Impact on Student Learning:
We are now in the second year of the grant and we just completed the first offering of the Introductory Environmental Science class with a field-based laboratory component. There were 60 students in the class split into three lab sections of 20 students each. The course fulfils both a general science requirement and serves as the introductory course for the Environmental Studies major. It is populated by roughly equal numbers of under- and upper-classmen. The three main student outcomes that we have tried to affect are student attitudes towards science, student proficiency in collection and analysis of data, and continued use of these skills by upper level students. Our main assessment tools are a variety of survey instruments and student performance in the class itself.
1. Student attitudes towards the power, process, and limitations of science.
Based upon a pre- and post-course survey for this spring term’s offering of the newly revised ENST 150 class, we surmise that the general perception of science and scientists is unchanged (Q15; Table 1). Their own view of their abilities in science is also unchanged (Q10) as is their perceived ability to find the main themes in their work or in lecture (Q5 and Q8). Scientific uncertainty, however, is something that students feel they understand better after taking the course (Q14). We attribute this directly to the field data collection and analysis that the students performed in lab. When students are engaged with taking the primary data and conducting the analysis they have a better appreciation for the complexities of science and the potential pitfalls. This likely lead to their improved understanding of the fundamental science behind environmental problems (Q6). Given their pre-existing attitudes towards science and the challenges presented to them in lab, it is encouraging that their perception of the scientific endeavor didn’t diminish. This suggests that even with their new found appreciation of the complexity of the science, they still trust the scientific process.
Table 1. Results of pre- and post-course survey in ENST 150: Introduction to Environmental Science. The responses were on a scale of 1-5 where 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree. Shaded rows indicate statistically significant differences (p<0.05).
| Question | Pre- Average (n=46) |
Post- Average (n=54) |
| 1. I can write a lab report | 3.37 | 4.15 |
| 2. I can use graphs to show what I found out in my experiment. | 3.98 | 4.31 |
| 3. It is hard for me to look at the results of an experiment and tell what they mean. | 2.61 | 2.26 |
| 4. I can use maps to show spatial patterns | 2.85 | 4.1 |
| 5. When I do my work in science class, I am able to find the important ideas | 3.87 | 3.83 |
| 6. I understand the fundamental science behind most environmental issues. | 3.20 | 3.96 |
| 7. I can design an experiment to test my ideas | 3.33 | 3.76 |
| 8. I have trouble figuring out the main ideas of what my science teacher is teaching us | 2.37 | 2.46 |
| 9. I can tell the difference between observations and conclusions in a paper | 4.33 | 4.48 |
| 10. Science is easy for me | 2.70 | 2.63 |
| 11. I can construct a logical argument | 4.02 | 4.04 |
| 12. I can read and interpret geospatial data | 2.46 | 3.81 |
| 13. I have a good idea of the abilities and limitations of GIS | 2.28 | 3.69 |
| 14. I have a good feel for scientific uncertainty | 3.17 | 3.80 |
| 15. I trust scientists and scientific research | 3.93 | 3.98 |
| 16. I can make and use conceptual models of the environment | 2.89 | 3.63 |
2. Improved student proficiency in collection and analysis of environmental data and geospatial patterns.
We used a series of 5 multi-week laboratories to progressively build skills in environmental data acquisition and analysis. The goal of the first lab was to learn how to gather field data with electronic notebooks. Working in teams, students used GIS enabled Tablet-PCs with ArcGIS to map tree distribution on campus. The focus of the second lab was an introduction to spatial analysis. Here we used the output from Global Climate Models to make maps of existing and predicted temperature changes. As the student progressed through labs 3-5 they were given increased control over the research questions and increased responsibility for how to answer those questions. Lab 4, for example, required students to gather soil samples from properties around campus and analyze those for lead content. The class data was pooled giving us 60 samples and allowing us to create an interpolated map of lead concentration around campus (Figure 1). From this map students needed to figure out what the spatial patterns were and what the likely cause of the. For the last lab students are given only very broad parameters and need to develop their own hypothesis and ways to test them using.
Figure 1: Interpolated may of soil lead concentration around Appleton WI. Prepared by ENST 150 Class, Spring 2009.
Our pedagogical approach has been very successful. In the pre- vs. post-course survey students felt that they improved in their ability in general scientific and quantitative skills like creating conceptual models (Q16), preparing lab reports (Q1), interpret experimental results (Q3 p<0.1), designing experiments (Q7), and using graphs to analyze data (Q2) (Table 1). Moreover, students vastly improved their perceived skill and understanding of geospatial analysis including making and interpreting maps (Q4 and Q12) and knowing what the functions, uses, and limitations of a GIS are (Q13). These data are corroborated by our evaluation of student work. On the first exam which covered course content and the first two labs the class average was around 65%. After two more labs the exam performance improved to an average of around 78%. Scores on labs also generally improved with lab 3 scores in the low 70s and lab 5 scores in the upper 80s.
3. Enable upper-level Environmental studies classes to make greater use of technologies such as GIS that students are introduced to in the Introductory Class.
Since this is the first full run of the course in the Introductory ENST class it is too early to get a full accounting of the long term effect of the changes in our curriculum. However, this past year two students that had previously used the tablets in GEOL 360/ENST 365: Surficial Processes both ended up doing mapping projects utilizing some combination of GIS and GPS. One student mapped volcanic hazards of Mt. Tungurahuara in Ecuador and another used the same technology to conduct wetland dilenations of a local nature preserve (Figures 2 and 3).
Figure 2: Wetland delineation map made using GPS-enabled Tablet PCs.
Figure 3: Map of Lahar Hazards on Tungurahau Volcano, Ecuador.
Impact on Teaching:
Integration of the tablet PC technology into courses has had far ranging effects both in the classroom and outside. The main focus of our plan was to utilize this technology in the field and the tablets have performed admirably in that capacity. With GPS cards we are able to gather positional data much more quickly than conventional surveying. This allows us to spend more time in the filed thinking about the This allows us to spend more time in the filed thinking about the problem at hand rather than rushing to get data. Students can actually perform some simple geospatial analysis in the field using ArcGIS. This is instructive because it often shows holes in data that can then be filled while in the field, reducing the need for follow up visits.
As useful as the tablets have been in the field the most surprising and unanticipated outcome has been their impact in the classroom. After attending the HP TFT Worldwide Conference, the PI had Classroom Presenter was installed on all of our machines. The combination of the tablet PC, its inking capabilities (for drawing diagrams, annotating picture, solving mathematical problems etc.) and the interactivity fostered by CP has revolutionized the classroom. This combination so far surpasses what is possible with pen and paper, and it presents a number of options not available with other products like clickers. Instructors can now pose problems in class and actually see how students approach them. By projecting student solutions to the rest of the class, we can engage in peer review and discuss how a problem was solved, what was difficult, and where further instruction or reinforcement is needed. The tradeoff is that one cannot cover as much ground as one could in a traditional lecture. The benefit is a better understanding of the essential concepts. This is a trade off worth taking.
Based upon this experience we applied for and were awarded an HP Leadership Grant: Pogil to Go. This year there were 3 live runs of tablets and the DyKnow student response system in class ranging from <10 to >50 students.
Student analysis and visualization of geospatial trends is greatly improved. The kinds of maps shown in Figures 1-3 would have taken a great deal of time to create by hand, they would have been less accurate, and would look less professional. Students are able to collect data into the same environment that they use to analyze and display the data.
