, a fluorescent surface-water tracer, in the stream
during tracer tests. The students are exposed to cutting-edge
technology and get experience programming, using, and extracting data from these instruments.
Students measure hydraulic conductivity from slug tests in
the wells, and they use their results, along with hydraulic gradients they measure from their water-table maps, to calculate
groundwater discharge (Q) and velocity (v) using Darcys law,
both horizontally across the stream and vertically up or down
through the streambed (from the mini-piezometer data). We
address the water-chemistry aspects in both groundwater and
surface water by using chemical analysis ampoule kits (Chemetrics). The students measure dissolved oxygen and iron in the field
and alkalinity and total and calcium hardness in the laboratory
later. They also measure field pH and specific conductance in the
field using WTW 340i multiparameter probes.
All of these chemical parameters are then used to determine
major water-rock interactions through bivariate plots (e.g., based
on mass action equation stoichiometry), coupled with reasonable
assumptions about the remaining solutes in the waters. The systems we investigate have low concentrations of Na and Cl, for
example, and these can either be neglected as a first approximation for much of the analysis, or they can be calculated by charge
balance difference from the concentrations of cations and anions
we measure. We particularly focus on the way in which organic
matter in streambeds and/or groundwater changes the oxidationreduction potential of water and how this changes water chemistry (Siegel, 2008). We use bivariate plots to distinguish gypsum
dissolution from calcite dissolution.
Geophysics Project
Figure 5. Students measuring stream discharge using the float method (one
type of velocity-area measurement), just downstream of Parshall flume.
Integrating hydrology and geophysics into a traditional geology field course: The use of advanced project options
and layer thicknesses for each of the layers in their model using
simple ray theory calculations. This technique is presented during the projects introductory lecture, and the students make this
determination without the use of computer software, allowing
them to develop a better understanding of principles of seismic
wave propagation.
After formulating a simple one-dimensional seismic velocity model that best fits the data, the students are required to interpret their velocity model. Because the students are conducting
their seismic experiment at the same field site as the ongoing
hydrology projects, they can use their measurements of groundwater depth to interpret their seismic velocity models. The water
table generally causes the largest velocity change at this site, so
the students are typically able to see how the shallow geophysical
measurements can be integrated with the hydrology projects that
they are also completing.
Terrace Mapping
The glaciofluvial terraces in Red Canyon, adjacent to the
hydrology and geophysics project sites, provide the setting for a
surficial mapping project that introduces students to basic aspects
of stream geomorphology, to concepts of stream equilibrium and
terrace formation, and to concepts of relative age determination
in surficial deposits. The project is set up in a consultant-client
context in which The Nature Conservancy (the property owner)
needs information about the relationship of the local alluvial history to glacial episodes in the alpine headwaters to the west of
their Red Canyon Ranch. In order to expand their irrigation system, The Nature Conservancy is particularly interested in identifying and correlating stream terrace deposits across the area.
To address these needs, each student field group: (1) identifies
and maps the Pleistocene and Holocene stream terraces and modern floodplains associated with the local streams (Cherry Creek,
Red Canyon Creek, and Barrett Creek; Fig. 4), (2) describes the
lithologies of the terraces, and (3) gathers data on the relative
ages of the terraces. The final report, which is completed during
a day in the laboratory, includes a map of the terraces, lithologic
descriptions, a cross section across the mapped area, and a report
discussing a series of questions about the terrace formation history and processes responsible for the terrace development.
Structural Analysis Projects
The Archean rocks of the South Pass greenstone belt were
the site of a gold rush near South Pass City beginning in 1867,
and gold was mined intermittently at the Carissa Mine into the
late 1940s. The day-long structural analysis study involves two
projects in lower-amphibolite-facies metamorphic country rocks
and local plutonic igneous rocks that are located near the abandoned Carissa Mine. The students are asked to determine fold
geometries and finite elongation orientations that may have
locally concentrated gold-bearing veins in the area. The two
projects are designed to instruct the students in field data gather-
145
146
Bauer et al.
Integrating hydrology and geophysics into a traditional geology field course: The use of advanced project options
147
4244N
10840W
25
0.5
Irrigation
ditches
1.0 km
10840W
Figure 6. Map of the Dry Lake area along the southern margin of Dallas dome. Topography in the western part of the map
is due to the Mesozoic dip slope dipping to the northeast into the Wind River basin. The syncline axial trace through Dry
Lake marks the change from this dip slope to the steep southwest limb of Dallas dome. Irrigation ditches flow along the
margin of the dip slope into the valley containing Dry Lake.
landfill used for another 30 yr. The citizens want it shut down.
The point of this exercise is to understand how the same hydrogeologic and geochemical data can be used to argue toward different aims. Students must stick to plausible science, and be careful not to stretch their interpretations too far. The project can be
easily related to projects that the students completed during the
first part of the course (weeks 2 and 3) because the landfill was
placed, unlined, in the exhumed axis of a dome (Fig. 7), similar to Dallas and Derby domes. The students map the Mesozoic
rock units that are deformed by the dome, and they are given
water-level elevations and water chemistry from monitoring
wells installed at the landfill. They prepare a hydrogeologic
cross section oriented normal to the axial trace of the dome and
through the landfill cells; the section must include their mapped
rock units, equipotential lines, and a few flow lines to document
the direction of groundwater flow. These lines are prepared based
on the water-table map that the students construct from monitoring well data and their interpretation of the vertical directions of
groundwater flow with respect to their mapped rock units. These
data and interpretations are the basis for their conclusions in the
environmental risk report that they complete.
Popo Agie River Dye Tracing Test
The Branson Field Camp is located less than 2 km from
Sinks Canyon State Park, next to the raging Middle Fork of the
100 m
Figure 7. Air photo of the Lander landfill area showing the axial
trace of the breached anticline, the location of monitoring wells
(white dots), and the landfill. The center of the landfill is located
at 425043N, 108414.5W.
148
Bauer et al.
Figure 8. Two students learning to program the field fluorometer during the Popo Agie dye tracing experiment.
Integrating hydrology and geophysics into a traditional geology field course: The use of advanced project options
149
students learn both basic data analysis and seismic survey design
methods as well as the basic theory underlying the data processing and analysis that they complete in the laboratory. In 2008,
the objectives of both of our refraction and reflection seismic
experiments (Dallas domeDry Lake and the Riverton landfill,
respectively) overlapped with advanced hydrology projects being
conducted in the same areas. As a result, the interpretation of the
seismic data included both the seismic images processed by the
geophysics students and the results of well data and hydrologic
models used for the hydrology projects.
Data for both the refraction and reflection projects are
acquired using a 32-channel Geometrics Geode data acquisition
system, using 10 Hz geophones and both a hammer and a Betsy
gun (blank shotgun rounds) for the source (Fig. 9). A total station
is used to survey and locate all sources and geophones. During
some phases of the experiments, students are able to use the total
station data to apply elevation corrections in their reflection and
refraction analysis. The general field and data reduction procedures used for our projects are described in Burger (1992) and
Underwood (2007).
Refraction Data Collection and ProcessingThe Dallas
Dome Site
The seismic-refraction projects over the past several years
have given students the opportunity to learn how to apply seismic
imaging to structural problems of faulting and folding near Dallas and Derby domes. The project for 2008 imaged the bedding
in the forelimb of Dallas dome beneath Dry Lake (discussed in
the hydrology section and shown in Fig. 6). The students found
evidence of the small syncline in the subsurface directly below
the lake (Fig. 6). The students also image the water table beneath
Dry Lake, which was observed to dip away from the lake, indicating that the lake was losing water to groundwater.
The Time-Term Method Used to Estimate Refractor Depth.
This method only requires layer assignments for each of the first
break arrivals. It assumes discrete constant velocity layers as
well as a horizontal refractor, which are valid assumptions in our
case. The students divide the refraction arrivals into a three-layer
model by identifying the changes in slopes of the traveltime plots.
We use the software package Plotrefa to calculate the velocities for an n-layer model. The students must decide, based upon
the observed traveltime, how many layers the data will support.
Next, they use a time-term inversion scheme to improve the data
fit beyond a simple one-dimensional (flat-layer) velocity model.
The results of the inversion calculations show a top layer that has
a relatively constant layer thickness of ~2 m (Fig. 10). The second
layer has a maximum thickness of ~18 m that pinches out toward
both ends of the cross section. This pinching out is most likely an
artifact of our acquisition geometry (pinching out at the ends due
to less coverage) and is not a reliable feature of the model. The
boundary between the first and second layers is probably the top
of the water table, while the third layer is probably a distinct lithologic unit (e.g., Frontier Sandstone). The shape of the model is
consistent with a synclinal structure. If reliable, these results may
Figure 10. Time-term inversion for traveltime data collected along the
northern shore of Dry Lake. The thickening of sediments is consistent
with the existence of a synclinal feature underlying the lake.
150
Bauer et al.
common depth point (CDP) gathers. They experiment with different velocity models by applying the normal move-out corrections before stacking the data. Finally, they learn how to convert
their data from two-way traveltime into depth.
After processing the data, the students must interpret the
seismic section using their knowledge of the local geology and
any available well control to try and image the potential perched
water table ~100 ft (~30.5 m) below the surface. An important
aspect of this interpretation is an understanding of the ambiguity
inherent in their data. For instance, deep well control is not available; the shallowest reflection is just under 100 ft (~30.5 m) deep,
but the deepest well only penetrates to a depth of ~55 ft (~17 m).
The interpretation is also hampered by our limited knowledge
of the local seismic velocity structure. As a result, the students
are expected to discuss both their possible interpretations and the
limits of their interpretations based on the quality and limits of
their data sets.
Despite these limitations, we did obtain a spectacular subsurface image of the Wind River Formation (Fig. 12). The image
suggests a remarkably laterally heterogeneous rock unit, which is
consistent with Wind River Formation exposures that the students
examined during the second week of the course (Table 1, Tertiary
unconformity). The reflection profile includes evidence of interlayered sandstone and siltstone lenses and possibly river channels
produced during the unroofing of the Wind River Mountains. We
also observe several major discontinuities at 200, 300, and even
700 ft (~61, 91, and 213 m). These boundaries could represent
significant changes in lithology, such as transitions from sandstone to claystone, or perhaps even the presence of water. Recognition of the alternative hypotheses and their relationship to
earlier field observations or to regional tectonic processes that the
students have learned about during previous project is an important part of the general learning experience. It helps us reinforce
the importance of the five dimensional thinking that we promote as part of our course.
Evolution of the Advanced Geophysics Projects
Each year our students conduct new seismic experiments
in a region where we only have a vague idea of the subsurface
structure. In areas that are proximal to previous years studies,
the students are given the prior years results as background, but
they are expected to independently formulate their own interpretations from the data that they collect. We have used several different software packages to process the seismic data. Currently,
we are using the Plotrefa suite of programs for the refraction
component and Seismic Unix (SU) for the reflection component.
We expect to eventually process both the reflection and refraction
data using SU.
Integrating hydrology and geophysics into a traditional geology field course: The use of advanced project options
100
200
R16
300
400
500
Lenses of sandstone/siltstone?
151
West
600
700
800
1000
Depth in meters
600
1200
Figure 12. Common depth point (CDP) stacks using a single stacking velocity with static corrections. The profile was taken along
the western edge of the Riverton landfill (Fig. 1). The landfill is located within the Eocene Wind River Formation, which consists
primarily of fluvial and terrestrial sediments from the Laramide uplift of the Wind River Mountains. The spacing between each CPD
trace shown here is 0.5 m, and the total spread length is 93 m. The R16 location along the profile indicates the location and depth
of penetration of the only water well in the area.
152
Bauer et al.
Integrating hydrology and geophysics into a traditional geology field course: The use of advanced project options
members and three teaching assistants are in the field and/or in
the laboratory with the students every day (and most evenings),
providing a student-instructor ratio of less than six to one. The
average of the fifth- and sixth-week faculty salary expenses is
nearly twice that of the average for the first four weeks. Most of
the expensive equipment that we use for these projects (seismic
equipment, total station, fluorometer, pH-conductivity meters,
flow meters, pumps, and chemical kits) was purchased with grant
funds from the National Science Foundation or with funds available from a field camp endowment made possible by alumni
contributions. Our computer equipment is subsidized by the University of Missouri, which provides our laptop computers and
standard site licensed software based on a computing fee paid
by the students in addition to their tuition. Although our courses
room, board, and transportation costs are operated on a breakeven basis, the university and our endowment provide a significant subsidy for our instructional costs. Our expanded curriculum
would not have been possible without these grants and subsidies.
153
Missouri, and alumni contributions to the Department of Geological Sciences of the University of Missouri. We thank The
Nature Conservancy of Wyoming for allowing us to use their
Red Canyon Ranch properties, and Bob Budd, past manager of
the Red Canyon Ranch, for the excellent background he provided to our students on the range management and scientific
objectives of The Nature Conservancys Red Canyon Ranch
project. We thank Geoprobe Systems and Wesley McCall for
the use of a Geoprobe unit to construct our well field in Red
Canyon, and James Luepke for many years of service as our
Geoprobe operator and demonstrator.
Dallas Rhodes, Drew Diefendorf, and Dennis Dahms made
critical contributions to the development of our early fifth-week
projects, which formed the basis for our initial hydrology and
associated geochemistry projects. Dennis continues to provide
expertise in alpine glacial geology and associated stream terrace features. We sincerely thank two anonymous referees for
their careful and thorough reviews, which helped to significantly improve this paper.
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES CITED
The two-stage expansion of hydrology and geophysics projects for our field course has allowed us to progressively develop
projects that are built on the foundation of our four weeks of
bedrock geology, geologic mapping projects, and regional geology. Our careful site selection and emphasis on shallow groundwatersurface-water interactions has also allowed us to integrate our hydrology and geophysics projects and accommodate
logistical aspects of our fifth- and sixth-week projects. We have
taken advantage of our fifth-week projects to provide fundamental instruction and background that allows students to successfully complete hydrology and geophysics exercises during both
the fifth- and sixth-week projects without requiring students to
have prerequisite courses in these subjects. Although students
who have previously completed introductory hydrogeology or
geophysics course may already be prepared with fundamental
background for our fifth-week projects, such students are still
challenged and gain valuable practical experience during our
advanced projects in hydrology and geophysics. Our advanced
option in hard-rock structural analysis provides an advanced
mapping and bedrock geology field experience for students who
are more interested in honing their geology skills than expanding
their background in hydrology or geophysics. Although we continue to make adjustments to our curriculum, we feel that we are
successfully maintaining our program breadth and providing fundamental instruction and experience in geologic mapping even
as we provide all students with basic exposure to field aspects of
hydrology and geophysics.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Funding that allowed us to develop our hydrology and geophysics projects was provided by National Science Foundation grant
0410493, the College of Arts and Science of the University of
Baker, M.A., 2006, Status Report on Geoscience Summer Field Camps: Report
by the American Geological Institute, Geoscience Workforce, GW-06-003:
http://www.agiweb.org/workforce/fieldcamps_report_final.pdf (accessed
September 2008).
Bauer, R., Siegel, D., Lautz, L., Dahms, D., Sandvol, E., and Luepke, J., 2003,
Investigating arid zone hydrologic systems at the local riparian to regional
bedrock scale: Multidisciplinary instruction through data analysis at the
University of Missouris Branson Field Laboratory: Geological Society of
America Abstracts with Programs, v. 35, no. 6, p. 119.
Baum, C.S., Williams, B.P., Allaire, M., Parra, L.A., Ferree, N., Story, C.,
Lautz, L.K., and Siegel, D.I., 2006, A vanishing act: Understanding the
path of the Popo Agie River through the Sinks Canyon Cave: Geological
Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 38, no. 7, p. 428.
Burger, H.R., 1992, Exploration Geophysics of the Shallow Subsurface: Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, 489 p.
Epis, R.C., and Chapin, C.E., 1975, Geomorphic and tectonic implications of
the post-Laramide, late Eocene erosion surface in the southern Rocky
Mountains, in Curtis, B.F., ed., Cenozoic History of the Southern Rocky
Mountains: Geological Society of America Memoir 144, p. 4574.
Fanelli, R.M., and Lautz, L.K., 2008, Water, heat and solute fluxes through the
hyporheic zone of small dams: Ground Water, v. 46, no. 5, p. 671687,
doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6584.2008.00461.x.
Gregory, K.M., and Chase, C.G., 1994, Tectonic and climatic significance
of a late Eocene low-relief, high-level geomorphic surface, Colorado: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 99, p. 20,14120,160, doi:
10.1029/94JB00132.
Groshong, R.H., 2006, 3-D Structural Geology: A Practical Guide to Quantitative Surface and Subsurface Map Interpretation (2nd edition): New York,
Springer, 400 p.
Jones, J.B., Mulholland, P.J., and Thorp, J.H., eds., 2000, Streams and Ground
Waters: New York, Academic Press, 425 p.
Keefer, W.R., 1970, Structural Geology of the Wind River Basin, Wyoming:
U.S. Geological Survey Special Paper 495-D, 35 p.
Knoop, P., Mogk, D., Crosby, B., Helper, M., Manone, M., Niemi, N., Snyder,
J., van der Pluijm, B., Wawrzyniec, T., and Walker, J., 2007, Using digital
information technologies in geoscience field courses: Geological Society
of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 39, no. 7, p. 259.
Lautz, L.K., and Fanelli, R.M., 2008, Seasonal biogeochemical hotspots in
the streambed around restoration structures: Biogeochemistry, v. 91,
p. 85104, doi: 10.1007/s10533-008-9235-2.
Lautz, L.K., and Siegel, D.I., 2006, Modeling surface and ground water mixing
in the hyporheic zone using MODFLOW and MT3D: Advances in Water
Resources, v. 29, p. 16181633, doi: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2005.12.003.
154
Bauer et al.
Lautz, L.K., and Siegel, D.I., 2007, The effect of transient storage on nitrate
uptake lengths in streams: An inter-site comparison: Hydrological Processes, v. 21, no. 26, p. 35333548, doi: 10.1002/hyp.6569.
Lautz, L.K., Siegel, D.I., and Bauer, R.L., 2006, Impact of debris dams on
hyporheic interaction along a semi-arid stream: Hydrological Processes,
v. 20, no. 1, p. 183196, doi: 10.1002/hyp.5910.
Lautz, L.K., Siegel, D.I., and Bauer, R.L., 2007, Dye tracing through Sinks
Canyon: Incorporating advanced hydrogeology into the University of
Missouris geology field camp: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 55,
no. 3, p. 197202.
McKay, L.K., and Kammer, T.W., 1999, Incorporating hydrogeology in a mapping-based geology field camp: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 47,
p. 124130.
Mears, B., Jr., 1993, Geomorphic history of Wyoming and high-level erosion surfaces, in Snoke, A.W., Steadmann, J.R., and Roberts, S.M., eds.,
Geology of Wyoming: The Geological Survey of Wyoming Memoir 5,
p. 608626.
Riihimaki, C.A., Anderson, R.S., and Safran, E.B., 2007, Impact of rock uplift on
rates of late Cenozoic Rocky Mountain river incision: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 112, no. F3, p. F03S02, doi: 10.1029/2006JF000557.
Roberts, S.M., 1989, Wyoming Geomaps: Geological Survey of Wyoming,
Educational Series 1, 41 p.
Siegel, D.I., 2002, The rocks rediscovered: Confessions of a die-hard hydrogeologist: August Geotimes, p. 1415.
Siegel, D.I., 2008, Reductionist hydrogeology: The ten top principles: Hydrological Processes, v. 22, p. 49674970, doi: 10.1002/hyp.7139.
Swanson, M.T., and Bampton, M., 2009, this volume, Integrated digital mapping in geologic field research: An adventure-based approach to teaching
new geospatial technologies in an REU Site Program, in Whitmeyer, S.J.,
Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical
ABSTRACT
Georgia Southern University maintains a traditional geology curriculum for both
bachelor of science (B.S.) and bachelor of arts (B.A.) degree candidates. Field experiences figure prominently in our curricula, and students have been taught to use
traditional means of gathering and recording field data (e.g., Brunton compasses and
notebooks with sketches). We have recently introduced high-resolution geophysical
investigations that are focused particularly on ground-penetrating radar. A nearby
field location, known as Middleground, offers an excellent road cut with sufficient
exposure, lithological heterogeneity, and relief to conduct both geological and geophysical investigations. We have shown students how one technique contrasts with
the other, and how they can be used to support each other. Student reactions to the
Middleground ground-penetrating radar exercise have been positive and enthusiastic, and have led us to formulate new and diverse applications of ground-penetrating
radar to assist students in developing their three-dimensional visualization skills and
a greater understanding of geophysical techniques in field investigations.
INTRODUCTION
The faculty of the Department of Geology and Geography at
Georgia Southern University (GSU) have maintained an undergraduate curriculum that includes traditional hard-rock and softrock course sequences. Direct feedback from graduate programs
and companies hiring our graduates indicates that the curriculum
is effective, and programs that omit these traditional courses (e.g.,
mineralogy-petrology-structural geology) are putting their students at a disadvantage. Field-based education is a priority (see
Bishop et al., this volume) in the preparation of Georgia Southern geology majors. This critical component is addressed through
field trips in courses for geology majors, optional national and
international extended trips for both geology and geography
Vance, R.K., Trupe, C.H., and Rich, F.J., 2009, Integrating ground-penetrating radar and traditional stratigraphic study in an undergraduate field methods course, in
Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 155161, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(13). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All
rights reserved.
155
156
Vance et al.
Integrating ground-penetrating radar and traditional stratigraphic study in an undergraduate field methods course
INTEGRATING GROUND-PENETRATING RADAR IN
A FIELD COURSE
Campus Demonstration
We incorporated ground-penetrating radar in our field methods class for the first time in the spring 2007 semester and will
use this pilot exercise to improve design, implementation, and
evaluation for successive courses. The spring 2007 Field Methods class consisted of 20 students and included a mixture of
experienced geology majors who had completed most of their
upper-level coursework, as well as some for whom field methods was their first upper-level course. The course is generally
composed of two distinct segments: exercises that provide training with equipment and techniques make up the first part of the
course, and geologic mapping exercises make up the second part.
The ground-penetrating radar exercise was introduced in the
middle of the semester after the students had done projects on
topographic maps, and had used the Brunton compass, total station surveying, and GPS navigation. These exercises were done
157
Figure 3. Excerpt from a set of three stacked, parallel, 500 MHz ground-penetrating radar profiles run outside
the Herty building on the Georgia Southern University (GSU) campus for a class demonstration and practice
session. The hyperbolic reflections at ~ 116122 ft (35.437.2 m) and 103107 ft (31.432.6 m) are utility
conduits. The heavy reflections at 106117 ft (32.335.7 m) in the uppermost profile are due to a pedestrian
walk composed of paving stones. The profile was processed to eliminate most of the ground-air wave, and the
time-gain was adjusted to enhance the signal that attenuates sharply at 23 ft depth (.6.9 m) with increasing
clay and moisture content. The X in the lowest profile is a surface marker for a reference feature noted during
the profile. The sharp vertical break in the middle profile represents a point where the student stopped forward
motion and rolled the cart backward to locate a reflector, producing a slight dislocation in the profile.
158
Vance et al.
of the building and crossing multiple utility features in the subsurface. This class activity allowed the students to gain direct
practice with the equipment and introduced a practical application and approach to locating buried utilities and underground
storage tanks. The monitor screen scrolls the radar profile as it is
produced, allowing immediate observation of anomalous reflections without processing the ground-penetrating radar profile.
Surface markers may be added to the profile record to register
known surface features and determine their relationship with the
imaged subsurface targets. After the demonstration, the profile
was downloaded to a flash drive and transferred to a laptop for
initial processing and printing. Printouts of the profiles were copied and handed out for review and discussion of features at the
next meeting of the class. Group review of profiles introduced
students to common components (e.g., ground-air wave signal)
of ground-penetrating radar profiles and encouraged interpretation of anomalous features observed on the profile. Signal loss
with depth that we observed on printouts prompted discussion of
antenna limitations and signal attenuation by clay and moisture.
Filtered and unfiltered profiles were displayed to illustrate the
role and effect of processing.
Field Site Geology
The GSU campus is located in Statesboro, Georgia, within
the eastern edge of the Inner Coastal Plain of Georgia. As such,
topography is typically subdued, and outcrops and road cuts are
rare. We are fortunate, however, to have a rather extensive, easily
navigated, and lithologically diverse road cut near our campus,
and it is this field site that has provided us with an opportunity
to merge classic stratigraphic description with a shallow geophysical technique (ground-penetrating radar). Our field site lies
~14 km north of Statesboro, Bulloch County, Georgia (Fig. 4).
The small community of Middleground is the nearest geographic
feature of note, though the site also lies within the drainage basin
of Spring Branch, a minor tributary of the Ogeechee River. Strata
in the vicinity of Middleground belong to the Meigs Member of
the Miocene Coosawhatchie Formation (Huddlestun, 1988) and
are characterized by weakly consolidated, fine- to coarse-grained,
locally conglomeratic, clayey sandstones, as well as rhythmically
bedded sand and clay couplets (Fig. 5). Preliminary analysis of
the units can be found in Bartholomew et al. (2007). The authors
and their students have measured and described a series of stratigraphic profiles at the site, recording characteristics of the units at
5 m intervals along a transect that parallels Metz Road, a county
road that runs north of Middleground. Initial observations of the
Middleground strata revealed fine sands that are typically interbedded with clays and contain discontinuous stringers of hematite-rich sediment. Pebble-bearing horizons are present, as is a
large body of cross-bedded sandstone that lies sublateral to, and
stratigraphically beneath, the alternating layers of sand and clay.
The road cut is, thus, lithologically heterogeneous, but, just as
importantly, the sandstones and their interbedded claystones bear
ghost shrimp burrows (form genus Ophiomorpha). Thus, all the
Integrating ground-penetrating radar and traditional stratigraphic study in an undergraduate field methods course
159
upslope of the local shallow groundwater table. Ground-penetrating radar signals are, therefore, relatively clear and easily read as
compared to many sites in the coastal plain where the water table
lies very near the surface, contributing to rapid signal attenuation
with depth. Three-dimensional visualization of the strata imaged
with ground-penetrating radar can be a challenge to many people.
Thus, conducting a ground-penetrating radar survey in a location
where exposures of the strata are available for direct comparison
(ground truth) with the radar image has the potential to facilitate
visualization and translation of a two-dimensional image into
three-dimensional space. This ideal training situation also allows
comparison of the resolution at differing frequencies if multiple
antennae are available, and analysis of signal attenuation with
changes in composition.
Field Exercise
In 2007, the ground-penetrating radar exercise was conducted in teams assigned to pair experienced students with those
lacking substantial field experience. Preparation for the exercise
included the classroom lectures on the physics, capabilities,
and limitations of the ground-penetrating radar equipment, the
campus demonstration of the MAL ground-penetrating radar
system, and assigned readings from Compton (1985) and Freeman (1999) to prepare them to describe sedimentary rocks. The
Middleground road cut (Fig. 6) was ideal for a local field project
because the rock surface at the site is accessible to study, and the
ground surface above the road cut is level to gently sloping and
has recently been cleared of brush. This surface provides access
to run ground-penetrating radar profiles and does not require corrections for topography. This level surface was measured parallel
the road cut and flagged at 1 m intervals to provide immediate
reference for stratigraphic sketches and ground-penetrating radar
profiles. In order to give all students the opportunity to use the
equipment, half of the class did their initial fieldwork on a Friday afternoon and the other half began their project on Saturday
morning. Students were given the UTM coordinates of the outcrop and a time to meet at the site.
The main objectives of the exercise were for each team to:
(1) describe an assigned section of the outcrop including
rock types, textures, composition, and sedimentary layering, and
measure and record planar features such as sedimentary layering
and joints;
(2) use ground-penetrating radar equipment to obtain a 500
MHz profile plus an additional 250 or 100 MHz profile along the
power line right-of-way several meters back from the top of the
outcrop;
(3) interpret two profiles (different frequencies) for each section, correlating outcrop data with the ground-penetrating radar
profiles; and
(4) prepare a report explaining how the outcrop data supported the ground-penetrating radar profile interpretation.
At the site, the students were introduced to the overall geologic setting of the exposure and began by sketching the entire
160
Vance et al.
Integrating ground-penetrating radar and traditional stratigraphic study in an undergraduate field methods course
marginal marine strata (using an auger to provide ground truth
for strata and water table);
(7) allow students to do some simple ground-penetrating
radar data processing as teams and evaluate the accuracy of the
velocity used to generate the profile;
(8) require photos with sketchesdigital cameras are reasonably priced, and students should get in the habit of photodocumentation of field features; and
(9) design and administer an evaluation instrument for this
exercise (all major courses are evaluated, but not individual exercises).
The overall experience in this initial effort was positive enough to encourage the incorporation of the refinements
described here into the second generation effort in 2009. These
experiences are learning processes for the instructors as well
as the students, and refinement of such exercises is continuous.
This pilot project did not include a specific evaluation to test the
improvements in student visualization of local geology. A specific evaluation instrument will be employed in the next field
class to gauge the success of this effort through a questionnaire
on the site geology, administered on site after initial traditional
road cut study, followed by a postcourse questionnaire to determine changes in interpretation of site geology after integration
of ground-penetrating radar surveys. The use of ground-penetrating radar in geotechnical work and stratigraphic studies and the
resulting literature continues to expand; consequently, incorporation of this geophysical tool in field courses is a very practical
experience for geologists. An understanding of the limitations of
the technique and the challenges of interpretation is an important
part of the experience. We are already using ground-penetrating
radar in several senior thesis research projects, and we have been
encouraged by the trial run described here to continue the introduction of this tool in our field methods course.
SUMMARY
Field methods course students received limited instruction on theory and basic operation of ground-penetrating radar
systems before hands-on training on campus conducting surveys that demonstrated the effectiveness of the instrument for
locating buried utilities. The campus exercise also demonstrated depth of penetration limits imposed by the attenuation
of ground radar energy by clay and water. This training was
extended to stratigraphic investigation of a local road cut, which
integrated traditional field observation and measurements with
the geophysical survey. The students embraced the use of
ground-penetrating radar, extending their view of the stratigraphy into the subsurface, while learning that deeper radar
energy penetration at lower antenna frequency is accompanied
by diminished resolution of stratigraphic features. This pilot
project successfully integrated classroom instruction, campus
161
fieldwork, local stratigraphic investigation, and valuable training with a versatile geophysical tool. The project provided the
instructors with a foundation to build upon and improve the
field exercise through the use of additional ground-penetrating
radar surveys that will allow construction of block or fence diagrams, and that will enhance the development of 3-D visualization and representation skills by students.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the improvement of the
manuscript resulting from the constructive reviews of Steve
Leslie, Ilya Buynevich, and Steve Whitmeyer and the acceptance
of roadside project activity by residents of the Middleground
community and the Georgia Department of Transportation.
REFERENCES CITED
Baker, G.S., Jordan, T.E., and Pardy, J., 2007, An introduction to ground penetrating radar (GPR), in Baker, G.S., and Jol, H.M., eds., Stratigraphic
Analyses Using GPR: Geological Society of America Special Paper 432,
p. 118.
Bartholomew, M.J., Rich, F.J., Lewis, S.L., Brodie, B.M., Heath, R.D., Slack,
T.Z., Trupe, C.H., III, and Greenwell, R.A., 2007, Preliminary interpretation of Mesozoic and Cenozoic fracture sets in Piedmont metamorphic
rocks and in coastal plain strata near the Savannah River, Georgia and
South Carolina, in Rich, F.J., ed., Guide to Fieldtrips: Boulder, Colorado,
Geological Society of America, 56th Annual Meeting, Southeastern Section, p. 738.
Bishop, G.A., Vance, R.K., Rich, F.J., Meyer, B.K., Davis, E.J., Hayes, H., and
Marsh, N.B., 2009, this volume, Evolution of geology field education for
K12 teachers from field education for geology majors at Georgia Southern University: Historical perspectives and modern approaches, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education:
Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of
America Special Paper 461, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(19).
Bristow, C.S., and Jol, H.M., eds., 2003, Ground Penetrating Radar in Sediments: Geological Society of London Special Publication 211, 366 p.
Compton, R., 1985, Geology in the Field: New York, John Wiley and Sons,
398 p.
Daniels, D.J., 2004, Ground Penetrating Radar (2nd edition): Institution of
Electrical Engineers Radar, Sonar, Navigation and Avionics Series 15
(series editors: N. Stewart and H. Griffiths): Bodwin, Cornwall, UK,
MPG Books Limited, 726 p.
Freeman, T., 1999, Procedures in Field Geology: Malden, Massachusetts,
Blackwell Science, 95 p.
Huddlestun, P.F., 1988, A Revision of Lithostratigraphic Units of the Coastal
Plain of Georgia, the Miocene through Holocene: Georgia Geological
Survey Bulletin 104, 162 p.
Hugenholtz, C.H., Moorman, B.J., and Wolfe, S.A., 2007, Ground penetrating
radar (GPR) imaging of the internal structure of an active parabolic sand
dune, in Baker, G.S., and Jol, H.M., eds., Stratigraphic Analyses Using
GPR: Geological Society of America Special Paper 432, p. 3545.
Rich, F.J., Trupe, C.H., III, Slack, T.Z., and Camann, E., 2009, Depositional and
ichnofossil characteristics of the Meigs Member, Coosawhatchie Formation (Miocene), east central Georgia: Southeastern Geology, v. 46, no. 2,
p. 8592.
Sharma, P.V., 2002, Environmental and Engineering Geophysics: Cambridge,
UK, Cambridge University Press, 475 p.
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY 5 MAY 2009
ABSTRACT
The Keck Geology Consortium is an 18-college collaboration focused on enriching
undergraduate education through development of high-quality geoscience research experiences for undergraduate students and faculty participants. The consortium projects are
year-long research experiences that extend from summer project design and fieldwork,
through collection of laboratory data and analysis during the academic year, to the culminating presentation of research results at the annual spring symposium. The Keck experience incorporates all the characteristics of high-quality undergraduate research. Students
are involved in original research, are stakeholders and retain intellectual ownership of
their research, experience the excitement of working in group and independent contexts,
discuss and publish their findings, and engage in the scientific process from conception to
completion. Since 1987, 1094 students (1175 slots, 81 repeats) and over 121 faculty (410
slots, multiple repeats) have participated in 137 projects, providing a substantial data set
for studying the impact of undergraduate research and field experiences on geoscience
students. Over 56% of the students have been women, and since 1996, 34% of the project faculty have been women. There are now 45 Keck alumni in academic teaching and
research positions, a matriculation rate three times the average of U.S. geoscience undergraduates. Twenty-two of these new faculty are women, indicating remarkable success in
attracting women to and retaining women in academic geoscience careers.
de Wet, A., Manduca, C., Wobus, R.A., and Bettison-Varga, L., 2009, Twenty-two years of undergraduate research in the geosciencesThe Keck experience, in
Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 163172, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(14). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All
rights reserved.
163
164
de Wet et al.
INTRODUCTION
The Keck Geology Consortium was started in 1987 by a
group of ten colleges including Amherst, Beloit, Carleton, Colorado, Franklin and Marshall, Pomona, Smith, Whitman, Williams, and The College of Wooster. Funding was provided by the
W.M. Keck Foundation, hence the name of the consortium. Trinity and Washington and Lee Universities were added in 1989. In
2006, six more institutions were added: Colgate, Macalester, Mt.
Holyoke, Oberlin, Union, and Wesleyan.
The idea for the consortium originated with Bud Wobus at
Williams College. It was patterned after the National Science
Foundation (NSF)supported WAMSIP Consortium of four of
the current Keck colleges (Williams, Amherst, Mt. Holyoke,
and Smith) in the 1970s, a collaboration that was nucleated by
Wobus at Williams and Mel Kuntz at Amherst (Wobus, 1988).
Their idea to support undergraduates as collaborators with faculty in original field-based research was inspired by the historic
and highly successful field course at Stanford, where they had
been graduate students. The basic concept of the consortium was
to bring together a group of small liberal arts colleges that had
traditionally produced a disproportionately large share of the
Ph.D.s granted in the earth sciences (Manduca and Woodward,
1995). The consortium was to fund, and support in various ways,
research projects by faculty and students from the consortium
member institutions (Manduca et al., 1999). The first three projects in 19871988 covered carbonate sedimentology (Bahamas),
volcanology (Colorado), and paleohydrology and clastic sedimentology (Montana), and they were directed by faculty from
Williams, Amherst, and Smith who had been part of the earlier
NSF-supported WAMSIP consortium. Providing a diversity of
projects has been one of the ongoing goals of the consortium,
along with broadening coverage of geoscience subfields as the
consortium grows.
Project workshops
Publication of symposium
proceedings - keckgeology.org: summer
Other presentations
and publications
165
two years of college and had taken at least one or two geology
courses, and those for rising senior geology majors who were
between their junior and senior year of college. Sophomore projects were phased out over the past few years, so all projects are
now geared toward rising senior students.
Summer Research
The actual research project may have three distinct phases,
beginning with a 4 wk field experience and continuing through
summer laboratory and/or sample preparation into research at a
students home institution during the academic year. In the field
phase, students identify a specific project and gather samples,
make field observations and measurements, and/or complete
mapping projects. As with any research program, the particular
methodologies used are matched to the project goals. In some
cases, the 4 wk period is divided between the field and laboratory
so that students can begin processing samples prior to returning
to their home campuses. Pre-fieldwork might include the use of
geographic information systems (GIS) to prepare field maps, or
training of students in the use of field equipment.
Field-based projects involve a wide variety of pedagogical approaches depending on the nature of the project and the
preferences and experience of the faculty. Each Keck experience
ensures that individual students will have their own research
objective within the overall project. In addition, funding for student field-related expenses, and often for analytical data collection, is assured.
The field phase is not just data collection; invariably, friendships develop, and a sense of common purpose and community
grows. This group identity motivates students during the field
season and supports them through their independent study the
following academic year. Shared challenges, goals, and experiences help integrate the students into a strong research group.
Project faculty employ a number of strategies to engage the students; for example, some students work first in a single large
group, or go through a systematic rotation of different roles (lead
investigator, field assistant), and others involve students in small
teams (three to four students) or assign permanent research partnerships. Regardless of approach, a sense of community is built
quickly through student-to-student interactions. Additionally,
students are housed together on projects, and the experience of
living, socializing, and working together enhances the sense of
camaraderie developed during the field season.
Many project faculty require their students to complete short
project proposals before finalizing the details of the projects. The
project faculty, may, in consultation with the student and home
institution research advisor, determine the specific project before
starting the field season, but usually project selection occurs in
the first few days of the summer fieldwork.
Many field-based projects include a laboratory component
during the summer phase of the project. Laboratory work may
occur before, during, or after the field phase. The summer laboratory work may only involve sample preparation, such as cutting
166
de Wet et al.
rock chips for thin sections, while the actual observations or analytical work will be done at the students home institution during
the academic year. In other cases, the laboratory work needs to be
completed over the summer because of the nature of the samples
or because the necessary analytical equipment is not available at
the students home institution. Since the students involved in the
Keck projects are required to continue their research as an independent project at their home institution after the summer, the
expectations for each project are high. The students need to leave
the summer season with a viable independent project that will
lead to further research that can be accomplished in an academic
year time frame.
Academic Year Independent Research
While the Keck 4 wk summer experience is shorter than the
time frame for many NSF Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) projects, we have found that continuing the students
research into the academic year has proven successful in many
ways. Maintaining momentum through the academic year, while
challenging, is one of the most successful aspects of the Keck
experience. Shared goals and the commitment of the on-campus
faculty research advisor, combined with regular communication
and attention by the project director, are fundamental to success
during the academic year. Goals are set at the project and program levels. Research plans and deadlines developed by the project directors are in keeping with the projects overall objectives.
In many cases, the students project is tailored to the expertise and analytical resources available at the students home institution. In other situations, students may analyze their samples at
another institution during the academic year. One of the great
strengths of the Keck Consortium is that students have access
to equipment at other Keck or collaborating institutions. This
enriches the students research experience and enhances the scientific value of the research.
Some projects have effectively used course management
software to facilitate communication and data sharing during
the academic year. Some projects involve coordinated laboratory work at one institution, or a collaborating research laboratory, during the academic year. For example, the Keck projects
directed by Tekla Harms, Jack Cheney, and John Brady in the
Tobacco Root Mountains of Montana have involved a midyear
workshop at Amherst College, where students meet to discuss
their results to date and collect additional analytical data. The
2005 Minnesota project took advantage of laboratory facilities at
Washington State University in January 2006.
Annual Symposium and Proceedings Volume
The annual spring Keck Geology Research Symposium is the
culminating event of the Keck research experience. Prior to the
symposium, students submit a six-page research paper with illustrations and references reporting the results of their research. These
short contributions are reviewed by the research advisors and
90
% Non-U.S. projects
80
70
% per year
167
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Year
Keck Emergency
Response Team
Keck Office:
Keck director
Keck administrative assistant
Keck Member
Institutions (18)
Keck
representatives
council - 18 members:
(1 faculty from each
member institution)
Meets twice a year:
Spring - Symposium
Fall - Annual GSA
Keck Projects:
5-8 per year
Keck nonmember
institutions
Project faculty
Project students
Project director
Project faculty
Student
research advisors
Project students
Student
research advisors
Other collaborators
168
de Wet et al.
169
170
de Wet et al.
80
90
% Female faculty
Faculty
Students
Projects
80
% Female students
70
70
60
50
50
60
40
30
40
30
20
20
10
10
0
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Year
0
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Year
50
% per year
40
30
20
10
0
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Year
we compiled information on alumni who entered academia (visiting, tenure-track, and tenured) as a career. This information is
instructive in evaluating claims that high-quality research experiences lead students to choose a career involving research and
teaching. Since on average there is about a 7 yr delay between
completing a B.A. degree and achieving a Ph.D., the following
information reflects the students that participated in Keck projects in the 1980s and 1990s.
Presently, there are over 44 Keck alumni, out of 710 Keck
students from 1988 to 1999, in faculty positions (visiting, tenuretrack, and tenured) in U.S. colleges and universities. This represents a yield of ~6%. When only junior projects are considered
(42 out of 44 Keck alums in academia completed a junior project, which involved a senior research project during the academic
year), the yield is even higher, 42 out of 503 junior students for
a yield of 8%.
For comparison, an average of 3138 earth science bachelors degrees were awarded in the U.S. between 1989 and
2000 (National Science Board, 2008). Taking into account the
approximately 7 yr delay between the B.A. and the Ph.D., and
looking at the years between 1997 and 2005, an average of 420
doctoral degrees were awarded in the United States (National
Science Board, 2008). Around 15%25% (~84) of Ph.D. graduates enter academia (Keelor, 2005; National Science Board,
2008) resulting in a 2%3% yield of bachelor degree students in
geology moving into academic careers. This number is almost
certainly even lower, considering that many academic positions
in the United States are occupied by graduates who completed
their undergraduate degree outside the United States. According to the National Science Board (2008), 26% of all geoscience Ph.D.s in 2003 were foreign-born. Based on these data,
Keck alumni that completed a junior project are at least three
times more likely than average to obtain a faculty geoscience
appointment.
171
Additionally, 22 out of 44, or 50%, of Keck alums in faculty positions are women. This is comparable to the proportion
of women participating in Keck junior projects between 1989
and 1999, which was 54% (58% for sophomore projects). This
is a yield of 93%. Compare this to the fact that in the United
States around 40% of bachelors degrees are awarded to women,
while only 21%22% of assistant professors are women, and
we observe a nearly 50% attrition rate (Holmes and OConnell,
2004; AGI, 2008). Proportionally, female Keck alumni are almost
twice as likely as other female geology undergraduates to enter
college and university teaching, so there is effectively no leaky
academic pipeline for Keck female alumni.
While we cannot be certain that Keck participation was the
dominant reason for the success of these students in pursuing an
academic career, it is certainly true that for most of them, the
Keck research experience was their most significant exposure to
doing research as undergraduates. Highly selective liberal arts
colleges have long been well regarded for their success in producing geoscience Ph.D.s, and in many ways the Keck Geology
Consortium has expanded and enhanced the successful student
mentoring activities of the participating geoscience departments
prior to Kecks inception in 1987. Since successful research skills
and experience are crucial for success at the Ph.D. level, and ultimately for entering academia, is not unreasonable to suggest that
the Keck experience positively impacted these students. As participation in the consortium expands to many non-Keck institutions, it will be informative to see if the success of the program
can be duplicated.
FUTURE CHALLENGES
Despite past successes, the consortium faces numerous challenges. One of the biggest challenges is maintaining the integrity
of the program while expanding participation to non-Keck students and faculty. The program relies on the full commitment of
all the participants, including the project faculty, students, and
research advisors. Senior faculty at the Keck institutions have
extensive experience with the workings and goals of the consortium and actively mentor their junior faculty. Students and faculty from outside the consortium must quickly come up to speed
with these requirements to realize the programs full benefits.
Another challenge involves increasing the participation of
students from underrepresented groups. For years, the consortium had an excellent track record of involving woman in the
program; however, women are no longer underrepresented at the
undergraduate and graduate levels in the geosciences. Over several years, the consortium ran sophomore projects that specifically targeted students from underrepresented groups. This funding is no longer available and the participation of students from
underrepresented groups in rising senior projects continues to be
a challenge. Recently, the consortium has received funding from
the ExxonMobil Foundation that provides several enhanced
grants for students from underrepresented groups. We anticipate
that the successful recruitment of increasing numbers of students
172
de Wet et al.
Brady, J.B., Burger, H.R, Cheney, J.T., and Harms, T.A., eds., 2004, Precambrian Geology of the Tobacco Root Mountains, Montana: Geological
Society of America Special Paper 377, 256 p.
Elgren, T., and Hensel, N., 2006, Undergraduate research experiences: Synergies between scholarship and teaching: Peer Review, v. 8, no. 1.
Holmes, M.A., and OConnell, S., 2004, Where are the women geoscience
professors?: Report on the National Science Foundation/Association for
Women Geoscientists Foundation Sponsored Workshop: Lincoln, Nebraska,
40 p., available at http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/geosciencefacpub/86/
(accessed 19 August 2009).
Keelor, B., 2005, Earth and Space Science Ph.D. Class of 2003, Report
Released: Eos (Transactions, American Geophysical Union), v. 86,
no. 31, doi: 10.1029/2005EO310004.
Knapp, E.P., Greer, L., Connors, C.D., and Harbor, D.J., 2006, Field-based
instruction as part of a balanced geoscience curriculum at Washington and
Lee University: Journal of Geological Education, v. 54, no. 2, p. 103108.
Lauer-Glebov, J.M., and Palmer, B.A., 2004, Knowing what we know: Assessing the Keck Consortiums core outcomes from a historical perspective:
Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 36, no. 5,
p. 156.
Manduca, C.A., 1996, The value of undergraduate research experiences: Reflections from Keck Geology Consortium alumni: Council on Undergraduate
Research Quarterly, v. 16, no. 3, p. 176178.
Manduca, C.A., and Woodard, H.H., 1995, Research groups for undergraduate
students and faculty in the Keck Geology Consortium: Journal of Geological Education, v. 43, no. 4, p. 400403.
Manduca, C.A., Grosfils, E., and Wobus, R.A., 1999, Working together for our
best interests: Sustainable collaboration in the Keck Geology Consortium:
Eos (Transactions, American Geophysical Union), v. 80, no. 46, p. F111.
National Science Board, 2008, Science and Engineering Indicators 2008 (Two
Volumes): Arlington, Virginia, National Science Foundation (volume 1,
NSB 08-01, 588 p.; volume 2, NSB 08-01A, 575 p.).
Palmer, B., 2002, Lessons from the Keck Geology Consortium: Benefits and
costs of large collaborations: Geological Society of America Abstracts
with Programs, v. 35, no. 6, p. 601.
Wobus, R.A., 1988, Interinstitutional collaboration in undergraduate geological
research: The consortium approach: Council on Undergraduate Research
Newsletter, v. 9, no. 2, p. 3235.
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY 5 MAY 2009
ABSTRACT
For over 50 yr, the Juneau Icefield Research Program (JIRP) has provided undergraduate students with an 8 wk summer earth systems and glaciology field camp. This
field experience engages students in the geosciences by placing them directly into the
physically challenging glacierized alpine landscape of southeastern Alaska. Mountaintop camps across the Juneau Icefield provide essential shelter and facilitate the programs instructional aim to enable direct observations by students of active glacier surface processes, glaciogenic landscapes, and the regions tectonically deformed bedrock.
Disciplinary knowledge is transferred by teams of JIRP faculty in the style of a scientific
institute. JIRP staffers provide glacier safety training, facilitate essential camp logistics,
and develop JIRP student field skills through daily chores, remote camp management,
and glacier travel in small field parties. These practical elements are important components of the programs instructional philosophy. Students receive on-glacier training in mass-balance data collection and ice-velocity measurements as they ski ~320 km
across the icefield glaciers between Juneau, Alaska, and Atlin, British Columbia. They
use their glacier skills and disciplinary interests to develop research experiments, collect
field data, and produce reports. Students present their research at a public forum at
the end of the summer. This experience develops its participants for successful careers
as researchers in extreme and remote environments. The long-term value of the JIRP
program is examined here through the professional evolution of six of its recent alumni.
Since its inception, ~1300 students, faculty, and staff have participated in the Juneau
Icefield Research Program. Most of these faculty and staff have participated for multiple summers and many JIRP students have returned to work as program staff and
sometimes later as faculty. The number of JIRP participants (19462008) can also be
measured by adding up each summers participants, raising the total to ~2500.
INTRODUCTION
Ralph Waldo Emerson believed in the education of the
scholar by nature, by books, and by action (Emerson, 1837). He
was probably the first North American philosopher to advocate
for the education of students using a pedagogy with emphasis
on direct student involvement and experience relative to bibliomania. Over the last half century, the Juneau Icefield Research
Connor, C., 2009, Field glaciology and earth systems science: The Juneau Icefield Research Program (JIRP), 19462008, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and
Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 173184, doi:
10.1130/2009.2461(15). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
173
174
Connor
on-site synthesis of Alaskas coastal geology, glaciology, climatology, geomorphology, ecology, meteorology, hydrology, geophysics, and other landscape information. They are trained in the
acquisition of discipline-specific data from nunatak base camps
located on bedrock ridge tops across the 3176 km2 glacierized
U.S.-Canada border region in the Coast Mountains of southeastern Alaska and northwestern British Columbia (Fig. 2). Students
are required to develop a research experiment and the data collection methodology and analysis to address it. Since initial research
on this glacier system beginning in 1946, Miller and his JIRP
faculty colleagues have incorporated geoscience education and
student training into their own Juneau Icefield summer research
program, inspiring generations of earth system science students.
At the 2002 meeting of the International Glaciological Society
held in Yakutat, Alaska, a straw poll of the audience revealed that
over 50% of the attendees, a broad spectrum of the worlds working and highly respected research climate scientists and their
graduate students were JIRP alumni.
Evolution of a Glacier Science Education Program:
A Brief JIRP History
Since its inception, research on the Juneau Icefield has been
directed toward the understanding of temperate coastal glacier
change under the influence of climate. Following World War
II and into the Cold War, U.S. strategic interests included Arctic sea-ice research and measurements of ice thickness to assess
effects on missile trajectories beneath the ice. The Taku Glacier
in the Juneau Icefield system, located in the southeastern Alaska
Field glaciology and earth systems science: The Juneau Icefield Research Program
175
Figure 2. Location map of the Juneau Icefield with selected research camps referenced in text. Basemap is by Bowen (2005).
176
Connor
mer semester JIRP credits toward their respective university field
camp requirements or for their degree programs breadth course
requirements. Students come from countries throughout the
world to participate in the JIRP program. Summer JIRP student
numbers have varied over the years, ranging from between 15 and
50, depending on funding resources and faculty and staff availability. In-service K12 science teachers have also participated
in JIRP, deeply enhancing their climate science teaching. Teacher
training methods developed by the JIRP program have provided
a template for other glacier-based, science education efforts for
Alaskas K12 teachers and students (Connor and Prakash, 2008).
Introduction of JIRP Students to Alaskan Glaciers in a
Maritime Rain Forest
Field glaciology and earth systems science: The Juneau Icefield Research Program
TABLE 1. 19962008 JUNEAU ICEFIELD RECIPIENTS OF NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE
ADMINISTRATION (NASA) ALASKA SPACE GRANT SCHOLARSHIPSUNIVERSITY ALASKA SOUTHEAST
Year
Student
University
Major
1
2008
Nicholas Chamberlin
Appalachia State University
Environmental Geology
2
2008
William Honsaker
University of Cincinnati
Geology
3
2008
Benjamin Kraemer
Lawrence University
Environmental Studies/Biochemistry
4
2008
James Menking
Tulane University
Geology/Spanish/Latin American
Studies
5
2008
Wilson Salls
Vassar College
Earth Science
6
2007
Seth Campell
University of Maine
Earth Sciences
7
2007
Corinne Griffing
University of Nevada
Geoscience
8
2007
Ruth Heindel
Brown University
Geology-Biology
9
2007
Marie McLane
Smith College
Geology
10
2007
Megan OSadnick
Wheaton College
Physics/Minor Astronomy
11
2007
Brooks Prather
Central Washington U.*
Geology
12
2006
Peter Flynn
U. of Alaska Southeast
Environmental Science
13
2006
Lauren Adrian
Whitman College
Geology
14
2006
Alana Wilson
University of North Carolina
Environmental Science
15
2006
Xavier Bruehler
Western Washington U.
Environmental Geology
16
2006
Dan Sturgis
University of Idaho
Geology
17
2005
Linnea Koons
Cornell University
Science of Earth Systems
18
2005
Orion Lakota
Stanford University
Geology
19
2005
Janelle Mueller
Portland State University
Geology/Earth Science
20
2005
Mathew Nelson
U. of Alaska Southeast
Environmental Science
21
2005
Nathan Turpen
University of Washington
Earth and Space Science
22
2004
Evan Burgess
University of Colorado Boulder Physical Geography/GIS
23
2004
Keith Laslowski
Brown University
Geology/Geomorphology
24
2004
Erin Wharton
University of Washington
Earth/Space Sciences
25
2004
Kate Harris
University of North Carolina
Geology and Biology
26
2004
Aaron Mordecai
University of Utah
Glaciology
27
2003
Lisa Chaiet
University of Idaho
Geoscience/Environmental Science
28
2003
Emilie Chatelain
University of San Diego
Environmental Science/Physical
Geology/Geography
29
2003
William Naisbitt
University of Utah
PhysGeog/Geomorph/Remote
Sensing/GIS
30
2003
Andrew Thorpe
Brown University
Geology
31
2003
Heather Whitney
Colorado State University
Chemistry
32
2002
Ari Berland
Pomona College, California
Geology
Environmental Science
33
2002
Liam Cover
U. of Alaska Southeast
Geology
34
2002
Ryan Cross
U. of Alaska Fairbanks
35
2002
Anna Henderson
Brown University
Geology
36
2001
Eleanor Boyce
Colby College, Maine
Geology
37
2001
Chris Kratt
Plymouth State College
Physics and Geology
Geology/Geomorphology
38
2001
Evan Mankoff
SUNY Oneonta, New York
39
2001
Colby Smith
University of Maine
Geology/Geomorphology
40
2001
Haley Wright
U. of California Santa Cruz
Geology/Environmental Science
41
2000
Michael Bradway
University of Idaho
Geology
42
2000
Danielle Kitover
Alaska Pacific University
Environmental Science
43
2000
Brady Phillips
Oregon State University
Environmental Science
44
2000
Jeanna Probala
Western Washington U.
Geology
Physical Geography
45
1999
Matthew Beedle
Montana State University
Environmental Science
46
1999
Julian Deiss
U. of Alaska Southeast
Geology
47
1999
Hiram Henry
Western Washington U.
48
1999
Kevin Stitzinger
U. of British Columbia
Geography
49
1998
April Graves
U. of Alaska Southeast
Environmental Science
50
1998
Hiram Henry
Western Washington U.
Geology
51
1998
David Potere
Harvard University
Geology
52
1998
Joan Ramage
Cornell University
Geology
53
1997
Matthew Beedle
Montana State University
Earth Science
54
1997
Joan Ramage
Cornell University
Geology
55
1996
Adam Hopson
Wesleyan College
Environmental Science
56
1996
Johanna Nelson
Stanford University
Earth Systems Science
Shad ONeel
57
1996
University of Montana
Geology
58
1996
Brett Vanden Heuval
Hope College
Geology
59
1996
Erin Whitney
Williams College
Chemistry/Geophysics
Note: This table provides a snapshot of the diversity of U.S. institutions that have sent their students to the Juneau
Icefield Research Program (JIRP). Participation by international JIRP students from Canada, the UK, Europe, the Middle
East, Asia, and South America is not reflected in this table, since non-U.S. citizens do not qualify for NASA Space Grant
scholarships.
*U.University
177
178
Connor
Field glaciology and earth systems science: The Juneau Icefield Research Program
Students keep lecture and field notes in waterproof Rite in
the RainTM notebooks for permanent and portable records of their
daily observations and experiences. These durable archives are
also used for student research project data, gear lists, and other
pertinent information. Students can later refer to their camp lecture notes as they review for their comprehensive final exam
given during the fall semester following their JIRP summer field
experience. This discipline-specific information, coupled with
their field observations, helps to prime JIRP student thinking
and guides the development of modest, short-time-scale research
projects. Students also evolve data collection plans and identify
appropriate analytical methods for data reduction with help from
the resources of the JIRP camp libraries. Field project logistics
are organized by JIRP staff around each students geographic
requirements. Once research plans are developed, students are
subdivided into synergistic research groups. Students assemble
their final research abstracts and reports on laptops at Camp 18
prior to the final descent of and departure from Llewellyn Glacier
at the end of the program (Fig. 1).
To complete their JIRP field experience, students leave Camp
18 and traverse across the high ice plateau region that forms the
AlaskaBritish Columbia border (Sprenke et al., 1999). This
segment of the Continental Divide forms the headwater boundary of the 847,642 km2 Yukon River watershed and separates
the south-flowing Taku Glacier system from the north-flowing
Llewellyn Glacier. JIRP students ski northward up the Taku and
Matthes Glaciers and cross the International Border, following
the Llewellyn Glaciers north-directed meltwater into Lake Atlin,
British Columbia (Fig. 2). Students leave the firnpack on the
upper Lewelleyn Glacier and hike using crampons over the blue
bubbly Llewellyn Glacier ice to Camp 26 (Fig. 2). They continue
descending down the glacier, exit onto the southern shoreline
of Lake Atlin, and cross the 133 km lake by boat, returning to
civilization in Atlin, British Columbia (population 400). In Atlin,
JIRP students refine their project results and present their work in
a specially convened annual JIRP Science Symposium for local
Atlin residents and visitors alike.
At the end of their JIRP summer experience, the students
are generally transformed individuals. They have gained great
confidence and maturity from their research experiences, from
their enhanced capabilities in remote-site field logistics and glacier survival, and, most importantly, from the cohort bonding
resulting from their shared understanding of the processes operating in this wild, sometimes dangerous, glaciated environment.
Such experiences early in an undergraduates education can often
change a students way of thinking about their long-term interests
and may redirect their career paths.
179
180
Connor
Field glaciology and earth systems science: The Juneau Icefield Research Program
and Iceland. ONeel began his doctoral work at the University of
ColoradoBoulder under Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research
(INSTAAR) Professor Tad Pfeffer, returning to work on Alaskan
tidewater glacier calving retreat dynamics, this time at the Columbia Glacier in Prince William Sound, Alaska. Shads JIRP training
paid off when, from 2004 to 2005, he was in charge of field logistics for the Columbia Glacier seismic project, including scheduling helicopter, organizing all personnel, supplies, and instrumentation, including a blasting campaign. He received his Ph.D. in 2006
and has published his Columbia Glacier research, as well as other
work, including seismic studies on the Bering Glacier (ONeel et
al., 2005, 2007; Anderson et al., 2004; Harper et al., 2006; Meier
et al., 2007; Pfeffer et al., 2008). He completed two postdoctoral
research fellowships at University of AlaskaFairbanks and at
Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Institute of Geophysics and
Planetary Physics, University CaliforniaSan Diego. He is currently employed as a research geophysicist at the U.S. Geological
Survey Alaska Science Center in Anchorage, where he works on
glacier-climate interactions and sea-level rise. Shad is also affiliated with the Glaciological Group at the Geophysical Institute at
University AlaskaFairbanks.
Erin Whitney: JIRP (1996)Researcher, National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (2008)
A graduate of Service High School in Anchorage, Alaskan
Erin Whitney (Fig. 5A) first participated in JIRP in 1996 while
an undergraduate at Williams College. Interested in chemistry as
an undergraduate, she later worked as a researcher at Los Alamos
National Laboratory, completed her M.S. at University Colorado
Boulder in 1999, and returned to JIRP as a staff member in 2004.
She continued her graduate work in Boulder and earned her Ph.D.
in 2006 in physical chemistry under Dr. David Nesbitt. She was
initially interested in studying the chemical processes occurring
above the icefield and in the upper atmosphere. For her doctoral
research, she used high-resolution infrared spectroscopy to study
the structures of slit jet-cooled gas-phase halogenated methyl radicals, as well as quantum state-resolved reaction dynamics in atom
+ polyatom systems (Whitney et al., 2005, 2006). Now employed
at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Whitneys research
focuses on the synthesis and characterization of novel nanostructured materials for the storage of hydrogen in next-generation
automobiles, as well as the development of new electrodes for
lithium-ion batteries. This work will lead to solutions to our global
fossil-fuel dependency and its consequences.
Joan Ramage Macdonald: JIRP (19971998)University
Professor (2008)
Joan Ramage (Fig. 5B) began her interaction with JIRP in
1997, at the beginning of her doctoral research at Cornell University under geology department professor Bryan Isacks. At that
time, she had already earned a B.S. in geology from Carleton
College (1993) and an M.S. from Pennsylvania State University
181
Figure 5. (A) 1996 Juneau Icefield Research Program (JIRP) student Erin
Whitney poses in front of the JIRP programs first Camp 17 building,
the 1954-vintage Jamesway, before skiing about 25 miles from Lemon
Creek Glacier to Taku Glaciers Camp 10 in typical temperate coastal
rainforest weather (photo by Connor). (B) Joan Ramage Macdonald on
the Taku Glacier circa 1998 (courtesy of Joan Ramage Macdonald).
182
Connor
of wetness, roughness, grain size, and meteorological observations of the snowpack as it metamorphosed and roughened over
the summer season. She earned her Ph.D. from Cornell in 2001
using these microwave observations of Juneau Icefield glaciers
to study its snow and glacier melt characteristics (Ramage et al.,
2000; Ramage and Isacks, 2002, 2003). Joan has held faculty
positions at Union College, New York, Creighton University,
Nebraska, and Lehigh University, Pennsylvania, where she is
presently an assistant professor in the Earth and Environmental
Science Department. She teaches courses in remote sensing, and
her research interests have taken her beyond the Juneau Icefield
into the Yukon Territory, Canada, the loess hills of Nebraska, and
the Peruvian Andes and the Patagonian Icefields of South America. Most of her research centers on observation of spatial and
temporal variability of seasonal snowpacks and past and present
mountain glaciers.
Hiram Henry: JIRP (1999)Geo-Environmental Engineer
(2008)
Juneau Douglas High School 1992 graduate, Alaskan
Hiram Henry (Fig. 6A) received his B.S. in geology from Western Washington University. During his first summer with JIRP
in 1999, his research project involved descending 300 m down
the bedrock cleaver below Camp 18 onto the Gilkey Glacier
(Fig. 2), where he measured diurnal flow stage relationships in
its supraglacial streams. Hiram returned to JIRP in the summers of 2000 and 2001 as a senior staff member and teaching assistant. During the winter of 2000, he worked in Antarctica. In 2004, he began a graduate program in glacier hydrology
and engineering at Portland State University in Oregon under
Christine Hulbe (JIRP student in 1989). He finished his study
of firn pack hydrology and meltwater production (Henry, 2006)
Field glaciology and earth systems science: The Juneau Icefield Research Program
REFERENCES CITED
(JIRP faculty and student alumni authors are given in bold type.)
Abrams, R.H., Miller, M.M., Leadbeater, J.M., and Vrooman, A., 1990,
Petrogenesis of Migmatite Complex on Vantage Peak Nunatak, Juneau
Icefield, Alaska: San Francisco, Glaciological and Arctic Sciences Institute, University of Idaho, Open-File Report 1990 (Abrams senior thesis:
University of San Francisco).
Adema, G.W., Sprenke, K.F., and Miller, M.M., 1997, Inferred bed morphology from seismic depth profiles of the Taku Glacier, Juneau Icefield,
Alaska: Program with Abstracts: Eos (Transactions, American Geophysical Union) v. 98, abstract H31A-27.
Anders, A.M., Roe, G.H., Montgomery, D.R., and Hallet, B., 2008, Influence of
precipitation phase on the form of mountain ranges: Geology, v. 36, no. 6,
p. 479482, doi: 10.1130/G24821A.1.
Anderson, R.S., Anderson, S.P., and MacGregor, K.R., ONeel, S., Riihimaki, C.A., Waddington, E.D., and Loso, M.G., 2004, Strong feedbacks
between hydrology and sliding of a small alpine glacier: Journal of Geophysical ResearchEarth Surface, v. 109, p. F03005.
Arendt, A.A., Echelmeyer, K.A., Harrison, W.D., Lingle, C.S., and Valentine,
V.B., 2002, Rapid wastage of Alaska glaciers and their contribution to rising sea level: Science, v. 297, p. 382386, doi: 10.1126/science.1072497.
Bass, P., 2007, Nunataks and Island Biogeography in the Alaska-Canada Boundary Range: An Investigation of the Flora and Its Implications for Climate
Change [Ph.D. thesis]: Athens, Georgia, University of Georgia, 225 p.
Beedle, M.J., Pelto, M.S., and Miller, M.M., 2005, Drivers of glacier mass
balance in southeast Alaska in the second half of the 20th century, in
Climate and Cryosphere (Clic) First Science Conference Program with
Abstracts, 1115 April 2005: Beijing.
Beedle, M.J., Dyurgerov, M., Tangborn, W., Khalsa, S.J.S., Helm, B., Raup,
R., Armstrong, R., and Barry, R.G., 2008, Improving estimation of glacier
volume change: A GLIMS study of Bering Glacier system, Alaska: The
Crysosphere, v. 2, p. 3351.
Blume, F., Meertens, C., Anderson, G., Erikson, S., and Boyce, E.S., 2007,
PBO Nucleus Project status: Integration of 209 existing GPS stations in
the Plate Boundary Observatory, in Southern California Earthquake Center Annual Meeting Program with Abstracts, September 912, 2007: Palm
Springs, California.
Bowen, W., 2005, Alaska Panoramic Map Atlas: http://130.166.124.2/alaska
_panorama_atlas/index.html (accessed 2005).
Boyce, E.S., Motyka, R.J., and Truffer, M., 2007, Flotation and retreat of lakecalving terminus, Mendenhall Glacier, southeast Alaska, USA: Journal of
Glaciology, v. 53, p. 211224, doi: 10.3189/172756507782202928.
Connor, C.L., 1999, LeConte: A Tidewater Glacier in Calving Retreat: Juneau,
University Alaska Southeast Media Services, 11 min DVD, (http://www
.uas.alaska.edu/media/productions/index.htm?collection=Miscellaneous).
Connor, C.L., and Prakash, A., 2008, Experiential discoveries in geoscience education: The EDGE program: Journal of Geoscience Education,
National Association of Geoscience Teachers, v. 56, no. 2, p. 179186,
www.edge.alaska.edu.
Connor, C.L., Streveler, G., Post, A., Monteith, D., and Howell, W., 2009,
The neoglacial landscape and human history of Glacier Bay, Glacier Bay
National Park and Preserve, southeast Alaska, USA: The Holocene, v. 19,
no. 3, p. 381393, doi: 10.1177/0959683608101389.
Cooper, W.S., 1937, The problem of Glacier Bay, Alaska: Geographical Review,
v. 27, p. 3762, doi: 10.2307/209660.
Copland, L., Sharp, M., and Dowdeswell, J., 2003, The distribution and flow
characteristics of surge-type glaciers in the Canadian High Arctic: Annals
of Glaciology, v. 36, p. 7381, doi: 10.3189/172756403781816301.
Cross, R.S., 2007, GPS-Based Tectonic Analysis of the Aleutian Arc and Bering Plate [M.S. thesis]: Fairbanks, University of AlaskaFairbanks, 100 p.
Currie, L.D., Carter, D.T., Cooper, J., Gunter, M.E., and Connor, C.L.,
1996, Geology of the northeastern end of the Juneau Icefield Research
Program Camp 26 nunatak, northwestern British Columbia: Geological
Survey of Canada, Current Research 1996-E, p. 7786.
Deiss, J., Clover, D., DAmore, D., Love, A., Menzies, M., Powell, J., and Walter,
M.T., 2004. Transport of lead and diesel fuel through a peat soil near Juneau,
AK: A pilot study: Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, v. 74, p. 118.
Emerson, R.W., 1837, American Scholar: From Addresses Published as Part
of Nature: Addresses and Lectures, An Oration Delivered before the
183
184
Connor
Miller, M.M., 1951, Englacial investigations related to core drilling on the Upper
Taku Glacier, Alaska: Journal of Glaciology, v. 1, no. 10, p. 579580.
Miller, M.M., 1954, Glaciothermal studies on the Taku Glacier southeastern Alaska: LAssociation Internationale dHydrologie Publication 39,
p. 309327.
Miller, M.M., 19561957, Glaciological Investigations on the Juneau Icefield,
Alaska with Special Reference to the Taku Anomaly [Ph.D. thesis]: Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University.
Miller, M.M., 1957, The role of diastrophism in the regimen of glaciers in the
St. Elias District, Alaska: Journal of Glaciology, v. 3, p. 292297.
Miller, M.M., 1961, A distribution study of abandoned cirques in the AlaskaCanada Boundary Range, in Raasch, G.O., ed., Geology of the Arctic:
Toronto, University of Toronto Press, p. 833847.
Miller, M.M., 1963, The Vaughan Lewis Glacier, Juneau Icefield, Alaska: Journal of Glaciology, v. 4, p. 666667.
Miller, M.M., 1964, Glaciology and geology of the Mount Everest region, central Nepal: Chap 16, in Ullman, J.R., ed., Americans on Everest: New
York, J.D. Lippincott Co., p. 401412.
Miller, M.M., 1976, Comments on the thermo-physical characteristics of
glaciers: Toward a rational classification: Journal of Glaciology, v. 16,
p. 297300.
Miller, M.M., 1977, Quaternary erosional and stratigraphic sequences in the
Alaska-Canada Boundary Range, in Mahaney, W., ed., Quaternary Stratigraphy of North America: New York, John Wiley and Sons, p. 492563.
Miller, M.M., 1985, Recent climate variations, their causes and Neogene perspectives, in Smiley, C.J., ed., Late Cenozoic History of the Pacific Northwest: Interdisciplinary Studies on the Clarkia Fossil Beds of Northern
Idaho: San Francisco, Pacific Division for the American Association for
the Advancement of Science, p. 357414.
Miller, M.M., and Field, W.O., 1951, Exploring the Juneau Ice Cap: Research
Reviews, April, p. 715.
Miller, M.M., and Field, W.O., 1951, Exploring the Juneau Ice Cap: Office of
Naval Research, Department of the Navy, Report NAVEXOS P-510, p. 715.
Miller, M.M., and Molnia, B.F., 2006, Extreme global warming impacts on
Alaskan coastal glaciers shown in long-term mass balance records from
the Juneau Icefield: European Geosciences Union: Geophysical Research
Abstracts, v. 8, p. 10,363.
Miller, M.M., Levanthal, J.S., and Libby, W.F., 1965, Tritium in Mt. Everest
ice: Annual accumulation and climatology at great equatorial altitudes:
Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 70, no. 16, p. 38853888, doi:
10.1029/JZ070i016p03885.
Miller, R.D., 1973, Gastineau Channel Formation, a Composite Glaciomarine
Deposit near Juneau, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1394-C, 20 p.
Molnia, B.F., 2008, Glaciers of North AmericaGlaciers of Alaska, in Williams, R.S., Jr., and Ferrigno, J.G., eds., Satellite Image Atlas of Glaciers
of the World: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1386-K, 525 p.
Motyka, R.J., ONeel, S., Connor, C.L., and Echelmeyer, K., 2002, 20th
century thinning of Mendenhall Glacier, Alaska, and its relationship to
climate, lake-calving, and glacier runoff: Journal of Global and Planetary
Change. v. 35, p. 93112, http://uas.alaska.edu/envs/publications/pubs/
motyka_etal.2002.pdf.
Nolan, M., Motyka, R.J., Echelmeyer, K.A., and Trabant, D.C., 1995, Icethickness measurements of Taku Glacier, Alaska, U.S.A., and their relevance
to its recent behavior: Journal of Glaciology, v. 41, no. 139, p. 541553.
ONeel, S., Echelmeyer, K.A., and Motyka, R.J., 2001, Short-term flow
dynamics of a retreating tidewater glacier: LeConte Glacier, Alaska,
ABSTRACT
Multiyear measurements of geologic processes with slow rates of change can provide valuable data sets for student learning in the classroom and opportunities for
undergraduate independent research. Here, we describe three projects for which data
have been collected for 34, 20, and 10 yr, respectively: the erosion of a small meandering stream, the weathering of limestone cubes, and local stream hydrology/chemistry,
including discharge, dissolved and suspended load, and major ion chemistry. These
data have been used at all levels of the curriculum in various ways, from visualizing
basic geologic principles in introductory courses to sophisticated statistical analysis
and interpretation in upper-level courses, always in a context of student research
leading to discovery about Earth systems. Depending on the project and the schedule
for data collection, students have played a major role in the data collection, synthesis, and interpretation while also learning valuable analytical and statistical skills.
Because the data sets are the product of many classes of students, there is a strong
sense of ownership of the data and thus significant quality control, making the data
sets useful as baseline studies for future projects. Where the study requires frequent
and time-sensitive sampling, it is more difficult for students to collect data or make
measurements. They may, however, have a hand in analyzing the samples collected
in order to learn analytical and interpretive techniques. In some cases, these projects
have expanded to include new long-term data sets that augment the original studies.
INTRODUCTION
The use of long-term data sets to elucidate slow natural
processes is not unique to us in either type or length of project.
Our limestone weathering cubes project was the result of the
convergence of ideas derived from two experiments: one from
the long-term erosion of Plexiglas rods and cubes by wind in the
Coachella Valley, California (Sharp, 1964), and another from the
study of tombstone weathering in New England (Rahn, 1971).
More recently, studies by Godfrey et al. (2008) and Matsukura
et al. (2007) have examined geomorphological processes similar
*retired
to our studies but, in one case, for an even longer period of time.
Long-term studies are not solely the domain of geology. Fieldbased ecological studies are typically long standing, such as the
various Long-Term Ecological Research sites (e.g., Greenland
et al., 2003) and the well-known Hubbard Brook study in New
Hampshire (Likens and Bormann, 1995).
Long-term projects with field components that involve undergraduate students in data acquisition and analysis, however, can be
a valuable part of a geoscience education. Like many geoscience
programs, the Dickinson College curriculum is built around a core
of field-based experiences. A key factor that makes the Dickinson
curriculum unique is that some of these experiences involve local
site studies and data collection over decadal time scales to solve
Potter, N., Jr., Niemitz, J.W., and Sak, P.B., 2009, Long-term field-based studies in geoscience teaching, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field
Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 185194, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(16).
For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
185
186
Potter et al.
real-world problems, and thus they foster a sense of research literacy at all levels of the curriculum. The three projects described
in this paper share several commonalities: (1) they all require
accumulation of data over timeshort-term measurement will
produce little or no useful data; (2) they have produced data sets
that are used across the curriculum, from introductory to advanced
courses, with varying levels of sophistication expected; and (3) all
of these projects have served as the topics for independent student
research projects. At Dickinson, we attract two types of geology
students, some of whom go to graduate school and others who
proceed directly into environmental consulting careers. These
field-based projects serve both groups well. Two of the projects
have continued beyond the retirement of the faculty member who
initiated them. A project need not end upon a faculty members
retirement, nor is the data set useless if the field study ceases.
There are several learning goals common to the three projects. Each project demonstrates that imperceptible change adds
up over time, emphasizing an understanding of geologic time and
rates of change. In these projects, we are able to quantify geologic
rates with student-collected data sets that are useful across a wide
range of courses in the geoscience curriculum. Unlike contrived
or laboratory-based projects, students see the variability in natural systems, and they see that they are part of something larger.
With a continually growing data set, they recognize the need for
quality control, and they feel a sense of ownership toward the
growing data set. Most errors in data collection and processing
become obvious when compared to previous measurements. Students must face the issue of what to do with these errors. These
kinds of projects counteract the Crime Scene Investigators (CSI)
mentality and enable students to see that solutions are not readily
apparent and that, frequently, a new set of questions arises every
time a new addition to the data set is acquired. Students can ask
how could we (or a future group) do better next time? This
mentality allows new methodologies and analytical techniques
to be developed midstream. These types of projects allow for
7730W
40N
expansion by integrating other long-term data sets into the existing ones. Engagement with these data sets enhances students
systems-based critical thinking skills by searching out concrete
connections between different but related types of data. These
data sets have also been used as baselines for student independent
research projects.
This paper describes three examples of local long-term projects used across our curriculum at Dickinson College (Fig. 1).
The projects are described in chronological order (by the date of
inception). The Meanders Project, started in 1974 and continuing, measures meander migration of a small stream and is used in
the geomorphology and field geology courses. The Weathering
Cubes experiment, started in 1989 and continuing, is used in
multiple introductory geology courses, geomorphology, and sedimentology and stratigraphy courses. The Yellow Breeches Creek
Project produced a data set of discharge and suspended and dissolved sediment data collected over a 10 yr period from 1993 to
2003. These data are used in introductory geology, geomorphology, geochemistry, environmental geology, and hydrogeology.
The projects fall into two categories: those with flexible and/
or less frequent sampling intervals (Meanders and Weathering
Cubes) and one, the Yellow Breeches Creek Project, where frequent sampling is necessary. The former are more amenable to
data collection by students. In the latter, the faculty collected the
samples, but students were responsible for much of the sample
analysis. We describe these projects and the transition of the
Meanders Project to adoption by a new member of the department upon the retirement of the faculty member who initiated it.
MEANDERS
In spring 1974, two students in Potters geomorphology class
surveyed four high-resolution topographic profiles across three
meanders on a small unnamed stream NW of Carlisle, Pennsylvania (Fig. 1). At normal flow, the stream is only ~10 cm deep
77W
5 10
20
km
7730W
77W
40N
Elevation (m)
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
1974
1979
1985
-0.8
10
1994
2004
2008
12
14
Distance (m)
0.2
Elevation (m)
187
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
1974
2008
B
0
10
15
20
Distance (m)
188
Potter et al.
To quantify the rate of local limestone weathering, we collected a large block of local micritic limestone, cut several cubes
of limestone, and put them out on the roof of a campus building
to weather. Six limestone cubes have now been weathering for
19 yr, except for one week a year, when they are brought inside
to be dried and weighed. The average cube weighed 177 g at
the inception of the experiment. Each exposed cube has lost over
3 g since they were put outside (Fig. 5). An unexposed and thus
unweathered control cube is weighed to establish the continuing
veracity of the experiment.
Each year we dry the cubes, and students weigh them. They
are asked to calculate the rate of weathering in g yr1, and to estimate how long it would take the average cube to weather away
using that rate. This exercise is fine for an introductory class, but,
of course, as the cubes weather away, their surface area decreases,
the surface chemistry of the cubes changes, and presumably the
rate will slow over time. This change of weathering rate suggests other studies for upper-level courses. For example, we have
asked our geomorphology classes to determine the surface area
of the cubes, and determine a bare-rock surface weathering rate.
That rate, based on the cube weathering, is ~8 m Ma1 (Potter and
Niemitz, 2001a).
When we discuss the local landscape, we contrast the valley underlain by limestone to the adjacent ridges underlain by
sandstone. This is a nice way to illustrate the distinction between
weathering of carbonate and silicate rocks in a wet temperate climate. When we first put the limestone cubes out to weather, it
189
190
Potter et al.
7715 W
7700W
4015N
Figure 7. The weekly 10 yr discharge record on the Yellow Breeches Creek collected at discharge site 1 (Fig. 1) with rainfall data. The record
shows major discharge events as well as the effects of overall wet and dry years on the discharge of the stream. Note that large rain events, particularly in the summer, do not always produce large discharge events, showing the underlying complexity of relationships in the system. Water
years begin on October 1.
Figure 8. Calendar year 1997 record of Yellow Breeches Creek Watershed (YBCW) discharge and stream chemistry as total carbonate
rocksourced elements (Ca2+, Mg2+) and silicate rocksourced elements (K+, Na+) compared to groundwater level and rainfall. Note the
examples of high correlation of longer time periods (1, 2) or specific
events (3) of high rainfall with discharge and groundwater-level responses. The rapid response of groundwater to rainfall is most likely
the result of stream discharge increases infiltrating the bedrock and
increasing groundwater level than the result of direct recharge of rain
to the groundwater table. A data gap exists between water days 1273
and 1295. CFScubic feet per second (ft3/s).
191
192
Potter et al.
1 km2 area. Pump tests from the water wells allow calculation of
average linear velocity to understand the amount of time it takes
the groundwater in storage to approach chemical equilibrium.
The geochemistry course is required for the geology major.
Students are taught more of the theory behind the instrumentation used to produce the chemical data from the water samples.
These analyses are given more statistical scrutiny than in other
classes, and more in-depth analyses of degree of saturation and
water facies types are produced from limestone and sandstonemetavolcanic lithofacies, as well as shale and Fe-rich sandstone
found in other parts of the watershed.
We have been fortunate to have obtained grant money to
instrument the well field and watershed. However, it is not necessary to have a drilled water well for monitoring in order to collect
these kinds of data, nor is it unreasonably expensive to obtain
and use data loggers (<$100) to collect data on short time intervals. The water-level monitors and rain gauges we use are relatively inexpensive ($100500) while being quite robust. We have
had them in the field for years without any breakdowns except
to change batteries. Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC)cased soil auger
holes for shallow groundwater-level monitoring and simple stilling wells for stream-level monitoring are adequate. Rain gauges
can be placed just about anywhere as long as there are no large
trees or buildings blocking the rainfall path.
The primary Yellow Breeches discharge site has produced
the longest data set. Shortly after the start of the primary study,
we added secondary water-level sites on the major tributaries of
the Yellow Breeches Creek and the well field with rain gauge
(1995). Another rain gauge transect was added in 1997 (Fig. 6).
Collection of the latter data sets continues to the present.
Course research projects from this particular long-term project have become starting points for senior independent research.
Two examples directly involve the original long-term stream discharge and chemistry database and the subsequent addition of
rainfall and groundwater level.
Over the past 5 yr, there has been considerable concern about
so-called legacy sediments (i.e., Walter and Merritts, 2008).
Legacy sediments are sediment volumes that have been trapped
behind thousands of mill dams throughout the Middle Atlantic
states starting in the mid-eighteenth century. They include much
of the nutrient supply and other harmful constituents from urban
and/or agricultural runoff before todays best management practices and sewage treatment plant pollution-control measures were
in place. Originally, these dams were necessary to provide water
power for the grinding of grain and other industrial processes.
However, with the advent of electricity, the mills were abandoned, and the dams began to decay due to neglect. Now, many
of the remaining dams are being removed to return the streams to
their original gradient and to improve stream biodiversity. With
the removal of the dams, the sediment and its potentially harmful
load are being remobilized, sending sediment to the Susquehanna
River and ultimately to Chesapeake Bay.
In order to understand this system and the potential threat
to Chesapeake Bay, we are interested in the rate of release, the
chemistry of the sediment load, and how that chemistry is apportioned to the mineralogy of the sediments. The YBC database
is invaluable as we are examining a very large legacy sediment
deposit upstream from the long-term discharge/chemistry collection site (Fig. 6). The data set partially covers the years over which
the deposit has been remobilized since the dam was removed in
1987. Filtered samples of suspended sediment captured downstream during the 10 yr study are being used to determine temporal changes in mineralogy and bulk chemistry. We can use these
time-tracked samples along with core samples from the legacy
deposit to determine mass balances and fluxes of elements indicative of land use and anthropogenic inputs. As these sediments
all come from low human impact land-use (state forest) areas, we
can use our findings as a baseline to compare to similar studies
from nearby agricultural and urban land-use sectors.
A second project uses all the long-term databases from
stream water, groundwater level, and rainfall to quantify the mass
fluxes of elements from local rain to vadose water to the groundwater and into the groundwater-fed stream. Dickinson College is
fortunate to own a 187 acre farm adjacent to the Yellow Breeches
Creek. Through the work of many academic departments and
individuals, the farm is not only striving for organic certification but also to become a center for biogeochemical studies in
the context of agriculture. Because our well field is located on
the farm property, we have an opportunity to quantify the purging of the nutrients, pesticides, and herbicides used in heretofore
traditional farming practices as the farm transitions to certified
organic status. In addition, with rainfall, soil water, and groundwater chemistry measurements, we are documenting chemical
transformations within soil types associated with three different
rock types within the farm boundaries as they undergo weathering in a wet temperate climate. Most of these kinds of regolith
development studies have been done only in humid climates.
As the YBCW is studied more and more, we suspect there
will be more opportunities to use the long-term databases already
established and to start others. By introducing the data set itself
and the methodologies for collecting a valid data set over time at
the beginning of students undergraduate education, we provide
more opportunity for in-depth study of various geologic processes and rates that would otherwise be quite invisible to them.
Long-term data sets provide opportunities to increase students
critical thinking, quantitative, and communication skills as well
as learn more about the processes themselves.
PROJECT CONTINUES: NEW PERSON, NEW IDEAS
Long-term monitoring projects such as the Meanders Project may extend beyond a given faculty members career, provided that younger members of the department are committed
to maintaining the project. At Dickinson, Potters retirement did
not mean the end of either the Meanders or Weathering Cube
Projects. In fact, his retirement represented an expansion of the
Meanders Project. Our success in maintaining these projects is
born out of several factors. First, although Potter had retired,
193
194
Potter et al.
REFERENCES CITED
Allmendinger, N.E., Pizzuto, J.E., Potter, N., Jr., Johnson, T.E., and Hession,
W.C., 2005, The influence of riparian vegetation on stream width, eastern Pennsylvania, USA: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 117,
p. 229243, doi: 10.1130/B25447.1.
Godfrey, A.E., Everitt, B.L., and Martin Duque, J.F., 2008, Episodic sediment
delivery and landscape connectivity in the Mancos Shale badlands and
Fremont River system, Utah, USA: Geomorphology, v. 102, p. 242251,
doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2008.05.002.
Greenland, D., Gooding, D.G., and Smith, R.C., eds., 2003, Climate Variability
and Ecosystem Response at Long-Term Ecological Research Sites: New
York, Oxford University Press, 480 p.
Likens, G.E., and Bormann, F.H., 1995, Biogeochemistry of a Forested Ecosystem (2nd edition): New York, Springer-Verlag, 159 p.
Matsukura, Y., Hattanji, T., Oguchi, C.T., and Hirose, T., 2007, Ten year measurements of weathering rates of rock tablets on a forested hillslope in
a humid temperate region, Japan: Zeitschrift fr Geomorphologie, v. 51,
p. 2740, doi: 10.1127/0372-8854/2007/0051S-0027.
Niemitz, J.W., and Potter, N., Jr., 1991, The scientific method and writing in
introductory landscape development laboratories: Journal of Geological
Education, v. 39, p. 190195.
Potter, N., Jr., and Niemitz, J.W., 2001a, An alternate approach to a local denudation rate: A 12-year record of limestone weathering in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, in Potter, N., Jr., ed., The Geomorphic Evolution of the Great
Valley near Carlisle, Pennsylvania: Carlisle, Pennsylvania, Southeast
Friends of the Pleistocene, 2001 Annual Meeting Guidebook, p. 3335.
Potter, N., Jr., and Niemitz, J.W., 2001b, Suspended and dissolved load in
Yellow Breeches Creek: An approximation to a denudation rate for the
Cumberland Valley based on 7 years of record, in Potter, N., Jr., ed., The
Geomorphic Evolution of the Great Valley near Carlisle, Pennsylvania:
Carlisle, Pennsylvania, Southeast Friends of the Pleistocene, 2001 Annual
Meeting Guidebook, p. 3032.
Potter, N., Jr., Hartman, D., and Allmendinger, N., 2001, STOP 1. 27 years
of meander migration on an unnamed creek, in Potter, N., Jr., ed., The
Geomorphic Evolution of the Great Valley near Carlisle, Pennsylvania:
Carlisle, Pennsylvania, Southeast Friends of the Pleistocene, 2001 Annual
Meeting Guidebook, p. 6679.
Rahn, P.H., 1971, The weathering of tombstones and its relationship to topography in New England: Journal of Geological Education, v. 19, p. 112118.
Reuter, J.M., 2005, Erosion Rates and Patterns Inferred from Cosmogenic 10Be
in the Susquehanna River Basin [M.S. thesis]: Burlington, The University
of Vermont, 172 p.
Roth, A.M., and Helmke, M.F., 2006, High times in the Great Valley: Remote
sensing by unoccupied aerial vehicle (UAV): Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 38, no. 2, p. A25.
Sevon, W.D., 1989, Erosion in the Juniata River drainage basin, Pennsylvania,
in Gardner, T.W., and Sevon, W.D., eds., Appalachian Geomorphology:
Geomorphology v. 2, p. 303318, and Addendum, v. 20, no. 3, p.5.
Sharp, R.P., 1964, Wind-driven sand in Coachella Valley, California:
Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 75, p. 785804, doi:
10.1130/0016-7606(1964)75[785:WSICVC]2.0.CO;2.
Walter, R., and Merritts, D., 2008, Natural streams and the legacy of water-powered
milling: Science, v. 319, no. 5861, p. 299304, doi: 10.1126/science.1151716.
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY 5 MAY 2009
ABSTRACT
The objective of the environmental science component of the James Madison
University field course in Ireland is to provide students with opportunities to conduct
original hypothesis-driven research. We use an exercise in fluvial geomorphology as
a case example of the way students used field observations and basic principles demonstrated by faculty mentors to develop and test hypotheses about the formation and
function of rivers. Specifically, students addressed two fundamental, and currently
unresolved, questions: (1) Can the location of large gravel bars be predicted? (2) What
controls channel width? Students also gained insight into foundational concepts in
fluvial geomorphology by investigating the distribution of deposited sediments, and
deciphering how past environmental conditions provide first-order controls on the
morphology of a modern-day river channel. In addition to identifying important geomorphic patterns, students gained useful skills in developing and testing scientific
questions in a rigorous and data-rich manner.
INTRODUCTION
Geology field courses that include a blending of both traditional and contemporary topics and targeted research projects
provide the ideal capstone experience for undergraduate geoscience students. Undergraduate students participation in original research is widely believed to encourage students to pursue
advanced degrees and careers in science (Russell et al., 2007).
The environmental science component of the James Madison
University field course provides students with an opportunity
to engage in the process of science by conducting hands-on
research projects based on timely and pressing questions that
May, C.L., Eaton, L.S., and Whitmeyer, S.J., 2009, Integrating student-led research in fluvial geomorphology into traditional field courses: A case study from James
Madison Universitys field course in Ireland, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern
Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 195204, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(17). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org.
2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
195
196
May et al.
9 54' 00" N
53 44' 00" W
14
Outlet to
Atlantic Ocean
Lower
River
13
12
11
10
Middle
River
8
7 6
197
5
3 41
2
Northern
Ireland
Study
Area
Upper
River
Republic
of Ireland
N
1 km
9 42' 00" N
53 40' 00" W
Figure 1. Map of the study area. The midsection of the river, denoted
by dashed lines that bisect the basin, contains large gravel bars investigated by student groups 1 and 2. Numbered circles indicate the location of sampling areas for student groups 3 and 4. Inset highlights the
location of County Mayo in western Ireland.
ery and Buffington, 1997) and large gravel bars. Students then
went searching for areas where sand deposits had formed. To their
surprise, and initial disappointment, surficial deposits of sandsized material were also uncommon in this portion of the channel
network. The role of the faculty advisor was then to demonstrate
and discuss the process of channel armoring, where finer-grained
sediments are trapped, and therefore protected, by a coarse surface layer (Dietrich et al., 1989). This line of inquiry and discovery provided an opportunity to discuss the importance of striving
for creative alternatives when preliminary observations do not fit
expectations, and it served to illustrate that real learning and discovery involve a constant process of evolving our understanding
and questioning of complex environmental systems.
From their observations, students deduced that subsurface
sediment deposits in large gravel bars would be a rich source of
sand, and therefore gold, deposits. Students were then surprised
to find that gravel bars were limited to a relatively small portion
of the channel network in the midsection of the basin (Fig. 1,
sites 18). In the upper section of the basin, bar development
was limited by channel steepness; downstream bar development
appeared to be limited by channel incision into thick layers of
cohesive sediment. Cohesive bank materials, caused by roots of
streamside vegetation or clay-rich soil, have a direct effect on
the processes and rates of bank erosion (Micheli and Kirchner,
2002a, 2002b). In the Carrownisky River, thick clay and organicrich sediments in the lower floodplain valley have distinct stratigraphic characteristics that suggest the lower river was formerly
a wetland (Fig. 1, sites 914).
Based on field observations and concepts described and
demonstrated by the faculty mentor, specific hypotheses were
developed by each of four smaller groups (Table 2). Students
TABLE 2. RESEARCH QUESTIONS, OBSERVATIONS, AND INSIGHTS GAINED FROM FIELD OBSERVATIONS MADE BY EACH STUDENT GROUP
Group number and research
Observations summarized by
Process-based understanding of
Important concepts in fluvial
Specific hypothesis tested
question
the students
observations demonstrated by the
geomorphology demonstrated
faculty mentor
and discussed
1. Where are deposits of sandSurficial deposits of sand were
Streambeds are characterized by two
Selective transport of
If the streambed is well armored,
sized particles most abundant?
uncommon on the surface of the
distinct layers of the sediment. The
sediment; channel armoring;
then deposits of sand-sized
streambed or bars throughout the
surface layer is primarily composed of
and interpretation of
material will be more abundant in
channel network. The subsurface
coarse sediment that is difficult for the
imbricated deposits.
the subsurface, because the
sediments of gravel bars in the
river to transport. This coarse surface
coarse surface layer prevents
low-gradient floodplain valley
layer protects the finer-grained
transport of the finer-grained
contained an abundance of sandsubsurface, which more closely
material stored in the subsurface.
sized particles.
approximates the load the river carries.
2. In reaches of the river where
Gravel bars of various sizes were
The size of gravel bars is largely
Gravel bar and meander
If bar size is determined by the
present in the midsection of the
dependent upon the space available to
development; mechanisms of
bars form, can the occurrence
radius of curvature in meander
of large bars be predicted?
river. Large bars appeared to be
accommodate bar formation. Bar
bank erosion.
bends, then small bars should
related to the curvature of
formation is limited in tightly confined
occur where the angle of
meander bends.
river canyons but can be extensive in
curvature is low, because there is
broad floodplain valleys.
less room for lateral expansion
and sediment deposition on the
inside of tight meander bends
compared to broad, high-angle
bends.
3. Where in the channel
The upstream end of the study
Bar development is limited to channels
Morphologic channel
If channel width inhibits bar
network do gravel bars form?
area was bounded by steep
with less than 2% slope, which is well
development; hydraulic
development in cohesive
channels, which limited the
documented in the literature (e.g.,
geometry; bank erosion and
sediments, then stream banks
potential for bar formation. In the
Montgomery and Buffington, 1997). In
characteristics of cohesive
composed of noncohesive
midsection of the river, gravel bars
low-gradient channels, bar
sediments.
materials will have the greatest
of various sizes were very
development can also be inhibited in
abundance of bars, because
abundant. In the lower river, the
narrow channels; however, the
channels can erode floodplains
channel was narrow, deeply
controls on channel width are not well
laterally in noncohesive sediment,
incised, and lacked bar
understood.
whereas channels incise vertically
development.
into cohesive sediments.
4. How do past environmental
Stratigraphic evidence exposed in
Climate change affects river discharge, Stratigraphic evidence for past
If the cohesion of stream-bank
conditions affect the modern
the channel banks indicated that
sediment load, and fluvial landform
fluvial features; sediment
materials affects channel
river channel?
landforms in the Carrownisky River development.
transport and deposition under
development, then areas of
valley have varied dramatically
varying environmental
cohesive and noncohesive
through time. Evidence for
conditions.
stream banks are determined by
alternating conditions of gravelpast environmental conditions,
bed river floodplains, deltas, and
because paleolake beds and
shallow lakes is present.
wetlands contain cohesive
sediments, paleochannels
produce noncohesive sediments,
and deltas have a mixture of
cohesive and noncohesive
sediments.
198
199
Angl
An
Angle
gle
gl
e (
())
Student research projects were conducted in the Carrownisky River basin, located in the Murrisk Peninsula of southwestern County Mayo, along the western coast of Ireland (Fig. 1).
The river originates in the glacial cirques of the Sheefry Hills of
the South Mayo region and flows northwest through predominantly flat, boggy terrain prior to reaching the Atlantic coast,
south of Clew Bay. The river is underlain by lightly metamorphosed, Ordovician to Silurian sedimentary rocks of the South
Mayo Trough, which range from turbidite sequences of the
Sheefry Formation through calcareous siltstones, quartzites, and
sandstones of the Croagh Patrick succession (Dewey, 1963; Williams and Harper, 1988; Graham et al., 1989; Dewey and Ryan,
1990). The trend of the Carrownisky River generally follows the
axial hinge region of a broad, east-westtrending syncline as the
river progresses downstream from headwaters among the steeply
north-dipping strata of the southern limb of the syncline.
Much of the present-day high-elevation landscape of westcentral Ireland is dominated by spectacular cirques, U-shaped
200
May et al.
100
A
Percent of grains <4 mm
B
80
60
40
20
Surface
Subsurface
Figure 3. (A) Coarse surface layer of gravel bars underlain by finer subsurface sediments. (B) Distribution of fine sediment (<4 mm) in the surface and subsurface layers throughout the study reach. Error bars indicate one standard deviation around the mean value.
100
10
1
1
10
100
2
201
C
D
Figure 5. (A) Noncohesive stream banks composed of clast-supported gravels. (B) Broad river channel and gravel bars formed in areas of
noncohesive stream banks. (C) Cohesive stream banks formed in clay-rich sediments; organic-rich midlevel layer overtopped by laminated
layers of fine sand. (D) Narrow and incised river channel formed in areas of cohesive stream banks. Scale bar denotes 0.5 m increments.
202
May et al.
30
25
20
15
10
5
Cohesive
Mixed
Noncohesive
Bank material
that cohesive banks can restrict channel width and therefore bar
development.
Students were able to predict where bars of varying sizes
would occur based on the angle of curvature of meander bends
(Fig. 7). High-angle bends were associated with large bars
because there was ample room for channel expansion and sediment deposition on the inside of bends. In contrast, low-angle
bends were associated with smaller bars because the space to
accommodate bar formation was limited in tight river bends.
Emanating from an interest in understanding the pattern
of channel development, students also wanted to interpret how
past environmental conditions influenced the present-day channel. Stratigraphic evidence revealed that the Carrownisky River
valley has undergone dramatic changes in landforms and fluvial
features (Fig. 8). Stratigraphic evidence in exposed river banks
suggests that a broad, braided river system flowed through the
midsection of the basin. These deposits form the noncohesive
banks where the modern-day channel is a single-thread meandering channel with abundant gravel bars (Figs. 5A and 5B). In
the lower river, stratigraphic evidence suggests that the valley
has alternated between a delta and shallow lake or wetland, and
a river-floodplain. These deposits form the cohesive sediments
where the modern-day channel is narrow and deeply incised
into the floodplain (Figs. 5C and 5D). The combined landforms
of braided rivers and wetlands are indicative of wetter climate
periods, when river discharge increases and sediment supply to
rivers is high due to accelerated hillslope erosion. Evidence of
widespread climatic cycles, including major flood events and the
expansion of wetlands, has been observed in other sedimentary
and archaeological records in the region (e.g., Barber et al., 2003;
Macklin and Lewin, 2003; Moore, 2006).
Learning Assessment
Students were evaluated on the quality of the data, thoroughness of the analysis, and content of the final presentation. A high
203
10000
y = 0.0003x3.064
r 2 = 0.67
1000
100
10
10
100
1000
steep mountain
streams
braided
stream
steep mountain
streams
meandering
river with
alternate bars
204
May et al.
on channel width in the field area that provided a first-order control on bar development and sediment deposition, new research
questions emerged. The emergence of new ideas and questions
is critical to the way scientific knowledge evolves and progresses. Only through active inquiry can the evolution of learning be demonstrated, and our experience suggests that this is best
done through student-led research in a field-based setting. Field
courses provide an ideal opportunity for teaching geoscience in a
way that mirrors the processes of discovery used by professional
researchers, and it moves far beyond many traditional methods of
teaching that only present established knowledge.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We wish to thank all of the students in the James Madison
University field course in Ireland, 2007, for contributing their
research results to this paper. We would especially like to thank
Joseph Bell for compiling data, and Greg Finklestein, Nikki
Jenkins, and Kean Lewis for contributing site photographs.
Kate Moore at the Department of Earth and Ocean Science,
National University of Ireland, Galway, provided field instructional assistance, logistical support, and the initial inspiration
for this endeavor.
REFERENCES CITED
Barber, K.E., Chambers, F.M., and Maddy, D., 2003, Holocene paleoclimates
from peat stratigraphy: Macrofossil proxy climate records from three oceanic raised bogs in England and Ireland: Quaternary Science Reviews,
v. 22, p. 521539, doi: 10.1016/S0277-3791(02)00185-3.
Bowen, D.Q., Phillips, F.M., McCabe, A.M., Knutz, P.C., and Sykes, G.A.,
2002, New data for the Last Glacial Maximum in Great Britain and Ireland: Quaternary Science Reviews, v. 21, p. 89101, doi: 10.1016/S0277
-3791(01)00102-0.
Bradshaw, R.H.W., 2001, The Littletonian Warm StagePost 10,000 BP, in
Holland, C.H., ed., The Geology of Ireland: Edinburgh, Dunedin Academic Press, p. 429442.
Bunte, K., and Abt, S.R., 2001, Sampling Surface and Subsurface Particle-Size
Distributions in Wadeable Gravel- and Cobble-Bed Streams for Analyses in Sediment Transport, Hydraulics, and Streambed Monitoring: U.S.
Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, General Technical
Report 74, 428 p.
Coxon, P., 2001, Cenozoic: Tertiary and Quaternary (until 10,000 years before
present), in Holland, C.H., ed., The Geology of Ireland: Edinburgh, Dunedin Academic Press, p. 387428.
De Paor, D.G., and Whitmeyer, S.J., 2009, this volume, Innovation and obsolescence in geoscience field courses: Past experiences and proposals for the
future, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(05).
Dewey, J.F., 1963, The Lower Palaeozoic stratigraphy of central Murrisk, County
Mayo, Ireland, and the evolution of the South Mayo Trough: Quarterly
Journal of the Geological Society of London, v. 119, p. 313344.
Dewey, J.F., and Ryan, P.D., 1990, The Ordovician evolution of the South
Mayo Trough, western Ireland: Tectonics, v. 9, p. 887903, doi: 10.1029/
TC009i004p00887.
Dietrich, W.E., Kirchner, J.W., Ikeda, H., and Iseya, F., 1989, Sediment supply
and the development of the coarse surface layer in gravel-bedded rivers:
Nature, v. 340, p. 215217, doi: 10.1038/340215a0.
Graham, J.R., Leake, B.E., and Ryan, P.D., 1989. The Geology of South Mayo,
Western Ireland: Edinburgh, Scottish Academic Press, 75 p.
Katz, B.J., 2004, Report on the status of academic geoscience departments: Explorer (American Association of Petroleum Geologists), v. 25, no. 7, p. 10.
Leopold, L.B., and Maddock, T., Jr., 1953, The Hydraulic Geometry of Stream
Channels and Some Physiographic Implications: U.S. Geological Survey
Professional Paper 252, 56 p.
Leopold, L.B., Wolman, M.G., and Miller, J.P., 1964, Fluvial Processes in Geomorphology: San Francisco, W.H. Freeman and Co., 522 p.
Macklin, M.G., and Lewin, J., 2003, River sediments, great floods and centennial-scale Holocene climate change: Journal of Quaternary Science, v. 18,
p. 101105, doi: 10.1002/jqs.751.
McNally, K., 1984, Standing Stones and Other Monuments of Early Ireland:
Belfast, Appletree Press, 128 p.
Micheli, E.R., and Kirchner, J.W., 2002a, Effects of wet meadow riparian
vegetation on streambank erosion: 1. Remote sensing measurements of
streambank migration and erodibility: Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, v. 27, p. 627639, doi: 10.1002/esp.338.
Micheli, E.R., and Kirchner, J.W., 2002b, Effects of wet meadow riparian
vegetation on streambank erosion: 2. Measurements of vegetated bank
strength and consequences for failure mechanics: Earth Surface Processes
and Landforms, v. 27, p. 687697, doi: 10.1002/esp.340.
Mix, A.C., Bard, E., and Schneider, R., 2001, Environmental processes of the
ice age: Land, oceans, glaciers (EPILOG): Quaternary Science Reviews,
v. 20, p. 627658, doi: 10.1016/S0277-3791(00)00145-1.
Montgomery, D.R., and Buffington, J.M., 1997, Channel-reach morphology
in mountain drainage basins: Geological Society of America Bulletin,
v. 109, p. 596611, doi: 10.1130/0016-7606(1997)109<0596:CRMIMD
>2.3.CO;2.
Moore, K.R., 2006, Prehistoric gold markers and environmental change: A twoage system for standing stones in western Ireland: Geoarcheology, v. 21,
p. 155170, doi: 10.1002/gea.20095.
Russell, S.H., Hancock, M.P., and McCullough, J., 2007, Benefits of undergraduate research experiences: Science, v. 316, p. 548549, doi: 10.1126/
science.1140384.
Smallidge, P.J., and Everham, E.M., 1994, Motivating students to participate in
a discussion-format course: Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, v. 75, p. 164165.
Walker, M.J.C., Bohncke, S.J.P., Coope, G.R., OConnell, M., Usinger, H., and
Verbruggen, C., 1994, The Devensian/Weichselian late-glacial in northwest Europe (Ireland, Britain, north Belgium, The Netherlands, northwest
Germany): Journal of Quaternary Science, v. 9, p. 109118, doi: 10.1002/
jqs.3390090204.
Williams, D.M., and Harper, D.A.T., 1988, A basin model for the Silurian of the
Midland Valley of Scotland and Ireland: Journal of the Geological Society
of London, v. 145, p. 741748, doi: 10.1144/gsjgs.145.5.0741.
ABSTRACT
Since 2003, the standard igneous and metamorphic petrology class at Fort Lewis
College has been taught as a field-based, inquiry-driven course focused on topics in
three different field areas (Ship Rock, Western Needle Mountains, San Juan volcanic
field). This format allows undergraduate students to investigate advanced topics in
petrology through field research while developing skills for continuing education and
scientific careers. These courses serve the needs of the students by promoting critical analysis and inquiry, and building on content taught in previous courses to solve
actual geologic problems. Many of the students also find enthusiasm for continued
research and make further contributions to the geologic community.
A research-focused field course at the undergraduate level allows students to
engage in all facets of research in the context of natural geologic complexity. In addition, these students can collaborate with professional geoscientists to network and
find opportunities that are not readily available to their peers outside the course.
Engaging undergraduate geoscience students in authentic research projects is a benefit to their education and career development.
INTRODUCTION
Petrology at the undergraduate level is a core element of
geology curriculum. This course plays an important role in the
education of students, helping them to develop skills in inquiry,
observation, and analysis. In the past 20 years, the undergraduate igneous and metamorphic petrology course at many colleges
and universities has undergone a major transformation. The
traditional format of this course often involved laborious, timeintensive petrographic and hand-specimen studies of rocks and
*gonzales_d@fortlewis.edu
semken@asu.edu
Gonzales, D., and Semken, S., 2009, A comparative study of field inquiry in an undergraduate petrology course, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle,
E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 205221, doi:
10.1130/2009.2461(18). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
205
206
INQUIRY IN EDUCATION
COURSE CONTEXT
Inquiry has become an important if not yet ubiquitous
component of science education, and the merits and methods
of inquiry are disseminated in the National Science Education
Standards (NSES; National Research Council, 1996). The positive impact on student learning of inquiry via authentic, scientific
research and similar experiential activities is documented (e.g.,
Project Kaleidoscope, 1991; Tobias, 1992; Haury, 1993, National
Academy of Sciences, 1997; Huntoon et al., 2001; Harnik and
Ross, 2003; Jarrett and Burnley, 2003; ONeal, 2003; Seymour
et al., 2004; Apedoe et al., 2006; Apedoe, 2007; Hunter et al.,
2007). The overall implication is that students can benefit greatly
when they have the opportunity to design a research project, collect and interpret their own data, and communicate their findings
in field settings. However, MacDonald et al. (2005) reported that
only 1% of a sampling of geoscience faculty in the United States
used research as a component in their curriculum.
Anderson (2007) defined inquiry learning as an active,
student-centered process that mirrors scientific inquiry and is
characterized by: (1) active, personal construction, rather than
absorption, of meaning; (2) reliance on prior conceptions that
are held by each learner, and that may be changed in the learning process; (3) dependence upon the contexts in which learning takes place (the more diverse the contexts, the richer the
knowledge constructed); and (4) enhancement by engagement
of ideas in concert with other learners. These four characteristics of inquiry learning (or constructivist learning) constitute
a metric for assessing the authenticity and effectiveness of
courses such as our field-research petrology course, and we will
return to them later herein.
UT CO
AZ NM
114
207
112
110
108
106
104W
42N
40
38
2007
2006
UTAH
ARIZONA
SJVF
COLORADO
NEW MEXICO
2003
SJB
100 KM
36
34
208
Course
calendar
Precourse
Week 1
Week 2
Week 3
Week 4
Week 5
Week 6
Week 7
Week 8
Week 9
Week 10
Week 11
Week 12
Week 13
Week 14
2007
Collaborative study with
U.S. Geological Survey to
investigate the acidneutralizing capacity
(ANC) of altered igneous
rocks in the western San
Juan volcanic field.
2006
Studied metamorphic
assemblages and fabrics
in Proterozoic rock units.
Conducted detailed
petrologic and structural
studies of ca. 1.7 Ga
granitic dikes.
Conducted petrochemical
and field studies on
Tertiary intrusive rocks to
assess magma genesis
and emplacement
histories.
Multiple stages of metamorphic
mineral growth during ductile
deformation of ca. 1.78 Ga rocks
under upper-amphibolite-facies
conditions.
The grade of metamorphism, and
timing relative to deformation, in ca.
1.7 Ga pelitic rocks were
inconsistent with previous published
results.
Proterozoic dikes were syn- to
postdeformational, and emplaced
during N-S compression at ca. 1.7
Ga.
Tertiary intrusive rocks had similar
petrogenesis and emplacement
histories.
Petrographic descriptions of
metamorphic mineral assemblages
and fabrics. Documented relationship
between metamorphism and
deformation.
Geologic map of ca. 1.7 Ga dikes and
trends. Outcrop and thin-section
descriptions of dike rocks.
Documented structural fabrics and
deformational history of dikes, and
constrained relationships of dike
emplacement to deformation.
Petrologic descriptions and
geochemical data for different Tertiary
intrusive rock units.
Three students
from course and
two in 2005 who
did not take the
class
Burgess and
Gonzales (2005)
Gonzales et al.
(2006)
Turner and Gonzales
(2006)
Class research
Five
paper/presentation
Continued research by
faculty and student
New pressure and
temperature constraints
from metamorphic
mineral assemblages
New geochemical,
petrologic, and structural
data for ca. 1.7 Ga dike
rocks and Tertiary
intrusive rocks
Class research
papers/presentations
Geologic maps
Continued faculty
research
New geochemical and
petrologic data
Digital database
TABLE 2. SUMMARY AND COMPARISON OF PROJECTS, PRODUCTS, AND CONTINUED OUTCOMES FOR FIELD-RESEARCH COURSES
Types of data collected
New hypotheses
Class products and new
Thesis projects
Professional
contributions
contributions
2003
A detailed study of
diatreme, plugs, and
dikes. Focused on the
different geologic units
and rock structures to gain
more insight into the
eruptive history.
Project goal
209
210
Precourse 1
10
11
12
13
14
Precourse 1
10
11
12
13
14
Precourse 1
10
11
12
13
14
2006
Field visits & design and develop research project
Submit project proposal for approval
Discussions and exercises on scientific research
Petrologic description & classification
Review processes in tectonic systems
Key petrologic topics
Regional geologic review
Field research & data compilation
Write report and present results
200 7
Field visits & design and develop research project
Wr ite project proposal for funding
Discussions and exercises on scientific research
Petrologic description & classification
Review processes in tectonic systems
Key petrologic topics
Regional geologic review
Field research & data compilation
Compile portfolio & present results
Figure 2. Comparison of the time line of topics covered in the 2003, 2006, and 2007 field-research petrology courses.
211
212
the top score. The field-research igneous and metamorphic petrology course received higher overall ratings in 2003 (4.82 0.4,
N = 12) and 2007 (5.0 0.0, N = 4) than the average rating for
two sections of the previous laboratory-based course (4.53 0.7,
N = 20). However, the 2006 class was rated much lower (3.9
1.5, N = 8). As noted already, the 2006 course differed in that
the students inquiry learning was far more open and unguided;
projects that year did not address a common problem nor were
they situated in close proximity to each other. Although several
of the students in the 2006 course gave the class a comparatively
low overall rating, five of the eight who completed it continued to
pursue their individual projects for senior theses (Table 2).
Student Surveys
At the end of each offering of the course, students anonymously completed a quantitative 16-item survey developed
specifically to address student attitudes and learning (Table 4).
Students agreed most strongly that a research-based course is
more professionally useful than one without a research component (3 yr average = 4.9), that the course increased their interest
in doing research (4.8), and that it improved their knowledge of
regional geology and geologic history (4.8). They also expressed
strong agreement with other statements affirming the personal
value of doing research and fieldwork (4.64.7). They were less
affirmative that they fully understood how to complete their projects (4.2), gained understanding of local culture in the study area
(4.0), were able to accomplish all required tasks (3.9), and that
they met their project objectives (3.9). Their only disagreement,
which was expected, was with the statement that they were familiar with their study site before taking the class (2.9). It is interesting that this survey shows that the students in 2006, who did not
give a high rating for the course overall, were very positive about
its research components and its impact on their interest.
Following the 2006 and 2007 courses, we administered a
qualitative summative survey with 21 short-answer questions
(Table 5). The items asked students to elaborate on their positive and negative impressions of the course, and on its impact
on their knowledge, interests, and professional preparation. Students often provided more than one response to a given item.
These data were analyzed using a naturalistic approach (Miles
and Huberman, 1994) to identify themes in the student responses
rather than matching them against prior classifications.
Similar and affirmative themes emerged from our analyses
of the quantitative and qualitative parts of the summative-student
surveys. Scheduling and lack of prior research experience posed
minor challenges, but students generally found their projects
attainable, enjoyable, and worthwhile. The opportunity to practice skills in the field was particularly valued, and most students
thought that the course provided the best preparation for senior
theses and professional careers of any they took.
PrePost Survey
In 2006 and 2007, we also administered a quantitative survey to assess students own perceptions of how their interests and
skills had changed from the start to the end of the class (Table 6).
The difference in the values is reported as normalized gain (Hake,
1998). It is evident that in most instances, students felt that their
interest and geologic knowledge increased.
Quality of Student Final Papers and Presentations
As a capstone exercise, all students were required to present
their findings individually or in their project teams of two or three
(Table 1). Each student wrote a Geological Society of America
(GSA)style research paper, which in 2007 was part of the summary portfolio. These were graded for scientific content and style
using the set of rubrics in Table 7. Greater weight was given to
the science of the paper.
Oral presentations, the first for some students, were given
with digital slides in 15 min GSA format. They were judged
by the lead instructor (first author) using content rubrics given
in Table 8. Emphasis was placed on scientific merit, quality of
data and methods, validity of interpretations and supporting
evidence, organization, and presentation style. Nearly all of the
213
TABLE 4. MEAN STUDENT RESPONSES TO THE SURVEY ITEMS IN THE SUMMATIVE COURSE EVALUATION, BY YEAR
(1STRONG DISAGREEMENT, 2DISAGREEMENT, 3NEUTRALITY, 4AGREEMENT, 5STRONG AGREEMENT)
Learning objective
Relevant item(s) from summative evaluation
2003 means
2006 means
2007 means
(N = 12)
(N = 7)
(N = 4)
Enhance interest in geology and petrology
My interest in geosciences increased as a result
4.6 0.6
4.6 0.52
5.0 0.0
of taking this class.
through focused study of a significant local
crystalline-rock body or landform.
My interest in igneous petrology increased as a
4.2 1.3
4.5 0.53
5.0 0.0
result of taking this class.
My interest in doing scientific research
4.6 0.6
4.9 0.35
5.0 0.0
increased as a result of taking this class.
Enhance familiarity with the region.
My knowledge of regional geology and geologic
4.9 0.5
4.5 0.76
5.0 0.0
history improved as a result of taking this
class.
Prior to taking this class, I was familiar with the
3.3 1.5
2.4 1.06
2.8 0.96
geologic feature where I did my research
work.
It was more interesting to study a geologic
3.8 1.4
3.1 0.64
3.8 1.50
feature I was familiar with, rather than one I
was not familiar with.
I gained understanding and appreciation of the
3.9 0.9
3.9 0.90
4.5 0.58
local culture in my study area as a result of
taking this course.
Conduct an authentic research project from
I understood the objectives of my research
4.2 0.8
4.1 0.64
5.0 0.0
initial planning to interpretation and
project.
dissemination of results.
I understood what I needed to do in order to
3.8 0.8
4.4 0.52
4.8 0.50
complete my research project.
I was able to accomplish all of the tasks needed
3.9 0.8
3.8 0.71
4.3 0.50
to complete my research project.
I feel that my work and results met the
3.8 1.1
3.5 0.93
4.8 0.50
objectives of my research project.
A course with a research component is more
4.6 0.8
4.5 0.53
5.0 0.0
interesting than one without a research
component.
A course with a research component is more
4.8 0.6
4.9 0.35
5.0 0.0
useful professionally than one without a
research component.
If possible, I would choose to take other
4.9 0.5
4.4 0.52
5.0 0.0
geoscience courses that enable me to do
scientific research.
I better understand how scientific research is
Enhance skills in scientific inquiry and critical
4.7 0.6
4.6 0.53
4.8 0.50
done as a result of taking this class.
thinking.
Apply petrologic and other geologic knowledge
My interest in doing field work increased as a
4.6 0.6
4.6 0.52
5.0 0.0
and skills in a field setting.
result of taking this class.
214
TABLE 5. ANALYSIS OF STUDENT RESPONSES TO A 21 ITEM QUALITATIVE SURVEY ADMINISTERED AFTER THE 2006 (n = 7)
AND 2007 (n = 4) COURSES*
Question
Respon se s
Why did you take this elective course?
Learn more about igneous and metamorphic petrology: 5
Learn more about research: 4
Gain more field experience: 4
Interest in local geology and petrology: 1
For career potential: 1
What were your career interests when you took the course?
Some aspect of geology: 3
Environmental geology: 2
Igneous petrology: 1
Petroleum geology: 1
Undecided: 7
What are your current career interests?
Hydrogeology/environmental geology: 4
Economic (including petroleum) geology: 4
Petrology: 1
Structural geology: 1
Field geology: 1
Some aspect of geology: 1
Did the course have an influence on your career interests?
Yes: 7; No: 4
What was your overall impression of the research-based focus of the
Effective in teaching how research is done: 6
field-research petrology course that you took?
Application to real-world situation: 1
Imparted a better understanding of igneous systems: 1
Learned by doing: 1
Project a little weak and rushed: 1
Did not improve technical writing skills as wished: 1
In what general ways did the course effect (impact) your education and
Enhanced research interest and/or skills: 4
learning?
Increased interest in field work: 2
Taught by application: 1
Enhanced confidence: 2
Increased independence as a learner and researcher: 1
Provided a professional contact for future collaboration: 1
What were two things that you experienced or learned in the course that
Problem solving: 4
you felt were the most useful to you, or most successful in the way it
Field methods: 4
was taught?
Data collection and analysis: 5
Better understanding of scientific method: 2
Observational skills: 2
Presentation skills: 1
Better understanding of regional geology: 1
Use of technology: 1
What were two things that you experienced or learned in the course that
Needed more time to complete project: 3
you didnt think were successful or something you might want added, or Needed more in-depth understanding of geologic concepts: 4
Needed more opportunity to develop communication skills: 2
you thought could be better?
Wanted more collaboration with peers: 1
Wanted more time with instructor: 1
No negative experiences at all: 1
No response: 6
Do you feel you had a good understanding of how to conduct scientific
No real understanding: 4
research when you took the course?
Some understanding: 5
Understood how, but had never really practiced it: 2
Do you feel that your understanding of how to conduct scientific research Yes, greatly: 9
improved after you took the course?
Yes, somewhat: 2
How did your interests in field studies change after you completed the
More interested in field studies after the course: 10
course?
No change in interest: 1
How did your interests in petrology change after you completed the
More interested in petrology after the course: 8
course?
Slightly more interested in petrology: 3
If you had a choice, would you prefer to have research integrated in other Yes: 11; No: 0
courses? Why?
Students learn better using inquiry: 3
Research links classroom to real world: 3
Good preparation for professional career: 2
Students have more direct involvement in learning: 1
Field-based research is integral to geology: 1
Good preparation for senior thesis & careers: 2
Have you taken another research-based course? Explain.
Have done some research in other courses: 5
No other authentic research courses: 6
What was the most important feature or characteristic of this course to
Working in the field: 6
you?
The research process: 4
Literature review: 1
Hands-on learning: 2
(Continued)
215
TABLE 5. ANALYSIS OF STUDENT RESPONSES TO A 21 ITEM QUALITATIVE SURVEY ADMINISTERED AFTER THE 2006 (n = 7)
AND 2007 (n = 4) COURSES (Continued)
Question
Responses
Did the course have an impact on your professional development?
Yes: 10; No: 1
Explain.
Initiated collaboration with professional geologists: 2
Good preparation for professional presentation: 2
Solidified geological knowledge: 2
Increased appreciation of research in geology: 1
Enhanced field skills: 1
Provided preparation for senior thesis: 1
Too academic; did not enhance skills: 1
Have you continued the research topic that you started in the course? If
Yes: 10; No: 1
you have, explain how.
As a senior thesis: 4
Through continued collaboration with professional geologist: 2
In other courses: 1
Through employment: 1
In community outreach activities: 1
Are you considering any topic in the field of petrology for graduate
Yes: 4; Maybe: 4; No: 3
studies? Did this course influence your decision? Explain.
Is there anything else you would like to write about this course?
Recommend this course as good preparation for senior thesis: 2
Recommend more research-based courses like this for professional
preparation: 3
This course would benefit any geology student: 2
It was fun: 1
It was a great experience: 2
When will the next one be offered? 1
Helped to show me that geology is not just lectures and labs: 1
Helped me learn proper citation form for future communication: 1
No response: 3
*Students typically included more than one explanation or reason in their responses.
studies, have noted that their experience in the course had a significant impact on their success. One student commented: The
research aspect of the class was the most valuable part. Learning how to go about a scientific investigation that includes actual
field work prepared me for my senior seminar research.
Postcourse Evaluation of Students by Colleagues
To track the academic progress and success of the 24 student participants in the field-research petrology course, we polled
faculty colleagues who encountered these students in subsequent
courses or as advisees on thesis projects. In 2003, two of the faculty who taught most of the students in following semesters noted
an increased enthusiasm and motivation for geology and research
(J. Collier and G. Gianniny, 2004, personal commun.). It was also
noted that the research experiences that students had in the course
was critical to their intellectual development, and, as a result, a
research component was implemented into an existing sedimentology course (G. Gianniny, 2004, personal commun.).
In 2008, we administered a survey to all departmental faculty (N = 5) to determine their impressions of the impact of the
course on students in the context of the entire undergraduate
program (Table 9). All of the students in the 2003 and 2006
courses had graduated, and two of the students from the 2007
course had begun senior thesis projects by the start of the 2008
2009 academic year. We asked faculty to judge how well the
course met its principal learning objectives based on their subsequent interactions with students. These data are presented in
216
217
TABLE 7. GRADING RUBRIC USED TO ASSESS PORTFOLIOS IN 2007 (A FRACTIONAL POINT VALUE WAS GIVEN WHEN REQUIRED)
Grade
5
4
3
2
1
0
Grade
6
5
4
2
1
0
Assessment criteria
A superior product that goes beyond the basic requirements. An excellent compilation of information and supporting resources
that is complete, organized, and presented in a professional manner. This is a compilation that is a useful tool in a job or
research project.
Meets requirements for assignment. Summaries are complete, thorough, and supported with additional information. Summary is a
good resource.
An average, solid job. Summary provides basic information that has been discussed or covered in textbook; does not add further
insight into the issue.
Coverage of the discussion is cursory and does not meet minimum requirements (i.e., incomplete, too general, or many
inaccuracies). Summary is not well organized or developed.
Summary is inadequate, and there are major flaws in explanations and organization. The information does not serve as a useful
resource.
No summary is turned in on the deadline date.
218
TABLE 9. RESPONSES OF DEPARTMENTAL FACULTY TO A SURVEY OF IMPACTS OF THE FIELD-RESEARCH PETROLOGY COURSE
ON STUDENT LEARNING, BEHAVIORS, AND ATTITUDES (INDIVIDUAL NUMERICAL FACULTY RATINGS ARE LISTED, AS WELL AS
OVERALL MEANS AND RESULTS)
Overall objectives and
Numerical ratings*
Mean
Overall results
Additional responses
criteria
ratings
Enhance interest in geology and petrology
Impact on enthusiasm for
5
5
5
3
4
Somewhat
Most of the students who take this elective class are
4.4 0.9
geology and petrology
better
motivated, but some of our better students have not been a
part.
The class has been successful in taking middle-of-the-road
students and developing their excitement for geologic
research.
[Field-research course] students are much more enthused
and excited by the notion of problem solving and research
in geology.
Students who completed field-research course acquired a
passion and enthusiasm for their project that carried over
into further research projects. Students were interested and
excited about doing research in geology.
Preparation to conduct an authentic research project
(1) Impact on professional 5
5
4
3
NA 4.3 1.0
Somewhat
Improves the students basic research skills by exposing
development
better
them to journal articles, historical background, and data
collection.
Ithink the field-based sessions will leave students with a
more cohesive set of associations to retain knowledge that
they will be able to apply to new problems.
Most of the students who completed the courses were better
prepared to tackle the complexities and challenges of
research.
More...research experience is generally a good thing.
The greatest impact seems to be on students who are
already strong, and who are ready to make the most of a
research experience.
Some students just dont have the background with their
minimal petrology exposure to successfully work in this
type of individual research environment.
Some students struggled with the concept of research and
did not develop the skills needed to tackle more
complicated problems to the fullest extent.
The students who took [field-research course] did not seem to
gain much theoretical understanding of the subject.
Students working on igneous rocks wrote research proposals
that showed a lack of understanding of igneous
geochemistry.
Because students take [field-research course] early (junior or
sophomore year), many have put off required math
classes.
Some students felt that the only significant research being
done was related to field-research course.
Some important advanced topics in petrology might not be
covered in field-research course; mix some advanced
petrology topics with research project. It might be good to
alternate research-intensive [field-research course] with
other upper-level courses in sedimentology, advanced
structural geology, etc.
As is typically the case, [field-research course students] will
probably not have been exposed to the breadth they would
have in a traditional approach.
(2) Impact on quality and
4
4
4
3
4 3.8 0.4
Somewhat
Continued work on a single topic during [field-research
success of senior
better
course] and then as a senior thesis topic strengthens their
theses
understandingsome students broaden their research
through time.
For some, the field-research course gave them a jump start
on their senior thesis.
Other students recognized that senior thesis projects were
also an actual contribution to...geology.
(Continued)
219
TABLE 9. RESPONSES OF DEPARTMENTAL FACULTY TO A SURVEY OF IMPACTS OF THE FIELD-RESEARCH PETROLOGY COURSE
ON STUDENT LEARNING, BEHAVIORS, AND ATTITUDES (INDIVIDUAL NUMERICAL FACULTY RATINGS ARE LISTED, AS WELL AS
OVERALL MEANS AND RESULTS) (Continued)
Overall objectives and
Numerical ratings*
Mean
Overall results
Additional responses
criteria
ratings
(3) Impact on research
3
5
4
3
NA 3.8 1.0
Somewhat Interaction with professionals outside of the department [was
opportunities beyond
better
beneficial].
this college
Some students had an opportunityto collaborate with other
students and professional scientists.
Enhance skills in scientific inquiry and critical thinking
(1) Impact on scientific
4
4
4
3
4 3.8 0.4
Somewhat Some students had an opportunity to learn new skills that
research skills
better
otherwise they would not have.
(2) Impact on critical4
4
4
3
4 3.8 0.4
Somewhat None
thinking skills
better
Apply petrologic and other geologic knowledge and skills in a field setting
(1) Impact on field skills
5
4
4
3
4 4.0 0.7
Somewhat
Field work always seems to bring out the best in students;
better
i.e., they have a better understanding of geologic
processes after observing field relationships.
Also improves their performance in field camp; they start with
strong field skills (map reading, compass skills, field notes,
etc.).
More field...experience is generally a good thing.
(2) Impact on interest in
5
5
5
3
5 4.6 0.9 Somewhat to
None
field studies and
much better
research
Further development of skills in oral and written communication
Impact on
3
4
4
3
NA 3.5 0.6
Little or no
The majority of students had a better idea of how to write a
communications skills
improvement
report, cite resources, and present their results.
The oral and written products, however, were not significantly
advanced over students who did not take the course.
The written and oral presentations were not of equal quality,
with oral presentations tending to be better....
The change to a portfolio seemed to cure some of this
problem, but better writing skills need to be expected or
developed in a research class.
From what Ive observed, the writing skills and research
preparation havent been significantly different between the
students who did and did not take the field-research
course.
*1much worse in most students; 2somewhat worse in most students; 3no improvement in any student; 4somewhat better in most
students; 5much better in most students.
220
221
Miller, D.M., Nilsen, T.H., and Bilodeau, W.L., 1992, Late Cretaceous to early
Eocene geologic evolution of the U.S. Cordillera, in Burchfiel, B.C., Lipman, P.W., and Zoback, M.L., eds., The Cordilleran Orogen, Conterminous U.S.: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America, Geology
of North American, v. G-3, p. 205260.
Mogk, D., Manduca, C., Brady, J., Davidson, C., and workshop participants, 2003,
Teaching petrology in the 21st century, discussion session II: Relationship of petrology to earth system science and the larger curriculum: http://
serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/petrology03/Discussion1.summary
.doc (accessed 1 September 2004).
National Academy of Sciences, Committee on Undergraduate Science Education, 1997, Science Teaching Reconsidered: A Handbook: Washington,
D.C., National Academy Press, 88 p.
National Research Council (NRC), 1996, National Science Education Standards: Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, 262 p.
Oldow, J.S., Bally, A.W., Av Lallemant, H.G., and Leeman, W.P., 1989, Phanerozoic evolution of the North American Cordillera, United States and
Canada, in Bally, A.W., and Palmer, A.R., eds., The Geology of North
America: An Overview: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America, Geology of North America, v. A, p. 139232.
ONeal, M.L., 2003, Field-based research experience in earth science teacher
education: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 51, p. 6470.
Orion, N., 1993, A model for the development and implementation of field trips
as an integral part of the science curriculum: School Science and Mathematics, v. 93, p. 325331.
Orion, N., and Hofstein, A., 1994, Factors that influence learning during a scientific field trip in a natural environment: Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, v. 31, p. 10971119, doi: 10.1002/tea.3660311005.
Plymate, T.G., Evans, K.R., Gutierrez, M., and Mantei, E.J., 2005, Alumni of
geology B.S. program express strong support for field geology and related
field and laboratory experiences: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53,
no. 2, p. 215216.
Project Kaleidoscope, 1991, What Works: Building Natural Science Communities: A Plan for Strengthening Undergraduate Science and Mathematics,
Volume One: Washington, D.C., Project Kaleidoscope, 100 p.
Rossbacher, L., 2002, Geologic column: Knowing a place: Geotimes, v. 47,
p. 48.
Schwab, F., 2001, Field workA nostalgic look back and a skeptical look forward: Geotimes, v. 46, p. 52.
Semken, S., 2003, Black rocks protruding up: The Navajo volcanic field, in
Lucas, S.G., Semken, S.C., Berglof, W.R., and Ulmer-Scholle, D.S., eds.,
Geology of the Zuni Plateau: Albuquerque, New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook 54, p. 133138.
Semken, S., 2005, Sense of place and place-based introductory geoscience
teaching for American Indian and Alaska Native undergraduates: Journal
of Geoscience Education, v. 53, p. 149157.
Semken, S.C., and Morgan, F., 1997, Navajo pedagogy and earth systems: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 45, p. 109112.
Seymour, E., Hunter, A.B., Laursen, S.L., and Deantoni, T., 2004, Establishing
the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences:
First findings from a three-year study: Science Education, v. 88, p. 493
534, doi: 10.1002/sce.10131.
Shea, J.H., 1995, Problems with collaborative learning: Journal of Geological
Education, v. 43, p. 306308.
Shumway, P.J., and Gonzales, D.A., 2008, A test of competing hypotheses on
the deformational history of ~1.7 Ga granitic dikes in the Coalbank Pass
area, western Needle Mountains, Colorado: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 40, no. 1, p. 68, paper no. 16-25.
Tobias, S., 1992, Revitalizing Undergraduate Science: Why Some Things Work
and Most Dont: Tucson, Arizona, Research Corporation, 192 p.
Turner, B.E., and Gonzales, D.A., 2006, An investigation of the geology and
emplacement history of the Wetherill Mesa diatreme, southwestern Colorado: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 38, no. 6,
p 37.
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY 5 MAY 2009
ABSTRACT
Field-based learning has been embraced at Georgia Southern University as an
emphasis first applied to geology majors courses 40 yr ago and then to teacher education programs for the past 30 yr. Building upon a strong foundation of field education
for geology majors in geology courses, we transferred the concepts to in-service education majors. From limited summer teacher workshops coupling lectures to field-site
visits, a comprehensive field-intensive program evolved to enhance the capability and
number of middle school science teachers. Courses integrating lecture, laboratory,
and field-based learning have been offered for 28 yr, providing teachers with education in physical geology, fundamentals of historical geology, and collections of minerals, rocks, ores, and fossils. These courses are tied to regional geology and supplemented with maps, posters, field guides, and textbooks. The St. Catherines Island
Sea Turtle program was developed concurrently, and 2008 marks 18 yr of integrating
conservation, research, and education into a program that conserves loggerhead sea
Bishop, G.A., Vance, R.K., Rich, F.J., Meyer, B.K., Davis, E.J., Hayes, R.H., and Marsh, N.B., 2009, Evolution of geology field education for K12 teachers
from field education for geology majors at Georgia Southern University: Historical perspectives and modern approaches, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and
Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 223251, doi:
10.1130/2009.2461(19). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
223
224
Bishop et al.
turtles and incorporates modeling and practice of field science and pedagogy through
teacher-centered activities. Fourteen teacher-interns per summer investigate loggerhead ecology, the human history, and geologic evolution of St. Catherines Island, and
create natural history, collections for their classrooms. New skills, knowledge, and
collections enhance teaching units on sea turtles and other endangered species that
are developed in a spring follow-up course. Field and instructional technologies are
integrated for regular use, including global positioning system (GPS), thermal data
loggers, temperature and moisture probes, ground radar, photography, web and pod
casts, plus note taking and field sketching. Geology and education professors, experienced teacher mentors, and local experts collaborate to produce one of the most successful teacher education programs in Georgia with respect to continuity of funding
and positive teacher and program review feedback.
INTRODUCTION
The Department of Geology and Geography at Georgia
Southern University (GSU) maintains an emphasis on field skills
and requires geology majors seeking the B.S. degree to complete
a field methods course (internal) and a summer field camp course
(external, but department approved). The department has long
supported regional trips tied to courses as well as extended fieldtrip offerings, including week-long spring break trips and longer
summer trips to regions including California, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, the Big Bend area of Texas, and
Hawaii, and geography study abroad trips to foreign countries
including Ecuador, India, and Nepal.
The commitment to field-based education for geology majors
has been pervasive throughout the geology curriculum at Georgia Southern University, and virtually all classes in the geology
majors have incorporated field components for 40 yr. Many of the
field locations and activities used in geology classes have been
modified and used in education of K12 teachers (Table 1). In
addition, the B.S. geology degree program has required a senior
thesis involving significant field research for some 40 yr. This
commitment to field education in the geology program is exemplified herein by many of the text figures showing geology majors in
the field (i.e., Figs. 1 3) and others showing K12 teacher-interns
immersed in field education (e.g., Figs. 9, 13, 14, 17C, and 19).
TABLE 1. GEORGIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY (GSU) GEOSCIENCE TEACHER COURSES WITH STRONG FIELD COMPONENT
Years
Courses
% field
Target audience
Funding source
(4 credit hours each)
component
19891995
Principles of Geology, Field
6574
Preservice and
Federal funds distributed through state agency:
Eisenhower Higher EducationImproving
Geology of the Southeast, Geology
in-service teachers
of Georgia, Introduction to
of grades 68, but
Secondary Math and Science Instruction in
Industrial Minerals, Georgias
K12 accepted
Georgia
Mineral Resources, Mineral
Resources of the Southern
Appalachians
1992
Sea Turtle Natural History, Sea
83
In-service teachers
Federal funds distributed through state agency:
present
Turtle Conservation, Sea Turtle
(for sea turtle of grades K12 have Eisenhower Higher EducationImproving
Conservation II
natural history) priority
Secondary Math and Science Instruction in
Georgia; Improving Teacher Quality Professional
Development Higher Education Program
Evolution of geology field education for K12 teachers from field education for geology majors
Security Program that was initiated under the Reagan administration. This evolved into the Higher Education Eisenhower Program for Professional Development of Teachers under the first
Bush administration, and it was sustained throughout the Clinton
years. The current Improving Teacher Quality Program, which
is part of the No Child Left Behind Act, has continued to be a
source of funding for our efforts to educate teachers in field techniques in geology. Ca. 1978, the state of Georgias Quality Basic
Education (QBE) program mandated change to an eighth-grade
earth science requirement in Georgia schools, and this change
revealed an immediate deficiency of middle school teachers
qualified to teach earth science. This change also brought attention to a teacher education system that emphasized teaching
methodology to the deficit of science content knowledge and science methodology. The struggle to reform the science education
system continues today, particularly as earth science was moved
to the sixth grade with the advent of the Georgia Performance
Standards in 2003; sixth-grade teachers have found themselves
in a similar position as their eighth-grade counterparts of several
years ago. In the words of Brown et al. (2001, p. 450),
The many reform efforts in science education at the K12 level over
the past 40 years have met with varying degrees of success. Scientific
literacy for all Americans continues to be elusive [sic], however, and
the number of students pursuing advanced studies in science does not
meet industry or teaching demands. A number of conferences to study
the problems in science education and to suggest reforms (e.g., AAAS,
1993; AGU, 1994; NRC, 1996; NSF, 1996) concluded that elementary
teachers are under-prepared in both science content and pedagogical
strategies. Science faculty must actively model appropriate pedagogy
for those students preparing to become K12 teachers (NSF, 1996).
It is this problem that so many of us have spent so much time trying to correct for four decades, including the geosciences faculty
at Georgia Southern University.
FIELD GEOLOGY FOR TEACHERS
Authors Bishop, Rich, and Vance began intensive teacher
education programs in 1989, when, as mentioned above, the
Eisenhower Higher Education Program provided a source of funds
that supported summer programs for Georgia teachers. These
programs were in great demand since the shift of earth science
curriculum to the eighth grade had left many teachers and their
regional school systems unprepared. The Department of Geology
and Geography offered concurrent summer courses such as Principles of Geology and Field Geology of the Southeast U.S. to
provide teachers with maximum graduate credit for degree programs or teacher certification credits for nondegree work. Field
trips used in various courses are summarized in Table 2. The
courses were month-long and intensive (~130 contact hours); a
typical week consisted of 4 h of lecture or laboratory instruction
per day for 2 or 3 d, and these were followed by field trips of
2 to 3 d duration. The lecture and laboratory course component
225
226
Bishop et al.
TABLE 2. FIELD STOP SITES USED IN TEACHER COURSES
General site geology
Site teaching applications
and/or features
Physiographic province:
Location:
Coastal Plain:
Tybee Island, GA
Cumberland Island, GA
Reids Bluff, FL
Starke, FL
Okefenokee Swamp, GA
Sandersville and Wrens,
GA
River Road and Griffins,
GA
Eutaw Springs and
Berkeley Quarry, SC
Providence Canyon State
Park, GA
Highway 27, Frog Bottom
Creek, GA
Ohoopee Dunes at Camp
Boyd, GA
Highways 80 and 78 road
cuts, AL
Blue Springs, MS
Highways 301 and 601,
SC
Freshwater swamp
Cretaceous-Tertiary strata in
open-pit kaolinite mines
Eocene Barnwell Group
Piedmont:
Strom Thurmond
Reservoir, GA
Burks Mountain, GA
Graves Mountain, GA
Stabilized dunes
Huddleston and
Hetrick (1979)
Ward and Blackwelder
(1980)
Donovan and
Reinhardt (1986)
Marsalis and Fridell
(1975)
Vaughan (1992)
Bishop (1983)
Colquhoun (1986)
Ridgeway, SC
Dorn Mine, SC
Au-bearing vein
Lake Murray, SC
Heggies Rock, GA
Sparta, GA
Granite pluton
Elberton, GA
Granite batholith
Hartwell, GA
Mica mine
Barite Hill, SC
Reference
Blue Ridge:*
Rosman, NC
Brevard zone
Toxaway Falls, NC
Toxaway gneiss
Migmatitic gneiss
Amphibolite, trondhjemite
Sulfide mineralization
Hartley (1976)
Clark (1999)
Gillon et al. (1998)
Whitney and Allard
(1990)
Carr (1978)
U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (1991)
Whitney and Wenner
(1980)
Whitney and Wenner
(1980)
Grant (1958)
Abrams and
McConnell (1986)
Evolution of geology field education for K12 teachers from field education for geology majors
Physiographic province:
Location:
Blue Ridge (Continued ):
Spruce Pine, NC
Boone to Linville Falls, NC
Fort Mountain, GA
Marble Hill, GA
Dahlonega, GA
Ballard Mine, TN
Barite mine
Silica mine
Paleozoic strata
Zinc mine
Pennsylvanian rocks
Paleozoic sed. rocks
Floyd Shale
Coosa fault in Paleozoic strata
227
Reference
Chowns (1986)
Maher (1970)
Thomas and Bearce
(1986)
McCormick et al. (1971)
www.shortmtnsilica.com
Byerly et al. (1986)
Cramer (1986)
Rindsberg and Chowns
(1986)
Waters (1983)
Economic geology (see Table 1) was an important component of the field trips. Georgia is a major producer of industrial
minerals, and these mineral resources were tied to the state economy, regional geology, and physiographic provinces through
the field excursions and the collection of teaching samples. The
application of essential mineral resources in construction materials and various goods used everyday also provides teachers with
another route for connecting their students to geology; this is an
approach emphasized at Georgia Southern University (Vance et
al., 2006a, 2006b, 2007).
The visits to active and inactive mines and quarries generated
multiple benefits to the teachers and program. For example, the
228
Bishop et al.
Figure 1. The present is the key to the past is a great learning concept
for geologists and teachers. (A) Modern ghost shrimp burrows standing in
relief at ebb tide on Cumberland Island beach, Georgia; and (B) a fossil
ghost shrimp burrow excavated in Eocene Tobacco Road Sand near Savannah River in Burke County, Georgia. (Burrows are ~2.5 cm in diameter.)
Evolution of geology field education for K12 teachers from field education for geology majors
229
230
Bishop et al.
Evolution of geology field education for K12 teachers from field education for geology majors
231
Figure 5. (A) Adult female loggerhead returning to the Atlantic Ocean in the dawn light after depositing a clutch of eggs (4 June 2008; nest
08-020) on South Beach, St. Catherines Island. Bar scale = ~10 cm. (B) Albino hatchling recovered from nest 08-076a on South Beach,
St. Catherines Island, 24 August 2008. Scale = ~1 cm.
232
Bishop et al.
Evolution of geology field education for K12 teachers from field education for geology majors
define
background
hypothesis
test
observation
experiment
modeling
accept
define
background
hypothesis
233
test
observation
experiment
modeling
accept
modify
reject
anomaly
modify
missing data
reject
the continually increasing body of new knowledge
anomaly
define
background
hypothesis
test
observation
experiment
modeling
accept
define
background
hypothesis
test
observation
experiment
modeling
accept
missing data
lack of precision
modify
the increasing body of new knowledge
reject
a paradigm shift
lack of precision
new & better technology
new connections
reject
Figure 6. The two-dimensional or stair-step model of the scientific learning process, a learning model based on the U.S. Geological Survey spiral of geologic time. The model emphasizes the way science really works: by building on foundations of previous investigation and knowledge
through the scientific methodologies.
Figure 7. The natural history sustainability model relies on a charismatic and significant foundation problem as a learning core for
scientists and teachers. The program is energized or propelled by a
collaborative approach to funding and staffing within a field-based
program that embraces a cross-disciplinary, hands-on, inquirybased mode of learning and application of emerging technology.
Participant feedback and experienced multidisciplinary staff guide
the evolution of the program, which is sustained and advertised
by growing learning communities of satisfied teacher participants.
Charismatic Focus is blurred to indicate dynamics.
234
Bishop et al.
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Introduction
The St. Catherines Island Sea Turtle Program provides Georgia teachers with the opportunity to participate in conservation
of the endangered and threatened loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta
caretta Linnaeus, 1758) (Spotila, 2004). Loggerhead sea turtles
(Figs. 5A and 5B) make up one of seven species of extant marine
turtles, all of which are endangered and protected by international,
national, and state statutes. Loggerhead sea turtles nest on the
southeastern Atlantic coast including sandy beaches of Georgias
Sea Islands. At first examination, it may seem more appropriate
for a biologist to direct such a program; however, the beach is the
critical component of the nesting, and geologists possess the necessary background and skills to understand the nesting medium of
the loggerhead sea turtle in the context of a dynamic barrier-island
environment and rising sea level. This conservation program provides for the integration of preservice and in-service teachers,
as well as undergraduate and graduate science students, into an
ongoing scientific research program and learning community.
Six science and education faculty members and two Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GaDNR) interns provide
instruction to 14 teacher-interns (island housing limits) per year
on topics such as the conservation of turtle nests, barrier-island
evolution, and island ecology. The observational scientific
method is continually practiced, and science and cognate fields
are integrated as teacher-interns investigate loggerhead sea turtle nesting ecology, the history of St. Catherines Island, coastal
physical processes, and as they create natural history collections
for use in their classrooms. Instructional technologies used and
demonstrated in the SCISTP include synchronous and asynchronous distance learning, digital photography used in PowerPointTM slide presentations, modular video learning in the field,
and integrated note taking and field sketching (Leslie and Roth,
2003). Over the years, we have put 126,907 hatchlings into the
Atlantic Ocean, and we have overseen field-based education of
207 teacher-interns who have impacted over 244,776 students
ranging from kindergartners through college seniors.
The fourteen participants for teacher-internships are selected
from an applicant pool of preservice and in-service schoolteachers, with preference for groups of up to four teachers from a
school, system, or region (Mooney, 2006). Teacher-interns monitor beaches, record nesting data, and protect nests for a 7 d interval on St. Catherines Island during the summer nesting season.
Residential Core CourseGEOL 5740: Sea Turtle Natural
History
Participants are trained (see Table 3) in two meetings prior
to initiation of internships on the island. They are taught the fundamentals of sea turtle biology and the field and classroom techniques that will be used during the internship. The first meeting is
normally a face-to-face meeting; the second usually is presented
Evolution of geology field education for K12 teachers from field education for geology majors
235
TABLE 3. STRUCTURE OF THE ST. CATHERINES ISLAND SEA TURTLE PROGRAM (SCISTP)
Event
Activities
GEOL 5740 G:
Sea turtle conservation internship
Sea Turtle Natural History course
May
Pre-internship meeting 1 at G.S.U.
Cover safety & basic operational protocols, island living conditions; meet colleagues
June
Pre-internship meeting 2 at G.S.U.
Cover sea turtle conservation protocols, basic loggerhead biology and ethogram;
or via distance learning
introduce field methods; discuss course expectations
Mid-July
78 d St. Catherines Island
Day 1Transport to island, room and work assignments, GPS & map training,
internship
group nest study on beach
Day 2Nest validation & relocation as a group, beach monitoring as a group,
evening presentation and beach monitoring team assignments
Day 3 to 7monitoring beaches as teams, building natural history sample
collections, evening note reading and presentations
Day 8transport off island
September or October 2 d meeting on St. Catherines Island Dig remaining nests; acquire complete season nesting database and image library;
wrap up
group discussion of nesting season
GEOL 5741 G:
Sustained contact with teachers to ensure integration of SCISTP experience into
Following spring:
Sea Turtle Conservation course
teachers classroom or laboratory exercises
JanuaryMay
Series of face-to-face and distance- Guiding development of endangered species teaching unit incorporating SCISTP
(spring semester)
learning meetings
experience and promoting growth of a sea turtle conservation learning community
Note: GPSglobal positioning system; G.S.U.Georgia State University.
Date
Summer:
236
Bishop et al.
Evolution of geology field education for K12 teachers from field education for geology majors
hatched eggs 3 d after emergence. Each observation, activity, or
nest event is sequentially documented for each nest by teacherintern participants (and faculty) in a daily notebook journal kept
in the field (Stanesco, 1991; Bishop and Marsh, 1998b). These
data are transcribed daily onto the turtle nesting forms and
entered in a spreadsheet, and a computer map is kept on computers in the Island Ecology Laboratory (Bishop et al., 2007b).
Sea turtle updates are sent out on a daily basis (e-mail updates
until 2007, then a daily blog on www.scistp.org thereafter) after
teacher-interns leave the island to maintain their ownership of the
program. Beginning in 2009, documentation of sea turtle nests
was supplemented by a Web-based database served from www
.seaturtle.org throughout the nesting season.
Formal and informal presentations in the afternoon and evening allow content specialists to discuss natural history, human
history, and pedagogy in this enriching field environment. At the
first meeting, students are welcomed to the island by Superintendent Royce Hayes, who reinforces some of the introductory
information and safety protocols for working on the island, as
well as addressing initial questions about St. Catherines Island
and the origin of the St. Catherines Foundation. The presentations and general experience on the island introduce participants
to a wide range of scientific investigations and subject matter,
promoting a big picture perspective on science and additional
ways to use the experience in the classroom. Many of the meetings are followed by teacher brainstorming sessions on ways
to use the information and experience in classes or laboratory
exercises. Presentations normally include:
(1) coastal geology and heavy mineral sand deposits, and
ground-penetrating radar demonstrations and applications by Dr.
Kelly Vance;
(2) physical processes active on Georgia beaches, geologic
evolution of St. Catherines Island, and sea turtles in the fossil
record by Dr. Gale Bishop;
(3) history of St. Catherines Island by Mr. Royce H. Hayes;
(4) collecting natural history specimens for the classroom,
and integration of the St. Catherines experience with the classroom by Ms. Nancy Marsh, Ms. Lynne Burkhalter, and Dr. Marti
Schriver;
(5) the geologic and climatic evolution of North America,
and sedimentary structures and processes by Dr. F. Rich;
(6) technology integration into the classroom by all staff
members;
(7) technology as a conservation tool by Dr. Ken Clark; and
(8) sea turtle health assessments and necropsy by Dr. Terry
Norton.
The teachers also use the evening sessions to share images
collected during the day, and they accumulate a substantial
image library by the end of the internship. Each participant is
photographed in the field as she/he performs daily duties. These
images are integrated into a master PowerPointTM presentation
and into a downloadable bulletin board (posted at http://www
.scistp.org/resources/presentations.php) describing loggerhead
sea turtle ecology, sea turtle nesting and hatching, and field
237
techniques. Each participant is normally provided with this presentation on CD-ROM/DVD, to be individualized for their own
classroom, thus enhancing each teachers self-image and their
credibility in the eyes of his/her students and colleagues. A DVD,
Journey of the Loggerhead, is available by purchase for use by
teachers wishing to teach a unit on endangered species, sea turtles, or scientific methodology in field research. Additional supporting materials include State of the Worlds Sea Turtles reports,
Gulko and Eckerts Sea Turtles; An Ecological Guide (2004),
and the 2007 Guide to Fieldtrips: 56th Annual Meeting, Southeastern Section of the Geological Society of America, which was
published by the Geological Society of America (Rich, 2007b),
which includes a substantial component on St. Catherines Island
and Georgia coastal geology.
Follow-Up Meeting
A face-to-face meeting is held on St. Catherines Island on a
weekend in September or October to distribute CD/DVDs containing images, slide shows, and spreadsheets of the data accumulated during the summer. This meeting allows each participant
the opportunity to follow up their summer course with the acquisition of new hard data, to reestablish networking with their cohort,
and to revisit St. Catherines Island to see hatchling sea turtles
again (McCaffrey et al., 2004). We also collect reflective evaluations and document input to improve the succeeding summers
internships, and, in some cases, schedule follow-up evaluations
in classrooms. Selected classrooms have been visited during fall
and spring semesters and observed to determine how effectively
the teachers are passing on the knowledge they acquired during
the preceding summer.
Follow-Up Sustained Contact CourseGEOL 5741:
Sea Turtle Conservation
A required four-semester-hour follow-up course (Table 3) is
offered in the spring semester to assist the interns in the integration of course content into their curricula. This course utilizes limited distance-learning components and computer-based
learning (McCaffrey et al., 2004; Bishop et al., 2007b) to guide
development of conservation-oriented teaching units on sea turtles or other endangered species
A traveling classroom exhibit was designed and executed
around the theme of Georgias loggerhead sea turtles ca. 1998.
This exhibit was modified for delivery to classrooms in the
Atlanta region and used to guide the design of exhibits at The
Georgia Sea Turtle Jekyll Island Center in 2006. It is available to
Georgia schools for integration into school curricula, providing
instructional ideas in science and mathematics for use in a wide
range of related discipline activities as a downloadable bulletin
board presentation (see http://www.scistp.org). These teaching
aids are combined by the teachers to produce a powerful teaching
unit developed around the themes of field research, environmental action, and endangered species.
238
Bishop et al.
Follow-up and evaluation of the effective integration of content, methodology, and pedagogy into the classrooms of interns
are accomplished through a series of questionnaires (and in 2009
by a formal evaluation). Selected former interns are asked to participate in the training meetings for the new intern group. This
further integrates them into a network and into distance-learning technology, and leads to an effective transfer of knowledge
through mentoring (Mooney, 2006).
Geological Principles Taught in the Sea Turtle Program
Geology taught in GEOL 5740 and 5741 in the St. Catherines Island Sea Turtle Program includes the physical geological processes observed daily on the beaches, tidal channels, and
marshes of St. Catherines Island, plus a host of geological principles and investigative techniques that are specifically integrated
into the context of nesting by sea turtles. These principles include
crosscutting relationships (crawlways, covering pits, and egg
chamber discontinuities), superposition (beach microstratigraphy
and heavy mineral accumulation), Stenos laws of stratigraphy
(cross sections and correlations originating during vibracoring
and documentation of geological and archaeological sites), and,
of course, uniformitarianism (modern processes applied to interpreting past history of island evolution and sea turtle nesting).
Investigative techniques include the use of three-dimensional
sedimentary peels of sea turtle egg chambers, interpretation of
modern traces and tracks (sea turtles, mammals, birds, reptiles,
and invertebrates) and ichnology (applied to ancient sea turtles),
taphonomy (studies of decomposition and disintegration of sea
turtles on the beach, in lagoons, and buried in the sand), and even
mining technology (hatchlings mine their way out of the egg
chamber in a process analogous to stoping).
Loggerhead Nesting EthogramLinking Geologic
Features to the Real World
Sea turtles have inhabited the world ocean for ~110 m.y.
(Kear and Lee, 2006). Loggerhead sea turtles live their entire
lives in the ocean as marine swimmers, except for periodic nesting on sandy beaches of the subtropical to temperate regions
of the world. Female sea turtles mature at ~2030 yr of age,
mate with one or more males in the ocean, and crawl onto sandy
beaches to deposit their eggs. Each female deposits multiple
clutches (avg. ~5.2/yr), but they do not nest every summer. This
gives rise to a strongly fluctuating pattern of sea turtle nesting in any given year. On the Georgia coast, sea turtles, mostly
loggerheads, deposit eggs from mid-May through August; eggs
incubate for ~5060 d, resulting in an annual nesting season
spanning the interval from mid-May until mid- to late October.
Each clutch of eggs consists of ~113 eggs, which are the size,
shape, and color of ping-pong balls.
The process of nesting in loggerhead sea turtles is a hardwired behavior that exhibits little variation. The sequence of activities (Fig. 9) involved in nesting is termed a nesting ethogram.
The nesting ethogram of loggerheads was described and exquisitely documented by Hailman and Elowson (1992) in Florida
(Table 4). When a turtle comes ashore, her flippers, so beautifully
adapted to swimming in the ocean, are used as legs in crawling
across the beach in a cumbersome manner. The sea turtle senses
the change of temperature of the sand surface (Stoneburner and
Richardson, 1981) as she crawls from the cooler sand below the
high-tide line onto the warmer, solar-heated sand above the hightide line. This change of temperature (2.9 C/0.5 m) triggers a
nesting attempt by the turtle.
In Georgia, some beaches are so erosional and obstructed
that turtles often have difficulty finding the thermal gradient and
soft, dry sand required to trigger initiation of the next step, and
wander (Fig. 10) for great distances (up to 559.3 m [1835 ft] has
been documented) until they nest. Triggered by crossing from
cool, firm sand to warm loose sand, the turtle wallows and digs
downward, forming a body pit, roughly the size and shape of her
body and sloping backward, until she hits the damp sand capable
of holding a nearly vertical face. The loggerhead then digs an
urn-shaped egg chamber with her rear flippers and deposits her
clutch of eggs in it, backfills the neck of the egg chamber, and
tamps it down. Some turtles excavate multiple egg chambers (up
to four have been documented), aborting egg chambers when
their flippers encounter very wet sand, a soil horizon and/or peat,
or buried logs. After egg deposition, the backfilled egg chamber
is packed with bioturbated sand, giving rise to an egg chamber
discontinuity appearing in plan view as a bulls-eye in the laminated sand that underlies the bioturbated sand of the covering pit.
Once eggs are deposited and the egg chamber neck is backfilled,
the turtle enters a covering behavior, throwing sand back over
Evolution of geology field education for K12 teachers from field education for geology majors
239
TABLE 4. LOGGERHEAD SEA TURTLE NESTING ETHOGRAM OF HAILMAN AND ELOWSON (1992) MODIFIED TO REFLECT
EXPECTED TRACE FOSSILS AND KNOWN TRACE FOSSILS AS OF 2008
Ethogram
Expected traces
Fossil record?
1. Copulation in the ocean
None
No
2. Approach to the beach
None
No
3. Ascent of the beach
3. Entrance crawlway
Possible
4. Wander to find nest site
4. Wandering crawlway
Yes*
5. Wallow a body pit
5. Body pit
Yes
6. Excava te the egg cham ber
6 . E g g c h a m be r
Yes
7. Depo sit the eg gs
7. Egg cham ber
Yes
8. Backfill the egg chamber
8. Egg chamber discontinuity
Yes
9. Covering activity
9. Covering pit
Yes
10. Return to the ocean
10. Exit crawlway
Possible
*The one known crawlway is attributed to being a wandering crawlway due to its position relative to the egg chambers and body pit.
Crosscutting Relationships
Figure 10. Extensive wandering pattern of a single loggerhead sea turtle searching for a nesting site on North Beach, St. Catherines Island
(nest 06-108; deposited 24 July 2006). Students read this sign and follow the trail of the turtle to locate and orient to the nest to validate and/
or relocate the clutch of eggs. You may be able to follow the crawlway
after the turtle entered the beach along the downed trees to the left,
then, using crosscutting relationships, follow her pathway to locate the
nest (at the head of her exit crawlway). This doomed nest was relocated on 24 July to ensure hatching 107 of 113 eggs on 20 September.
Crawlway width is approximately 1 m wide as scale.
the body pit as she scoots forward and rotates. This action forms
a covering pit or nest and disguises the exact position of the egg
chamber. Flipper scarps are often produced as the turtle rotates,
forming the outside of the covering pit. When she is finished covering the pit, the female crawls back to the sea, leaving an exit
crawlway. The end result of the behavior of nesting is a suite
of traces and structures that can be synthesized as a generalized
sketch (Fig. 11). This nesting process is repeated an average of
~5.2 times every 24 yr by each nesting loggerhead, with a range
of 18 nests per nesting season (Spotila, 2004). The Florida Fish
and Wildlife Conservation Research Web site has video clips
illustrating the nesting of sea turtles.
Geological cross sections are presented to the teacherinterns as a way of introducing them to Stenos laws of lateral
continuity, original horizontality, and superposition. These diagrams appear in various sections of the pre-internship meetings,
during the total-immersion segments of the residency, and on
web materials that we provide for teachers to use in their curricula. Stratigraphic relationships are presented in cross sections
and correlations as we discuss the evolution of barrier islands
(Bishop et al., 2007a; Linsley et al., 2008; Reitz et al., 2008),
and they are reinforced during field lectures on the beach as we
describe the modern transgression that is occurring as sea level
240
Bishop et al.
Figure 11. Typical morphology of loggerhead sea turtle nest illustrated in plan view (top) with two cross
sections (north-south and x-y) oriented at right angles. Scales for map and cross sections are indicated to
right. The egg chamber and body pit would be masked by the covering pit and not visible at the surface.
Evolution of geology field education for K12 teachers from field education for geology majors
241
Figure 12. Excavation and back-filling of the egg chamber neck by the female loggerhead sea turtle produces bioturbation analogous to
that of a large burrow, locally truncating horizontal laminations. During excavation of the covering pit, this feature shows up as a bullseye guiding the student to the egg chamber. This bulls-eye may be (A) prominent when heavy mineral sands (HMS) are prominent or
(B) subtle when HMS are not prominent. Scale is 10 cm.
242
Bishop et al.
Evolution of geology field education for K12 teachers from field education for geology majors
Figure 16. Application of uniformitarianism to sea turtle tracks and traces interpreting Cretaceous Fox Hills sea turtle nesting structures (column on left) using recent nesting analogs produced by loggerhead sea turtles (column on right): (AB) cross-sectional
view of Fox Hills crawlway and oblique view of recent crawlway, (CD) cross-sectional view of Fox Hills covering pit and recent
covering pit, (EF) cross-sectional view of Fox Hills egg chamber and recent egg chamber structures associated with fluidization
of wet sand, and (GH) cross-sectional view of Fox Hills egg molds and recent eggs exposed in storm scarp. Bar scale is 10 cm.
243
244
Bishop et al.
Figure 17. Aborted nesting attempt leaves open egg chamber (A), which was filled with polyurethane foam, allowed to set for a day, and excavated, providing a cast (B) of the egg chamber. (C) A St. Catherines teacher-intern with an egg chamber cast excavated from the sand (nest 07-044).
Casts preserve beach microstratigraphy, grooves made by rear flippers, and the general egg chamber morphology, providing a fascinating true to
scale laboratory and class display or manipulative. 10 cm scale is indicated.
the nesting evidence (Fig. 9), which is then immediately validated by careful archaeological style excavation.
In 2007, GaDNR intern Alyse Eddy extended the use of
these nest interpretation techniques, measuring crawlway parameters in an attempt to correlate multiple nesting attempts by
single turtles, and return nesting by the nesting turtles, a direct
application of ichnology, to the modern realm. A University of
Georgia Ph.D. student, Brian Shamblin, collaborated with us in
this study, using a permitted take of one egg per nest to match
mitochondrial DNA (mDNA) from nest to nest. In 2008, Eddy
and Shamblins research were combined with crawlway sketching techniques of Lockley (1991) and production of foam casts
of crawlways to document the application of multiple methods to
determine crawlway attribution.
Nests are covered with screens and sand to thwart predation
by raccoons (Procyon lotor Linnaeus, 1758) (Anderson, 1981)
and feral hogs (Sus scrofa Linnaeus, 1758) (Hayes et al., 1996).
Each nest is visited daily, and sedimentological or biological
events are documented on a monitoring list and in notebooks.
Tracks of raccoon, hogs, lizards, birds, mice, snakes, and ghost
crabs have been documented crossing the screens of conserved
nests. Tunnels of voles (Scalopus aquaticus Linnaeus, 1758)
have occasionally been encountered crossing nests, and burrows
of ghost crabs (Ocypode quadrata Fabricius, 1787) are common
around and in sea turtle nests. These tracks provide many teachable moments (Figs. 18A and 18B) in which to discuss predation,
trace fossils, and critical thinking. Offending vertebrate predators (primarily hogs and raccoons) are eliminated (but not with
students around) or trapped using HaveahartTM Traps, enabling
Evolution of geology field education for K12 teachers from field education for geology majors
245
out of burial sites). These animals have been used to study turtle
taphonomy and the decomposition and disintegration of sea turtles on the beach and in marine lagoons (Knell, 2004) (Fig. 19).
They are sometimes buried to produce osteological specimens
for use in comparative anatomy.
Uniformitarianism
The general concept of uniformity of physical and chemical laws as applied to geologic processes (actualism) persists as
a potent teaching device, not only for geologists, but for K12
teachers. The present is the key to the past is applied extensively across the SCISTP activities. In terms of geologic education in the field, uniformitarianism is most evident as we learn
and teach about the evolution of St. Catherines Island and the
modern transgression caused by global warming. The formation
and application of trace fossils, including the application of modern knowledge to the discovery of a fossilized suite of nesting
structures (Figs. 16A16H) in the Cretaceous Fox Hills Sandstone near Limon, Colorado (Brannen and Bishop, 1993, 1994;
Bishop, et al., 2000; Bishop and Pirkle, 2008), and the meaning
of extinction as it pertains to all extant sea turtles and Earth are
also discussed. Uniformitarianism is also used in the SCISTP to
envision the future based upon what we see happening today.
Additional Field LessonsTurtles and Mining Engineering
Sea turtle eggs are incubated by solar heating in beach sand.
The embryonic turtles develop within the eggs and hatch after ~52
Figure 19. Studies in taphonomy. Graduate student Mike Knell documents progressive bone scatter of decomposing and disarticulated loggerhead and Kemps Ridley sea turtle carcasses in South Lagoon, South
Beach, St. Catherines Island, for comparison to Cretaceous Western
Interior fossil sea turtles.
d, exiting the egg by cutting its flexible membrane with an egg tooth
(carbuncle). Upon hatching, the enrolled hatchling straightens, and
its carapace and plastron harden, forming a fully functional turtle
capable of crawling and swimming upon emergence at the surface.
Because the eggs are deposited in an egg chamber at some depth
beneath the surface, the newly hatched turtles must mine their way
246
Bishop et al.
Evolution of geology field education for K12 teachers from field education for geology majors
~4.93 on a scale of 5.0. Evidence of the success of the course
is provided as the teachers respond to the summative question:
Considering all of the above (52) qualities that are applicable,
how would you rate this course? A resulting average of 4.63 out
of 5.0 in rating all 53 attributes of the instructors and the course
has been achieved. The interns feelings about this course are further summarized by open-ended reflective comments taken from
various annual assessments, including the following:
WOW! What a fabulous courseI think I learned more on St. Catherines than all my high school and college years combined.[and had]
positive female role models.
These open-ended comments, selected from the evaluations, indicate that the educational goals and objectives of the
projects are being well served; interns are leaving the internship
feeling that they participated in, and learned in a real-world,
hands-on conservation effort supported by content competency,
strong pedagogy, and a model that integrates technology into
the classroom.
CONCLUSIONS
Field-based courses are the most challenging to deliver, considering the logistical difficulties of transporting, housing, and
feeding students, reducing risk factors, the need for insurance
and protection from liability, the local and regional legal environment, and rapidly rising fuel costs. However, we believe the
benefits of the field learning environment continue to outweigh
the difficulties (Novak, 1976; McKenzie et al., 1986; Manner,
1995; Nyer, 2001). The efficacy of field education at GSU has
been one of the key reasons why geology majors have been successful in completing graduate school programs and competing
in the workplace over the past four decades. Anecdotal evidence
and alumni surveys support this conclusion, but we have never
formally attempted to measure this effect. We have been satisfied
with the result of our classic geology curriculum and the input
(proven or not) of education in the field, which is strengthened
by independent student research in a program of senior theses.
These effects have been transferred to the education of K12
teachers in numerous classroom field trips and in field courses
designed specifically to enhance content knowledge, provide for
247
the use of free (collected) natural history specimens as manipulatives in their classrooms, and encourage risk-taking pedagogical techniques in their classrooms (i.e., highly effective but
unconventional teaching styles).
The efficacy of SCISTP is considerable; it is built on the
foundations of classroom field education and course-centered
field excursions designed specifically for educators. Our informal impressions of how a professional development course ought
to be designed and executed are also central to success (Gibson,
et al., 1992; Loucks-Horsley et al., 2003). The robust feedback
system (a 53 question annual course assessment) is used as a formative tool to rapidly and effectively respond to teacher-interns
suggestions and concerns. The effectiveness of the SCISTP has
been repeatedly substantiated by annual assessment, resulting
in an overwhelming consensus that the program is effectively
serving the students needs. Unsolicited and solicited anecdotal
evidence confirms this contention as indicated in the previous
section. We believe the strengths that have led to the effectiveness of the SCISTP include the following: (1) selection, and
self-selection by mentors, of cohorts of effective teacher-interns;
(2) application of real-world research on charismatic sea turtles
and coastal habitat by a cadre of scientists; (3) development of
an inquiry-based teaching model in which the teacher-interns
develop self-esteem and accept risk-taking as a normal part of
their repertoire; and (4) use of robust electronic technologies and
manipulatives. Interns carry the information back into their classrooms, where it compounds as it is taught to cohort after cohort
of students. These K12 students are confronted by an enthusiastic proponent of stewardship of the coastal habitat and organisms,
one they see in presentations actually doing fieldwork, learning,
getting dirty, and perspiring, andloving it!
By linking strong science, science education, and technology (McCaffrey et al., 2005), we can support robust learning into
the future. If any of these components are lacking, the efficacy
of strong science education is drastically diminished. We yearn
for the return of strong cross-curricular discipline-based teacher
education programs, but until that happens, programs like the
SCISTP, and other programs described in this volume, will have
to bear the load and fill the gaps in content as well as they can.
Our philosophy (Marsh and Bishop, 1998) for science education
in K12 classrooms can be summarized here as: The best way to
learn is by doing; the best way of teaching is by modeling [learning]. As colleagues and teachers see successful integration of
content, pedagogy, and technology into the classroom and laboratory, they respond by concluding, Hey!I can do that, too!
and they do!
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Many organizations have supported the St. Catherines Island
Sea Turtle Program over the last 19 yr, including our major
sponsors, the Georgia Higher Education EisenhowerImproving Teacher Quality Program (~60% of funding) and the St.
Catherines Island Foundation, Inc. Essential support of the
248
Bishop et al.
teachers programs has also been received from Georgia Southern University, GeoTrec LLC of Fayette, Iowa, and the Georgia
Department of Natural Resources (Non-Game Division). Occasional grants have been received from the Edward John Noble
Foundation (administered through the American Museum of
Natural History), the St. Catherines Island Scientific Research
Advisory Committee, The Turner Foundation, The JST Foundation, the M.K. Pentecost Ecology Fund, and the Partnership
for Reform in Science and Mathematics (PRISM), a National
Science Foundation (NSF)sponsored initiative designed to
improve teachers science and math content knowledge.
So many individuals have contributed to our program that
we hesitate to name them for fear of leaving somebody out who
deserves to be acknowledged, if we have done so, please accept
our apology! We thank the St. Catherines Island staff for their
day-to-day support for 18 yr, especially Jeff Woods, Spyder
Crews, Alan Dean, Richard Bew, Fred Harden, Lee Thompson,
Ian Dutton, Kerry Peavler, Veronica Greco, Dr. Terry Norton,
Jen Hilburn, and Mary-Margaret Pauley Macgill. Co-authors
Royce Hayes, Ed Davis (along with Doris Davis), Kelly Vance,
Fred Rich, Brian Meyer, and Nancy Marsh provided service far
above and beyond the line of duty in helping in so many ways
over so many years. Georgia Department of Natural Resources
personnel who have helped with the program include Charles
Maley, Mike Harris, Brad Winn, Mark Dodd, and Adam Mackinnon. The board members of the St. Catherines Island Foundation, Inc., are collectively thanked for their continuing support
of the St. Catherines Island Sea Turtle Program.
REFERENCES CITED
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Waters, M., and Le, A.P., 2008, Representations of nature
of science in high school chemistry textbooks over the past four decades:
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 45, no. 7, p. 835855, doi:
10.1002/tea.20226.
Abrams, C.E., 1986, Base metal mines and prospects of the southwest Ducktown District, Georgia, in Misra, K.C., ed., Volcanogenic SulfidePrecious Metal Mineralization in the Southern Appalachians: University of
Tennessee Department of Geological Sciences, Studies in Geology 16,
p. 7896.
Abrams, C.E., and McConnell, K.I., 1986, The Pumpkinvine Creek Formation
at the type locality, in Neathery, T.L., ed., Centennial Field Guide Volume 6: Southeastern Section: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of
America, Geology of North America p. 275276.
Absher, B.S., and McSween, H.Y., Jr., 1986, Winding Stair Gap granulites: The
thermal peak of Paleozoic metamorphism, in Neathery, T.L., ed., Centennial Field Guide Volume 6: Southeastern Section: Boulder, Colorado,
Geological Society of America, Geology of North America, p. 257260.
Alexander, C.R., and Henry, V.J., 2007, Wassaw and Tybee IslandsComparing undeveloped and developed barrier islands, in Rich, F.J., ed., Guide to
Fieldtrips: 56th Annual Meeting, Southeastern Section of the Geological
Society of America: Statesboro, Georgia, Geological Society of America,
p. 187198.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), 1993, Benchmarks for Science Literacy, Project 2061: Oxford, UK, Oxford University
Press, 448 p.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), 1995, Project
2061: Science Literacy for a Changing FutureA Decade of Reform:
New York, Oxford University Press, 448 p.
American Geophysical Union Chapman Conference, 1994, Scrutiny of undergraduate geoscience education: Is the viability of the geosciences in jeopardy?: Washington, D.C., American Geophysical Union, p. 355.
Anderson, S., 1981, The raccoon (Procyon lotor) on St. Catherines Island,
Georgia, U.S.A.: Nesting sea turtles and foraging raccoon: The American
Museum of Natural History Novitates, no. 2713, p. 19.
Bauer, H.H., 1994, Scientific Literacy and the Myth of the Scientific Method:
Champaign, Illinois, University of Illinois Press, 192 p.
Billes, A., and Fretey, J., 2001, Nest morphology in the leatherback turtle:
Marine Turtle Newsletter, v. 92, p. 79.
Bishop, G.A., 1983, Fossil decapod crustaceans from the Late Cretaceous Coon
Creek Formation, Union County, Mississippi: Journal of Crustacean Biology, v. 3, no. 3, p. 417430, doi: 10.2307/1548142.
Bishop, G.A., 1990, Modeling heavy mineral accumulation on an evolving
barrier island on the southeastern coast: University System of Georgia,
Chancellors Special Funding Initiative, p. 112.
Bishop, G.A., 2003, Handbook for Sea Turtle Interns (second editon): Statesboro,
Georgia, Georgia Southern University, p. 149 (revised, illustrated, and
posted as pdf document at http://www.scistp.org; accessed 6 January 2009).
Bishop, G.A., 2007, The St. Catherines Island Sea Turtle Program: www.scistp
.org (accessed 20 April 2008, revised December 2008, accessed 9 January 2009).
Bishop, G.A., and Bishop, E.C., 1992, Distribution of ghost shrimp, North
Beach, St. Catherines Island, Georgia: American Museum of Natural History Novitates, no. 3042, p. 117.
Bishop, G.A., and Brannen, N.A., 1993, Ecology and paleoecology of Georgia
ghost shrimp, in Farrell, K.M., Hoffman, C.W., and Henry, V.J., Jr., eds.,
Geomorphology and Facies Relationships of Quaternary Barrier Island
Complexes near St. Marys, Georgia: Atlanta, Georgia Geological Society,
p. 1929.
Bishop, G.A., and Marsh, N.B., 1994, The 1992 St. Catherines Sea Turtle
Program: Nest validation by beach stratigraphy, in Schroeder, B.A., and
Witherington, B.E., compilers, Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual
Symposium on Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Technical Memorandum
MNFS-SEFSC 341, p. 2224.
Bishop, G.A., and Marsh, N.B., 1995, Computer utilization in the St. Catherines Sea Turtle Conservation Program, in Rock Eagle Annual Computing
Conference Proceedings: Athens, Georgia, University System of Georgia,
p. 211.
Bishop, G.A., and Marsh, N.B., 1996, Pushing the envelopeTechnology integration into the classroom, in Rock Eagle Annual Computing Conference
Proceedings: Athens, Georgia, University System of Georgia, p. 512.
Bishop, G.A., and Marsh, N.B., 1998a, The St. Catherines Natural History Science Education Model: Georgia Southern University Academic Innovation On-Line Conference: http://cost.georgiasouthern.edu/geo/webconf
.html (accessed 8 January 2009).
Bishop, G.A., and Marsh, N.B., 1998b, Electronic earth science education:
An integrated, holistic approach, in Rock Eagle Annual Computing
Conference Proceedings: Athens, Georgia, University System of Georgia, p. 1320 (http://WWW.PeachNet.EDU:80/OIIT/re/re98/; accessed
6 January 2009).
Bishop, G.A., and Marsh, N.B., 1999a, The St. CatherinesEisenhower natural
history science education model, in 1999 Sigma Xi Forum Proceedings:
Reshaping Undergraduate Science and Engineering Education: Tools for
Better Learning: Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, p. 143144.
Bishop, G.A., and Marsh, N.B., 1999b, Sea turtle nesting habitat assessment:
A rapid, integrated, technological approach, in Ahead of the Curve: Proceedings of the Rock Eagle Conference: Athens, Office of Information
and Instructional Technology, University System of Georgia, 10 p.
Bishop, G.A., and Pirkle, F.L., 2008, Modern Meaning in a 70 Million-YearOld Sea Turtle Nest: State of the Worlds Sea Turtles (SWoT), Volume 3:
Arlington, Virginia, Hawksbills, 20 p.
Bishop, G.A., and Williams, A.B., 2005, Taphonomy and preservation of burrowing Thalassinidean shrimps: Proceedings of the Biological Society of
Washington, v. 118, no. 1, p. 218236, doi: 10.2988/0006-324X(2005)118
[218:TAPOBT]2.0.CO;2.
Bishop, G.A., Marsh, N.A.B., and Pirkle, F.L., 2000, Fossilized Cretaceous
sea turtle nest from Colorado, in Kalb, H.J., and Wibbles, T., compilers,
Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Symposium on Sea Turtle Conservation and Biology: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-443, p. 101103.
Bishop, G.A., Hayes, R.H., Meyer, B.K., Rollins, H.E., Rich, F.J., Thomas,
D.H., and Vance, R.K., 2007a, Transgressive barrier island features of
St. Catherines Island, Georgia, in Rich, F.J., ed., Guide to Fieldtrips:
Evolution of geology field education for K12 teachers from field education for geology majors
56th Annual Meeting, Southeastern Section of the Geological Society of
America: Statesboro, Georgia, Geological Society of America, p. 3985.
Bishop, G.A., Vance, R.K., and Meyer, B.K., 2007b, Evolution of emerging
electronic technologies; St. Catherines Island Sea Turtle conservation
program, in University System of Georgia Rock Eagle Technology Conference: Atlanta, p. 111 (http://www.usg.edu/oiit/re/re07/proceedings/
evolution_emerging.pdf; accessed 8 January 2009).
Booth, R.K., and Rich, F.J., 1999, Identification and paleoecological implications of a late Pleistocene pteridophyte-dominated assemblage preserved
in brown peat from St. Catherines Island, Georgia: Castanea, v. 64, no. 2,
p. 120129.
Booth, R.K., Rich, F.J., and Bishop, G.A., 1998, Palynology and depositional
history of late Pleistocene and Holocene coastal sediments from St. Catherines Island, Georgia, USA: Palynology, v. 23, p. 6786.
Booth, R.K., Rich, F.J., Bishop, G.A., and Brannen, N.A., 1999, Evolution of
a freshwater barrier-island marsh in coastal Georgia: U.S.A.: Wetlands,
v. 19, p. 570577.
Brannen, N.A., and Bishop, G.A., 1993, Nesting traces of the loggerhead sea
turtle (Caretta caretta Linne), St. Catherines Island, Georgia: Implications for the fossil record, in Farrell, K.M., Hoffman, C.W., and Henry,
V.J., Jr., eds., Geomorphology and Facies Relationships of Quaternary
Barrier Island Complexes near St. Marys, Georgia: Atlanta, Georgia Geological Society, p. 3036.
Brannen, N.A., and Bishop, G.A., 1994, Nesting traces of the loggerhead sea
turtle (Caretta caretta Linne), St. Catherines Island, Georgia, in Bjorndal,
K.A., Bolten, A.B., Johnson, D.A., and Eliazar, P.J., compilers, Proceedings of the 14th Annual Symposium of Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation: National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration Technical
Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-351, p. 195197.
Brannen, N.A., Carter, J., Harris, M., Maley, C., Hayes, R.H., Winn, B., and
Bishop, G.A., 1993, Handbook for Sea Turtle Interns: Statesboro, Georgia, Georgia Southern University, p. 178.
Brown, L.M., Kelso, P.R., and Rexroad, C.B., 2001, Introductory geology for
elementary education majors utilizing a constructivist approach: Journal
of Geoscience Education, v. 49, no. 5, p. 450453.
Byerly, D.W., Walker, K.R., Diehl, W.W., Ghazizadeh, M., Johnson, R.E., Lutz,
C.T., Schoner, A.K., Simmons, W.A., Somonson, J.C.B., Weber, L.J., and
Wedekind, J.E., 1986, Thorn Hill: A classic Paleozoic stratigraphic section in Tennessee, in Neathery, T.L., ed., Centennial Field Guide Volume
6: Southeastern Section: Boulder, Colorado, Geology of North America,
Geological Society of America, p. 131136.
Carr, M., 1978, Structural chronology of the Lake Murray spillway, central
South Carolina, in Snoke, A.W., ed., Geological Investigations of the
Eastern Piedmont, Southern Appalachians: Carolina Geological Society
1978 Guidebook: West Columbia, Division of Geology, South Carolina
State Development Board, p. 2124.
Chamberlin, T.C., 1890, The method of multiple working hypotheses: Science
(old series), v. 15, p. 9296; reprinted 1965, v. 148, p. 754759.
Chestnut, D.R., and Cobb, J.C., 1986 Pennsylvanian-age distributary-mouth bar
in the Breathitt Formation of eastern Kentucky, in Neathery, T.L., ed., Centennial Field Guide Volume 6: Southeastern Section: Boulder, Colorado,
Geological Society of America, Geology of North America, p. 5153.
Chowns, T.M., 1986, Spout Springs Gap, in Neathery, T.L., ed., Centennial
Field Guide Volume 6: Southeastern Section: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America, Geology of North America, p. 6364.
Clark, S.H.B., 1999, Geologic Maps and Block Diagrams of the Barite Hill
Gold-Silver Deposit and Vicinity, South Carolina: U.S. Geological Society Open-File Report 99-148A, 7 p.
Clayton, T.D., Taylor, L.A., Jr., Cleary, W.J., Hosier, P.E., Graber, P.H.F., Neal,
W.J., and Pilkey, O.H., Sr., 1992, Living with the Georgia Shore: Durham,
North Carolina, Duke University Press, 188 p.
Colquhoun, D.J., 1986, The geology and physiography of the Orangeburg
Scarp, in Neathery, T.L., ed., Centennial Field Guide Volume 6: Southeastern Section: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America,
Geology of North America, p. 5153.
Cramer, H.R., 1986, Geology of Lookout Mountain, Georgia, in Neathery, T.L.,
ed., Centennial Field Guide Volume 6: Southeastern Section: Boulder,
Colorado, Geological Society of America, Geology of North America,
p. 153157.
Darrell, J.H., II, Brannen, N.A., and Bishop, G.A., 1993, The beach, in Farrell, K.M., Hoffman, C.W., and Henry, V.J., Jr., eds., Geomorphology and
Facies Relationships of Quaternary Barrier Island Complexes near St.
249
250
Bishop et al.
Marsh, N.B., and Bishop, G.A., 1994, The St. Catherines Sea Turtle Program:
Modeling effective science education through conservation and research
partnerships, in Sigma Xi Proceedings of the Forum on Scientists, Educators, and National Standards: Action at the Local Level: Atlanta, Sigma
Xi, The Research Society, p. 214215.
Marsh, N.B., and Bishop, G.A., 1998, The St. Catherines/Eisenhower natural history education model: Georgia Journal of Science, v. 56, no. 4, p. 212223.
Martin, A.J., and Rindsberg, A.K., 2008, Ichnological signatures of storm-washover fan deposits: Yellow Banks Bluff, St. Catherines Island, Georgia: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 40, no. 4, p. 15.
McCaffrey, D.F., Lockwood, J.R., Koretz, D., Louis, T.A., and Hamilton,
L., 2004, Models for value-added modeling of teacher effects: Journal
of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, v. 29, no. 1, p. 67101, doi:
10.3102/10769986029001067.
McCaffrey, K.J.W., Jones, R.R., Holdsworth, R.E., Wilson, R.W., Clegg, P.,
Imber, J., and McConnell, K.I., 1986, The Cartersville fault at Carters
Dam, in Neathery, T.L., ed., Centennial Field Guide Volume 6: Southeastern Section: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America, Geology
of North America, p. 271273.
McCaffrey, K.J.W., Jones, R.R., Holdsworth, R.E., Wilson, R.W., Clegg,
P., Imber, J., Hollman, N., and Trinks, I., 2005, Unlocking the spatial
dimension: Digital technologies and the future of geoscience fieldwork:
Journal of the Geological Society of London, v. 162, p. 927938, doi:
10.1144/0016-764905-017.
McConnell, K.I., 1986, The Brevard fault zone west of Atlanta, Georgia, in
Centennial Field Guide Volume 6: Southeastern Section: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America, Geology of North America, p. 281
283, doi: 10.1130/0-8137-5406-2.281.
McConnell, K.I., and Costello, J.O., 1984, Basement-cover rock relationships
along the western edge of the Blue Ridge thrust sheet in Georgia, in Bartholomew, M.J., ed., The Grenville Event in the Appalachians and Related
Topics: Geological Society of America Special Paper 194, p. 263279.
McCormick, J.E., Evans, L.L., Palmer, R.A., and Rasnick, F.D., 1971, Environment of the zinc deposits of the MascotJefferson City District, Tennessee: Economic Geology and the Bulletin of the Society of Economic
Geologists, v. 66, p. 757762.
McCurdy, C., 2009, Potential Biasing of Hatchling Sex Ratios of the Loggerhead Sea Turtle, Caretta caretta, on St. Catherines Island, Georgia, 2007:
A Pilot Study [Masters thesis]: Milledgeville, Georgia College and Sate
University, 100 p.
McKenzie, G.D., Utgard, R.O., and Lisowski, M., 1986, The importance of
field trips: Journal of College Science Teaching, v. 16, p. 1720.
Mooney, S.J., 2006, A simple group work approach for effective field work: A
soil sciences case study: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 54, p. 7479.
National Research Council, 1996, From analysis to action: Undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: Report of a
convocation: Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, p. 1336.
National Science Foundation Advisory Board, 1996, Shaping the future: New
expectations for undergraduate education in science mathematics, engineering, and technology: A report on its review of undergraduate education: National Science Foundation Report NSF 96-139, p. 176.
Novak, J.D., 1976, Understanding the learning process and effectiveness of
teaching methods in the classroom, laboratory, and field: Science Education, v. 60, p. 493512, doi: 10.1002/sce.3730600410.
Nyer, E.K., 2001, Fieldwork makes great training ground: Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation, v. 21, p. 28, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6592.2001
.tb00639.x.
Orion, N., and Hofstein, A., 1994, Factors that influence learning during a scientific field trip in a natural environment: Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, v. 31, no. 10, p. 10971119, doi: 10.1002/tea.3660311005.
Peters, W.C., 1978, Exploration and Mining Geology: Hoboken, New Jersey,
John Wiley and Sons, 696 p.
Pickering, S.M., Jr., Hurst, V.J., and Elzea, J.M., 1997, Mineralogy, Stratigraphy and Origin of Georgia Kaolins: Field Excursion F4, 11th International Clay Conference, 69 p.
Pirkle, F.L., Rich, F.J., Reynolds, J.G., Zayac, T.A., Pirkle, W.A., and Portell,
R.W., 2007, The geology, stratigraphy and paleontology of Reids, Bells and
Roses Bluffs in northeastern Florida, in Rich, F.J., ed., Guide to Fieldtrips:
56th Annual Meeting, Southeastern Section of the Geological Society of
America: Statesboro, Georgia, Geological Society of America, p. 137155.
Pirkle, W.A., and Pirkle, F.L., 2007, Introduction to heavy-mineral sand deposits of the Florida and Georgia Atlantic Coastal Plain, in Rich, F.J., ed.,
Evolution of geology field education for K12 teachers from field education for geology majors
Guide to Fieldtrips: 56th Annual Meeting, Southeastern Section of the
Geological Society of America: Statesboro, Georgia, Geological Society
of America, p. 129151.
Reade, E.H., Power, W.R., Keeners, M.J., and White, D.H., 1980, Barite deposits in the Cartersville District, Bartow County, Georgia: Geological Society of America, Atlanta, Field Trip 19, p. 379384.
Reinhardt, J., Smith, L.W., and King, D.T., Jr., 1986, Sedimentary facies of
the Upper Cretaceous Tuscaloosa Group in eastern Alabama, in Neathery, T.L., ed., Centennial Field Guide Volume 6: Southeastern Section:
Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America, Geology of North
America, p. 363367.
Reitz, E.J., Linsley, D., Bishop, G.A., Rollins, H.B., and Thomas, D.H. (with
a contribution by Hayes, R.H., and Thomas, D.H.), 2008, Chapter 5: A
brief natural history of St. Catherines Island, in Thomas, D.E., ed., Native
American Landscapes of St. Catherines Island, Georgia: 1. The Theoretical Framework: American Museum of Natural History, Anthropological
Papers 88, p. 4861.
Reynolds, R.W., 2004, On the practical aspects of incorporating field-based
projects into introductory oceanography: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 52, no. 3, p. 218223.
Rich, F.J., 2007a, Biological and sedimentological dynamics of the Okefenokee
Swamp Florida, in Rich, F.J., ed., Guide to Fieldtrips: 56th Annual Meeting, Southeastern Section of the Geological Society of America: Statesboro, Georgia, Geological Society of America, p. 163176.
Rich, F.J., ed., 2007b, Guide to Fieldtrips: 56th Annual Meeting, Southeastern
Section of the Geological Society of America: Statesboro, Georgia, Geological Society of America, 198 p.
Rich, F.J., Bishop, G.A., Marsh, N., and Vance, R.K., 2006, Earth science
teacher development at Georgia Southern University: Geological Society
of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 38, no. 7, p. 191.
Rindsberg, A.K., and Chowns, T.M., 1986, Ringgold Gap: Progradational
sequences in the Ordovician and Silurian of northwest Georgia, in Neathery, T.L., ed., Centennial Field Guide Volume 6: Southeastern Section:
Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America, Geology of North
America, p. 159162.
Rutherford, F.J., and Ahlgren, A., 1990, Science for All Americans: American
Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS): New York, Oxford
University Press, 272 p.
Sacks, P.E., Maher, H.D., Jr., Secor, D.T., Jr., and Shervais, J.W., 1989, The
Burks Mountain Complex, Kiokee Belt, southern Appalachian Piedmont
of South Carolina and Georgia, in Mittwede, S.K., and Stoddard, E.F.,
eds., Ultramafic Rocks of the Appalachian Piedmont: Geological Society
of America Special Paper 231, p. 7586.
Spotila, J.R., 2004, Sea Turtles: A Complete Guide to Their Biology, Behavior,
and Conservation: Baltimore, Maryland, Johns Hopkins University Press,
240 p.
Stanesco, J.D., 1991, The personal journal as a learning and evaluation tool in
geology field-trip courses: Journal of Geological Education, v. 39, no. 3,
p. 204205.
Stoneburner, D.L., and Richardson, J.I., 1981, Observations on the role of
temperature in loggerhead nest site selection: Copeia, p. 238241, doi:
10.2307/1444068.
Thomas, D.H., 1988, St. Catherines: An Island in Time: Georgia History and
Culture Series: Atlanta, Georgia Endowment for the Humanities, 83 p.
251
Thomas, D.H., Andrus, C.F.T., Bishop, G.A., Blair, E., Blanton, D.B., Crowe,
D.E., DePratter, C.B., Dukes, J., Francis, P., Jr., Guerrero, D., Hayes, R.H.,
Kick, M., Larsen, C.S., Licate, C., Linsley, D.M., May, J.A., McNeil, J.,
OBrien, D.M., Paulk, G., Pendleton, L.S.A., Reitz, E.J., Rollins, H.B.,
Russo, M., Sanger, M., Saunders, R., and Semon, A., 2008, Native American Landscapes of St. Catherines Island, Georgia: American Museum of
Natural History, Anthropological Papers 88, 1136 p.
Thomas, W.A., 1988, the Black Warrior Basin, in Sloss, L.L., ed., Sedimentary
CoverNorth American Craton: United States: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America, Geology of North America, v. D2, p. 471488.
Thomas, W.A., and Bearce, D.N., 1986, Birmingham anticlinorium in the
Appalachian fold-thrust belt, basement fault system, synsedimentary
structure, and thrust ramp, in Neathery, T.L., ed., Centennial Field Guide
Volume 6: Southeastern Section: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society
of America, Geology of North America, p. 191200.
Trupe, C.H., Stewart, K.G., Adams, M.G., Waters, C.L., Miller, B.V., and
Hewitt, L.K., 2003, The Burnsville fault: Evidence for the timing and
kinematics of southern Appalachian Acadian dextral transform tectonics:
Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 115, no. 11, p. 13651376,
doi: 10.1130/B25256.1.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1991, Technical Draft Recovery Plan for Three
Granite Outcrop Plant Species: Jackson, Mississippi, 51 p.
Vance, R.K., Rich, F.J., Bishop, G.A., and Asher, P.M., 2006a, Mineral resource
education at Georgia Southern University: Geological Society of America
Abstracts with Programs, v. 38, no. 7, p. 191.
Vance, R.K., Rich, F.J., and Asher, P.A., 2006b, Geology and mineral resource
education at Georgia Southern University: A seventeen year retrospective
and a bright outlook, in Reid, J.C., ed., Proceedings of the 42nd Forum
on the Geology of Industrial Minerals: North Carolina Geological Survey
Information Circular 34, p. 255268.
Vance, R.K., Rich, F.J., Asher, P.M., and Bishop, G.A., 2007, Mineral resource
education at Georgia Southern University: Filling the void: Northwestern Mining Association 113th Annual Meeting Final Program: Spokane,
Washington, Mining for Today and Tomorrow, p. 27.
Vaughan, M., 1992, The Sands of the Ohoopee: Nature Conservancy, March/
April, p. 33.
Ward, L.W., and Blackwelder, B.W., 1980, Stratigraphy of Eocene, Oligocene
and Lower Miocene Formations, in Coastal Plain of the Carolinas, Excursions in Southeastern Geology, Volume 1: Geological Society of America,
Atlanta, Field Trip, v. 9, p. 190198.
Waters, J.A., 1983, Floyd Shale, north of Floyd Springs, in Chowns, T.M., ed.,
Geology of Paleozoic Rocks in the Vicinity of Rome, Georgia: Georgia
Geological Society, 18th Annual Field Trip Guidebook, p. 8284.
Whitney, J.A., and Allard, G.O., 1990, Structure, Tectonics and Ore Potential
along a Transect across the Inner Piedmont, Charlotte Belt and Slate Belt
of Eastern Georgia: 25th annual Field Trip: Georgia Geological Society
Guidebooks, v. 10, no. 1, 166 p.
Whitney, J.A., and Wenner, D.B., 1980, Petrology and structural setting of
post-metamorphic granites of Georgia, in Frey, R.W., ed., Excursions
in Southeastern Geology, Volume 2: Geological Society of America
Fieldtrips Guidebook: Falls Church, Virginia, American Geological Institute, p. 351378.
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY 5 MAY 2009
ABSTRACT
Water education (WET) for Alabamas black belt is an outreach project that
provides off-campus environmental and water-education activities to middle school
teachers and children from predominantly African-American families in some of Alabamas poorest counties. Its main goal is to help students and teachers from resourcepoor schools become knowledgeable about surface water and groundwater so they
can identify and sustain safe aquifer zones, where clean water resources are available for long-term use and economic development. Activities are conducted at two
field sites, Auburn Universitys E.V. Smith Center in Macon County and the Robert
G. Wehle Nature Center in Bullock County. Children from rural schools that lack
scientific facilities and equipment are introduced to standard methods for assessing
water quality and instrumentation for testing water quality at the field sites. Both
hosting centers have easy access to surface water (ponds, wetlands, streams) for data
collection. The E.V. Smith site also has access to groundwater through nested wells.
Educational activities focus on determining groundwater flow, the interaction of
groundwater and surface water, and the hydrologic properties (porosity and permeability) of different aquifer materials (sands, gravels, and clays). The project also
incorporates simple laboratory exercises that reinforce learning objectives specified
by the state of Alabama science curriculum for grades 68. Results of the project
suggest that by partnering with local universities, low-resource rural school systems
*leeming@auburn.edu
Lee, M.-K., Wolf, L., Hardesty, K., Beasley, L., Smith, J., Adams, L., Stone, K., and Block, D., 2009, Water education (WET) for Alabamas black belt: A hands-on
field experience for middle school students and teachers, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives
and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 253259, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(20). For permission to copy, contact editing@
geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
253
254
Lee et al.
can provide their students with access to state-of-the-art equipment and to scientific
expertise. However, schools may be less likely to participate if they must bear the costs
of transportation and materials for the field experience themselves.
INTRODUCTION
The availability of clean, fresh water is of increasing
concern throughout the world (e.g., Alley, 1999; Shat, 2005;
Moench, 2005; Foster, 2006). Youth, as future citizens, play an
important role in obtaining and maintaining water resources.
Project WET (water education) addresses the need to provide
enriching and stimulating water-related educational activities
for middle school children in Alabamas black belt region,
an area that originally derived its name from characteristic dark
soils. The region now hosts some of Alabamas poorest communities. Although successful examples of stimulating laboratory
and field exercises exist for college-level hydrology courses
(e.g., Gates et al., 1996; Hudak, 1996; Lee, 1998; Rimal and
Ronald, 2000; Salvage et al., 2004; Tedesco and Salazar, 2006),
implementation of hands-on water education for middle school
students has been extremely limited.
Our educational project involves field activities at Auburn
Universitys E.V. Smith Center, located in Macon County, and
the Robert G. Wehle Nature Center in Bullock County, Alabama
(Fig. 1). Coastal-plain aquifers in the counties surrounding the
field sites are heavily exploited for drinking and irrigation (e.g.,
Cook, 1993; Penny et al., 2003; Lee et al., 2007). As demand
increases, overuse may severely deplete groundwater supplies,
and pollution from wastes disposal, oil spills, and agricultural activities may make some groundwater sources unusable.
85.92 W
85.86 W
32.45 N
32.45 N
To Tallassee
Elmore County
iver
osa R
Macon County
po
Talla
Railroad
Milstead
EVS1
County
EVS2-3
Rd. 40
AL-229
EVS4-5
To Auburn
I-85
To Montgomery
1 km
32.42 N
32.42 N
85.92 W
85.86 W
Modules
Aquifer in a
tank
Aquifer
materials
255
TABLE 1. OVERVIEW OF INDOOR EXPERIMENTS AND LIST OF REQUIRED MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT
Activity
Materials/Equipment
1. Marking the position of water table; identifying saturation and unsaturated zones; adding
10 gallon aquarium
water, and then observing the new position of water table; learning concept of recharge.
Gravel and sand
PVC pipe and plug
2. Observing connection of groundwater to a lake; learning the concept of groundwater
Liquid soap pump
discharge to surface-water body; learning the structure of well screens and well casing
Empty yogurt cup
and their uses; visualizing contaminant transfer.
Plastic tubing
3. Removing water from the tank using a handheld pump; observing how the position of the
Squirt bottle
water table changes in response to pumping; describing the effects of drought on water
1 gallon tub
table.
Erasable markers
Fruit juice
1. Measuring the amount of water ponding above different sediments (gravel, sand, clay)
after water infiltrates downward and fills up open pore spaces between solid sediment
grains (porosity assessment).
2. Comparing the rate at which water flows through syringe filled with gravel, sand, and clay
(permeability assessment).
Darcys
experiment
Conducting the classic Darcys experiment to visualize flow and contaminant transport
through a sand layer under varying hydraulic gradient.
Constant-head permeameter
(HM-3891, Humboldt Inc.)
Fruit juice
Sand
5 gallon bucket
50 mL graduated cylinder
Water-quality
acquisition
Three 60 mL syringe
Three millipore (0.45 m) filter
Gravel, sand, clay
256
Lee et al.
and contaminant transport (fruit juice provides a colored tracer)
through a sand layer under a given hydraulic gradient. In the testing water quality module, students use the HACH surface-water
test kit and employ a titration method to measure dissolved oxygen (DO) in a surface-water sample collected from the field site.
Laboratory exercises are described in detail at the WET Web site
http://www.auburn.edu/~leeming/outreach.htm.
Well Drilling and Installation
might affect production from a well. This exercise prepares students for outdoor field activities in which they will purge a well
and test water quality. In the aquifer materials module, students
are introduced to the concepts of permeability and porosity. They
compare differences in porosity and permeability of three common aquifer materialsgravels, sands, and clays (Fig. 3). Samples of sediments collected from wells drilled at the E.V. Smith
field site are compared in this activity. For the Darcys experiment activity, students use a constant-head permeameter (HM3891, Humboldt Inc.) to simulate the classic Darcys experiment.
The objective of this activity is to help students visualize flow
Figure 3. Students compare how fast water can flow through gravels,
sands, and clays under the same hydraulic gradient as the plug (filter
stop) at the bottom of syringes is removed simultaneously.
257
Water-Quality Assessment
In this activity, students learn the quantities that are important for assessing groundwater quality and how they can test for
these quantities. We begin by defining the concept of pH and
explain that normal atmospheric precipitation is slightly acidic.
Students are asked to give examples of common acidic (orange
juice, coke) and basic (lime, alkaline salt) solutions. We remind
students of the importance of DO, as covered in the indoor
preparatory exercise. Students then use handheld water-quality meters to compare pH and DO values of water withdrawn
from wells EVS 1, 2, and 3. The pH value of groundwater at
EVS 3 is slightly acidic (5.86.2), which is very close to that
of local rainfall. Students are led to conclude that the source of
shallow groundwater is from direct atmospheric precipitation
and recharge due to the similarity in pH. Groundwater from
EVS 2 is extracted from the shallow alluvial aquifer and has
a pronounced orange-red color and high DO values. Students
examine core sediments recovered in this zone; the cores are
generally devoid of organic matter and are oxidized with the
orange color of Fe-oxyhydroxide solids. In contrast, groundwater from the nearby deeper well EVS 3 is clean and free of
Fe-oxyhydroxide solids. The deeper groundwater exhibits moderately reducing conditions with relatively low DO values. The
deeper aquifer contains abundant organic matter. Students also
sample gasoline-contaminated groundwater from EVS 1. The
258
Lee et al.
contaminated water has a pale pink color, strong fuel odor, and
very low DO values. They are asked how they can tell that the
water is contaminated and how gasoline might get into the soil
and groundwater. The students conclude that water from different depths (aquifers) at a site can vary in water quality; such a
concept is practical and important for finding clean water supply from different aquifer zones.
Program Assessment and Evaluation
The overall goal of the WET project is to enrich the knowledge and understanding of students and teachers in the basics of
hydrology so that they can utilize water-resources information,
achieve a deeper awareness of water-quality issues, and understand the interplay among natural and anthropogenic changes
and the water cycle. At the conclusion of the WET activities, students revisit key concepts by participating in a series of assessment activities. The first activity involves matching basic hydrologic terms (e.g., water table, saturated and unsaturated zones,
etc.) using a schematic illustration. These terms were introduced
during the indoor field preparation and outdoor well testing. In
the second activity, students are asked to write short answers to
the following questions:
1. What happens to an aquifer when it rains?
2. What happens to an aquifer when it stops raining (during
a drought)?
3. Which material (gravels, sands, clays) is most permeable
(allows fast water movement)?
4. Which material (gravels, sands, clays) is most porous
(provides more space to store water)?
5. How can groundwater become contaminated, and how
can we clean it up?
6. How can we bring groundwater from aquifers up to the
surface?
7. What procedure is used before water sampling to get a
representative water sample from a well?
8. Name a few common sources of groundwater contamination.
The evaluation results show that a very high percentage
(>80%) of the student participants were able to match key
terms with the schematic drawing with a minimum of 75%
correct answers. Although all participants were able to answer
correctly over 75% of the short answers, the quality of expression and level of detail varied considerably. Once students had
an opportunity to answer the questions on their own, the WET
instructors led a discussion in which the students contributed
their opinions. Although students were usually able to successfully match key terms with their meanings if definitions were
provided, they were less successful in remembering the terms
and definitions if they had to recall the information totally on
their own. Students were, however, able to describe the handson activities in which they participated and, in their own words,
express the purpose of the activity. For example, most did not
recall the specific meanings of the terms pH and DO, but they
259
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Funding for this project was provided by Auburn University
Outreach Scholarship Program (to Lee and Wolf). The authors
thank Auburn Universitys E.V. Smith Center and the Robert
G. Wehle Nature Center for assistance in running the fieldday activities. Transportation to the field sites was provided by
Auburn Universitys Environmental Institute.
REFERENCES CITED
Alley, W.M., 1999, Sustainability of Ground-Water Resources: U.S. Geological
Survey Circular 1186, 79 p.
American Ground Water Trust, 2007, WellWhats All That Drilling About?:
Concord, New Hampshire, Eau Claire Press Company, 31 p.
Cook, M.R., 1993, The Eutaw Aquifer in Alabama: Geological Survey of Alabama Bulletin 156, 105 p.
Foster, S., 2006, Groundwater; sustainability issues and governance needs: Episodes, v. 29, p. 238243.
Gates, A.E., Langford, R.P., Hodgeson, R.M., and Driscoll, J.J., III, 1996, Groundwater-simulation apparatus for introductory and advanced courses in environmental geology: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 44, p. 559564.
Horton, J.W., Jr., Zietz, I., and Neathery, T.L., 1984, Truncation of the Appalachian Piedmont beneath the coastal plain of Alabama: Evidence from the
new magnetic data: Geology, v. 12, p. 5155.
Hudak, P.F., 1996, Hydrogeology lessons and exercises for introductory physicalgeology students: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 44, p. 315316.
King, D.T., Jr., 1990, Facies stratigraphy and relative sea-level historyUpper
Cretaceous Eutaw Formation, central and eastern Alabama: Transactions
of the Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies, v. 40, p. 381387.
Lee, M.-K., 1998, Hands-on laboratory exercises for an undergraduate hydrogeology course: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 46, p. 433438.
Lee, M.-K., Griffin, J., Saunders, J.A., Wang, Y., and Jean, J., 2007, Reactive
transport of heavy metals and isotopes in the Eutaw coastal plain aquifer, Alabama: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 112, p. G02026, doi:
10.1029/2006JG000238.
Moench, M., 2005, Groundwater; the challenge of monitoring and management: Worlds Water, v. 20042005, p. 79100.
Penny, E., Lee, M.-K., and Morton, C., 2003, Groundwater and microbial processes of the Alabama coastal plain aquifers: Water Resources Research,
v. 39, p. 1320, doi: 10.1029/2003WR001963.
Raymond, D.E., Osborne, W.E., Copeland, C.W., and Neathery, T.L., 1988,
Alabama Stratigraphy: Geological Survey of Alabama Circular 140, 97 p.
Rimal, N.N., and Ronald, D.S., 2000, Using available resources to enhance
the teaching of hydrogeology: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 48,
p. 508513.
Salvage, K., Graney, J., and Barker, J., 2004, Watershed-based integration of
hydrology, geochemistry, and geophysics in an environmental geology
curriculum: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 52, p. 141148.
Shat, T., 2005, Groundwater and human development; challenges and opportunities in livelihoods and environment: Water Science and Technology,
v. 51, p. 2737.
Tedesco, L.P., and Salazar, K.A., 2006, Using environmental service learning in
an urban environment to address water quality issues: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 54, p. 123132.
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY 5 MAY 2009
ABSTRACT
The School of Rock (SOR) expedition was carried out onboard the JOIDES
Resolution during a 2 wk transit from Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, to Acapulco, Mexico, in 2005 as a pilot field program to make scientific ocean drilling research
practices and results accessible to precollege educators. Through focused inquiry, the
program engaged and exposed 10 teachers and three informal educators to the nature
of scientific investigation at sea and to the data collected and discoveries made over
nearly four decades of scientific ocean drilling. Success stemmed from intense planning, institutional support, and a program design built on diverse experiences of the
instructional team and tailored to educator needs, including an integrated C3 (connections, communications, and curriculum) instructional approach. The C3 approach
*Current address: European Union Center, Annenberg Presidential Conference Center, 1245 TAMU, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843-1245, USA.
St. John, K., Leckie, R.M., Slough, S., Peart, L., Niemitz, M., and Klaus, A., 2009, The Integrated Ocean Drilling Program School of Rock: Lessons learned
from an ocean-going research expedition for earth and ocean science educators, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education:
Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 261273, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(21). For permission to
copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
261
262
BACKGROUND
The Integrated Ocean Drilling Program (IODP) is an international (United States, Japan, 17 European countries, Peoples
Republic of China, and the Republic of Korea) scientific ocean
drilling program that explores Earth history and structure
recorded in seafloor sediments and rocks, and monitors subseafloor environments (Fig. 1; IODP Planning Sub-Committee,
2001). The IODP builds upon the earlier successes of the Deep
Figure 1. Scientific ocean drilling research by Integrated Ocean Drilling Program (IODP) and its legacy programs, Deep Sea Drilling Project (DSDP) and Ocean Drilling Program (ODP), into the earth system
by drilling the seafloor. A broad range of earth system components,
processes, and phenomena can be investigated using marine cores and
seafloor monitoring. (Figure is from IODP Planning Sub-Committee,
2001; figure originally by Asahiko Tiara.)
263
Figure 2. Drill site map showing Deep Sea Drilling Project (DSDP), Ocean Drilling Program (ODP), and Integrated Ocean Drilling Program
(IODP) sites (from http://iodp.tamu.edu/scienceops/maps.html).
drilling. The ramp-up for the School of Rock (SOR) expedition program began soon thereafter. As an introduction to her
new position, Education Director Peart sailed on the JOIDES
Resolution during a short transit between expedition port calls
in 2004. It was during this experience that she conceived the
idea of transforming a usually quiet and low-staffed ship on
transit between expeditions to a vibrant school at sea populated
by highly motivated formal and informal educators as the students, and a diverse instructional team of research scientists,
education specialists, and media-resource specialists. The goal
of this floating field school was to make ocean drilling science
accessible to educators in a high-impact way.
264
Fundamental
practice to all
ocean drilling
research
Major
scientific
discoveries
about the
earth system
Figure 3. Comparison of (A) select scientific ocean drilling practices and discoveries with (B) relevant education content standards (National
Research Council [NRC], 1996). PETMPaleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum.
PLANNING LOGISTICS
The SOR expedition was a teacher research field experience
blended with an inquiry-based workshop. As such, planning for
logistics varied little from any field-based learning experience
and borrowed heavily from logistical planning for IODP expeditions, especially in the use or adaptation of policies, forms, and
documentation. Logistical planning began in late 2004, when the
draft 2005 expedition schedule was first published, and the Expedition 312 transit was identified as suitable for an all-education
expedition. The USIOs education and outreach team outlined
and submitted an education plan based upon the science objectives of Expedition 312, thinking that cores drilled from the same
site during earlier expeditions and scientific staff would likely to
be onboard during the transit.
Once the concept was approved and, in late October to
November 2005, the transit schedule was confirmed, the oppor-
265
266
EVALUATION DESIGN
The SOR ocean-going research experience was implemented
as a pilot program, and its evaluation was informed by the designbased research approach (or design studies), which emphasizes
both qualitative and quantitative data collected in cooperation
between researcher and practitioners (Bell et al., 2004). Designbased research is a systematic but flexible approach to studying
educational innovations in authentic teaching and learning contexts (i.e., during SOR), enabling researchers and instructional
team members to design, implement, and improve instructional
materials and programs as they are being implemented. As such,
the design-based research approach was able to provide just-intime feedback to the instructional design team.
Because SOR was a pilot study, the design-based research
approach matched the inductive reasoning phase of a research
cycle, which emphasizes the movement from facts, observations,
and evidence through inductive logic to general inferences (Krathwohl, 1993; Tashakkori and Teddlie, 2003). The primary data
source (i.e., facts) for this critical feedback was through teacher
connections. In the teachers daily connections journals, they
were prompted to record connections of all kinds (e.g., past experience and knowledge, people, memorable events, instructional
ideas) encountered during laboratory, classroom activities, curriculum development, classroom communications, and throughout the day. The teachers were also asked to record frustrations,
or missed connections. A more summative evaluation included
focused interviews and observations after the expedition by the
field program evaluator. Questions and observations focused on
teacher involvement in a variety of required and elective activities sponsored by the SOR program, including reflection on the
efficacy of these activities and implementation of the developed
curricula in their respective classrooms. Additionally, long-term
impact of the SOR experience was collected through systematic
and continuous communication and data collection with all SOR
participants. A monthly e-mail that details the current state of
the education and outreach components of Deep Earth Academy
(formerly JOI Learning) routinely includes the celebration of the
professional successes (e.g., a new job, a new exhibit, or a presentation at a conference that includes/involves SOR) of the SOR
participants and instructors. The e-mail includes prompts to continue to provide examples of the ways in which the participants
and instructors continue to use SOR curricula, develop new curricula, present at conferences, teach workshops, publish papers,
or anything else they want to celebrate related to SOR. There also
have been two annual follow-up questionnaires that have provided
additional documentation of SOR activities by participants.
IMPLEMENTATION
The SOR field expedition for educators took place during the IODP preExpedition 312 transit from Victoria, British
Columbia, Canada, to Acapulco, Mexico, from 31 October to 12
November 2005 (Fig. 4). The SOR continued for two additional
Open
Introduction to
geochemistry
Geochemistry
activity on percent
carbonate
analysis
C3 time
Open
Warm up and
debrief
C3 time
Warm up and
debrief
Abrupt events in
Earth history
discussion
Activities on K-P
extinction, PETM,
E-O boundary and
Oi1 event
Warm up and
debrief
Climate cyclicity
discussion
Activities on
Milankovitch
cyclicity and
suborbital
oscillations
Open
Day 13
In Acapulco
(Continued )
Open
C3 time
C3 time
Ship tour
Day 6
Climate
change
discussion
Biostratigraphy continued:
sample processing in
paleo laboratory,
photomicroscopy of smear
slides
Day 12
Under way to Acapulco,
Mexico, and in Acapulco
Activity on sediment pointcount analysis and
interpretation
Observe arrival in port
Customs and immigration
Introduction to biostratigraphy:
construction of age-depth plots
and sedimentation rates
(Group A) and C3 time (Group
B)
Core description
continued
Day 5
Paleomagnetism
Ocean crust
C3 time
C3 time
C3 time
C3 time
laboratory tour
lecture, core
and activity:
description, thin
polarity reversal,
section photostratigraphy,
microscopy
correlation to
GPTS,
construction of
age-depth plots
Geochemistry
contd
Evening
C3 time
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Key: E-OEocene-Oligocene; GPTSgeomagnetic polarity time scale; K-PCretaceous-Paleocene; Oiinitial Oligocene glaciation event; PETMPaleocene-Eocene thermal
maximum.
Afternoon
Morning
Open
Evening
Lifeboat drill
Plate tectonic activities
continued
C3 Time =
connections,
curriculum, and
communications
Day 7
Day 8
Under way to Acapulco, Mexico
Orientation: safety
JOIDES Resolution tour and
introductions
Ocean drilling legacy lecture
History of Our Planet Revealed:
Stories Only Rocks Can Tell by
Dr. Jeff Fox, Director, IODP
Afternoon
Morning
Day 1
In PortVictoria, British
Columbia, Canada
Transport participants to JOIDES
Resolution
Cabin assignments, paperwork
Orientation: life on board,
communications
267
268
a cross section of the ships manifest, as well as develop instructional laboratory demonstration videos. The career interview format was developed through group discussion between the SOR
instructional team and educators. Instructional laboratory videos
were not part of the instructional design, but they were incorporated and supported when this exciting idea emerged through
teacher-instructor discussions. Educators also interacted with the
captain and crew on the ships bridge regularly; meteorological and oceanographic data, which were normally collected and
recorded twice daily by the bridge deck crew, became a sharedtask of rotating paired educators and the bridge deck crew.
DISCUSSION
What Did We Accomplish?
Logistics of ocean-based research are well understood by
IODP scientists and managers; however, the logistics and value
of an all-education expedition for a cohort of teachers were
untested aboard the JOIDES Resolution until the SOR. This
was due to two primary factors: (1) the scientific ocean drilling
IODP legacy program rarely has times when science programs
are not scheduled on the vessel, and (2) berth space is prioritized
to maximize scientific outcome. With SOR, we demonstrated that
a research vessel can be populated by a group of teachers and
scientists brought together for the single purpose of education.
While the ships crew and technicians traveled onboard the vessel
between scientific expeditions from Victoria to Acapulco, the ship
was repurposed for education by placing the SOR instructional
team and the teacher cohort aboard with a wealth of cores and data
at their disposal.
The National Research Council publication titled How
People Learn (Bransford et al., 2000) recognizes that people
construct a view of the natural world through their experiences
and observations. To explain phenomena and make predictions,
people need to draw from their own authentic experiences and
observationsthey need to engage in deliberate practice, to promote a conceptual change of prior knowledge (Chinn and Malhotra, 2002). By bringing teachers into the field setting of marine
geoscientists, the teachers develop their own skills of observation, data interpretation, and synthesis that exemplify theoretical
and empirical (Bransford et al., 2000; Bransford and Donovan,
2005) best practices for learning. In addition, the SOR program
for teachers and informal educators modeled key aspects of the
nature of science: (1) discoveries and scientific connections are
rarely made in isolation, but they are the fruits of collaboration, and (2) scientific advancements often rely on technological
advancement, especially in marine geoscience.
What Did We Learn?
Borrowing from the old African proverb, it takes a whole
ship to raise a SOR teacher. As a world-class research vessel,
the JOIDES Resolution and her crew were the perfect host for the
269
that they started planning to order core material from the repository.
A representative statement by a teacher sums up the success
of the pilot SOR field expedition for teacher education:
270
*SORSchool of Rock
SOR participant
SOR participants
and SOR instructors
SOR instructors
Classroom exercise
Grades K4
Grades 58
Grades 912
Grades K4
Grades 58
Grades 912
Undergraduate
Grades 58
Grades 912
SOR participant
Classroom exercise
Grades 912
Undergraduate
Grades 912
Grade Level
Grades 912
Undergraduate
Grades 58
Grades 912
Grades 912
Undergraduate
Grades K4
Grades 58
Grades 912
Undergraduate
Grades 912
Undergraduate
Grades 912
Undergraduate
SOR instructors
SOR instructors
SOR instructors
SOR instructors
SOR participant
Developed by
SOR instructors
Classroom exercise
Classroom exercise
Classroom exercise
Microfossils
Title
Plate Tectonics and Contributions from Scientific
Ocean DrillingGoing Back to the Original Data
Nannofossils Reveal Seafloor Spreading Truth!
271
272
273
St. John, K., Leckie, R.M., Jones, M.H., Pound, K.S., and Pyle, E.J., 2008,
Constructing knowledge of marine sediments in introductory geology and
oceanography courses using DSDP, ODP, and IODP Data: Eos (Transactions, American Geophysical Union), v. 89, no. 53, Fall meeting supplement, abstract ED31A-0596.
Tashakkori, A., and Teddlie, C., 2003, Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social
and Behavioral Research: Thousand Oaks, California, Sage, 200 p.
Warme, J.E., Douglas, R.G., and Winterer, E.L., 1981, The Deep Sea Drilling
Project: A Decade of Progress: Society for Sedimentary Geology (SEPM)
Special Publication 32, 563 p.
White, K., and Urquhart, E., eds., 2003, ODP Highlights, International Scientific Contributions from the Ocean Drilling Program, United States Science
Support Program, 36 p. Available online at http://www.odplegacy.org/PDF/
Outreach/Brochures/ODP_Greatest_Hits2.pdf (accessed 18 January 2009).
Zachos, J.C., Pagani, M., Sloan, L., Thomas, E., and Billups, K., 2001, Trends,
rhythms, and aberrations in global climate change 65 Ma to present: Science, v. 292, p. 686693, doi: 10.1126/science.1059412.
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY 5 MAY 2009
ABSTRACT
To encourage Hispanic participation and enrollment in the geosciences and ultimately enhance diversity within the discipline, we recruited ten middle and high
school science teachers for a three-week field experience to the Central Mexico volcanic belt. Supported by the National Science Foundations Opportunities for Enhancing Diversity in the Geosciences (OEDG) program, the experience began with a minipedagogy course on multiculturalism and inquiry methodologies at Northern Illinois
University (NIU) and continued with fieldwork in Mexico, where participants worked
with Universidad National Autonoma de Mexico geoscientists, visited local schools,
and attended cultural events. The experience culminated in the teachers producing
standards-based educational materials from their field experiences and presenting
them at professional conferences. We measured the efficacy of these activities quantitatively via pre- and post-tests to assess affective domain changes (i.e., confidence levels, preconceptions, and biases), NIU staff observations of participants in their home
institutions, and evaluations of participants field books and pedagogical materials.
Additionally, effectiveness was measured by reviews of still and video footage, and
examination of comments in field books and on surveys given before the program,
directly after, and one year after the experience. We present these data here and identify specific activities that are both effective and efficient in changing teacher behaviors and attitudes, enabling them to better connect with their Hispanic students in
their geoscience classrooms.
*kkitts@niu.edu
Kitts, K., Perry, E., Jr., Leal-Bautista, R.M., and Velazquez-Oliman, G., 2009, Geological field experiences in Mexico: An effective and efficient model for enabling
middle and high school science teachers to connect with their burgeoning Hispanic populations, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 275289, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(22). For
permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
275
276
Kitts et al.
INTRODUCTION
Problem Identification
Huntoon and Lane (2007) reviewed data from the National
Science Foundation (NSF) and found that since 1966, fewer B.A./
B.S. to Ph.D. degrees have been awarded in the geosciences than
in any other science, technology, engineering, or mathematics
(STEM) field. Additionally, from 1995 to 2001, degrees awarded
to underrepresented groups were lower in the geosciences than
all other STEM fields. In a recently released report (2009), the
American Geological Institute suggests that the disparity between
whole-population numbers and their corresponding representation in the profession can be viewed as a first-order proxy of the
recruitment and sustainability of geoscience as a discipline. They
show that in 2009 women earn 43% of all geoscience degrees,
but comprise only 18.6% of non-tenure track geoscience faculty
and 14.2% of tenure-track geoscience faculty. They also show that
the trends cited in Huntoon and Lane have continued into 2008.
Specifically, the percentage of all STEM degrees conferred to Hispanics and African Americans is 8%, whereas the percentage of
geoscience degrees conferred is only 2%. In contrast, Hispanics
and African Americans comprise 29% of the current population.
The U.S. Census projects that of the additional 5.6 million
school-age children living in the United States in 2025, 93% will
be Hispanic (Schmidt, 2003). Extending these predictions further
out, both the Pew Research Center (2008) and the American Geological Institute (2009) estimate that by the year 2050, Hispanics
will represent 29%30% of the population. These trends are particularly troubling as Hispanics have traditionally been the most
underrepresented population in science and math (National Center for Educational Statistics, 1999; Huntoon and Lane, 2007;
American Geological Institute, 2009). Therefore, unless more
Hispanics choose geoscience careers, there will be a shortage of
geoscientists to tackle the technical and environmental problems
of the next generation.
The restructuring of the United States economy has generated a dramatic decline in manufacturing and an equally dramatic
rise in a polarized service sector. One part consists of menial,
low-wage jobs, and the other part consists of high-skill, highwage jobs requiring advanced technical, scientific, and professional skills (Sassen, 1991, 1994). Additionally, Lynch et al.
(1996) found that socioeconomic status is the single most powerful factor that affects science motivation and performance. This
occurs both at the individual family level and on the institutional
level. Because local tax bases fund most school districts, a disproportionate number of Hispanic students, by virtue of where
they live, attend underfunded schools, exacerbating their difficulties and limiting their choices.
However, despite a recognition of the economic value of an
advanced education, only 52% of immigrant and native-born Hispanic high school students graduate (Greene and Foster, 2003).
Although the Latino share of all bachelors degrees awarded has
exceeded population growth rates, the gap between Hispanic
277
278
Kitts et al.
TABLE 1. FIELD EXPERIENCE ACTIVITIES MAPPED TO THE NINE KEY STRATEGIES
Key strategy
Field experience activity
1. Content knowledge and
Mini-courses on Northern Illinois and Mexico geology
confidence
Fieldwork practice at Northern Illinois University (NIU)
Field experience
Mini-geology courses at Universidad National Autonoma
de Mexico (UNAM)
Visit to CENAPRED (Mexican National Disaster
Preparedness Organization)
2. Identification of
misconceptions
Multicultural workshop
Parent panels at NIU and in Mexico
School visit
Field experience
Visit to CENAPRED
Cultural events and museums
3. Pedagogical methodologies
Mini-pedagogy courses
Literacy training
Modeling of inquiry in the field
Authentic research activities
Requirement to produce teaching materials
Field experience
Providing each participant with camera
Requirement to produce teaching materials
Visit to CENAPRED
6. Mentorship
Field experience
Team-building exercises in field
Funding to present at conferences
Providing access to NIU and UNAM scientists
School visit
7. Active research
Field experience
Providing access to NIU facilities
Funding to present at conferences
Visit to CENAPRED
8. Teacher leadership
9. Identity formation
Identity workshop
Field experience
Providing access to NIU facilities
Funding to present at conferences
studies in the late 1980s and the early 1990s disproved this deficit model, and the paradigm switched to examining possible
environmental reasons why success or failure in science correlated with gender and ethnicity. Since the mid-1990s, most of
the studies have focused on societal/cultural biases and expectations. Today, the paradigm assumes that it is the system that
needs remediation and not the students, and the latest studies
are bearing this out. For example, Hyde et al. (2008) showed
that the mathematics achievement gap no longer exists between
girls and boys.
279
280
Kitts et al.
281
282
Kitts et al.
283
TABLE 2. STUDENT t-TEST ANALYSIS OF SEVEN INSTRUMENTS EVALUATING CHANGE IN ATTITUDES AND CONFIDENCE IN PARTICIPANTS
Instrument
Number of
Number of
Pre-experience
Postexperience
t-test
Level of
questions
participants
mean and
mean and
p value
significance
variance
variance
Definition of science
7
Middle school
6
4.29 0.22
4.46 0.25
0.21
None
High school
4
4.71 0.18
4.21 0.43
0.05
Significant
All
10
4.37 0.22
4.39 0.16
0.48
None
Attitudes on learning science
7
Middle school
6
4.69 0.12
4.71 0.05
0.44
None
High school
4
4.61 0.37
4.82 0.14
0.22
None
All
10
4.66 0.20
4.73 0.07
0.36
None
Attitudes on science
5
Middle school
0.09
None
6
4.37 0.31
4.77 0.08
High school
4
4.70 0.29
4.80 0.04
0.36
None
All
10
4.58 0.31
4.78 0.05
0.24
None
Attitudes on professional development
27
Middle school
6
3.86 0.57
3.91 0.41
0.40
None
High school
4
4.02 0.88
4.14 0.67
0.31
None
All
10
3.92 0.62
4.00 0.42
0.35
None
Confidence in teaching science
10
Middle school
6
4.21 0.09
4.42 0.06
0.05
Significant
High school
4
4.45 0.05
4.65 0.06
0.04
Significant
All
10
4.32 0.05
4.50 0.04
0.04
Significant
Attitudes on inquiry
10
Middle school
6
1.80 0.11
1.79 0.32
0.49
None
High school
4
1.95 0.39
1.65 0.39
0.17
None
All
10
1.78 0.11
1.66 0.22
0.25
None
Attitudes on nontraditional students
14
0.04
Significant
Middle school
6
2.72 0.71
2.21 0.33
High school
4
2.36 0.16
1.95 0.42
0.03
Significant
10
2.57 0.37
2.11 0.27
0.02
Significant
All
284
Kitts et al.
escorted to two maars in central Mexico. They were encouraged to make observations and develop a scientific question.
The question the teachers agreed upon was, How did this
structure form? The teachers worked in pairs, took data, developed hypotheses at the first site, and tested them against the
second site, examining the predictability of their models. The
five teacher pairs presented their findings to each other and
came to the conclusion that these structures were maars that
were formed when a volcanic vent erupted under or near a lake
bed (i.e., the correct answer).
After the teachers produced their own inquiry-based lessons
plans, the plans were peer-reviewed, posted on the companion
Web site, and classroom tested the following year. Nine of the
ten teachers presented their lesson plans at local, regional, or
national conferences. Additionally, during the 20062007 and
20072008 school years, six of the participants served as cooperating teachers for student teachers placed by NIU. All these
student teachers (total of nine) were trained to use inquiry and
made use of the materials produced during the experience. Six
of these student teachers presented their own modified versions
of these teaching materials at the 2007 and 2008 National Conventions of the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA).
Although the participants showed positive change in the frequency of use and quality of their inquiry-based lesson plans,
they did not succeed at implementing any science literacy methodologies. During the pedagogy mini-course, participants were
given several reading strategies to incorporate into their lesson
plans. Despite an average score of 4.4 out of 5 on the estimated
usefulness of these strategies, not a single teacher incorporated
any of the reading strategies into their lessons plans. When asked
why not, they responded almost unanimously that they had forgotten. Therefore, as with the production of the inquiry-based
lesson plans, the teachers need explicit support in order to fully
integrate these strategies into their everyday teaching repertoire.
4. Change in Usage of Culturally Relevant Examples and
Activities
No participants identified themselves as using any Central or South American geologic examples in their teaching.
Instead, they used the standard examples in the textbooks (i.e.,
Mt. St. Helens and Hawaii). They were also uniformly unaware
of online materials such as those produced by CENAPRED,
which have entire educational units dedicated to disaster preparedness in Spanish. All of the participants and their nine student teachers are now using their lesson plans, photos, virtual
field trips, and artifacts gained during the field experience to
teach geological concepts in their classrooms. As a result, all
of the participants self-observed that their Hispanic students
were more interested in lessons that included these culturally
relevant materials than those that did not.
One participant designed and ran an action research project
testing specifically whether her observations stood up to scientific scrutiny. She used examples from her field experience in
two sections and her standard materials in two other sections
285
286
Kitts et al.
287
in support of our overarching objective of increasing the participation of Hispanic students in the geosciences, we will provide
the opportunity and resources to (1) help the teachers develop
and incorporate a literacy plan into their science teaching, and
(2) encourage and bolster a sense of competency, skill, and selfautonomy in geoscience among the teachers and their students.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank the teacher participants for their hard work. We thank
the geology staff at UNAM, the staff at CENAPRED, and the
teachers at San Martin School for allowing us to visit their institutions and for being such wonderful hosts. This research is supported by a National Science Foundation (NSF) Opportunities
for Enhancing Diversity in the Geosciences grant (0503386).
REFERENCES CITED
Aikenhead, G.S., 2008, Humanistic perspectives in the science curriculum, in
Abell, S.K., and Lederman, N.G., eds., Handbook of Research on Science
Education: New York, Routledge Press, p. 881910.
Akerson, V.L., and Hanuscin, D.L., 2007, Teaching nature of science through
inquiry: Results of a 3-year professional development program: Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, v. 44, p. 653680, doi: 10.1002/tea.20159.
American Geological Institute, 2009, Status of the Geoscience Workforce
2009: Alexandria, Virginia, 136 p.
Anderson, R.D., 2008, Inquiry as an organizing theme for science curricula, in
Abell, S.K., and Lederman, N.G., eds., Handbook of Research on Science
Education: New York, Routledge Press, p. 807830.
Atwell, N., 1998, In the Middle: New Understandings about Writing, Reading,
and Learning (2nd ed.): Portsmouth, New Hampshire, Heinemann, 560 p.
Baker, D., and Leary, R., 1995, Letting girls speak out about science: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 32, p. 327, doi: 10.1002/
tea.3660320104.
Banks, J.A., and Banks, C.A., eds., 2004, Handbook of Research on Multicultural Education (2nd ed.): San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, a Wiley Imprint,
1089 p.
Baptiste, H., and Key, S., 1996, Cultural inclusion: Where does your program
stand?: Science Teacher (Normal, Illinois), v. 63, no. 2, p. 3235.
Beghetto, R.A., 2007, Factors associated with middle and secondary students
perceived science competence: Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
v. 44, p. 800814, doi: 10.1002/tea.20166.
Bell, R.L., Smetana, L., and Binns, I., 2005, Simplifying inquiry instruction:
Science Teacher (Normal, Illinois), v. 72, no. 7, p. 3033.
Bianchini, J.A., Cavazos, L.M., and Helms, J.V., 2000, From professional
lives to inclusive practice: Science teachers and scientists views of gender and ethnicity in science education: Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, v. 37, p. 511547, doi: 10.1002/1098-2736(200008)37:6<511
::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-3.
Board on Children, Youth, and Families, 2002, Community Programs to Promote Youth Development: Washington, D.C., National Academies Press,
432 p.
Britner, S.L., 2008, Motivation in high school science students: A comparison
of gender differences in life, physical, and earth science classes: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 45, p. 955970, doi: 10.1002/
tea.20249.
Brotman, J.S., and Moore, F.M., 2008, Girls and science: A review of four
themes in the science education literature: Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, v. 45, p. 9711002, doi: 10.1002/tea.20241.
Capobianco, B.M., 2007, Science teachers attempts at integrating feminist
pedagogy through collaborative action research: Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, v. 44, p. 132, doi: 10.1002/tea.20120.
Carlone, H.B., and Johnson, A., 2007, Understanding the science experiences
of successful women of color: Science identity as an analytic lens: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 44, p. 11871218, doi: 10.1002/
tea.20237.
288
Kitts et al.
Jones, G., Howe, A., and Rua, M., 2000, Gender differences in students
experiences, interests, and attitudes toward science and scientists: Science Education, v. 84, p. 180192, doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X
(200003)84:2<180::AID-SCE3>3.0.CO;2-X.
Kahle, J.B., and Lakes, M.K., 1983, The myth of equality in science classrooms: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 20, p. 131140, doi:
10.1002/tea.3660200205.
Kahle, J.B., and Meece, J., 1994, Research on gender issues in the classroom, in
Gable, D., ed., Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning:
New York, Macmillan, p. 542557.
Keys, C.W., and Bryan, L.A., 2001, Co-constructing inquiry-based science with
teachers: Essential research for lasting reform: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 38, p. 631645, doi: 10.1002/tea.1023.
Kitts, K., 2005, Enhancing Diversity Track 1: Intensive Field Experience in
Northern Illinois and Central Mexico for Junior and Senior High School
Teachers Serving Large Hispanic Populations: National Science Foundation (NSF) Opportunities for Enhancing Diversity in the Geosciences
Grant Application: http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/earlycareer/
research/NSFgrants.html (accessed 18 August 2009).
Kitts, K., Luo, W., and Hung, W.-C., 2008, Did it ever rain on Mars? A professional development opportunity for teachers and an actual NASA research
opportunity for middle and high school students: The Earth Scientist,
v. 27, no. 2, p. 1720.
Koballa, R.T., Jr., and Glynn, S.M., 2008, Attitudinal and motivational constructs in science learning, in Abell, S.K., and Lederman, N.G., eds.,
Handbook of Research on Science Education: New York, Routledge
Press, p. 75102.
Kozoll, R.H., and Osborne, M.D., 2004, Finding Meaning in Science: Lifeworld, Identity, and Self: Science Education, v. 88, p. 157181.
Lee, O., Buxton, C., Lewis, S., and LeRoy, K., 2006, Science inquiry and
student diversity: Enhanced abilities and continuing difficulties after an
instructional intervention: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 43,
p. 607636, doi: 10.1002/tea.20141.
Llewellyn, D., 2004, Teaching High School Science through Inquiry: A Case
Study Approach: St. John Fisher College: Rochester, New York, Corwin
Press, 232 p.
Lynch, S., Atwater, M., Cawley, J., Exxles, J., Lee, O., Marrett, C., RojasMedlin, D., Secada, W., Stefanich, G., and Willetto, A., 1996, An Equity
Blueprint for Project 2061, 2nd Draft: Washington, D.C., American Association for the Advancement of Science, 282 p.
Markus, H.R., and Nurius, P., 1986, Possible selves: The American Psychologist, v. 41, p. 954969, doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.41.9.954.
National Center for Educational Statistics, 1999, The Conditions of Education:
Washington, D.C., National Center for Educational Statistics.
National Science Foundation, 2003, New Formulas for Americas Workforce:
Girls in Science and Engineering: National Science Foundation Publication NSF03207: http://www.nsf.gov/pubsys/ods/ (accessed 18 August
2009), 260 p.
National Science Foundation, 2007, New Formulas for Americas Workforce:
Girls in Science and Engineering 2: National Science Foundation Publication NSF07660: http://www.nsf.gov/pubsys/ods/ (accessed 18 August
2009), 87 p.
National Science Teachers Association, 2008, Science Teaching Standards:
http://www.nsta.org/publications/nses.aspx (accessed 18 August 2009).
Pew Research Center, 2008, Immigration to Play Lead Role in Future U.S.
Growth; U.S. Population Projections: 20052050: http://pewresearch.org/
pubs/729/united-states-population-projections (accessed 18 August 2009).
Potter, E.F., and Rosser, S.V., 1992, Factors in life science textbooks that may
deter girls interest in science: Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
v. 29, p. 669686, doi: 10.1002/tea.3660290705.
Roberts, D.A., 2008, Scientific literacy/science literacy, in Abell, S.K., and
Lederman, N.G., eds., Handbook of Research on Science Education: New
York, Routledge Press, p. 729780.
Roth, K.J., 2008, Science teachers as researchers, in Abell, S.K., and Lederman, N.G., eds., Handbook of Research on Science Education: New York,
Routledge Press, p. 12051259.
Sadowski, M., 2003, Adolescents at School: Perspectives on Youth, Identity, and
Education: Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press, 200 p.
Safayeni, F., Derbentseva, N., and Caas, A.J., 2005, A theoretical note on concepts and the need for cyclic concept maps: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 42, p. 741766, doi: 10.1002/tea.20074.
289
Wallace, J.E., and Haines, V.A., 2004, The benefits of mentoring for engineering students: Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, v. 10, p. 372391, doi: 10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.v10.i4.60.
Weinburgh, M., 1995, Gender differences in student attitudes toward science: A
meta-analysis of the literature from 1970 to 1991: Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, v. 32, p. 387398, doi: 10.1002/tea.3660320407.
Yin, Y., Vanides, J., Araceli Ruiz-Primo, M., Ayala, C.C., and Shavelson, R.J.,
2005, Comparison of two concept-mapping techniques: Implications for
scoring, interpretation, and use: Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
v. 42, p. 166184, doi: 10.1002/tea.20049.
Zacharia, Z., and Barton, Z.C., 2004, Urban middle-school students attitudes
toward a defined science: Science Education, v. 88, p. 197222, doi:
10.1002/sce.10110.
Zeldin, A.L., Britner, S.L., and Pajares, F., 2008, A comparative study of the
self-efficacy beliefs of successful men and women in mathematics, science, and technology careers: Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
v. 45, p. 10361058, doi: 10.1002/tea.20195.
Zuniga, K., Olson, J.K., and Winter, M., 2005, Science education for rural
Latino/a students: Course placement and success in science: Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, v. 42, p. 376402, doi: 10.1002/tea.20064.
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY 5 MAY 2009
Stokes, A., and Boyle, A.P., 2009, The undergraduate geoscience fieldwork experience: Influencing factors and implications for learning, in Whitmeyer, S.J.,
Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461,
p. 291311, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(23). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
291
292
the particular characteristics of fieldwork as a learning environment that help promote learning.
Learning objectives can be classified into three main types
or domains: cognitive, affective, and psychomotor (Bloom,
1956; Kratwohl et al., 1964; Dave, 1970). In geology, as in most
other field disciplines, specified outcomes typically emphasize
the cognitive domain (knowledge, understanding, and conceptualization) and, to some extent, the psychomotor domain,
(practical skills) but they exclude the affective domain. The term
affective refers to representations of value, and the affective
domain deals with outcomes such as emotions, moods, attitudes, and feelings, which reflect positive or negative personal
value (Clore et al., 2001). Affective outcomes are valuable in
themselves, e.g., the development of attitudes and behaviors
appropriate to professional practice, but they can also strongly
influence cognitive outcomes (Ashby et al., 1999; Isen, 2000).
According to Eiss and Harbeck (1969), sensory input, e.g., from
seeing or hearing, prompts responses in the affective domain
that interact with the cognitive and psychomotor domains to
produce learning (Fig. 1). Hence, the affective domain may
play a much more fundamental role in learning than previously
considered, acting as the driver for the entire learning process
and therefore representing a necessary precondition for learning to occur (Eiss and Harbeck, 1969; Iozzi, 1989; Perrier and
Nsengiyumva, 2003; Beard and Wilson, 2005) (Fig. 1). Examining the role of the affective domain is thus crucial to understanding learning processes (Koballa and Glynn, 2007).
The relationship between affect and cognition is of particular interest since it is cognitive outcomes that educators typically
seek to enhance. This relationship is influenced by aspects of the
academic context such as learning environment, nature of the
Cognitive
OVERT
BEHAVIOR
LEARNING
PROCESS
Affective
Psychomotor
SENSORY
INPUT
293
294
B
C
A
This study used pre- and postexperience surveying, individual and group interviews, and direct observation of student
activities to address the following questions:
295
approach (Patton, 1990). Interviews would open with a predetermined question such as why do you think it is important to
learn to map? or, later on in the field course, how do you feel
you are progressing? after which the researcher would allow
the conversation to progress naturally, and thus enable themes
and topics to emerge. Qualitative interviews of this type are valuable because they allow flexibility in the subject and sequence of
the discussion, and enable students to define their experiences in
their own words (Cohen et al., 2000). Themes identified during
interviews earlier in the field course, such as difficulty in visualizing structures, or issues relating to motivation, formed the basis
for questions asked during later interviews. As this approach
required distracting the student from their task, interview times
were restricted to ~510 min.
An additional group interview of approximately 1 h duration was conducted with ten students at the end of day seven.
This took a slightly more focused approach using topics and
issues identified from the in situ interviews, but with the wording and sequencing of questions decided during the course of the
interview (Patton, 1990). Issues addressed included motivation,
social and cultural aspects, difficulties experienced by the students, the impact of the field course on learning in general, and
issues specific to mapping such as visualizing in three dimensions. In contrast to the field interviews, the setting was outside of
the learning environment and during the students free time. Participants were entirely voluntary and included a mix of genders,
ages, and degrees of physical mobility. This approach enabled
discussions to develop between the participants and a wide range
of responses to be gathered (Cohen et al., 2000), thus providing a clearer indication of, and deeper insight into, the range of
attitudes and opinions present within the group (Rabiee, 2004;
Breen, 2006).
All interviews were recorded using a digital voice recorder
and transcribed verbatim by the researcher conducting the interview.
Observation
Observing learning processes directly can be difficult, and
this is one of the reasons why learning is typically considered
in terms of products (i.e., learning outcomes) (Schmitz, 2006).
Direct observation of fieldwork is rarely reported in the literature (e.g., Orion and Hofstein, 1994; Lai, 1999), yet this procedure can provide valuable insight into the learning process (Lincoln and Guba, 1985). As with the interviews, a semistructured
approach was applied to the observation that enabled us to gather
data to illuminate specific issues (e.g., the nature of social interactions) alongside more emergent themes (Cohen et al., 2000).
Observations were undertaken by the two researchers during the
faculty-led introductory sessions and on the same days as the in
situ interviews, and focused on (1) looking for evidence from the
students behavior that fieldwork promoted positive (or negative) responses, and (2) finding clues as to the factors influencing
these responses. During the faculty-led days, the researchers each
accompanied and observed different groups of students as they
296
were introduced to the study area and embarked upon preliminary data collection. For the remainder of the time, the researchers located themselves in specific, but separate, parts of the field
area and observed students as they worked within that area.
Spending time with the students during the introductory period
helped them to become used to the presence of the researchers,
and thus to reduce reactivity effects (Cohen et al., 2000).
Data were collected in the form of in situ and reflective field
notes, and photographs. The combination of interviews and observations in this way is a particularly useful means of cross-checking and hence validating the findings from qualitative research.
Observations provide checks on information gathered from interviews, while interviews enable the researcher to explore the internal feelings of the students, rather than just their external behavior
(Patton, 1990). Both data sets were strengthened through immersion in the learning context over time (Morrison, 1993). In this
study, the observational data are used to support and provide further context for interpretations based on the survey and interview
data, rather than as the basis for interpretations per se.
Data Analysis
Quantitative Data
Quantitative survey data were analyzed using Excel and
SPSS. All data were subject to descriptive statistical analysis,
while inferential statistics were used to investigate differences
between pre- and post-fieldwork responses. Paired data were
collected either as three-point (i.e., ordinal) Likert scale data
(1 = positive, 0 = neutral, 1 = negative), or continuous-scale
data in which students indicated their agreement with statements
by marking an X along a continuum (10 cm line) ranging from
totally disagree (0) to totally agree (10). The students score
represented the distance to the X from the zero point, measured
to the nearest 0.1 cm. Boyle et al. (2007) applied parametric tests
to their paired data on the grounds that these are more powerful
than nonparametric tests and are robust against minor violations,
particularly if sample sizes are large (Kinnear and Gray, 2000).
This study had a significantly smaller sample size than Boyle et
al. (2007), and the majority of data were found not to be normally
distributed; hence, all paired data were compared using nonparametric methods. The continuous data were analyzed using the
Wilcoxon signed ranks test, which is the nonparametric equivalent if the t-test and assumes a continuous scale of measurement.
Paired Likert scale data were analyzed using the Sign test, which,
although relatively low power, is more appropriate for the limited
scale range (three-point), which can result in a high proportion of
tied ranks, and hence erroneous calculations of P values using the
Wilcoxon signed ranks test (Roberson et al., 1995). Differences
between subgroups, e.g., gender, were tested using the 2 test.
Qualitative Data
All interview transcripts were coded independently by
both researchers using NVivo 2.0, and key themes were identified using thematic content analysis (Patton, 1990; Libarkin and
Positive feelings
297
Negative feelings
Number of responses
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Eagerly
anticipating
Cant
wait
Relaxed
Happy
Confident
about
what is
expected
Concerned
Worried
Dont
know
what to
expect
Dont
want
to go
Apprehensive
Negative feelings
Positive feelings
40
Key
35
Number of responses
Rank 3
30
Rank 2
25
Rank 1
20
15
10
5
0
Learned
a lot
Worthwhile Thoroughly
enjoyed it
Glad we
had to go
Want to
go again
Found
it hard
Wish not
compulsory
Did not
enjoy
Lived up
to my fears
Didnt
know
what to
expect
Figure 3. Students feelings toward fieldwork as measured (A) prefield course and (B) postfield course. Students were
presented with ten options (indicated on the x-axis) and asked to select and rank the three that they felt reflected their own
feelings. Positive feeling amongst the students increased as a result of the field course.
298
n
51
51
51
51
50
50
Post-fieldwork data
mean
SD
0.882
0.325
1 .0 00
0 .0 00
0 . 52 9
0 .6 44
0.588
0.572
0.600
0.535
0.843
0.464
Significance
(two-tailed)
0.077
0.016
0.607
1.000
0.791
0.549
53
53
53
53
0.792
0.792
0.755
0.679
0.409
0.454
0.477
0.547
0.267
1.000
0.167
0.238
53
53
53
0.981
0.642
0.755
0.137
0.484
0.434
0.375
1.000
0.332
53
0.774
0.466
0.096
53
0.226
0.697
0.832
53
53
0.264
0.509
0.593
0.576
0.648
0.052
53
53
53
0.528
0.698
0.906
0.608
0.503
0.295
1.000
0.238
0.003*
53
53
53
53
0.434
0.792
0.943
0.358
0.537
0.409
0.233
0.682
0.332
0.000*
0.000*
0.001*
299
TABLE 3. SUMMARY STATISTICAL DATA FOR SURVEY QUESTIONS SCORED BY CONTINUOUS SCALE (0 = TOTALLY DISAGREE;
10 = TOTALLY AGREE)
Pre-fieldwork data
Knowledge
mean
SD
n
a) Firsthand experience of themes/topics studied in class
62
8.302
1.880
makes it easier to understand them
b) Fieldwork gives me a chance to develop my problem62
7.976
1.963
solving skills
Perception of fieldwork as being u s eful
a) Fieldwork will help my understanding of the subject
62
8.682
1.672
b) It is important to know how to solve problems in the field
62
8.576
1.813
c) Without a field experience, my degree subject would be
61
7.328
2.534
too academic and theoretical
d) Fieldwork skills will be important to me in my choice of
61
7.580
2.558
career
Note: Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to test data for statistical significance.
*Significant at 99% or above.
n
53
Post-fieldwork data
mean
SD
7.994
1.685
Z
1.792
Significance
(two-tailed)
0.073
53
8.338
1.515
0.842
0.400
51
51
53
8.365
9.124
8.336
1.397
1.057
2.055
2.076
1.714
3.334
0.038
0.086
0.001*
53
7.958
1.976
0.136
0.892
300
Process
Student characteristics
Learning
1. Demographic
2. Personal
7. Experiential processes
Product
Outcomes
9. Geologic/Academic
age
prior experience
learning by doing
mapping/field skills
gender
preparation
subject-specific knowledge
physical ability
expectations
visualization skills
developing competencies
accommodation
physical challenge
food
learning environment
weather
location
illness/injury
duration
lack of sleep/tiredness
10. Nongeologic/
Nonacademic
peer-to-peer learning
novice-expert interaction
5. Logistical
nature of terrain/
4. Academic
8. Social processes
Nongeologic/
Nonacademic
independence/autonomy
teamwork
time management
safety awareness
Approach
surface
social relationships/skills
confidence
deep
6. Social/cultural
nature of task/challenge
social activities
teaching context
cultural activities
social context
social relationships
Affective Response
Figure 4. Factors characterizing the students learning experience as indicated by the qualitative data. Affective responses
to presage factors influence students approaches to learning, which subsequently influence the learning outcomes. Approaches to learning are also implied from the learning processes observed within the field environment. Solid lines
indicate direct influences on learning; dashed lines indicate indirect links to learning approaches. Factors are based on the
3P model of Biggs (2003) (see text for discussion).
and from their feelings and attitudes toward the learning processes operating during the fieldwork.
Factors Influencing the Student Experience
Six of the ten themes identified relate to the input, or presage stage of learning (Fig. 4). These themes relate both to student
characteristics, and characteristics of the field course, the latter of
which are subdivided according to academic/geologic aspects,
and nonacademic/nongeologic (i.e., extra-curricular) aspects. It
is interesting to note the similarity among the four major field
course characteristics identified from this study (boxes 36 in
Fig. 4) and the factors defining novelty space (Orion and Hofstein, 1994; Elkins and Elkins, 2007). This provides independent
support for the novelty space theory, which states that barriers to
successful engagement with learning are created by geographical
(physical), cognitive (academic), psychological (logistical), and
social/cultural factors.
Student Characteristics
Student characteristics are defined by demographic (e.g., age,
gender) and personal factors (e.g., prior experience, expectations).
Learn new skills and improve on others, get to know other students
better.
301
to the physical aspects of the fieldwork, where a lack of confidence amongst females during the early stages of fieldwork was
often exacerbated by a perceived (but not necessarily deliberate)
macho attitude amongst some of the male students (Bracken
and Mawdsley, 2004).
I think I had forgotten over 95% of what I had learned so I was really
happy with the lecturers having preparation sessionsit really helped.
If its interesting you are a lot more likely to get up and do [fieldwork].
I like the outdoors, but I find it easier to learn in a lecture hall than
in the field.
302
What we are doing is going at a reasonable rate with few breaks, and
we seem to finish earlier so we can get out of the sun.
TABLE 4. SIGNIFICANT ASPECTS OF THE STUDENTS LEARNING EXPERIENCE IDENTIFIED FROM OPEN SURVEY QUESTIONS
Aspect of
Number of
Geologic/academic factors
Nongeologic/nonacademic factors
experience
responses
Best
50
Learning process
20
Social activities
20
Place/location
6
Cultural activities
19
Engaging in physical activity
3
Camping/food
1
Receiving feedback
2
Weather
1
31*
41
Worst
50
Social context
Duration of field course
Safety
Uncertainty/confusion
Lack of physical ability
2
2
1
1
1
Weather
Illness/injury
Tiredness
Camping/food
Local people
Cultural activities
18
16
7
6
5
1
53
Cultural activities
Social activities
Camping/food
32
11
3
46
7
Most memorable
48
Geology/scenery
Learning process
10
2
12
*Because a single response may contain more than one factor, the total sum of factors relating to a particular aspect
(geologic/academic + nongeologic/nonacademic) may be greater than the number of responses.
Its the social experience as wellthere are certain things that you
wont get at home, but over here the experience counts for more as you
are in the field as well.
During the daythere seems to be still the separate boy and girl groups,
but when it comes to socializing in the evenings its really different.
I feel more motivated to get up and do work cos like, we have the
evenings off to do what we want so I, like, think that I dont mind having to work the long hours in the sun.
Attitudes toward the social and cultural activities, and particularly the fiesta, were not unanimously positive, however,
and some students considered being unable to fully opt-out of
activities (e.g., by suffering disturbed sleep through noise) detrimental to their learning. Further, and perhaps unsurprisingly,
motivation appeared to peak during the time of greatest social
and cultural activity, with a subsequent decline clearly evident
from the close of the fiesta (day seven) to the end of the course.
At this point, despite having made significant progress toward
meeting their outcomes, students began to lose motivation and
disengage from the learning task. Anecdotally, this effect is well
recognized by seasoned field geologists, who frequently consider themselves at greatest risk toward the end of their fieldwork
when thoughts start to turn to home.
Were thinking about going back and what were going to do when we
get back now, which is difficult and were not focusing on [the work].
303
Its not just about physically putting stuff on a map, its also understandinglike, you learn about faults, but you cant really understand
them until youve experienced them.
You can learn the theory of [geology], but its completely different
when youve got to put it into practice.
Its about confidence, I mean to go up and touch a rock and say its
such and such, you need it, but if youre wrong, so what, its a learning process.
304
You need to get out in the field cos, like, you learn a lot more. It is so
much better, it is an experience which will stay in your mind forever.
Social Learning
The field is a social as well as a physical learning environment
(Marques et al., 2003; Hall et al., 2004), and both social and physical interactions are crucial to the learning experience (Meredith et
al., 1997). These interactions were facilitated in the field by the
breaking down of social barriers via social and cultural activities,
and by the social context of the learning task. Attitudes to collaborative working, and by implication social learning, were largely
positive, and many students expressed a preference for smaller
group sizes, which they felt allowed for greater interaction with
faculty members, and encouraged a more active type of learning.
After a while [in a bigger group] you are just listening, youre not talking to other peopleit is just listening and then your brain becomes
tired because youre not occupied.
It becomes annoying when you cant visualize ityou just sit there
and are really frustrated.
Working around this area, and actually being able to see the hills, and
see the different unitsyou can see whats going on on the ground.
Whereas if you just look at a flat page with different colors and lines,
its not always easy to work out what its doing.
You first turn up and you dont know what is going on or what you are
looking at, but as time goes by, you start to see what is going on and
understand what you are looking at, and you get enthused because you
actually understand what is going on.
I think a big part of the degree was getting to know people when
youre in the field so you work together in the field, and then when you
get back youre working in groups in tutorials or lectures.
I dont want to be led into any answers, I just need some reassurance
to know that I am heading in the right direction. It is about building
your confidence up.
We got the lecturer to check [the map] and he said it was looking
alright, so extra motivation, which was brilliant.
305
People could have told us [there was no right answer], but we wouldnt
have taken it on board.
TABLE 5. CHANGES IN STUDENTS SOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS AS IDENTIFIED FROM THE POST-FIELDWORK SURVEY
Change in relationship
Social group
Other significant change
N
Number of
Good or
Unchanged
Declined
responses
improved
Mapping group
52
41
8
0
Some conflict/differences of
6
opinion
Other students
50
33
2
0
Got to know more people*
22
Academic faculty, graduate
51
51
0
0
Increased confidence to
12
students, and technical staff
approach
*Where a response referred to getting to know more people, this was not assumed to indicate good or improved relationships, unless explicitly
stated.
306
This ability to cope with uncertainty is an important outcome from the learning experience, since the complex and variable nature of real geologic data requires expert geoscientists
to become highly skilled in subjective interpretation (Raab and
Brosch, 1996; Frodeman, 2003). Further, the sense of achievement and satisfaction felt by students reflected the value attached
to the learning outcomes, and hence likely attitudes to future fieldwork (Pintrich and De Groot, 1990; Rozell and Gardner, 2000).
It is satisfying at the end of the day when you look at your map and
you think I did that.
In many respects, these nongeologic and nonacademic outcomes might be considered more significant than subject-specific
or academic skills, since these will find application in a much
broader range of contexts and careers. The important thing, however, is that successful outcomes were clearly achieved in all
three learning domains. Gains in the cognitive and psychomotor
domains are reflected in enhanced reasoning skills and practical abilities, while the overcoming of negative feeling and the
attribution of value to the learning outcomes reflected a positive
impact on the affective domain. These outcomes will influence
students attitudes and feelings toward their subsequent fieldwork
activities, and hence their approaches to future learning.
DISCUSSION
[L]earning involves moving from the familiar to the unfamiliar, traversing the emotional quagmire of success, self-doubt, challenge, and
classroom identity.
Alsop and Watts (2003, p. 1043)
307
308
309
Entwistle, N., and Ramsden, P., 1983, Understanding Student Learning: London, Croom Helm, 248 p.
Entwistle, N., and Smith, C., 2002, Personal understanding and target understanding: Mapping influences on the outcomes of learning: British
Journal of Educational Psychology, v. 72, p. 321342, doi: 10.1348/
000709902320634528.
Fletcher, S., and Dodds, W., 2004, Dipping toes in the water: An international survey of residential fieldwork within ICM degree course curricula, in Green,
D.R., Angus, S., Bailey, D., Eleveld, M., Furmanczyk, K., Hansom, J.,
Longhorn, R.A., Paskoff, R., Psuty, N.P., Randall, R., Ritchie, W., Salman,
A., Taussik, J., Pinto, F.T., and Wensink, H., eds., Proceedings of the 7th
International Symposium: Delivering Sustainable Coasts: Connecting Science and Policy: Aberdeen, UK, Cambridge Publications, p. 305309.
Forgas, J.P., 2001, The affect infusion model (AIM): An integrative theory of
mood effects on cognition and judgments, in Martin, L.L., and Clore,
G.L., eds., Theories of Mood and Cognition: Mahwah, New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, p. 2762.
Frodeman, R., 2003, Geo-Logic: Albany, New York, State University of New
York Press, 184 p.
Fuller, I., Edmondson, S., France, D., Higgitt, D., and Ratinen, I., 2006, International perspectives on the effectiveness of geography fieldwork for learning: Journal of Geography in Higher Education, v. 30, p. 89101, doi:
10.1080/03098260500499667.
Gagn, R.M., and White, R.T., 1978, Memory structures and learning outcomes: Review of Educational Research, v. 48, p. 187222.
Gasper, K., and Clore, G.L., 2002, Attending to the big picture: Mood and
global versus local processing of visual information: Psychological Science, v. 13, p. 3440, doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00406.
Gedye, S., and Chalkley, B., 2006, Employability within Geography, Earth
and Environmental Sciences: http://www.gees.ac.uk/pubs/guides/emp/
geesemployability.pdf (accessed July 2008).
Glynn, S.M., and Koballa, T.R., 2006, Motivation to learn in college science,
in Mintzes, J.J., and Leonard, W.H., eds., Handbook of College Science
Teaching: Arlington, Virginia, National Science Teachers Association
Press, p. 2532.
Gold, P.W., 2005, The neurobiology of stress and its relevance to psychotherapy: Clinical Neuroscience Research, v. 87, p. 201211.
Golledge, R.G., Marsh, M., and Battersby, S., 2008, Matching geospatial concepts with geographic educational needs: Geographical Research, v. 46,
p. 8598, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-5871.2007.00494.x.
Hall, T., Healey, M., and Harrison, M., 2004, Fieldwork and disabled students:
Discourses of exclusion and inclusion: Journal of Geography in Higher
Education, v. 28, p. 255280, doi: 10.1080/0309826042000242495.
Hattie, J., Marsh, H.W., Neill, J.T., and Richards, G.E., 1997, Adventure education and Outward Bound: Out-of-class experiences that make a lasting
difference: Review of Educational Research, v. 67, p. 4387.
Hill, J., and Woodland, W., 2002, An evaluation of foreign fieldwork in promoting deep learning: A preliminary investigation: Assessment and Evaluation, v. 27, p. 539555, doi: 10.1080/0260293022000020309.
Hsieh, H.-F., and Shannon, S.E., 2005, Three approaches to qualitative content analysis: Qualitative Health Research, v. 15, p. 12771288, doi:
10.1177/1049732305276687.
Iozzi, L.A., 1989, What research says to the educator. Part Two: Environmental
education and the affective domain: The Journal of Environmental Education, v. 20, p. 613.
Isen, A.M., 2000, Positive affect and decision making, in Lewis, M., and
Haviland, J., eds., Handbook of Emotions: New York, Guildford Press,
p. 417435.
Ishikawa, T., and Kastens, K., 2005, Why some students have trouble with maps
and other spatial representations: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53,
p. 184197.
Kelso, P.R., and Brown, L.M., 2009, this volume, Integration of field experiences in a project-based geoscience curriculum, in Whitmeyer, S.J.,
Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical
Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America
Special Paper 461, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(06).
Kempa, R.F., and Orion, N., 1996, Students perception of co-operative learning
in earth science fieldwork: Research in Science and Technological Education, v. 14, p. 3341.
Kent, M., Gilbertson, D.D., and Hunt, C.O., 1997, Fieldwork in geography
teaching: A critical review of the literature and approaches: Journal
310
311
Storbeck, J., and Clore, G.L., 2005, With sadness comes accuracy; with happiness, false memory: Mood and the false memory effect: Psychological
Science, v. 16, p. 785791, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01615.x.
Taber, K.S., 2000, Case studies and generalizability: Grounded theory and
research in science education: International Journal of Science Education,
v. 22, p. 469487, doi: 10.1080/095006900289732.
Tal, R.T., 2001, Incorporating field trips as science learning environment
enrichmentAn interpretive study: Learning Environments Research,
v. 4, p. 2549, doi: 10.1023/A:1011454625413.
Tobin, K., 1998, Qualitative perceptions of learning environments on the World
Wide Web: Learning Environments Research, v. 1, p. 139162, doi: 10.1023/
A:1009953715583.
Trigwell, K., and Prosser, M., 1991, Improving the quality of student learning:
The influence of learning context and student approaches to learning on
learning outcomes: Higher Education, v. 22, p. 251266, doi: 10.1007/
BF00132290.
Turner, P., and Curran, A., 2006, Correlates between bioscience students
experiences of higher education and the neurobiology of learning: BEE-j
(Bioscience Education e-Journal), v. 7, http://www.bioscience.heacademy
.ac.uk/journal/vol7/Beej-7-5.htm (accessed July 2008).
Vygotsky, L.S., 1978, Mind and Society: The Development of Higher Mental
Processes: Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press, 159 p.
Whang, P.A., and Hancock, G.R., 1994, Motivation and mathematics achievement: Comparisons between Asian-American and non-Asian students:
Contemporary Educational Psychology, v. 19, p. 302322, doi: 10.1006/
ceps.1994.1023.
Zull, J.E., 2002, The Art of Changing the Brain: Enriching Teaching by Exploring the Biology of Learning: Sterling, Virginia, Stylus Publishing, 263 p.
ABSTRACT
This paper looks at general and specific external drivers from a variety of national
and supranational organizations (professional associations and accreditation authorities, government agencies, government legislation, European Union) that have produced a range of codes, regulations, and educational requirements that affect the
way field training is run, provided, and assessed in Ireland and the United Kingdom.
The effects of these driving factors on fieldwork provision in the UK and Ireland
are illustrated through the experience of three earth science departments that have
(re)designed their field class planning to ensure: (1) compliance with new and continuing government legislation; (2) compliance with the requirements of accrediting
bodies and government auditing agencies; and (3) the needs of students and employers for appropriate field class learning outcomes and associated assessment strategies.
INTRODUCTION
Fieldwork has always been an important part of any geosciences training, but, at least in the UK and Ireland, it has undergone
a number of significant changes over the last few decades due to
the influence of external drivers. These drivers can be grouped
under four headings: general guidance from professional associations for working in the field; educational guidance (including
accreditation); employer needs; and government legislation. This
paper will discuss each of these in turn using short experiential
accounts to show how fieldwork provision has evolved as a result,
after which their overall impact on fieldwork will be considered.
Much of this is now tied up in the Bologna Declaration of 1999,
which became a trans-European project aiming to produce a
Boyle, A.P., Ryan, P., and Stokes, A., 2009, External drivers for changing fieldwork practices and provision in the UK and Ireland, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W.,
and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 313321, doi:
10.1130/2009.2461(24). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
313
314
Boyle et al.
techniques training before students commence independent geological mapping projects involving 2035 days of fieldwork in
year three. Later in year three, many students will complete a
synthetic field class in which regional geology is addressed (e.g.,
tectonics of the European Alps, geology of a major sedimentary
basin). Ireland and Scotland operate a four-year degree program,
where the first year is often devoted to providing a basic training
in relevant sciences, and the fieldwork component of this year is
variable. However, the other years generally follow the model
applied in England and Wales. This approach allows development of fieldwork skills and understanding to develop in parallel
with general geoscience skills and understanding throughout the
three or four years of the program.
GENERAL GUIDANCE FROM PROFESSIONAL
ASSOCIATIONS FOR WORKING IN THE FIELD
General guidance on how to behave in the field has long been
provided by the Geologists Association through its freely available Geological Fieldwork Code, first published in 1975 (http://
www.geologists.org.uk/publications.html). The code provides
general advice about behavior in the countryside, such as seeking
prior permission to enter onto private property, how to conserve
geological exposures (e.g., Students should be encouraged to
observe and record and not to hammer indiscriminately), working
in quarries, and so on. The history behind its development is given
by Green (2008). Most, if not all, UK and Irish geoscience departments issue a copy of this code, or one similar, to new students
at the start of their degree courses and follow its guidance in the
field. Geoconservation is becoming increasingly important (e.g.,
Burek and Prosser, 2008; http://www.geoconservation.com; http://
www.geolsoc.org.uk/gsl/groups/geoconservation), and changing
practices are perhaps best summed up by the marked decrease in
the use of hammers at outcrops, such that it is unusual for one to be
used by most field classes.
More recently, in April 2007, the British Standards Institute published BS 8848: A Specification for Adventurous Activities, Expeditions, Visits and Fieldwork Outside the UK (British
Standards Institute, 2007), which addresses consumer concerns
about the risks associated with adventurous holidays, fieldwork,
expeditions and other visits and the participants variable levels
of competence, training, and fitness. The standard is a voluntary
specification that builds on existing good practice. For fieldwork,
everyone from staff to undergraduates needs to be fully aware of
the formal structures that are in place to ensure safety, including risk assessments, individual training and preparation, dealing
with incidents, and insurance coverage. Although the specification applies to fieldwork outside the UK, it will undoubtedly also
inform fieldwork practices within the UK. Some of the issues
have been discussed by Neild (2007) and Butler (2008).
In Ireland, specific codes of practice for geological fieldwork, separate from those within the UK, have not been formally
established. However, countryside codes do exist that should be
adhered to. These codes espouse similar values to those in the UK.
External drivers for changing fieldwork practices and provision in the UK and Ireland
designing assessments to test their attainment has been generic
in UK higher education for some time, as epitomized by Biggs
(1999, 2003) books on constructive alignment.
At Liverpool, these pedagogical developments gave rise to
a radical change in the way year one and two field classes were
run. These classes are all training classes that aim to provide students with the field skills necessary for undertaking independent
fieldwork. The classes used to consist of a set of field days in
which students recorded information in notebooks, sedimentary
log sheets, etc., which would all be collected at the end of the
field class and assessed. Sometimes students were required to
write an essay summary of the class. A departmental review of
field training decided that the best way to improve field training
was to map field class activities to a set of required competences,
set up appropriate tasks for students to investigate and complete
in the field, and undertake all marking and feedback on the field
class. The emphasis had to be on assessing student demonstration of field skills, not their overall knowledge of geology. Thus,
students would have a set of activities to complete in a field day,
and their outputs (notebooks, logs, etc.) would be collected at the
end of the field day and marked that evening to provide feedback
to the students before commencing the next days fieldwork. For
higher-level field classes, students would typically engage in a
project over two or three days, which would then be collected
in, assessed, and returned before commencing the next project.
While this was (and is!) undoubtedly hard work for the teachers,
it produced great improvements in field classes. Key advantages
include (Hughes and Boyle, 2005):
(1) students can learn from their initial work and use this
experience to inform their future work in the same class;
(2) students get used to doing the work in the field (including things like stereonets on tracing paper), and plagiarism is
more difficult;
(3) staff can recognize what is and is not working; and
(4) all assessment is finished when the field class ends so
staff do not go away with a box-load of marking.
Field notebooks are commonly assessed by a short interview with the student in the field. One member of staff can typically deal with the whole cohort on a particular day. The advantages of this method of assessment for the notebooks include
(Hughes and Boyle, 2005):
(1) formative feedback is instant and personalized;
(2) the student can clarify misunderstandings in the notebook;
(3) the staff member does not have to keep writing the same
comment in every notebook (e.g., missing scale, orientation, caption, annotation, etc., on sketch); and
(4) the student gains experience of a viva vocestyle assessment.
Close coupling of the teaching, learning, and assessment
modalities is important for engendering positive attitudes in the
students and helping them learn better during fieldwork (Boyle
et al., 2007).
Plymouths response to the QAA benchmarks has been to
alter field activities rather than delivery, in order to ensure that
315
316
Boyle et al.
(EU) nation states. The process is embodied in this quote from the
European Commission Education and Training Web page at http://
ec.europa.eu/education/higher-education/doc1290_en.htm:
This process involves a far-reaching reform of higher education in Europe which, especially through the Tuning Project,
has now spread to over 65 countries worldwide. To produce
comparable and compatible awards, it is essential for programs
now to be designed upon internationally recognized educational
theory, rather than local tradition. This necessitates a change in
emphasis from inputs (curricula) to outcomes (student-acquired
competences, learning outcomes, student workload, and degree
profiles). UK and Irish universities are consequently moving
away from a model of fieldwork as something that was done in
the vacation to support the curriculum to that of properly defined
and accredited modules.
The need to develop national qualifications frameworks has
led to the Irish and Scottish three-year B.Sc. ordinary/general
degrees being given a lower status compared to their four-year
B.Sc. honors degrees. This has placed an emphasis on the added
value in the fourth-year curriculum and consequently the fourthyear field-based project. The move in Europe to develop sectoral
qualifications frameworks will provide an opportunity for the
geoscience community to define its requirement for field training
at all levels.
External drivers for changing fieldwork practices and provision in the UK and Ireland
EMPLOYER NEEDS
Part of the educational program redesign process required
by the Bologna Process involves the consultation of stakeholders,
especially the geoscience industry, to define key competences that
should be developed during field training. However, few reliable
surveys exist. UK-based surveys into the competencies required
by graduate employers (e.g., Brennan et al., 2001; Harvey et al.,
1997) have identified a number of generic skills known to be
developed through fieldwork, e.g., teamwork, independent work,
adaptability, and initiative. Interestingly, several competencies
identified as desirable (and again developed through fieldwork)
are also identified as shortfalls between what employers want, and
what graduates offer, e.g., working under pressure, time management, planning, and taking responsibility (Gedye and Chalkley,
2006). Penn (2001) identified further competencies that are desirable in geoscience-related careers, including numeracy, innovation/creativity, project/task management, research/investigative
skills, and professional skills/knowledge.
The more recent Graduate and Industry Survey by the
Institute of Geologists in Ireland (Meehan, 2004) asked employers which geology courses at university they considered to be
most useful in readying graduates for employment with their
own respective companies. Field mapping skills was the highest
placed with 64% of respondents identifying it as an essential competence. Tuning Higher Education Structures in Europe Phase IV
carried out a survey of generic and specific competences required
within all nine disciplines including earth sciences; the results
will soon be available from the Tuning Web site. An early result
relevant to field studies is that all employers (not just geoscience
employers) placed the ability to apply knowledge in practical
situations as a competence that was highly important, but in
which graduates had low achievement. The Tuning Phase I report
(Gonzlez and Wagenaar, 2003) reported a survey covering the
If [universities] can provide subject knowledge and grounding in attitudes/behaviours and skills, then when [graduates] come into companies they are receptive to the specific training and development that
companies provide. The use of fieldwork...is very important because
this is one of the best routes for integrating [knowledge, attitudes and
skills]. (A. Thomas, 2007, personal commun.)
317
Competence description
Capacity for analysis and synthesis
Capacity for applying knowledge in practice
Basic general knowledge
Grounding in basic knowledge of the profession 8
Oral and written communication in native language
Knowledge of a second language
Elementar y computing skills
Research skills
Capacity to learn
Critical and self-critical abilities
Capacity to adapt to new situations
Capacity for generating new ideas (creativity)
Decision-making
Inter personal skills
Ability to work in an interdisciplinary team
Appreciation of diversity and multiculturality
Ethical commitment
Academic
Employer
Graduate
2
5
1
11
9
15
16
11
3
6
7
4
12
14
10
17
13
1
3
12
14
7
14
4
15
2
10
5
9
8
6
13
17
16
3
2
12
13
7
15
10
17
1
9
4
6
8
5
11
16
13
318
Boyle et al.
the cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains) can be integrated. An interesting question, within the UK at least, is to what
extent do benchmarking and accreditation procedures meet the
needs of industry, as ranked in Table 1, for example? Do these
procedures really produce students with the requisite skills and
competencies for a career in geoscience industry, or is further
provision required?
GOVERNMENT LEGISLATION
Evolving legislation has had an effect on fieldwork provision; particularly the Special Educational Needs and Disabilities
Act 2001 (SENDA, Great Britain, 2001) and general Health and
Safety law, in addition to legislation affecting land access.
SENDA was introduced in order to ensure educational
opportunity for all citizens. For higher education, this is embodied in the Quality Assurance Agencys expectation that:
External drivers for changing fieldwork practices and provision in the UK and Ireland
the end of their second academic year before they embark on
their independent fieldwork. It is for reasons of student safety
(and cost) that independent mapping projects initially went into
decline amongst UK universities. Previously, it was common
practice for students to work completely independently, or in
pairs, in whichever location they chose. Although arguably less
independent, the current model of field camps followed by
many universities, including Plymouth, addresses many of the
issues relating to health and safety and requires students to take
collective responsibility for risk assessment.
In relation to BS8848 (British Standards Institute, 2007),
investigations are currently under way at Plymouth into the ways
in which current risk assessment procedures need to change in
order to meet the relevant guidelines. The intention will be to
ensure that the standards set by the university exceed the minimum requirements laid down by BS8848.
In Ireland, the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act (2005)
places a statutory onus upon universities to conduct all student
activities, including fieldwork, in a safe manner. It is normal for
both students and staff to: perform a risk assessment of any field
program; undergo safety training; and to be required to understand and mitigate risks. Formal training is provided for the staff
as part of the universities staff training programs, and academic
credits are often associated with student engagement in the safety
culture. In many cases Codes of Practice are based upon or similar to those used in the UK. The system is policed by University
Safety Offices.
At Galway students conduct their final year mapping project
work independently but in adjacent areas from a common base
camp. Similar safety procedures to those employed in Liverpool
are practiced. In Ireland, mobile phones are the most common
method of communication, and care is taken to avoid the few
remaining areas that do not have adequate coverage. In addition
field safety, shore safety, small boat handling, and safety at sea
courses audited by external bodies are an integral part of relevant
modules and are awarded academic credits.
The Geologists Association fieldwork code identified the
key issue of access to land. In the UK, right to roam legislation
under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 has improved
walking access to open uncultivated countryside in England and
Wales, but it did not include the (geologically important) coastlines of England and Wales; though around 70% of the English
coast is currently accessible. A draft Marine Bill issued in April
2008 seeks to address coastal access rights in England and Wales.
Similar legislation in Scotland, The Land Reform (Scotland) Act
2003, has formalized previous de facto rights of land access.
These legislation changes have made is easier to organize field
classes in open, uncultivated parts of Great Britain, though it is
still good practice to check on access beforehand.
There is no similar right to roam legislation in Ireland.
Instead, access is limited to relatively few statutory rights of way
and to permitted access onto public and private lands. Buckley
et al. (2008) provided an excellent summary of the provision of
public access to land in Ireland and other countries. The Irish
319
Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs published a National Countryside and Recreation Strategy in 2006
that addresses various issues in regard to land access. There is
a public right of recreation along the foreshore. However, shore
access is often across private land and may be challenged (Cregan,
2006). There is also legislation concerning potential liability of
landowners for injuries to individuals crossing their lands; owners have a duty of care to those entering their lands, including
trespassers, and despite some clarification of the liability situation by The Occupiers Liability Act of 1995, there is continued
and increasing difficulty with land access in parts of Ireland.
Liverpool has run geological and geomorphological mapping field classes in the west of Ireland for over 30 years. Our
first significant issue was in 1995, at the time the Occupiers Liability Act 1995 was in the news, when a mapping exercise on the
Omey Granite in Connemara was curtailed by refusal of access
to part of its southern contact. Discussion with the landowner
could not resolve the issue. More recently, in southern County
Mayo, access has been removed in part of the Erriff valley where
glacial landforms are mapped and the Kilbride Peninsula where
the main geological mapping training took place. The upshot of
this is that the mapping training field class moved in 2008 to an
area in the French Alps where access is less of an issue. However,
financial concerns arising from the current global credit crunch
and the fall in value of the UK currency mean that 2009 may be
the last year the course runs in France.
The proximity of Plymouth to both Dartmoor National
Park and the coastline of southwest England means that students have easy access to some of the most outstanding exposure in the UK. Extensive access is also available to local quarries (see Scott et al., 2007), which provide excellent examples
of man-made exposures, and enable observation of industrial
processes such as blasting and extraction. In addition, voluntary
bodies dedicated to the conservation of regionally important
geological and geomorphological sites throughout the UK (see,
for example, http://www.devonrigs.org.uk) provide information to interested parties about contacts needed in order to gain
access to locally significant sites.
THE 2001 FOOT AND MOUTH EPIDEMIC
Perhaps the biggest nonlegislative issue to affect access to
land in the UK and Ireland was the 2001 foot and mouth epidemic (a highly contagious disease affecting cloven hoofed animals, including cattle, sheep, and pigs), which resulted in access
being withdrawn to many parts of the UK and Irish countryside.
This meant that many universities were faced with finding alternatives to UK or Irish-based field courses where access was no
longer possible, or in some cases withdrawing fieldwork provision altogetheralbeit temporarily (see Fuller et al., 2003; Scott
et al., 2006). The main field course affected at Plymouth was the
stage-two mapping course, which was held in Argyll, on the west
coast of Scotland; it was moved to the Teruel region of Spain. This
presented a very different, but no less challenging mapping loca-
320
Boyle et al.
tion (see Stokes and Boyle, this volume), which provided relative
freedom to roam compared to some other overseas locations. At
Liverpool, a year one field class to southwest Wales was relocated to Cyprus and a year three field class to Donegal in Ireland
was relocated to SE Spain. Many final year independent mapping projects were relocated to various parts of mainland Europe,
especially Spain. Although there are no longer access restrictions
relating to the foot and mouth outbreak, the threat of infectious
disease amongst livestock is an ongoing concern within the UK,
and it is a potential future threat to access to land.
DISCUSSION
The evidence presented here illustrates that the last decade
and a half have seen a number of developments that have impacted
the provision of fieldwork in UK and Irish geoscience degree
programs, and that such developments are likely to continue as
Europe-wide harmonization proceeds. At the same time, there
have been increasing pressures on fieldwork that militate toward
decreasing its importance in geoscience degree programs. Boyle
et al. (2007) listed a number of potentially detrimental factors:
(1) the cost to students raises questions about whether field
courses are equitable: Kent et al. (1997) found that they can be
manifestly unfair;
(2) the cost to institutions can be high;
(3) the time burden on staff can detract from their ability to
conduct research and thus progress their careers, particularly in
research-led universities that focus on the recurring UK Research
Assessment Exercise first run in 1986a good research record
is more important to the university than teaching students in the
field;
(4) there can be problems accommodating students with special needs and/or disabilities;
(5) there is fear of litigation; and
(6) there is a perception that there are technological alternatives to fieldwork, including remotely sensed data, geographic
information systems (GIS), and virtual field exercises.
The last in the list has the theoretical potential to solve most
if not all of the first six issues. Much effort has been expended
in the development of virtual environments, but, as Boyle et al.
(2007) and Butler (2008) pointed out, there is no substitute for
the real thing. The requirement for real fieldwork experience by
Geological Society of London accreditation and the QAA subject
benchmark statements means that virtual fieldwork is unlikely to
replace real fieldwork for the foreseeable future.
While developments described in this paper have placed
mostly unwelcome extra bureaucratic burdens on academic and
support staff, they have had a significant number of positive
effects. As noted already, accreditation and subject benchmarking have placed an effective ring-fence around the time devoted
to geoscience fieldwork. Prospective students expect to undertake an accredited degree program, with its specified fieldwork
component. Since accreditation became the norm for UK geoscience degrees, no significant UK geoscience department has
External drivers for changing fieldwork practices and provision in the UK and Ireland
Buckley, C., Hynes, S., and van Rensburg, T.M., 2008, Comparisons between
Ireland and other developed nations on the provision of public access
to the countryside for walkingAre there lessons to be learned?: The
Rural Economy Research Centre, Working Paper 08-WP-RE-03, Dublin.
Available at http://www.teagasc.ie/agresearchSearch/rerc/downloads/
workingpapers/08wpre03.pdf (accessed 24 August 2009).
Burek, C.V., and Prosser, C.D., eds., 2008, The History of Geoconservation:
Geological Society of London Special Publication 300, 312 p.
Butler, R., 2007, Views on Field Teaching: Bristol, Joint Information Systems
Committee (JISC), 14 p. Available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/
webadmin?A3=ind0710&L=GEO-TECTONICS&E=base64&P
=402486&B=--Apple-Mail-10--592091000&T=application%2Fpdf;%20
name=%22viewsonfieldteaching.pdf%22&N==viewsonfieldteaching
.pdf (accessed 24 August 2009).
Butler, R., 2008, Teaching Geosciences through Fieldwork, GEES Learning and
Teaching Guide: Plymouth, Higher Education Academy Subject Centre
for Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences (GEES), 56 p. Available at http://www.gees.ac.uk/pubs/guides/fw/fwgeosci.pdf (accessed 24
August 2009).
Comhairle na Tuaithe, 2006, National Countryside Recreation Strategy: Dublin, Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, 45 p. Available at http://www.pobail.ie/en/RuralDevelopment/ComhairlenaTuaithe/
file,8590,en.pdf (accessed 24 August 2009).
Corbett, R.G., and Corbett, E.A., 2001, Geology programs and disciplinary
accreditation: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 49, no. 2, p. 130134.
Cregan, M., 2006, IrelandAccess to the coast, in Peter Scott Planning
Services Ltd, ed., Coastal Access in Selected European Countries:
Sheffield, Natural England, p. 115120. Available at http://www
.naturalengland.gov.uk/Images/Annex%204%20coastal%20access
%20Europe%20partC_tcm6-9047.pdf (accessed 24 August 2009).
Drummond, C.N., and MarKin, J.M., 2008, An analysis of the Bachelor of Science in geology degree as offered in the United States: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 56, no. 2, p. 113119.
European University Association, 2004, Quality Review of the National University of IrelandGalway, Institutional Evaluation Programme: Brussels,
European University Association (EUA), 20 p. Available at http://www
.nuigalway.ie/quality/downloads/Final_Report_Galway_20041220.pdf
(accessed 24 August 2009).
Fuller, I., Gaskin, S., and Scott, I., 2003, Student perceptions of geography
and environmental science fieldwork in the light of restricted access to
the field, caused by foot and mouth disease in the UK in 2001: Journal of Geography in Higher Education, v. 27, no. 1, p. 79102, doi:
10.1080/0309826032000062487.
Gedye, S., and Chalkley, B., 2006, Employability within Geography, Earth and
Environmental Sciences, GEES Learning and Teaching Guide: Plymouth, Higher Education Academy Subject Centre for Geography, Earth
and Environmental Sciences (GEES), 86 p. Available at http://www.gees
.ac.uk/projtheme/emp/empguide.htm (accessed 24 August 2009).
Gonzlez, J., and Wagenaar, R., 2003, Tuning Educational Structures in Europe,
Final Report, Phase One: Bilbao, Universidad de Deusto, 316 p. Available
at http://www.tuning.unideusto.org/tuningeu/index.php?option=com
_docman&task=docclick&Itemid=59&bid=17&limitstart=0&limit=5
(accessed 24 August 2009).
Great Britain, 2001, Special Educational Needs and Disabilities Act (2001):
Elizabeth II, Chapter 10: London, The Stationery Office, 60 p. Available
321
at http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts2001/pdf/ukpga_20010010_en.pdf
(accessed 24 August 2009).
Green, C.P., 2008, The Geologists Association and geoconservation: History
and achievements, in Burek, C.V., and Prosser, C.D., eds., The History of
Geoconservation: Geological Society of London Special Publication 300,
p. 91102.
Harvey, L., Moon, S., and Geall, V., 1997, Graduates Work: Organisational
Change and Students Attributes: Birmingham, Centre for Research into
Quality (CRQ), UCE Birmingham, 139 p. Available at http://www0.bcu
.ac.uk/crq/publications/gw/ (accessed 24 August 2009).
Hughes, P., and Boyle, A.P., 2005, Assessment in the Earth Sciences, Environmental Sciences and Environmental Studies, GEES Learning and Teaching
Guide: Plymouth, Higher Education Academy Subject Centre for Geography,
Earth and Environmental Sciences (GEES), 41 p. Available at http://www
.gees.ac.uk/pubs/guides/assess/geesassesment.pdf (accessed 24 August 2009).
Kent, M., Gilbertsone, D., and Hunt, C., 1997, Fieldwork in geography teaching:
A critical review of the literature and approaches: Journal of Geography in
Higher Education, v. 21, p. 313332, doi: 10.1080/03098269708725439.
Meehan, I., 2004, Institute of Geologists of Ireland Graduate and Industry Survey: Dublin, Institute of Geologists of Ireland, 43 p. Available at http://
www.igi.ie/assets/files/Papers/IGISurvey.pdf (accessed 24 August 2009).
Neild, T., 2007, Editorial. Safety first or safety cage?: Geoscientist, v. 17, no. 9,
p. 2.
Penn, I., 2001, What does the employer want? A British Geological Survey perspective on graduate employability: Planet, Special Edition One, p. 45.
Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, 1999, Code of Practice for
the Assurance of Academic Quality and Standards in Higher Education.
Section 3: Students with disabilities: Gloucester, UK, Quality Assurance
Agency for Higher Education (QAA), 29 p. Available at http://www
.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/codeofpractice/section3/default.asp
(accessed 24 August 2009).
Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, 2007, Benchmark Statement
for Earth Sciences, Environmental Sciences and Environmental Studies:
Mansfield, UK, Linney Direct, 31 p. Available at http://www.qaa.ac.uk/
academicinfrastructure/benchmark/statements/EarthSciences.pdf
(accessed 24 August 2009).
Scott, I., Fuller, I., and Gaskin, S., 2006, Life without fieldwork: Some lecturers perceptions of geography and environmental science fieldwork:
Journal of Geography in Higher Education, v. 30, no. 1, p. 161171, doi:
10.1080/03098260500499832.
Scott, P.W., Nicholas, C., Turner, H., Roche, D., and Shail, R., 2007, Access and
Safety at Geological Sites: A Manual for Landowners, Quarry Operators and
the Geological Visitor: Exeter, David Roche Geo Consulting, 52 p. Available at http://www.sustainableaggregates.com/docs/theme3/miro_ma_5_2
_001c.pdf (accessed 24 August 2009).
Stokes, A., and Boyle, A.P., 2009, this volume, The undergraduate geoscience
fieldwork experience: Influencing factors and implications for learning, in
Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society
of America Special Paper 461, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(23).
Tuning Members, 2005, Summary of OutcomesEarth Sciences: University of
Deusto, Bilbao, 6 p. Available at http://tuning.unideusto.org/tuningeu/images/
stories/template/Template_Earth_Sciences.pdf (accessed 24 August 2009).
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY 5 MAY 2009
ABSTRACT
Field instruction is a critical piece of undergraduate geoscience majors education, and despite its central importance, relatively little educational research has
explored how students learn to solve problems during geological fieldwork. This
study adds to work presented in previous studies by our group using global positioning system (GPS) tracking of students engaged in independent field examinations. We
examined four students from our previous studies working in a new field area. We
also applied a new variant of our polygon coding approaches for analyzing student
navigation tracks to gauge the sensitivity of our method to the time scale of analysis.
We captured position data at 1 min intervals and then coded the resulting data by
generating 5 min and 15 min sequential polygons. Our analysis shows that the two
methods are comparable at the coarsest scale, but that finer-scale coding reveals more
detailed movements related primarily to identification of key features and lithologies,
which lends insight into effective geologic problem solving in the field. Coherence of
small-scale and large-scale coding is most useful for showing longer-range planning
in problem solving as the large-scale movements average out small-scale investigatory
moves. Our results also suggest that in detailed and difficult field areas with topography that permits easy reoccupation of critical areas, there is an optimum amount
of relocation and back-tracking. Too much retracing indicates confusion, as found in
our earlier study. However, too little reoccupation of key areas appears to accompany
a failure to recognize important features. Our study offers additional refinement of
instructional tools in gauging student skills in geologic field problem solving offered
by GPS tracking.
Riggs, E.M., Balliet, R., and Lieder, C.C., 2009, Effectiveness in problem solving during geologic field examinations: Insights from analysis of GPS tracks at
variable time scales, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological
Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 323340, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(25). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological
Society of America. All rights reserved.
323
324
Riggs et al.
INTRODUCTION
Field-based instruction is widely acknowledged to be a
central part of undergraduate education in the geological sciences; however, research into understanding and documenting
the growth of problem-solving skills and cognition connected
to learning gains in the field is only now realizing significant
advances and widespread community effort. Studies demonstrating the value of the field environment and effective field
pedagogy are increasingly numerous in geology and geography
education. Kent et al. (1997) and Orion (2003) provide thorough
overviews of the various types and styles of learning experiences
that are encompassed under the term fieldwork. Of the many
types, depth, and duration of fieldwork experiences, this study
is primarily concerned with long-term fieldwork by advanced
undergraduates in their capstone field coursework. Issues of
problem solving, concept formation, and expertise in the creation
of geologic maps are the main focus of this study.
Other studies have addressed aspects of problem solving,
notably Huntoon et al. (2001), who examined the effectiveness
of a problem-based learning approach to field pedagogy for a
mixed group of advanced undergraduate geology students and
in-service teachers. Comparisons of field-based learning and
classroom-based teaching (Kern and Carpenter, 1986; Tretinjak
and Riggs, 2008), and examinations of the effects of field-based
learning augmented or replaced by technological innovations and
precursory exercises (Browne, 2005; Hesthammer et al., 2002;
Kelly and Riggs, 2006) consistently show that fieldwork deepens problem-solving abilities and that well-designed preparatory
exercises (field, virtual, or classroom) consistently aid students
in constructing a fuller picture of key geoscience concepts in
the field. The effect is similar to that observed by Libarkin and
Kurdziel (2006) showing the increase in the sophistication of student ontologies and meaning-making related to geologic ideas
and concepts. The work of Brodaric et al. (2004) is particularly
helpful in understanding how fieldwork may increase conceptual
understanding and ontological sophistication of geologic ideas,
and, conversely, how student behavior and movement in the field
and student-generated maps and notes can be used to understand
conceptual depth and problem solving. Brodaric and coauthors
proposed a knowledge construction model for geological ideas
that relates conceptual models and scientific models of geological
concepts to models of occurrence. Occurrence models are a combination of detailed, local observations situated within regional
occurrences and regional context, as well as a recognition of the
class and category of observations and data. A functional geological model, i.e., a conceptually complete model such as those
field instructors strive to foster in their students doing mapping
exercises and projects, is formed from the working combination
of the conceptual model and the occurrence model.
The challenge is to measure the functionality and correctness of students geological models, and to understand how students recognize the class and category of observations and link
them to broader knowledge of regional context and history, such
325
Geologists never have all the information they need to fully solve
any given problem with the confidence of an analytical solution
(Brodaric et al., 2004; de Caprariis, 2002; Frodeman and Raab,
2002). They must rely on the construction of multiple working
hypotheses which can be pursued in order to gather more relevant
data, which in turn improve the working hypotheses. Success at
this depends on expertise and early pattern recognition, and also
additional skills of planning and field navigation to optimize a
path through likely data-rich regions in a field area given everpresent time constraints. Because of these additional features to
problem solving in a geologic field context, it is clear that the act
of problem solving is best studied in its naturalistic context and
is impossible to study and duplicate in a fully controlled laboratory setting because so much of the problem-solving strategy is
bound up in individual response to the real situation. This is what
leads us to the research traditions of naturalistic decision making.
This area of research deals with the class of problem-solving and
decision-making situations embedded in data-poor situations,
usually under time constraints, where the presence of expertise
has a strong influence on moment-to-moment decisions made by
problem solvers. Examples are firefighters, military commanders, air-traffic controllers, and many others. Expert problem solvers employ pattern recognition to make an educated guess at the
class or style of a situation and make decisions for gathering
additional data that quickly reduce the number of possible solutions and constrain the true nature of the problem.
In a geologic setting, studies of teaching and learning in the
field must also consider the complex interactions of factors that
may have a bearing on an individual students actions, decisions,
mental model formation, and ultimate learning outcomes. Many
process models have been proposed within the naturalistic decision making tradition that can account for these factors (Klein
et al., 1993; Lipshitz et al., 2001; Zsambok and Klein, 1997).
Of the available published process models, we find the schema
model of Marshall (1995) to be most productively adapted to
geologic problem solving. This model recognizes that decision
making involves the construction of mental models (schema) that
are in turn constructed of subordinate schema that work together
iteratively to provide the basis for decision making. Marshalls
research group worked primarily with naval tacticians whose
interactions with battlefield tactical displays were monitored
by eye tracking and qualitative analysis of active command and
control communications. Marshall produced a model with four
components that iteratively work together to construct problem
solving in these types of data-poor, time-limited situations, called
a schema model, based on the schema or mental submodels that
had to go into the overall problem-solving process. The four
components are:
(1) identification knowledgethe ability to recognize relevant information and assess from clues in the environment when
a situation is similar to prior experiences or education;
(2) elaboration knowledgethe immediate associated recall
of related facts and elements that aid in the confirmation or adjustment of the initial assessment of a situation from identification
326
Riggs et al.
327
328
Riggs et al.
Table 1, along with results of subsequent navigation track coding using both 5 and 15 min polygons as described later herein.
Points were awarded for accurate recognition and placement on the map of key geologic features such as structural
elements (e.g., fold axes, etc.), contacts between geologic units,
and correct identification of formations. Decreasing amounts of
points for each key feature were granted with decreasing accuracy of location or omission of that feature. However, because
of the inherent difficulty of this map area, especially in terms
of stratigraphic ambiguity, points were also awarded for constructing internally consistent and coherent geologic maps even
if units were fundamentally misidentified. This led to many
objectively poor geologic maps receiving high point totals
(for internal consistency) and therefore reduces the variance in
scores. The map scores do show some variance consistent with
the ultimately quality of the maps, but a result of subjective
adjustment of these scores for grading of internal consistency
is that there is not much variance in the scores, reducing their
usefulness for this analysis, especially compared with the map
scoring used in our previous study area with this group of students. Map detail and quality are instead better discussed in the
following narrative sections describing the results for each of
the four students, presented as case studies.
All complete GPS records were imported into ArcGIS for
analysis. Density clustering was not conducted for these data
as they were for the tracks in Riggs et al. (2009) because of
the small number of subjects involved in this study. We instead
constructed polygons of each consecutive 5 and every 15 GPS
data points, representing, respectively, 5 and 15 min of work
for that student. Adjacent polygons were strung together in a
sequence to create time-series tracks. This data-processing
approach enabled a comparison of results of the same coding
scheme applied to tracks at two different time scales.
This was done in order to understand the influence of
tracking time scale on the interpretation of problem-solving
behavior, and to see whether different types of behavior from
different stages of the problem-solving sequence in Marshalls
schema model were resolved differently at different time scales.
We had collected this data set at a finer temporal resolution than
our initial study (1 min as opposed to 3 min intervals), and
ongoing research is collecting data at 10 s intervals with continuous sampling schemes. The differential processing of our
track data presented an opportunity to see if a temporal granu-
TABLE 1. COMPARISON BETWEEN STUDENTS MAP PERFORMANCE AND VARIOUS POLYGON MEASURES FROM TWO DIFFERENT STUDIES
Name
Map score-1
Polygon score-1
Codes % total-1
Map score-2
Codes % total-2
Codes % total-2
(15 min)
(5 min)
(15 min)
Adrianne
34
47
12
46
51
44
Jay
24
50
25
44
55
62
Mark
12
44
28
44
20
22
Jesse
3
40
31
43
35
32
Note: Study 1 is a previous data set in a different area with the same students and only includes 15 min polygons and a polygon scoring method
not used in the second study (for details, see Riggs et al., 2009). Area 2 is the subject of this study. Code percentages were calculated by dividing
the number of codes by the total number of polygons for each individual student as summarized in Table 2.
329
a touch and go. We added one new code for a zigzag path
across outcrops, which emerged with the shorter time-scale track
coding. We coded these in time-series fashion from start to finish
of the field examination and totaled the number of instances of
each code for each student. These data are summarized in Table 2
and are included for each of our four students with their tracks,
maps, and cross sections as combined figures.
Student field notes were also analyzed with the maps and
tracks to determine the timing of the creation and placement of
each of their data stations, and to put their track movements in a
temporal context. In all cases, significant insights into problemsolving approaches and challenges emerged from the close reading of notes coupled with simultaneous, polygon-by-polygon
analysis of their coded tracks at both 5 and 15 min time scales.
This combined analysis led to the following case study analyses
presented on a student-by-student basis.
FINDINGS
Here, we present first a critical analysis of each students
map and cross section, combined with a running narrative of
Figure 2. Dynamic codes and definitions for polygon navigation tracks. Numbered polygons in the secondary codes indicate temporal sequence.
330
Riggs et al.
TABLE 2. SUMMARY AND BREAKDOWN OF CODING FOR 5 AND 15 MIN POLYGON TRACKS FOR ALL STUDENTS
Secondary codes 5 min
Double
Retrace
Touch and
Path
Back and
Branch Zigzag
Total
Total
Student
back
go
cross
forth
codes
polygons
Adrianne
11
18
3
4
8
44
86
Jay
15
15
5
12
2
49
89
Mark
5
2
3
6
16
82
Jesse
4
5
3
7
2
5
26
74
% of
total
51
55
20
35
% of
total
44
62
22
32
Touch and
go
Path
cross
Back and
forth
3
1
3
their progress through the field area and the evolution of their
solutions to the field problem as presented in the maps and
notes. Following this discussion, we present a quantitative analysis of the coding, focusing on comparisons between the results
of 5 min and 15 min polygon coding, comparisons with other
students in this field exam, and comparisons with performance
from an earlier field examination during this same course.
Individual Track ResultsLink to Maps and Field Notes
We present all the individual results from this investigation, including the completed map, cross section, each complete
polygon track at both time scales, and the corresponding coding
for the time series at both the 5 and 15 min scale. Unfortunately, the print medium does not permit the dynamic presentation of all students polygon tracks accompanied by real-time
coding illustration. To augment this static presentation of our
data, we have posted animated versions of these figures on the
Internet that show the temporal progression of each students
traverse . These animations are available by navigating to links
for Research/Field Navigation Studies available at the Riggs
Group Web pages at http://www.purdue.edu/eas/riggslab/
fieldnav/index.html. Next, we attempt to provide a relevant
summary narrative for each student in the study, along with
analysis of relevant major points observed in each students
behavior in the field and insights revealed from close reading of
the notes keyed to the polygon tracks. All student maps, cross
sections, and tracks are shown grouped together for comparison
in Figures 3, 4, and 5, respectively, for ease of comparisons.
Data stations shown on their completed maps are also shown on
their 5 and 15 min polygon tracks in Figure 5. Coding for both
5 and 15 min tracks is shown for all students in Figure 6, which
also shows the interpreted time for data station formation, and
in some cases pre- or reoccupation of these sites where relevant,
for ease of comparison to tracks, maps, and animations. The
animations of these tracks also show a running coding chart
that illustrates the assignment of codes in real time with student
navigation decisions and station formation.
Branch
Zigzag
Total
codes
11
16
5
7
Total
polygons
25
26
23
22
Mark
Marks map had poorly distributed structural measurements
and in general reflected a correct but unsophisticated interpretation of the field area geology. This was especially true in the
northern portion of the area, where his resulting map ignored all
of the sedimentological and structural detail in that region.
A comparison of Marks field notes with the data station
numbering and the track sequences shown for both the 15 and 5
min polygons yields interesting insights into his approach to the
field area in general, but it also helps to pinpoint the geographic
and temporal points where difficulties in problem solving arose.
We find that with this track, the 5 min polygon analysis in particular is useful for highlighting moments of intensive investigations by Mark in small regions, when his notes show him actively
considering different identification possibilities for rock units
and contacts. His elaboration strategies (as illustrated in his field
notes) are expressed equally well in both the 5 and 15 min polygon tracks.
Marks field day started at a measured pace, taking advantage of good outcrops near the south entrance to the field area.
Within the first hour, he had made five data stations complete
with attitude measurements and accurate rock identifications. His
notes also reflect preliminary model construction, and his movements as recorded in both sets of polygon tracks show him executing this plan to collect additional data and test his stratigraphic
and structural hypothesis.
As he entered the second hour of his field day, Mark encountered the prominent basalt sill that traverses the field area. He
spent almost the next hour working his way up to the topographic
high within the basalt on the west side of the central canyon, collecting attitude data but making very poor rock identifications,
mistaking the basalt for a sedimentary breccia unit. His notes
show that he continued making structural hypotheses during this
time, focusing on the syncline visible from this vantage. He also
wrote that he was looking for evidence of overturning, which was
the case for the syncline structure along strike in the previous
project area, but which was not present in this field area. A tone
331
Figure 4. Final geologic cross sections for each student. Note that students were allowed to select their own cross-section orientation and location, which are indicated on their completed maps, to allow them to highlight their structural interpretations.
332
Figure 5. Final 5 min (left) and 15 min (right) polygon tracks for each student. Numbered circles are student-created stations recorded in notes and on geologic map. See narrative
and posted animations for sequences (http://www.purdue.edu/eas/riggslab/fieldnav/index.html).
333
334
Riggs et al.
Figure 6. Coding for both the 5 and 15 min polygon tracks for each student. Sequential numbers refer to 1 min global positioning system (GPS)
track points; 5 min polygons were constructed from overlapping sets of 5 track points each, while 15 min polygons incorporated 15 track points.
Scale refers to the relative size of the polygons involved in the 5 min codes. The added notation S1, S2, etc., shows the approximate time that
students created data stations as interpreted from close reading of notes combined with analysis of animated polygon tracks.
335
on his map (but added in the notes out of order, possibly after
looking back across the valley from station 9). In any case, at
this stage, the notes show confusion about this small fold and the
implications for this to the larger-scale structures. He resolves
this with an odd solution on the cross section and basically fails
to solve this problem.
Jesses note taking ceases after data station 10 for the
remaining 80 min of the examination day. However, Jesses 5
min polygon track shows that after this time he makes a zigzagging traverse over an area that he maps as the trace of the larger
syncline in the south. He also traverses back across the valley in
the south to confirm the location, and presumably lithology of
the Tps/Tpb contact. He also maps in another part of the Tps unit
above this, and while these units do interfinger sedimentologically in this area, he makes no attempt to justify or explain this
apparent contradiction in his cross section.
Jay
Jesse
Jesses map shows reasonably well-distributed measurements but distinctly more detail in the northern end of the field
area. The southern end shows incomplete contacts and a poorly
constrained syncline axis. His map in the northern region is
detailed, but it also has a significant misidentification of lithology, which ultimately greatly complicated the structural interpretation required. This is reflected in internal inconsistencies in the
north end of his cross section for the field area.
His traverse starts with a long reconnaissance overview,
traveling the entire length of the field area toward the north and
circling around and up to the west to a vantage point. This strategy leads to an early identification of the basalt intrusion and the
megabreccia in the northern portion of the field area. He also
attempts to sight in some attitude data but then must descend into
the valley and traverse into the northeastern quadrant to collect
genuine measurements and make lithological determinations.
The 5 min polygon track shows the pauses in his traverse that
correspond to data station sites on his finished map. This additional loop and eventual detailed retracing of some of the initial
loop to the west does leave his map with good detail in the megabreccia outcrops, but it did not provide sufficient time (or insight)
in this area to change his mind about the misidentified basal
breccia unit (which should have been mapped as the lacustrine
facies). This looping doubled traverse and the partial large-scale
retracing (shown well in the 15 min polygon track) took roughly
4 h at the beginning the examination time, leaving Jesse short
on time to complete the southern part of the examination area in
appreciable detail.
His notes early in the field day reflect traverse planning and
execution, but this plan does not seem to extend beyond the ~2
h reconnaissance traverse. He does seem to recognize early the
large-scale structure and attitude of the beds, but he makes no
clear predictions or tests of his conclusions. This leads him to
get easily distracted by a small-scale fold located near station 7
336
Riggs et al.
cross section is one of the better ones turned in for this map exercise. Altogether her mapping errors are relatively small and do
not seem to be connected to problem-solving failures as much as
representational (i.e., artistic, drafting-related) and location difficulties. Her traverse is ultimately very efficient, with only three
instances of large-scale retracing, one of which can be explained
as a quick reconnaissance traverse. While this may seem inefficient in terms of ground coverage, it is likely to have contributed
to her overall solution to the field area and was clearly a planned
action and was ultimately quite effective compared with that of
our other three case studies, which raises other issues in the simplistic interpretation of our numerical results derived from our
coding approach.
337
0.70
0.60
R2 = 0.8769
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
% total 5 min
Figure 7. Comparison of code percentage between 5 and 15 min polygons. The R2 value shows that percentages are similar regardless of the
time resolution and therefore do not affect the coding analysis.
Quantitative Results
Table 1 summarizes the results of this study, as well as the
results for these particular students from Riggs et al. (2009). The
students are similarly rank-ordered by score in this study (map
score 2) as before (map score 1), and the earlier point about the
map scores not having a large amount of variance is easy to see
in these data. However, the total number of secondary codes
accumulated does vary much more among these students and, as
described already in the narratives, is related more to their actual
problem-solving strategies and difficulties. We have tallied the
total number of secondary codes appearing in both the 5 and 15
min coding for this map area (indicated by -2 in the column
headings) and have completed this same calculation for the earlier map area (1), which was only coded at a 15 min interval.
We divided the number of secondary codes by the total number
of polygons created for each student and present this as a percentage. This calculation was performed to allow normalization
of our data between the two field areas and between individual
students with slightly different track lengths in both studies. We
see in the earlier results a trend consistent with the conclusions
of Riggs et al. (2009), namely, that a lower amount of secondary
codes is correlated positively with a higher map score and is the
best predictor of performance in this study. In the current field
area, this correlation does not seem to hold simply at either coding time scale, as seen in the last two columns of Table 1. This
apparent contradiction will be discussed next.
Table 2 breaks down each students polygon coding into
separate maneuvers on both time scales of coding, and then also
summarizes the totals and as percentages of total codes compared
with total numbers of polygons. The 5 and 15 min codes are very
similar in this analysis, with notable exceptions in the Back and
Forth code. The 5 min polygons are evidently particularly sensitive to small-scale motions around an outcrop, and in Jays case,
this is especially evident in light of his confused behavior noted
in the narrative. We also directly compared the total codes generated by the 5 and 15 min coding approach by plotting the percentage of secondary codes out of all polygons for each student at the
15 min time scale versus the same quantity for the 5 min polygon coding. This is presented in Figure 7. We found a very good
338
Riggs et al.
finish to the field problem and subtracting all the polygons accumulated after the conclusion of her navigation track at the finish
area as a result (all subsequent movements were not related to
data collection, but rather milling about the finish area instead),
one could argue that her 5 min codes could be reduced to 41% of
her total and her 15 min codes could be reduced to 37% because
her polygon totals and code totals would also come down. This
puts her near Jesses coding figures. While his map had more
problems than hers and his traverse approach had significant difficulties compared with hers, his map is arguably second only
to hers in terms of details and subtlety of interpretation. Marks
map is very coarse in its detail, and his percentage of codes to
polygons is also lowest. Jays map is also relatively coarse in the
resolution of detail and completeness of interpretation, and his
percentages show the highest number of codes relative to polygons at both time scales. His tracks also show the most obviously
confusion-related features, which greatly increased his secondary code count, especially in the 5 min track. This suggests, but
certainly does not conclusively demonstrate, that there may be
an optimum level of inefficiency, as seen in strict path coding,
in complex areas like this field examination. Too much complexity in a track at any time scale likely indicates real inefficiency
and ineffectiveness of thought, geologic model formation and
action, as we found in our previous study with this same group
of students. Too little complexity in a track likely shows a lack
of detailed investigation that leads to an overly simplistic interpretation of the geology. Somewhere in the middle is the right
balance between back-tracking inefficiency as students reinvestigate problem areas in the light of accumulating data. In this field
area, this is possible because there are easy paths to key outcrops
that do not involve intense physical investment climbing hills or
traveling long distances on foot. Our earlier field area, reported in
Riggs et al. (2009), had a strong topographic bias that encouraged
students to think carefully before ascending very steep slopes for
limited gain in geological understanding. As a result, the students
who did the thinking in advance (Adrianne in particular) had a
very efficient traverse with almost no back-tracking. In the field
area used in this study, very selective back-tracking was rewarded
by enhanced detail and understanding, making the tradeoff in
navigational efficiency worth the effort. These four case studies
and their supporting data sets are only suggestive. This argument
must stand only as an assertion at this stage, and we are in the
process of collecting data at much higher temporal resolution
over a variety of field problems and topographic settings with
larger numbers of students. As this new data is analyzed, this
assertion is now high on our list to test further.
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
The general conclusions we reached in Riggs et al. (2009)
state that, in general, more efficient traverses generate better
results, and while this is still true, the concept of efficiency is
perhaps better replaced by effectiveness, in that a speedy and
direct traverse (efficient by geographic terms) is not necessar-
339
lecting much larger volumes of data that will build on this work
and other early work to create a much more complete picture of
the link among human cognition, geologic problem solving, and
physical movement and navigation in the coming years.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to recognize the San Diego State University
Department of Geological Sciences and the Purdue University
Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences for their support of this work. We also thank Dave Mogk, Joe Elkins, and an
anonymous reviewer who all provided detailed and insightful
comments and encouragement that have greatly improved the
quality of this manuscript and the clarity of our arguments and
interpretations.
REFERENCES CITED
Baker, K.M., Libarkin, J.C., and Petcovic, H.L., 2007, Geologic mapping strategies of novices and experts as evidenced through GPS track and map
analysis: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 39,
no. 6, p. 557.
Bransford, J., National Research Council (U.S.), Committee on Developments
in the Science of Learning, and National Research Council (U.S.), Committee on Learning Research and Educational Practice, 2000, How People
Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School: Washington, D.C., National
Academy Press, 374 p.
Brodaric, B., and Gahegan, M., 2007, Experiments to examine the situated nature
of geoscientific concepts: Spatial Cognition and Computation, v. 7, p. 6195.
Brodaric, B., Gahegan, M., and Harrap, R., 2004, The art and science of mapping: Computing geological categories from field data: Computers &
Geosciences, v. 30, p. 719740, doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2004.05.001.
Browne, J., 2005, Learning Outcomes of Virtual Field Trips Used for Geoscience
Education [M.S. thesis]: San Diego, California, San Diego State University,
43 p.
Chadwick, P., 1978, Some aspects of the development of geological thinking:
Journal of Geology Teaching, v. 3, p. 142148.
Chamberlin, T.C., 1890, The method of multiple working hypotheses: Science,
v. 15, p. 9296, doi: 10.1126/science.ns-15.366.92.
de Caprariis, P.P., 2002, Developing successful learning strategies in structural
geology: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 50, p. 145149.
Endsley, M.R., 2000, Situation Awareness: Analysis and Measurement: Mahwah, New Jersey, Erlbaum, 383 p.
Endsley, M.R., 2001, Designing for situation awareness in complex systems, in
Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Symbiosis of Humans,
Artifacts and Environment: Kyoto, Japan, Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, p. 176190.
Frodeman, R., and Raab, T., 2002, What is it like to be a geologist? A phenomenology of geology and its epistemological implications: Philosophy and
Geography, v. 5, p. 6981, doi: 10.1080/10903770120116840.
Hesthammer, J., Fossen, H., Sautter, M., Sther, B., and Johansen, S., 2002,
The use of information technology to enhance learning in geological field
trips: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 50, p. 528538.
Huntoon, J.E., Bluth, G.J.S., and Kennedy, W.A., 2001, Measuring the effects
of a research-based field experience on undergraduates and K12 teachers: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 49, p. 235248.
Ishikawa, T., and Kastens, K.A., 2005, Why some students have trouble with
maps and other representations: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53,
p. 184187.
Kali, Y., and Orion, N., 1996, Spatial abilities of high-school students in the
perception of geologic structures: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 33, p. 369391, doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199604)33:4<369
::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-Q.
Kellogg, K.S., and Miggins, D.P., 2002, Geologic Map of the Sawmill Mountain Quadrangle, Kern and Ventura Counties, California: U.S. Geological
Survey Open-File Report 02-406, 16 p.
340
Riggs et al.
Kelly, M.M., and Riggs, N.R., 2006, Use of a virtual environment in the Geowall to increase student confidence and performance during field mapping: An example from an introductory-level field class: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 54, p. 158164.
Kent, M., Gilbertsone, D.D., and Hunt, C.O., 1997, Fieldwork in geography teaching: A critical review of the literature and approaches:
Journal of Geography in Higher Education, v. 21, p. 313332, doi:
10.1080/03098269708725439.
Kern, E.L., and Carpenter, J.R., 1986, Effect of field activities on student learning: Journal of Geological Education, v. 34, p. 180183.
Klein, G.A., Orasanu, J., Calderwood, R., and Zsambok, C.E.E., 1993, Decision Making in Action: Models and Methods: Norwood, New Jersey,
Ablex Publishing, 480 p.
Kozhevnikov, M., and Hegarty, M., 2001, A dissociation between object manipulation spatial ability and spatial orientation ability: Memory & Cognition, v. 29, p. 745756.
Libarkin, J.C., and Kurdziel, J.P., 2006, Ontology and the teaching of earth system science: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 54, p. 408413.
Liben, L.S., Myers, L.J., and Kastens, K.A., 2008, Locating oneself on a map
in relation to person qualities and map characteristics, in Freksa, C., Newcombe, N.S., Grdenfors, P., and Wlfl, S., eds., Spatial Cognition VI.
Learning, Reasoning, and Talking about Space: International Conference
Spatial Cognition 2008, Freiburg, Germany, September 1519, 2008:
Lecture Notes in Computer Science Volume 5248/2008: Heidelberg, Germany, Springer, p. 171187.
Lieder, C.C., 2005, Problem Solving Strategies of Geology Students during
Independent Field Examination Shown by GPS Tracks: San Diego, California, San Diego State University, 76 p.
Lieder, C.C., and Riggs, E.M., 2004, Problem solving strategies of geology students during independent field examinations shown by GPS tracks: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 36, no. 5, p. 554.
Lipshitz, R., Klein, G., Orasanu, J., and Salas, E., 2001, Taking stock of naturalistic decision making: Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, v. 14,
p. 331352, doi: 10.1002/bdm.381.
Marshall, S.P., 1995, Schemas in Problem Solving: New York, Cambridge University Press, 424 p.
Marshall, S.P., 2002, The index of cognitive activity: Measuring cognitive
workload, in Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE 7th Conference on Human
Factors and Power Plants: Scottsdale, Arizona.
Novak, J.D., 1976, Understanding the learning process and the effectiveness of
teaching methods in the classroom, laboratory, and field: Science Education, v. 60, p. 493512, doi: 10.1002/sce.3730600410.
Orion, N., 1993, A model for the development and implementation of field trips
as an integral part of the science curriculum: School Science and Mathematics, v. 93, p. 325331.
Orion, N., 2003, The outdoor as a central learning environment in the global
science literacy framework: From theory to practice, in Mayer, V.J., ed.,
Implementing Global Science Literacy: Columbus, Ohio, The Ohio State
University Press, p. 5366.
Orion, N., and Hofstein, A., 1994, Factors that influence learning during a scientific field trip in a natural environment: Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, v. 31, p. 10971119, doi: 10.1002/tea.3660311005.
Orion, N., Hofstein, A., Tamir, P., and Gidding, G.J., 1997, Development and
validation of an instrument for assessing the learning environment of
outdoor science activities: Science Education, v. 81, p. 161171, doi:
10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199704)81:2<161::AID-SCE3>3.0.CO;2-D.
Petcovic, H.L., Libarkin, J.C., and Baker, K.M., 2007, Behavioral cognitive
processes of novices and experts during field mapping activities: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 39, no. 6, p. 579.
Petcovic, H.L., Libarkin, J.C., and Baker, K.M., 2008, Problem-solving in the
field: Novice to expert geologic mapping strategies, behavior, and cognition: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 40, no. 6,
p. 351.
Pick, H.L., Heinrichs, M.R., Montello, D.R., Smith, K., and Sullivan, N.C.,
1995, Topographic map reading, in Hancock, P.A., Flach, J.M., Caird, J.,
and Vincente, K.J., eds., Local Applications of the Ecological Approach
to Human-Machine Systems: Hillsdale, New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum,
p. 255284.
Richardson, A.E., Montello, D.R., and Hegarty, M., 1999, Spatial knowledge
acquisition from maps and from navigation in real and virtual environments: Memory & Cognition, v. 27, p. 741750.
Riggs, E.M., Lieder, C.C., and Balliet, R.N., 2009, Geologic problem solving
in the field: Analysis of field navigation and mapping by advanced undergraduates: Journal of Geological Education, v. 57, p. 4863.
Schofield, N.J., and Kirby, J.R., 1994, Position location on topographical maps:
Effects of task factors, training, and strategies: Cognition and Instruction,
v. 12, p. 3560, doi: 10.1207/s1532690xci1201_2.
Tretinjak, C.A., and Riggs, E.M., 2008, Enhancement of geology content
knowledge through field-based instruction for pre-service elementary
teachers: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 56, p. 422433.
Zsambok, C.E., and Klein, G., 1997, Naturalistic Decision Making: Mahwah,
New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 414 p.
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY 5 MAY 2009
ABSTRACT
There is little argument that field course experiences are both complex and unique
in the range of learning experiences provided to students. Conversely, they offer logistical
and cost challenges that might cause one to question whether they provide a sufficient
cost-benefit ratio to warrant continuation, particularly in a climate where resources have
become scarce. In such a climate, it is important to have on hand rigorous data that support assertions of learning effectiveness. Many of the data supporting the evaluation of
field course experiences can come from an analysis of assessments of student performance
relative to course goals, but these data alone may not provide sufficient support. A close
examination of faculty actions relative to student learning outcomes, as well as a researchbased analysis of course curricula designed to best support student learning, can provide
two additional sources of data. When used in concert with student assessment data, evaluative success can be triangulated. A consistent set of tools in this evaluative framework
also provides information on specific areas for maximizing student learning. This chapter
outlines such a set of tools, using a specific field course experience that is in transition
as a model. Pilot data collected within the existing field course experience structure are
discussed in a manner that informs the development of performance assessments, instructional actions, and curricular organization. Using data derived from these sources, evaluations of field course experiences can be used to better articulate the cost-benefit ratio in
terms of student learning in the cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains.
INTRODUCTION
There is little doubt that field camp experiences, or field
course experiences, are intensive of financial, faculty, and material resources. As costs have risen, it is not an unreasonable question to ask if the investment is worth the outcome. A cursory
review of the intended outcomes of field course experiences,
as posted online (Baker, 2006; King, 2009) provides a generally consistent view that field course experiences serve to hone
students skills, prepare them for the workplace, allow them to
apply classroom-based learning to real situations, serve as a capstone learning experience, or immerse them in the conventions
and expectations of professional geoscientists. These outcomes
Pyle, E.J., 2009, The evaluation of field course experiences: A framework for development, improvement, and reporting, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and
Pyle, E.J., eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological Society of America Special Paper 461, p. 341356, doi:
10.1130/2009.2461(26). For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org. 2009 The Geological Society of America. All rights reserved.
341
342
Pyle
343
After completing the field course, you will be qualified to work for
an industrial, governmental, or academic employer who needs you to
make your own way to an isolated village in a foreign country, assess
the local geology, natural resources, natural hazards, environmental
conditions, etc., write a project report, draft a publishable map, generate a data base, and return home safely. The main objective is for you
to become confident at scientific observation, interpretation, and solution of geological problems in the field. You will learn to recognize and
interpret a wide variety of rock types, structures, and geomorphic features. We will place emphasis on methods of map-making, data recording, and report preparation. Projects from one to five days duration will
be conducted in well-exposed igneous, metamorphic, and sedimentary
rocks, ranging in age from Precambrian through Quaternary and correlative to rocks and sediments of the northern Appalachians.
344
Pyle
Task
Week
345
Nature
Independent mapping
10
Figure 3. Changes in student reports of prior experience, perceived learning, and perceived utility of exercises across the span of the 2008 James
Madison University field course.
for future offerings of the JMU field course experience are used
as examples in each of these contexts.
STUDENT ASSESSMENT
The available literature on student assessment in field
course experiences is focused to a large extent on the cognitive
outcomes, identifying the content of what should be learned in
field course experiences by different audiences (Anderson and
Miskimins, 2006) or comparing field and laboratory components
of a students program experience (Noll, 2003). Measures of
student learning are largely quantitative but limited to objective
test or pre- to postexperience comparisons. There is an implicit
346
Pyle
347
TABLE 1. COGNITIVE TAXONOMIC ELEMENTS REFERENCED WITH RESPECT TO POTENTIAL FIELD COURSE
EXPERIENCE TASKS OR EXPECTATIONS OF STUDENTS, WITH ACTIVE VERBS TO FRAME THE OBJECTIVE
Cognitive level
Sample verb s
Earth science concept
Knowledge
Define, describe, identify
Rock texture, RFM identification
Comprehension Interpolate, estimate, predict
Draw contour lines from elevation data
Application
Compute, modify, relate, use
Graph a topographic cross section
Analysis
Diagram, divide, infer
Plot fold axis on a map
Synthesis
Arrange, generate, design
Construct a geologic map from field data
Evaluation
Contrast, interpret, appraise
Assess landslide hazards from map data
RFMrock-forming mineral.
Dispositions
The third domain to consider in the preparation of geoscientists deals with the starting point in thinking and acting, namely,
ones dispositions and habits of mind. Arguably, these starting
points are first governed by the affective domain, which is concerned largely with feelings and emotions, but they are not limited this area. Instead, they drive the basic template of a students
approach to a problem or unique situation, and they strongly
influence attitudes and potential actions (Azjen and Fishbein,
1980). Like knowledge and skills, affective dimensions can be
taxonomically arranged (Krathwohl et al., 1973), as in Table 3.
Among the three domains discussed here, dispositions
and affect are perhaps the most difficult to measure or assess.
More importantly, they are likely the objectives most difficult to
explain to those outside of the geosciences, or for that matter, any
science. However, they are also clearly a part of the covert curriculum, and few instructors would not attach some value or professional satisfaction to students clearly attaining these objectives.
The knowledge, skills, and dispositions outlined here are a
first step in representing the structure of the discipline in instruction and assessment. Returning to the structure of the discipline,
assessment items or tasks can be built around: (1) knowledgebased representations, as distinct from knowledge as beliefs
described previously; (2) lexical representations of terminology specific to context; and (3) prototypes or exemplars, which
are in part model or graphical representations of phenomena
(Smith, 1995; Lawrence and Margolis, 1999; Murphy 2002;
Sibley, 2005). More specific task/item examples are provided
in Table 4.
TABLE 2. PSYCHOMOTOR TAXONOMIC ELEMENTS USEFUL TO FIELD COURSE INSTRUCTION AND ASSESSMENT
Psychomotor
Sample indicators
Earth science action
level
Imitation
Crude reproduction of action based on
Determination of mineral sample physical properties, such as hardness, streak,
observation and minimal practice
or observing cleavage
Manipulation
Performance from instruction with attention Measurement and data encoding using a Brunton compass or Jacobs staff
to form
Precision
Accuracy, proportion, and exactness in
Collection of physical and chemical data at several points along a stream
performance, with minimal error
Articulation
Coordinating a series of acts with harmony Map generation from a series of station measurements, plotted on a base map
and consistency
Naturalization
Smooth, natural performance with minimum Generation of finished maps that reflect multiple layers of data collection and
of psychic energy
procedures and coordinate well with field notes and diagrams
348
Pyle
TABLE 3. AFFECTIVE TAXONOMIC ELEMENTS THAT SHOULD INFLUENCE FIELD COURSE INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN
AND STUDENT ASSESSMENT
Dispositional
Sample indicators
Earth science action
level
Receiving
Follow directions, locate, identify
Following along with a field trip guidebook as a part of a field trip
Responding
Complete assigned tasks at or above level
Once a local geologic map has been studied, seeking out a regional
required, or for self-satisfaction
geologic map to see larger context
Valuing
Accept, prefer, and commit to scientific values
More than one measurement of a particular parameter is sought in each
location
Organizing
Personal values are brought into line with scientific Each field investigation is approached with a set of questions framed on
values
methodologies and possible outcomes
Characterizing
Lifestyle adoption indicative of a preference for
Active seeking of communications with other students and faculty on
scientific values
geological issues
TABLE 4. FIELD COURSE EXPERIENCE ASSESSMENT ELEMENTS, PROVIDING A BASIS FOR RUBRIC DEVELOPMENT AND
ASSESSMENT PLANNING
Structure
Sample task within field course
Rationale from knowledge, skills, and dispositions
KnowledgeBased on observations of current stream conditions and local erosion
Knowledgedistinguishing beliefs from prior
based
and sedimentation patterns, making a prediction of how the stream
knowledge, applied to novel situation
changes when flow reaches flood conditions.
Skillsmeasurements and observational descriptions
of setting
Dispositionsuse of more than one parameter in
making the prediction
Lexical
Correctly applying terminology in a lithologic description using texture,
Knowledgerecall and appropriate application of
and mineralogy, and internal features or structures.
terminology
Skillseffectively communicating descriptions in
written or oral form
Dispositionsusing a variety of descriptive terms in a
manner that reflects possible contexts
Prototype
Constructing an accurate cross section from a map, or distinguishing
Knowledgesynthesizing an analogy representing the
the correct cross section from distracters, stating reasons for rejection. distribution and orientation of materials
Skillsdrafting a cross section with consistency of
measurement, to scale, from the map
Dispositionscross section contains all necessary
detail, drafted in a manner that communicates clearly
the interpretations drawn
349
TABLE 5. APPLICATION OF ASSESSMENT STRUCTURE ELEMENTS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF RUBRIC STRANDS FOR
THE ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT WORK IN FIELD COURSE EXERCISES, WITH EXEMPLAR STATEMENTS
Task element
Knowledge, skills,
Exemplar/mastery
Assessment
and dispositions
structure
Lithologic description
Knowledge, skill
Description includes accurate information on rock type, mineralogy, grain
Knowledge, lexical
size and range, texture, and special characteristics, in clear language with
proper syntax and grammar.
Structural
Knowledge, skill
Structural interpretations are directly supported by measurements; inferred
Prototype
representation
structures are distinguished from those directly observed; both small- and
large-scale structures are represented.
Symbology/
Skill
Correct symbols and markings are used for structural features, contacts,
Prototype
marking
internal features; these symbols show proper orientation and position;
appropriate density to support inferences; clear and unambiguous
representation of measurements and observations; measurements include all
important features of base-map area.
Presentation
Skill, disposition
Clean, neat; meets or approaches professional standards; layout of legend,
Prototype
key, etc., is clear and supportive of map presentation. Attention to detail is
evident.
Field book
Skill, knowledge, Majority of both major and minor features are captured through complete
Knowledge, lexical
affect
written and graphical descriptions; measurements and observations are
organized for easy review, retrieval, and interpretation; handwriting is clear
and legible.
Supporting materials,
Skill, disposition
Supporting materials are directly tied to specific inferences; measurements
Knowledge,
e.g., stereonet plots,
(scale, angles, etc.) are accurate; materials are clear/focused and legible.
prototype
data tables, etc.
points will also enhance the utility of the assessment data in the
overall evaluation framework.
ASSESSMENT, INSTRUCTORS, AND INSTRUCTION
As previously stated, program evaluations that provide
meaningful information collect data from a variety of sources
and data that represent a variety of participants, faculty being one
of these groups. It is generally expected for the design of field
course experience activities to adhere to the goals of the course,
but it seems a disservice to both the faculty and the program as
a whole to limit faculty evaluation data to summative, end-ofcourse student evaluations of instruction. There are biases inherent in the administration and use of these instruments in higher
education classrooms, as has been documented (Fox and Hackerman, 2003). However, if these instruments are biased, there is no
guarantee that anecdotal information from student written comments is any less biased. Typically, these instruments are designed
for in-class use and do not necessarily reflect the complexity of
instruction in field course experiences, nor do they necessarily
capture student responses relative to skills or dispositional learning. With the nearly full-time contact between faculty and students in field course experiences, there is the real prospect of an
atmosphere in which personality is a contributor to recollection
of past activities, by both students and faculty. If student assessments are to be explicit and largely objective, then faculty assessment as a function of evaluation should employ a more rigorous
methodology that can demonstrate both validity and reliability.
As described already, the 2008 JMU field course experience
was a transitional year, bringing in a variety of faculty new to
both the geological as well as instructional context. Drawing on
the faculty expertise, elements that were previously piloted, such
350
Pyle
351
352
Pyle
of undergraduate students through the geosciences concept inventory (GCI), but this instrument was intended to be used in large
introductory geology courses. An instructor should ask, What
are the preconceptions of students in field course experiences? A
reasonable assumption would be that, since they had presumably
mastered the basic knowledge, skills, and dispositions in previous
courses, preconceptions held by students would be supplanted
by scientifically sound and representative ideas. However, there
seems to be little data to support that assertion. Field course experience evaluation frameworks thus should use an analysis of student preconceptions to inform instructional design.
As was stated already, the goals and objectives of field course
experiences are intended to be oriented toward the knowledge,
skills, and dispositions necessary to geologists. Thus, the nature
of geoscience inquiry is of high importance. When learning and
practicing the use of equipment in the field, making and recording
systematic observations, and making reasonable interpretations,
students are engaged in the forms of inquiry that are conventional
to the geosciences (Kitts, 1977; Frodeman, 2003; Pyle, 2008).
Since the bulk of student objectives and assessment in field course
experiences are skill-focused, it is appropriate that these data be
used as a part of program evaluation, especially since assessment
data may be cross-referenced to course goals and faculty actions.
Finally, the decision of the skills to employ, the knowledge
to access, and persistence to a task are all driven by the executive,
or metacognitive, function. Complete mastery is not a necessary
prerequisite to field course experience tasks, but a student who
has been prepared in a manner that integrates geoscience knowledge, skills, and dispositions, scaffolded from their preconceptions to strong geoscience metacognition, can begin to recognize
the skills and knowledge to access in a given field situation. This
function is often assumed to have occurred within successful students, and it may well be used as a part of program assessment
when consulting alumni, but an analysis of the sense that students have of their increased knowledge, skills, and dispositions
has largely been undocumented in the evaluation of field course
experiences. Thus, if learning is to be documented as a part of
an evaluation, it would be well served to include information on
metacognition, particularly with respect to student skills and dispositions. If such an evaluation were to include clear documentation of changed student metacognition related to field course
experience goals, any case for curricular decisions would be that
much more compelling. A summary of these elements, cross-referenced with learning objective categories suggesting how work
by Bransford and his colleagues (2000) can be applied to field
course experiences, is presented in Table 7.
In prior offerings of the JMU field course experience, the
precourse questionnaire asked students to indicate whether they
had taken certain core courses or not. For the 2008 offering, this
same information was collected, along with a request for their
personal feelings of competence with the content represented in
these courses, as a proxy for potential preconceptions. These data
do not provide strong information on student preconceptions, but
they do suggest that it would be fruitful to probe deeper into students knowledge base, particularly in course areas (1) that they
feel particularly comfortable with, (2) that they may be uncomfortable with, and (3) the intersection of these areas with field
course experience objectives. These data will be collected from
the 2009 field course experience participants. By sampling KSDs
from among the KSDs inherent in the core courses, informal
interviews with students will focus on preconceptions before a
given exercise and on metacognitive strategies after an exercise.
The 2008 offering can be seen as a high-water mark between
a traditional orientation toward analog geologic mapping skills,
and one that is inclusive of both traditional as well as digital
techniques. These were implemented as complementary techniques throughout the curriculum. During 2008, however, an
environmental science strand was piloted in which each student
participated, and whereby geologic mapping techniques were
complemented by field techniques in stream and landslide geomorphology. This was based in part on perceived student interests and needs, and this was underscored by the data collected
from the crude measurements employed at the onset of the field
course experience and drove an evolution toward curricular
change. As a result, the 2009 curriculum will develop in students
a common set of traditional as well as digital mapping skills, and
then allow them to select either a geologic or environmental science track that is geared more toward independent work. This
design is built around a model that is intended to develop habits
of mind as much as it is to solidify skills and enhance knowledge,
embedding students first in a structured inquiry setting (Bell et
al., 2005), and then into a more guided setting. As students progress toward the final weeks of the course, they will be engaged in
independent mapping or environmental projects, where not only
TABLE 7. APPLICATION OF THE HOW STUDENTS LEARN SCIENCE FRAMEWORK TO STUDENT OBJECTIVE
AND ASSESSMENT CATEGORIES
Domain
Preconceptions
Inquiry
Metacognition
Knowledge
Factual knowledge, use of
Applies terminology to new situations in order to Uses and adopts new terminology
terminology
analyze situation or synthesize interpretations
and concepts in novel situations
Skills
Use of compass, hand-lens, other Designs and conducts investigation through a
Communicates with confidence
tools
variety of data sources
the results of work in written and
visual form
Dispositions
Ability to measure and record data Consistently applies skills and knowledge with
Expresses clear self-evaluation of
and observations accurately and
integrity, generates and tests multiple
abilities, strengths, and
consistently
hypotheses and interpretations
weaknesses
353
354
Pyle
355
REFERENCES CITED
The course will teach students how GPS navigation and digital mapping and data analysis using geographic information systems
(GIS) can facilitate fieldwork and improve the understanding of the
geology. Working with sedimentary, metamorphic, and igneous rocks,
students learn how to make methodical observations, accurate recordings, and sound interpretations of the geology seen in outcrop. Exercises include measurement and analysis of sedimentary sections, construction of geologic maps, structural analysis of folds and faults, slope
stability analysis, and environmental assessments. Students will learn
Acheson, K.A., and Gall, M.D., 1997, Techniques in the Clinical Supervision of
Teachers (4th ed.): New York, Longman, 288 p.
Anderson, C.W., 1987, Strategic teaching in science, in Jones, B.F., et al., eds.,
Strategic Teaching and Learning: Cognitive Instruction in the Content
Areas: Alexandria, Virginia, Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development, p. 7391.
Anderson, D.S., and Miskimins, J.L., 2006, Using field-camp experiences to
develop a multidisciplinary foundation for petroleum engineering students: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 54, no. 2, p. 172178.
356
Pyle
Astin, A.W., Banta, T.W., Cross, K.P., El-Khawas, E., Ewell, P.T., Hutchings, P.,
Marchese, T.J., McClenney, M., Mentkowski, M., Miller, M.A., Moran,
E.T., and Wright, B.D., 1996, Assessment forum: 9 principles of good
practice for assessing student learning: Washington, D.C., American
Association for Higher Education, http://www.facet.iupui.edu/resources/
AAHE%20Principles.pdf (accessed 11 March 2009).
Atkin, J.M., and Coffey, J.E., 2003, Everyday Assessment in the Science Classroom: Arlington, Virginia, National Science Teachers Association, 184 p.
Ault, C.R., Jr., 1998, Criteria of excellence for geological inquiry: The necessity of
ambiguity: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 35, no. 2, p. 189212,
doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199802)35:2<189::AID-TEA8>3.0.CO;2-O.
Ajzen, I., and Fishbein, M., 1980, Understanding Attitudes and Predicting
Social Behavior: Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, 278 p.
Baker, M.A., 2006, Status Report on Geoscience Summer Field Camps: Washington, D.C., American Geological Institute, Report GW-06-003, 8 p.
Bell, R.L., Smetana, L., and Binns, I., 2005, Simplifying inquiry instruction:
Assessing the inquiry level of classroom activities: Science Teacher (Normal, Illinois), v. 72, no. 7, p. 3033.
Bloom, B.S., 1956, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook I: The
Cognitive Domain: New York, David McKay Co., 196 p.
Boyer, E.L., 1990, Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate:
Princeton, New Jersey, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching, 160 p.
Boyle, A., Maguire, S., Martin, A., Milsom, C., Nash, R., Rawlinson, S., Turner,
A., Wurthmann, S., and Conchie, S., 2007, Fieldwork is good: The student
perspective and the affective domain: Journal of Geography in Higher
Education, v. 31, no. 2, p. 299317, doi: 10.1080/03098260601063628.
Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., and Cocking, R.R., eds., 2000, How People
Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School: Washington, D.C., National
Academies Press, 374 p.
Butler, R., 2008, Teaching geoscience through fieldwork: Bradford, UK, Geography, Earth, and Environmental Sciences (GEES), http://www.gees
.ac.uk/pubs/ guides/fw/fwgeosci.pdf (accessed 11 March 2009).
Bybee, R.W., ed., 2002, Learning Science and the Science of Learning: Arlington, Virginia, National Science Teachers Association, 151 p.
Chamberlin, T.C., 1897, The method of multiple working hypotheses: The
Journal of Geology, v. 5, p. 837848.
Chi, M.T.H., Feltovich, P.J., and Glaser, R., 1981, Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices: Cognitive Science, v. 5,
p. 121152.
Chiappetta, E.L., and Koballa, T.R., 2006, Science Instruction in the Middle
and Secondary Schools: Developing Fundamental Knowledge and Skills
for Teaching (6th ed.): New York, Allyn and Bacon, 320 p.
Dave, R.H., 1975, Developing and writing behavioral objectives (Armstrong,
R.J., ed.): Tucson, Arizona, Educational Innovators Press.
Duit, R., 2006, Students and Teachers Conceptions and Science Education:
Kiel, Germany, Institut fr die Pdagogik der Naturwissenschaften, http://
www.ipn.uni-kiel.de/aktuell/stcse/stcse.html (accessed 11 March 2009).
Ebert-May, D., 1998, Annotated Version of Potential Activities and Assessment for Faculty Professional Development Workshops: http://darkwing
.uoregon.edu/~first/examples.htm (accessed 5 September 2009).
Fox, M.A., and Hackerman, N., eds., 2003, Evaluating and Improving Undergraduate Teaching in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Washington, D.C., National Academies Press, 232 p.
Frechtling, J., 2002, The 2002 User-Friendly Handbook to Project Evaluation:
Arlington, Virginia, National Science Foundation, Report NSF 02-057, 92 p.
Frodeman, R., 1995, Geological reasoning: Geology as an interpretive and historical science: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 107, no. 8, p. 960
968, doi: 10.1130/0016-7606(1995)107<0960:GRGAAI>2.3.CO;2.
Frodeman, R., 2003, Geo-logic: Breaking the Ground between Philosophy
and the Earth Sciences: Albany, New York, State University of New York
Press, 192 p.
Gardner, H., 1993, The Unschooled Mind: How Children Think and How
Schools Should Teach: Cambridge, Massachusetts, Basic Books, 320 p.
Goetz, J.P., and LeCompte, M.D., 1984, Ethnography and Qualitative Design
in Educational Research: San Diego, California, Academic Press, 292 p.
Hemler, D., and Repine, T., 2006, Teachers doing science: An authentic geology research experience for teachers: Journal of Geoscience Education,
v. 54, no. 2, p. 93102.
Hughes, P., and Boyle, A., 2005, Assessment in the Earth Sciences, Environmental Sciences, and Environmental Studies: Bradford, UK, Geography,
Earth, and Environmental Sciences (GEES), 47 p.
Huntoon, J.E., Bluth, G.J.S., and Kennedy, W.A., 2001, Measuring the effects
of a research-based field experience on undergraduates and K12 teachers: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 49, no. 3, p. 235248.
Kesidou, S., and Roseman, J.E., 2002, How well do middle school science programs measure up? Findings from Project 2061s curriculum review: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 39, no. 6, p. 522549, doi: 10.1002/
tea.10035.
King, H.M., 2009, Geology field campsComprehensive listing: http://
geology.com/field-camp.shtml (accessed 10 March 2009).
Kitts, D.B., 1977, The Structure of Geology: Dallas, Texas, SMU Press, 199 p.
Kizlik, B., 2009, Measurement, Assessment, and Evaluation in Education:
http://www.adprima.com/measurement.htm (accessed 10 March 2009).
Krathwohl, D.R., Bloom, B.S., and Masia, B.B., 1973, Taxonomy of Education
Objectives, the Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook II: Affective Domain: New York, David McKay Co., 196 p.
Lawrence, S., and Margolis, E., 1999, Concepts and cognitive science, in Margolis, E., and Lawrence, S., eds., Concepts: Cambridge, Massachusetts,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, p. 383.
Libarkin, J.C., and Anderson, S.W., 2005, Assessment of learning in entry-level
geoscience courses: Results from the geoscience concept inventory: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53, no. 3, p. 394401.
Mestre, J.P., and Cocking, R.R., 2000, The science of learning: Journal of
Applied Developmental Psychology, v. 21, no. 1, Special Issue, p. 1135.
Murphy, G.L., 2002, The Big Book of Concepts: Cambridge, Massachusetts,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, 563 p.
Noll, M.R., 2003, Building bridges between field and laboratory studies in an
undergraduate groundwater course: Journal of Geoscience Education,
v. 51, no. 2, p. 231236.
ONeal, M.L., 2003, Field-based research experience in earth science teacher
education: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 51, no. 1, p. 6470.
Pyle, E.J., 2008, A model of inquiry for teaching earth science: Electronic
Journal of Science Education, v. 12, no. 2, http://ejse.southwestern.edu/
volumes/v12n2/articles/art1-pyle.pdf (accessed 11 March 2009).
Resnick, L.B., 1983, Mathematics and science learning: A new conception: Science, v. 220, p. 477478, doi: 10.1126/science.220.4596.477.
Sibley, D.F., 2005, Visual abilities and misconceptions about plate tectonics:
Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53, no. 4, p. 471477.
Simpson, E.J., 1972, The Classification of Educational Objectives in the Psychomotor Domain: Washington, D.C., Gryphon House.
Smith, E., 1995, Concepts and categorization, in Smith, E., and Osherson, D.,
eds., Thinking: An Invitation to Cognitive Science, Volume 3: Cambridge,
Massachusetts, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press p. 333.
Trowbridge, L.W., Bybee, R.W., and Powell, J.C., 2004, Teaching Secondary
School Science: Strategies for Developing Scientific Literacy (8th ed.):
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, 384 p.
Zimpher, N., 1998, Ten changing demands on college teachers in the future,
in Changing Demands on College Teachers: A Conference on Teaching
Support Providers, 27 April, Columbus, Ohio: http://web.archive.org/
web/20040606130612/http://www.acs.ohio-state.edu/education/ftad/
Publications/ten-nancy.html.
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY 5 MAY 2009
Contents J
OF AMERICA