Active Learning in an Introductory Oceanography Course: A Case Study of Promoting Scientific Interest and Literacy through Renewable Energy and Plate Tectonic Assignments

Introductory Oceanography in the Earth and Environmental Science Department at the University of Pennsylvania has moved from a traditional lecture-based course to a Structured Active In-class Learning (SAIL) model, where students individually acquire the basics of the material before class, and in-class activities are designed to help students reach the higher order learning objectives through collaborative exercises. In implementing tools such as online modules, data-driven, quantitative in-class activities, preand post-lecture exercises, reflective writing assignments, and peer review, we aim to increase the science literacy of the student population, enhance their critical thinking skills, and correct common scientific misconceptions. This course is the product of three years of refinement via an annual SAIL university seminar with other faculty, the National Association of Geoscience Teachers Introductory Course Workshop at the 2014 American Geophysical Union conference, and surveys conducted by the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL). While implementing active learning techniques with college students is not without complications, in this case study we explore how a SAIL course that utilizes technology to flexibly and creatively account for class size and STEM experience can foster an inquisitive classroom dynamic and knowledge acquisition, particularly as it relates to science literacy and increased interest in earth and environmental science. Results from preand postinstruction surveys, course reviews and student performance indices illustrate this objective. In addition to a summary of our assessment, readers will see examples of student exercises focused on ocean renewable energy and seafloor spreading that help students to understand fundamental concepts of plate tectonics, ocean tides and waves. Readers will also gain insight into the design and implementation of innovative teaching tools in introductory earth and environmental science courses.

[1]  Samuel Riffell,et al.  Using web-based instruction to improve large undergraduate biology courses: An evaluation of a hybrid course format , 2005, Comput. Educ..

[2]  Nancy Kober,et al.  Reaching Students: What Research Says about Effective Instruction in Undergraduate Science and Engineering. , 2015 .

[3]  David N. Steer,et al.  Assessment and Active Learning Strategies for Introductory Geology Courses , 2003 .

[4]  D. Thompson,et al.  Misconceptions and Conceptual Changes concerning Continental Drift and Plate Tectonics among Portuguese Students Aged 16‐17 , 1997 .

[5]  R. Ridky,et al.  Developing and Applying a Set of Earth Science Literacy Principles , 2012 .

[6]  Daniel R. Marburger,et al.  Absenteeism and Undergraduate Exam Performance , 2001 .

[7]  Marcos D. Caballero,et al.  How Can We Improve Problem Solving in Undergraduate Biology? Applying Lessons from 30 Years of Physics Education Research , 2012, CBE life sciences education.

[8]  D. Romer,et al.  Do Students Go to Class? Should They? , 1993 .

[9]  Diane Ebert-May,et al.  Innovation in large lectures—teaching for active learning , 1997 .

[10]  A. Hofman,et al.  Using clickers to facilitate interactive engagement activities in a lecture room for improved performance by students , 2014 .

[11]  G. Norman.  Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics , 2010, Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice.

[12]  Lena A. E. Tibell,et al.  Boosting complex learning by strategic assessment and course design , 2004 .

[13]  R. Hake.  Lessons from the Physics Education Reform Effort , 2001, physics/0106087.

[14]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom , 2006 .

[15]  W. McKeachie,et al.  Creationist vs. Evolutionary Beliefs: Effects on Learning Biology , 2002 .

[16]  Dimitra Dodou,et al.  Five-Point Likert Items: t test versus Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon , 2010 .

[17]  T. Bierma,et al.  STEM for Non-STEM Majors: Enhancing Science Literacy in Large Classes. , 2013 .

[18]  P. Brickman,et al.  Developing a Test of Scientific Literacy Skills (TOSLS): Measuring Undergraduates’ Evaluation of Scientific Information and Arguments , 2012, CBE life sciences education.

[19]  Randy Moore,et al.  Attendance and Performance: How Important Is It for Students To Attend Class?. , 2003 .

[20]  A Guided Inquiry Approach to Learning the Geology of the U.S. , 2004 .

[21]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. , 1999 .

[22]  Patricia A. Heller,et al.  Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 2: Designing problems and structuring groups , 1992 .

[23]  Harold V. Thurman.  Essentials of oceanography , 1983 .

[24]  Carl E. Wieman,et al.  Physics Exams that Promote Collaborative Learning , 2014 .

[25]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Cooperative learning : increasing college faculty instructional productivity , 1991 .

[26]  A. Ahlgren,et al.  Science for all Americans , 1990 .

[27]  R. Hake.  Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses , 1998 .

[28]  Suzanne Reeve,et al.  Teaching cell biology in the large-enrollment classroom: methods to promote analytical thinking and assessment of their effectiveness. , 2003, Cell biology education.

[29]  J. Webster,et al.  Magnetism, the Earth as a Magnet, and Seafloor Banding—How Much Magnetism is Enough? , 2004 .

[30]  Michelle K. Smith,et al.  Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[31]  T. A. Gatlin,et al.  Students' Experience in a General Chemistry Cooperative Problem Based Laboratory , 2011 .

[32]  Louis Deslauriers,et al.  Improved Learning in a Large-Enrollment Physics Class , 2011, Science.

[33]  Patricia A. Heller,et al.  Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 1: Group versus individual problem solving , 1992 .