Search

The geosciences have a pervasive, persistent, and deeply troubling lack of diversity, despite the availability of a suite of well-documented, research-based strategies for broadening participation in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics). The pervasiveness, persistence, and depth of the problem indicate that the lack of diversity is systemic, and is embedded in the culture of our discipline, including in the academic departments where future geoscientists are educated. Shifting the demographics of our community will therefore require changing the culture of geoscience, including within our departments. Departmental change is possible and can be accelerated intentionally. Levers for cultural change include using data to illuminate the need; incentivizing the work that closes equity gaps and builds inclusive environments; and developing a departmental community of practice committed to just, equitable outcomes. Departmental discussion groups can facilitate and support both the development of a community of practice and the ongoing work of the community, including identifying context-appropriate solutions from the research literature. The SAGE 2YC project (Supporting and Advancing Geoscience Education at Two-Year Colleges) has used discussion groups to raise awareness and understanding of the factors leading to homogeneity in the geoscience community and of the strategies for achieving equity and inclusion. SAGE 2YC participants have successfully closed or narrowed equity gaps. As scientists, we have the skills necessary to gather, analyze, and interpret relevant data and to evaluate the efficacy of strategies we implement. As humans, we have the moral and ethical responsibility to do this work to improve equity and inclusion in STEM.

Spatial visualization is an essential prerequisite for understanding geological features at all scales, such as the atomic structures of minerals, the geometry of a complex fault system, or the architecture of sedimentary deposits. Undergraduate geoscience majors bring a range of spatial skill levels to upper-level courses. Fortunately, spatial thinking improves with practice, and students benefit from intentional training. Several promising teaching strategies have emerged from recent cognitive science research into spatial thinking: gesturing, predictive sketching, and comparison, including analogy and alignment. Geoscience educators have traditionally incorporated many of these tools in their teaching, though not always consciously, intentionally, and in the most effective ways. Our research team, composed of geoscientists and cognitive psychologists, has collaborated to develop curricular materials for mineralogy, structural geology, and sedimentology and stratigraphy courses that incorporate these strategies intentionally and purposefully, supporting student understanding of the spatially challenging concepts and skills in these courses. Collectively, these two dozen learning activities comprise the Spatial Thinking Workbook (http://serc.carleton.edu/spatialworkbook/index.html). Pre- to posttest gains on a suite of assessment instruments, as well as embedded assessments, show that these curricular materials boost students' spatial thinking skills and strengthen their ability to solve geological problems with a spatial component.

The long geological time needed for landform development and evolution poses a challenge for understanding and appreciating the processes involved. The Web-based Interactive Landform Simulation Model--Grand Canyon (WILSIM-GC, http://serc.carleton.edu/landform/) is an educational tool designed to help students better understand such processes, using the Grand Canyon as an example. Although the project is still ongoing, here, we present the initial results of using the WILSIM-GC in an introductory physical geography laboratory course. We used a quasiexperimental design to assess the efficacy of WILSIM-GC as a tool for teaching landform development and evolution. Students were assigned to a control group or a treatment group, alphabetically by last name. Pretests and posttests were administered to measure students' understanding of the concepts and processes related to Grand Canyon formation and evolution. Results show that, although both the interactive simulation and a more-traditional, paper-based exercise were effective in helping students learn landform evolution processes, there were several advantages and affordances to the simulation approach. The improvement effect from pretest to posttest scores was large for the treatment group, but small to moderate for the control group. In addition, for those questions requiring higher-level thinking, the percentage of students answering correctly was higher in the treatment group than it was in the control group. Furthermore, responses to the attitudinal survey indicate that students generally favor the interactive simulation approach. We can leverage these advantages to enhance students' learning by integrating interactive simulation exercises into curricular materials, including materials for online or hybrid courses and flipped classrooms.

Spatial thinking skills are critical to success in many subdisciplines of the geosciences. We tested students' spatial skills in geoscience courses at three institutions (a public research university, a comprehensive university, and a liberal arts college, all in the midwest) over a two-year period. We administered standard psychometric tests of spatial skills to students in introductory geology, mineralogy, sedimentology and stratigraphy, hydrogeology, structural geology, and tectonics courses. In addition, in some courses we administered a related spatial skills test with geoscience content. In both introductory and upper level undergraduate geology courses, students' skills vary enormously as measured by several spatial thinking instruments. Additionally, students' spatial skills generally improve only slightly during one academic term, in both introductory and advanced geoscience classes. More unexpectedly, while there was a tendency for high-performing students to be adept at multiple spatial skills, many individual students showed strong performance on tests of one spatial skill (e.g., rotation) but not on others (e.g., penetrative thinking). This result supports the contention that spatial problem solving requires a suite of spatial skills, and no single test is a good predictor of "spatial thinking."

This paper presents results from a randomized experimental design replicated over four semesters that compared students' performance in understanding landform evolution processes as measured by the pretest to posttest score growth between two treatment methods: an online interactive simulation tool and a paper-based exercise. While both methods were shown to be effective at enhancing students' learning of the landform concepts and processes, there was no statistically significant difference in score growth between the two instructional methods. However, the attitudinal survey indicated that students consistently favored the simulation approach over the paper-based exercise. With the simulation method, female students showed greater score growth than males, especially for test items requiring higher level thinking. This indicates that the visually rich interactive simulation tool may be integrated to better support female students' learning in geoscience. Science major students generally outperformed non-science major students in terms of score growth, which suggests that background knowledge played an important role in realizing the potential of computer modeling in enhancing students' learning. Sufficient scaffolding is necessary to maximize the effect of interactive earth surface modeling in geoscience education.

Faculty play an important role in attracting students to the geosciences, helping them to thrive in geoscience programs, and preparing them for careers. Thus, faculty have the responsibility to work toward broadening participation in the geosciences by implementing equitable and inclusive practices in their teaching and their programs. Faculty professional development that promotes diversity and inclusion is one way to move evidence-based practices into wider use. The adoption of these practices may be accelerated through a professional development diffusion model that amplifies the impacts through the work of faculty change agents. An example of this approach is the SAGE 2YC professional development program, in which faculty change agents learn and practice strategies during workshop sessions, implement changes in their own teaching, and then work in teams to lead workshops in their region under the auspices of the national program. Although this example focuses on two-year colleges, the model is applicable to faculty professional development more broadly. The success of the model is due in large part to a suite of leader-developed workshop sessions and curated resources that change agent teams may select and adapt for the regional workshops they lead. Furthermore, change agents are trusted colleagues, which makes adoption of the evidence-based practices by regional workshop participants more likely. Increased adoption of a change agent approach to faculty development will support the creation and sharing of additional resources, leading to wider diffusion and implementation of inclusive teaching practices.

Geoscience instructors and textbooks rely on analogy for teaching students a wide range of content, from the most basic concepts to highly complicated systems. The goal of this paper is to connect educational and cognitive science research on analogical thinking with issues of geoscience instruction. Analogies convey that the same basic relationships hold in two different examples. In cognitive science, "analogical comparison" is understood as the process by which a person processes an analogy. We use a cognitive framework for analogy to discuss what makes an effective analogy, the various forms of analogical comparison used in instruction, and the ways that analogical thinking can be supported. Challenges and limitations in using analogy are also discussed, along with suggestions about how these limitations can be addressed to better guide instruction. We end with recommendations about the use of analogy for instruction, and for future research on analogy as it relates to geoscience learning.

Spatial reasoning is a critical skill in the Geosciences. Using a randomized control study with 592 undergraduate students enrolled in introductory and advanced Geology courses, our data indicates that regular, short interventions throughout an academic semester improve students' spatial thinking skills significantly with a moderate to large effect size when compared to an instruction-as-usual control group. We found evidence for additional gains in students who participated also in hands-on training interventions. We found even larger training effects on students who achieved correct scores of >50% on the practice modules, with gains of almost three-quarter of a standard deviation relative to their baseline scores. Male and female students display significant differences in spatial skills, with males outperforming females. Training resulted in similar magnitudes of improvement in both genders, so we see no evidence that the interventions closed the gender gap. Using the initial performance as a baseline, poor performers' spatial skills appear to improve through practice at the same rate as their peers. We argue that 15.4% of students improve their spatial skills through participation in the training towards a threshold that appears to be critical for participation in STEM careers. On a reflection survey, half of the students reported that they felt their spatial thinking skills improved through their participation, and over a third found the training beneficial for their overall learning in Geology or other classes. We hypothesise that formal training opportunities for spatial reasoning could increase the potential pool of students who successfully enter and succeed in Geoscience careers.

Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics ( STEM) disciplines commonly illustrate 3D relationships in diagrams, yet these are often challenging for students. Failing to understand diagrams can hinder success in STEM because scientific practice requires understanding and creating diagrammatic representations. We explore a new approach to improving student understanding of diagrams that convey 3D relations that is based on students generating their own predictive diagrams. Participants' comprehension of 3D spatial diagrams was measured in a pre- and post-design where students selected the correct 2D slice through 3D geologic block diagrams. Generating sketches that predicated the internal structure of a model led to greater improvement in diagram understanding than visualizing the interior of the model without sketching, or sketching the model without attempting to predict unseen spatial relations. In addition, we found a positive correlation between sketched diagram accuracy and improvement on the diagram comprehension measure. Results suggest that generating a predictive diagram facilitates students' abilities to make inferences about spatial relationships in diagrams. Implications for use of sketching in supporting STEM learning are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The long geological time needed for landform development and evolution poses a challenge for understanding and appreciating the processes involved. The Web-based Interactive Landform Simulation Model--Grand Canyon (WILSIM-GC, http://serc.carleton.edu/landform/) is an educational tool designed to help students better understand such processes, using the Grand Canyon as an example. Although the project is still ongoing, here, we present the initial results of using the WILSIM-GC in an introductory physical geography laboratory course. We used a quasiexperimental design to assess the efficacy of WILSIM-GC as a tool for teaching landform development and evolution. Students were assigned to a control group or a treatment group, alphabetically by last name. Pretests and posttests were administered to measure students' understanding of the concepts and processes related to Grand Canyon formation and evolution. Results show that, although both the interactive simulation and a more-traditional, paper-based exercise were effective in helping students learn landform evolution processes, there were several advantages and affordances to the simulation approach. The improvement effect from pretest to posttest scores was large for the treatment group, but small to moderate for the control group. In addition, for those questions requiring higher-level thinking, the percentage of students answering correctly was higher in the treatment group than it was in the control group. Furthermore, responses to the attitudinal survey indicate that students generally favor the interactive simulation approach. We can leverage these advantages to enhance students' learning by integrating interactive simulation exercises into curricular materials, including materials for online or hybrid courses and flipped classrooms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]