Virtual Field Experiences in Introductory Geology: Addressing a Capacity Problem, but Finding a Pedagogical One

Abstract:

Student enrollment in geoscience at the University of Calgary has approximately quadrupled over the past two decades. This has caused significant strain on departmental resources including lab/field equipment and faculty/staff workload. With introductory classes ranging from 300-500 students, important activities such as field trips are logistical impossibilities and the impact on the student experience in terms of quality of learning and engagement is major and negative. Field experience is fundamental to the geoscience curriculum, but is presently lacking until the summer before third year.  

To mitigate the absence of field experience, we propose the use of Virtual Field Experiences (VFEs). VFEs are web-based explorations that approximate field experiences wherein students engage in inquiry-based exploration of geoscientific principles. Field data ranging from gigapan photographs of mountains to photomicrographs of rock thin sections are gathered from a location of interest. Data arrangement happens in a hyperlinked presentation format that allows students the freedom to explore the data in a nonlinear fashion.  

The co-PIs in this project share a concern for the state of field activities in the first two years of the geology and geophysics programs. Our initial proposal is to develop at least three VFEs to address a broad range of relevant geoscience principles ranging from introductory to advanced levels of study. The initial development would begin in spring 2016, with pilots of the VFEs in 2016-17 and full implementation during the 2017-2018 academic year. The second year would include a qualitative and quantitative assessment of the efficacy of the VFEs.

Goals for Understanding or Improving Student learning

As a result of the VFEs, students in geology and geophysics will have an improved ability to:

• Develop an approach for investigating a field site

• Identify geographical features and explain the geologic processes that formed them

• Identify and analyze rocks in hand sample and in the laboratory

• Describe relationships between rock sections and outcrops

• Visualize three-dimensional rock structures such as stratigraphic sequences, faults and folds

• Engage (both individually and collaboratively) in open-ended problem solving

• Communicate the foregoing to peers in the scientific community

Context & Inquiry

Due to a rapid increase in student enrollment in the geoscience program coupled with a relatively steady number of faculty members, there has been a gradual decrease in the capacity of the department to offer field experiences in the first two years of student course work. A recent review by the geoscience undergraduate committee found that only two courses during the first two years of a geology degree currently include a field component, either in the form of outdoor labs or an optional field trip. Instructors cite high student numbers, and cold, unpredictable weather in the Winter semester as limiting factors for the incorporation of field work in their courses.

In addition to a mastery of fundamental theoretical concepts, there is also a set of practical skills necessary for success in geoscience. Many of these skills are highlighted in the Department of Geoscience’s recently developed “Learning Outcomes” document, including identifying minerals and rocks, appreciating the various spatial and temporal scales of geologic phenomena, visualizing structures and processes created by geologic phenomena, problem solving, collaboration, and communication. Lab components of introductory courses tend to address these skills in a piecemeal and often decontextualized manner. VFEs, on the other hand, address each of the skills, often in tandem, and contextualize them through association with the location under investigation.

The University of Calgary has several technology resources (e.g. touch tables, ICT 3-D visualization room) that can help enhance the visualization and student interactivity of VFEs. We understand and acknowledge that the VFE cannot and should not replace actual fieldwork; however, the status quo in the first two years of the geoscience program is inadequate field experiences (virtual or real). Given the current strain on departmental resources, VFEs would bridge the gap in field experience, generating a positive impact on the learning and skill development in students. Two questions we would like to explore during this project are:

1. How can we leverage the opportunities that technology at the university offers to develop meaningful Virtual Field Experiences (VFEs) for student learning?

2. How can VFEs augment geoscience students’ educational experiences and skill development?

Grounded in existing scholarship

Orion and Ault (2007) distinguish Earth science from other sciences based on its reliance on historical methods (Dodick & Argamon, 2006; Frodeman, 1995; Turner, 2013), spatial reasoning (Kastens & Ishikawa, 2006; Liben & Titus, 2012) and visual representation (Kali & Orion, 1996; Rapp & Uttal, 2006). Properly constructed and executed, VFEs can address all of these components of Earth science.

A reliance on historical methods refers to the idea that geologists have access to the results of some cause or phenomenon, and the purpose of investigation is to determine that cause (Cleland, 2013). We can address this point in terms of the inquiry of the completed VFE. Inquiry here refers to students engaging in scientifically oriented questions, prioritizing evidence in the creation of an explanation, connecting explanations to other scientific knowledge and communicating/arguing the explanation to others (Bybee, 2006). By posing questions such as “Why does this location look the way it does?” or, “How might you use these rocks to interpret the geologic history of the location?” students need to invoke “retroactive thinking” (Orion & Ault, 2007) to develop an explanation, in terms of past events, to explain modern signs.

Spatial reasoning includes such tasks as describing and interpreting objects, comprehending spatial properties and processes, and using space as a metaphor for non-spatial concepts (Kastens & Ishikawa, 2006). The VFE will have students correlate objects such as landforms, outcrop structures and patterns, to mineral crystals and sediment grains in a similar fashion to an actual field experience. This will encourage students to synthesize two-dimensional observations into three-dimensional images, and work with maps (both topographic and geologic) and geologic cross sections overlain on Google Earth images. This experience will build their skill at visualizing phenomena that influence the shape of the land and fabric of the rock. This will also help develop students’ ability to associate sedimentary bed thickness (for instance) with time; an important skill for a practicing geoscientist.

Finally, we will emphasize the visualization aspect of geoscience with technologies housed on campus such as touch tables, computer workstation classrooms and the visualization room at the Taylor Family Digital Library (TFDL) (and ICT?). The purpose of this aspect is to utilize the visualization technologies to “make complex information accessible and cognitively tractable” (Uttal & O'Doherty, 2008, p 53). These visualization technologies will be instrumental in availing the students of the range of data available to geoscientists (Orion & Ault, 2007), from panoramic photos of landscapes down to photomicrographs of rock thin sections.  

Workshops and publications about creating and utilizing VFEs occur online (cf. http://virtualfieldwork.org/Publications,_Presentations_and_Reports.html), but there appears to be a lack of systematic investigation assessing their efficacy. We stand primed to contribute to such a knowledge base.

Methods Aligned with Inquiry and Goals

The work will occur in four phases, outlined as follows:

Phase One (Data Collection): We will create at least three different VFEs focussing on a broad enough range of concepts from geology and geophysics that would allow multiple courses to incorporate their use (e.g. GLGY 201, GLGY 202, GLGY 209, GLGY 301, GLGY 307, GLGY 313, GLGY 333, GLGY 343, GLGY 353, GLGY 381, GOPH 351, GOPH 355) This data collection period would take place in the late spring or early summer of 2016 and would involve bringing in Don Duggan-Haas, PhD, as an expert in VFE construction. Dr. Duggan-Haas will advise us at each of our selected locations on the approach to data collection for VFEs, to the extent that it is idiosyncratic relative to normal geoscientific data collection. Examples of the type of data to be collected are low angle aerial photography of the study area, gigapan photos of the study location, high-resolution images of rock hand samples and geophysical data such as ground penetrating radar (GPR). Gigapan photos are produced from several hundred zoomed high-resolution photos of a distant landscape compiled using computer software to stitch the photos into one large photo, similar to the approach used in creating global maps of Earth and other planets using satellite photos. This technology allows one to zoom out to see the whole landscape, but also to zoom in to see specific rock structures in a particular location of the outcrop, much as one can view the Earth over a range of scales from global to street-level using web-based applications such as Google Earth. In addition, we will collect rock samples to create thin sections for photomicrographs, so the scale of data goes down to the crystal or sediment grain.

Phase Two (Data Curation): Compiling the raw field data into a hyperlinked presentation format of the VFEs will involve substantial effort in terms of data selection, maintenance and archiving. To accomplish this task we will hire a student research assistant (RA) to act as the digital curator of the VFE data. Under the supervision of the co-PIs, the RA will create the gigapans, thin sections and photomicrographs, compile the data from each location into a usable hyperlinked digital format (e.g. Prezi.com) and develop a consistent presentation framework for the VFEs. In addition to the actual VFE deliverables, this phase will also involve significant skill development for the RA in terms of data collection and preparation, project management and research communication. The co-PIs will direct the trajectory of the VFE development including the structure of the digital format and inquiry question development. This will happen during the summer and fall of 2016).

Phase Three (VFE Pilots): We will pilot the VFEs in several of the courses listed in Phase One, in cooperation with the applicable instructors. We will observe student interaction when using learning technologies such as touch tables and other visualization tools to ascertain strengths and limitations of the VFEs with the intention of mitigating the limitations if possible. During the pilots, the focus will be on qualitative assessment of the effectiveness of the first draft of the VFEs. Following this qualitative assessment, we will revise the VFE content to address any features that did not seem to support the learning trajectory.

Phase Four (VFE Implementation and Analysis): Following the revisions in Phase Three, we will implement the VFEs in a larger number of courses during the 2017-18 academic year. The co-PIs will utilize pre/post instruments to quantify learning changes in the students. Where data is available, we will quantify the efficacy of the VFEs at building student skills relative to the status quo by comparing performance on laboratory assignments and relevant conceptual examination questions from previous years. We will also collect and analyze qualitative data of a few small groups of participants to gain a more detailed understanding of student experiential learning from a phenomenographic context (Stokes, 2011) as they work in groups and interact with the digital data. Compilation and interpretation of the quantitative and qualitative analysis will take place in the spring of 2018.  

Potential Impact

Development of the proposed VFEs will have both short-term and long-term impacts on the quality of the geoscience program:

1. (Virtual) Place-based education gives students the opportunity to learn about geological phenomena in their own area.

2. The large span of scale (ability to zoom in and out quickly and repetitively) is an advantage to being out in the field where that ability does not exist.

3. Students will develop an approach to fieldwork so that they are better prepared for upper level field schools. As mentioned previously, the VFEs are not meant to replace actual fieldwork, but rather to fill a void in a resource stretched department.

4. Students will develop a sense of retrospective thinking, spatial thinking, and visualization skills.

5. Students will gain additional experience identifying rocks and minerals with appropriate context with respect to their source and origin.

6. The VFEs will be web-based, and so available to anyone with Internet access. In the long-term, this would be a marketable asset of the geoscience program at the University of Calgary.

Dissemination of Results

There are many venues for disseminating the information about the development and efficacy of the VFEs within the University of Calgary and the broader geoscience education academic community.

One excellent opportunity would be the annual University of Calgary Conference on Learning and Teaching in the spring of 2017 (VFE Pilots) and 2018 (VFE Implementation and Efficacy). The co-PIs could also organize workshops on VFE development for other departments that rely on field work, such as bioscience, environmental science, geography and civil/environmental engineering, to help transfer the skills across the Faculty of Science and the Schulich School of Engineering. These workshops can take place both during initial data collection, as well as the following summer once we have refined our methodologies. The Faculty of Science presents Science Teaching Forums on a regular basis, and the Department of Geoscience also has a Friday Afternoon Talk Series (FATS) where we could present findings at various phases of the project, as well as solicit interested faculty members to utilize the VFEs.

The Geological Society of America (GSA) Rocky Mountain Section meeting will be in Calgary during the summer of 2017. One of the co-PIs is chairing the education session aptly titled “Using the Rocky Mountains as a Natural Laboratory”. This would afford us the opportunity to run a workshop on VFE development to a broader, international audience beyond the University of Calgary. The VFE concept could also be featured in a workshop at the Geological Association of Canada’s annual GAC-MAC conference in the spring of 2018.

Journals such as the Journal of Geoscience Education and the Journal of College Science Teaching could publish the VFE construction and implementation data. Other Journals such as Science Education and Journal of Research in Science Teaching would be appropriate venues for the research on student learning. We would encourage the RA hired for Phase Two to be a co-author on all publications and presentations, thereby also closing the “gap” in the research cycle of disseminating results to the professional community (Walkington, 2014).

Published research results: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10899995.2018.1547034

Bybee, R. W. (2006). Scientific inquiry and science teaching. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education (pp. 1-14). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

Cleland, C. E. (2013). Common cause explanation and the search for smoking gun. In V. R. Baker (Ed.), Rethinking the fabric of geology: Geologic Society of America Special Paper 502 (pp. 1-9). Denver, CO: Geologic Society of America.

Dodick, J., & Argamon, S. (2006). Rediscovering the historical methodology of the earth sciences by analyzing scientific communication styles. In C. A. Manduca & D. W. Mogk (Eds.), Earth and Mind: How Geologists Think and Learn about the Earth: Geological Society of America Special Paper 413 (pp. 77-93). Denver, CO: Geological Society of America.

Frodeman, R. (1995). Geological reasoning: Geology as an interpretive and historical science. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 107, 960-968.  

Kali, Y., & Orion, N. (1996). Relationship between Earth sincere education and spatial visualization. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 369-391.  

Kastens, K. A., & Ishikawa, T. (2006). Spatial thinking in the geosciences and cognitive sciences: A cross-disciplinary look at the intersection of the two fields. Special papers(413), 53-76.  

Liben, L. S., & Titus, S. J. (2012). The importance of spatial thinking for geoscience education: Insights from the crossroads of geoscience and cognitive science. In K. A. Kastens & C. A. Manduca (Eds.), Earth an Mind II: A Synthesis of Research on Thinking and Learning in the Geosciences: Geological Society of America Special Paper 486 (pp. 51-70). Denver, CO: Geological Society of America.

Orion, N., & Ault, C., R. (2007). Learning earth sciences. In S. Abell & N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook on research on science education (pp. 653-688). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates Publishers.

Rapp, D. N., & Uttal, D. H. (2006). Understanding and enhancing visualizations: Two models of collaboration between earth science and cognitive science. In C. A. Manduca & D. W. Mogk (Eds.), Earth and Mind: How Geologists Think and Learn about the Earth: Geological Society of America Special Paper 413 (pp. 121-127). Denver, Co: Geological Society of America.

Stokes, A. (2011). A phenomenographic approach to investigating students' conceptions of geoscience as an academic discipline. In A. Feig & A. Stokes (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry in geoscience education research. Special Paper 474 (pp. 23-36). Boulder, CO: Geological Society of America.

Turner, D. (2013). Hisotrical geology: Methodology and metaphysics. In V. R. Baker (Ed.), Rethinking the fabric of geology: Geological Society of America Special Paper 502 (pp. 11-18). Denver, CO: Geological Society of America.

Uttal, D. H., & O'Doherty, K. (2008). Comprehending and learning from 'visualizations': A developmental perspective. In J. K. Gilbert, M. Reiner, & M. Nakhleh (Eds.), Visualization: Theory and Practice in Science Education (pp. 53-72). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

Walkington, H. (2014). GEOverse: An undergraduate research journal: Research dissemination within and beyond the curriculum. In V. C. H. TOng (Ed.), Geoscience research and education: Teaching at universities (Vol. 20, pp. 189-198). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.