Geoscience Education

Feedback Loops 

Feedback loops are systems in which an initial action triggers a chain of influences that either amplifies or counteracts the initial action. Feedback loops are important for understanding emergent system behavior across a range of STEM and liberal arts fields, including the stability that characterizes negative feedback loops (as in physiological regulation, ecological predator-prey balance, economic supply and demand, and climate stability), and the growth, collapse, and instability that result from positive feedback loops (as in compound interest, pandemic disease spread, climate change, nuclear chain reactions, and viral marketing). 

Because feedback loops are powerful elements of so many important systems, feedback loop thinking can empower students to tackle novel problems in unfamiliar contexts. Yet in much of undergraduate instruction, the feedback loop concept is used narrowly, merely to explain one phenomenon of importance in the course, such as the ice-albedo feedback loop that contributes to global climate change in an environmental science course. We developed a suite of mini-lessons that can be adopted/adapted for any course in which at least one feedback loop is currently being taught. The mini-lessons expand feedback loop thinking from the narrow context of one loop to a generalizable concept applicable across multiple disciplines.  

GeoUncertainty 

All scientists must cope with variability in data to make inferences about the world. However, in observation-based geology, how scientists cope with variability is particularly consequential because it determines what becomes data in the first place, with observations that are deemed “too variable” potentially being ignored or minimized. Inour work we have looked at 1. How variability impacts geologists’ willingness to turn an observation into data by recording it, and their willingness to share data by publishing it, and 2. Whether geoscientists can make inferences from variable observations, and how the accuracy of their inferences is impacted by level of variability. Geologists were presented with arrays of disciplinary data representing the orientation of planar features within a rock formation, where orientation variability was systematically manipulated. We found that substantial individual differences in criterion tolerance of variability: high-criterion individuals perceived low-to-moderate degrees of variability as more noise than signal and were never willing to publish high variability data (and often not willing to record it), while those with low criterion perceived low-to-moderate degrees of variability as more signal than noise and were always willing to record high variability data (and often publish it). Regardless of tolerance for variability, geologists overall were good at making accurate orientation estimates from variable data, even at the highest levels of variability employed in the study. Together, these results imply there may be situations where scientists avoid recording or publishing variable data, despite being able to draw meaningful conclusions from such data. 

Extreme Weather 

We are working on an exploratory project that will, for the first time, investigate the cognitive processes that support reasoning about complex atmospheric processes. There is currently no theoretical basis for understanding this kind of reasoning nor a complete understanding of how experts transfer their reasoning to students. With this project, we are seeking to build a foundation for future work with goals to 1. Contribute to cognitive science with new theories of human reasoning about complex fluid phenomena; 2. Pursue an understanding of expert reasoning in atmospheric science and how experts transfer that reasoning to students; 3. Connect current education practice with research-based evidence of how students think and learn in authentic atmospheric science contexts.  

This project takes on an interdisciplinary perspective with a research team made up of a cognitive scientist, a geoscience education researcher, and two atmospheric scientists. We have embedded in an 11-day convective field study course and employed methods associated with cognitive anthropology to observe student and expert practice. This early-stage research is important for atmospheric science, cognitive science, and education because it seeks to understand how atmospheric scientists reason about authentic atmospheric processes and how they share this expertise with students. By studying how experts convey deep aspects of their thinking to students and how students assimilate expert practice, we can lay the groundwork for multiple future investigations that address important and interesting questions in cognitive science and atmospheric science education.  

Gesture

Hand gestures are a normal, ubiquitous, and telling part of spoken language. They constitute a central feature of human development, knowing, learning, and communication across cultures (Roth, 2001). Gestures are used quite fervently in fields that are characterized as dealing with abstract matters such as science and mathematics. Gesturing is prevalent in these fields because much of science and math involve spatial thinking and requires communication of abstract and spatial concepts. A portion of spatial thinking involves building, manipulating, and using mental spatial representations. Spatial thinking also involves the use of external representations, such as maps, models, and iconic gestures (Liben, Christensen, & Kastens, 2010).

Gesture plays a very significant role in the field of geology because it is a highly spatial science that makes heavy use of graphics, models, and gestural representations (Liben, Christensen, & Kastens, 2010). A study is currently being conducted looking the role of gesture in reading and interpreting geologic maps. Geologic maps give information about the spatial relationships of geologic structures at the surface, which can inform one about the underlying 3D structures. The study focuses on how expert geologists and novices differ in the use of gestures in their explanations of these maps.

Can gesture facilitate penetrative thinking?

Within the domain of geoscience, students with high visual penetrative ability use spatial gestures to solve Geologic Block Diagrams (Ales & Riggs, 2011).  Given the role of gesture in problem solving, gesture might facilitate penetrative thinking.  We investigated whether gesture can improve performance on the Geologic Block Diagram test.

We found that participants who were asked to use their hands to explain how they would build 3D versions of geologic block diagrams from flat layers of Play-Doh showed greater improvement on the Geologic Block Cross-Sectioning Test (GBCT) than students in a gesture-prohibited group. These results suggest that gesturing facilitates penetrative thinking.

Atit, K., Gagnier, K., and Shipley, T.F. (2015). Student gestures aid penetrative thinking. Journal of Geoscience Education, 63:66–72