Using independent, investigative learning in environmental geology
Contact details
Neil Thomas,
School of Earth Sciences & Geography,
Kingston University,
Kingston-upon-Thames,
Surrey
KT1 2EE
Tel: 020 8547 7525
Fax: 020 8547 7497
Email: n.thomas@kingston.ac.uk
Classification Category
- Using teaching and learning processes which simulate research processes (e.g. project-based modules, dissertation modules, problem based learning etc)
- Development of student research skills (explicitly, in addition to other
disciplinary and generic skills)
Context
- Course/unit/module title: The assignment is run as part of a Level 3 (Honours Year) full credit module entitled 'Environmental Geology'
- Course title: The module is core for Applied Geology and Environmental Geology students and optional for Single Honours Geology, Single Honours Earth Science and Joint Honours Geology students
- Level 3 (Honours year)
What does the teacher do?
The approach uses 3-stage individual mini-projects where students are allocated a specific environmental geophysics problem and required to design a solution, interpret field data and present their findings in technical report and verbal format. The students' background in geophysics is consistent: they take a second year core module in Resource Exploration & Evaluation which contains three weeks of exploration geophysics (eight lectures and three practicals) exposing them to an intensive introduction to the topic. The structure and necessity to include a large amount of content in this module precludes any deeper coverage of geophysics. This experience is supported by a one-day geophysical field exercise on the second year trip to Skye. When they begin the Environmental Geology module in the second semester of the third year, many students have forgotten the basics of geophysics.
Therefore, their exposure to environmental geophysics begins with an introductory one-hour lecture which revises the major techniques but places them in an environmental rather than exploration context. As preparation for their individual mini-projects, this is the limit of formal lecturing. Later in the module, in the context of landfill monitoring, I lecture on GPR and electrical tomography, which are not covered in the second year module and are therefore entirely new to them. These techniques are therefore not included in the data banks for the mini-projects. This limited exposure to techniques during lecturing demands that students conduct a significant amount of background research into geophysical techniques, survey design, logistics and costings during the desk study stage of their mini-projects. This is supported by the opportunity for consultation with me at set times. This approach encourages student-centred investigative learning and invariably motivates them to get their teeth into their mini-projects. In short, they take ownership of the learning process.
Each student is given an environmental problem (see Figure 1 for example) and is put into the scenario of being a consultant recruited to address this problem for a client. The client is either the local authority or a private land owner. Either way, the client demands a professional approach and prompt, concisely-presented results. The assignment is in three parts:
(a) Desk study.
Students, after receiving their mini-project brief, have three weeks to conduct appropriate research and produce a 500 word report (plus diagrams) detailing their proposed strategy for addressing their problem. They are given the following headings to guide report preparation:
- Project objectives;
- Proposed geophysical survey plan (technique(s) and field layout);
- Logistics (costs, staffing etc..) of the field survey (bearing in mind the constraints given in the brief);
- Data requirements from the field workers.
During this stage, four hours are timetabled in the module for research and consultancy with tutor. Students are informed that they have a maximum of five minutes per consultancy session and must have specific questions to ask, indicating that they have performed some preliminary research before coming to the tutor. "What techniques should I use?" or "How do I start this?" are not valid questions!
(b) Data interpretation & final report
Students are given their datasets, along with marked desk study reports and
feedback sheets. Note that if a student makes an inappropriate request for
data in their desk study, they are informed of this but still given the correct
data set. There is no cumulative penalty for this mistake. Students have a
further 2 weeks (including 2 timetabled hours) to interpret their data and
produce and submit a full technical report to the client. Again, guidance
is given on the required report structure.
(c) Open meeting presentation
Students are required to prepare and deliver a solo presentation to an open
public meeting (20 minute session, including 5 minutes for fielding questions)
describing their problem outline, methodology, data interpretation and recommendations.
The audience includes Councillors (soon up for re-election) and members of
the lay public (staff members and other students) who have a vested interest
in the environmental issues of each project. A disruptive group of 'eco-warriors'
(usually noisy postgraduate students…type casting at its best!!) also
makes an appearance! During their presentations, students must show appropriate
local and environmental considerations and effective handling of heckling
from concerned local residences and the 'eco-warrior' group. This scenario-based
presentation is a new addition to the module. In previous years, the presentation
has just been delivered to me and the student group which has not generated
huge enthusiasm from the students since it is seen as just another assessment
method.
Assessment and feedback of student performance
The assignment accounts for 30% of the total module mark and comprises both
formative (consultations and interim desk study) and summative (final report
and oral presentation) elements. Students appreciate the chance, offered by
the formative assessment, to check on their progress. Assessment is weighted
approximately 65% for technical content and 35% for Key Skills.
Students are given feedback forms at every assessment stage (desk study report,
final report and presentation) containing marks awarded and comments from
the assessor in each category. Consultation with the tutor during, and debrief
after, the desk study stage is very important to the process. Students become
progressively more aware of geophysical techniques, project management and
environmental problem solving during this time. Affording the time for this
development to take place is the main reason for allocating three weeks for
the desk study.
Hot tips and things to look out for
This assignment has evolved, over the four years that I have run it, into
a major part of student-lead learning in our honours year. The data analysis
and interpretation are not highly taxing - to make them so would serve to
detract from the main aims of the exercise - and the required amount of staff
time is not restrictive. Initially, there is a time implication in setting
up the project briefs and datasets. When I first developed this module, I
had a cohort of forty-one students, requiring forty one datasets! With the
general drop in student numbers, between fifteen and twenty students now take
the module so I can be more selective as to which datasets to use. Once the
projects are set up, the only drain on staff time is the provision of five
minute consultancy slots (timetabled), assessment and feedback time (well
structured) and attendance at the three hour open meeting (timetabled). Set
against this not unreasonable demand on time, the all round benefits are significant.
From a curriculum angle, this is an exercise which requires students to integrate
technical knowledge, acquired through independent research of geophysical
methodology with vocational skills in a tutor-facilitated environment. From
a tutor's point of view, the assignment enables me to assess students' abilities
in: awareness of geophysical methodology, application of this methodology
to a realistic applied environmental problem, and the host of Key Skills listed
in the assignment aims. These are skills I would bracket under the broad banner
of 'problem solving' at an advanced level. From a student perspective, they
gain crucial experience in this kind of exercise which not only has exceptional
educational value in technical and deep learning terms, but also has potential
benefit for their career development. The experience has already been used
by numerous students who have evidenced this assignment in response to an
interviewer's questions along the lines of "Tell me about a situation
you have been in where you were required to solve a significant problem".
Does it work?
Students are given the opportunity to evaluate their learning and give feedback on the assignment via a short questionnaire distributed after the open presentations. The questions, with sample responses from students, are given below:
1. What did you learn from completing this assignment?
(a) Technical (environmental geophysics) aspects
"…the depth of detailed planning that is needed before commencing this type of project is far greater than I would have thought………… In previous modules we have learned the techniques required in order to carry out geophysical investigations. This module was excellent in that we could apply the techniques to real life situations and physically see how they should be applied and work. It tied together a few loose ends"
" the kinds of results expected from a geophysical survey and then the considerations of what can be done with these data."
(b) Key Skills
"I learnt more about how important the presentation of data and the ability to write reports will be in the 'real world'"
"Researching the techniques and background myself helped my learning because it forced me to read thoroughly and ask questions when I did not understand something"
"The fact that my brief limited me to one field day meant that I had to think about arranging time very carefully. I learned that there are many things to consider other than just the technique to be used"
"To do well in the assignment, I had to make sure my report and presentation were up to scratch. This was useful as I will be expected to do these things when I get a job"
"I don't like Maths. but had to do some…..it forced me to understand what was required"
2. What did you like most about the assignment?
"The fact that every one had their own geophysical problem and their own data to work from. Also the fact that the problem had a realistic base, which made the whole project much more interesting. Finally the structure of the project, being broken down into three parts, was a good way to check our progress, to make sure that the we were not making major errors."
"I tried to be as professional as possible and enjoyed keeping the report and survey realistic and fulfilling the brief"
3. What did you not like about the assignment?
"Not so much 'not like' but more difficult was, in the desk study, finding out costings of carrying out the chosen methods. As we have no previous knowledge of this it was difficult even to know where to begin."
4. Roughly how much time did you spend on:
- The desk study? Responses range from 2 hours to 5 days (ave. 3 full days)
- The data interpretation? Responses range from 3 hours to 8 hours (ave. 5 hours)
- The final report? Responses range from 1 day to 5 days (ave. ~ 8 hours)
- Preparing the presentation? Responses range from 1 hour to 4 hours (ave. ~ 2.5 hours)
5. Please make any other constructive comments below.
"I thought the exercise would have been better if we could mark each other's talks!"
"The presentations were a bit pointless but then I hate doing them anyway!" (comment made before additional of scenario-based presentation)
What problems/issues have arisen?
Some students can become demotivated if they fail to find sufficient information or fail to understand their particular problem. This problem is countered by careful tutoring and pointing them in the appropriate direction when they clearly are in trouble.
Some students fail to be concise in their reportage, or place emphasis on the background rather than the detailed problem solving element of the exercise.
Details of support material/course work/assessment methods
Assignment instructions and sample datasets available from n.thomas@kingston.ac.uk
Relevant references
Thomas, N., 2000. Using independent, investigative learning to teach environmental geophysics to geology undergraduates, Teaching Earth Sciences, 25 (3), 152-156.