Field work is an integral component of undergraduate geoscience education. Field areas for these crucial experiences are carefully selected, but how do these places affect our students? This study compares the field experience of students participating in two distinct modules of a study abroad field camp in New Zealand, through sense of place and perceptions of learning. The situated module was geological mapping based in a single site, whereas the roadside module was based on smaller exercises in multiple discrete sites. Survey findings indicate that students became significantly more attached to the situated field area, but had no significant change in their attachment to the roadside field area. Field observations and interview findings suggest that this may be due to student autonomy, the immersive landscape, and strong alignment of student perceptions of learning with instructor intentions on the situated field module. In contrast, the roadside module was more determined by the instructor, and student perceptions of learning did not align well with instructor intent in conveying a sense of the regional geologic history. We assimilate our field observations and student and instructor interview data into a schematic model of the two field trip styles. This model is then used to visualize an improved pedagogy to foster greater engagement with the landscape and geology in the roadside trip. We recommend that roadside field trips have explicit assessments that connect the field sites together. Our interview data suggest that this connection would be further enhanced with greater opportunities for student ownership of in-field decision making through student-centered learning, encouragement of a sense of exploration, and development of a student and instructor field learning community. RESEARCH CONTEXT Field Education: Benefits and StylesField trips are widely used in geoscience education around the globe and in several other disciplines, including geography (e.g., Gold et al

No abstract

Conducting research, collecting data, and teaching students outside of a laboratory or classroom setting are commonplace across disciplines. For many scientists, being "in the field" is paramount to the work that they do (Cutter, 1993;Rudwick, 1996;Wilson, 1982).Therefore, in numerous disciplines, engaging undergraduates in experiences that take place in the field ais not only expected and intuitive (Dressen, 2002), but also considered central to training

Field education is a critical and enriching component of the undergraduate geoscience curriculum, enhanced when combined with a study abroad program. The affective domain – defined in geoscience as emotion, motivation, and connection to Earth – is an integral part of the field experience. Using questionnaire data collected at the start of two geoscience field trips, this study compares motivation and connection to Earth of study abroad students from the United States with local New Zealand students. Results show that study abroad students have more expert-like motivations and ecological worldviews, and are more attached to and see more positive and diverse meanings in the field area. To take advantage of this and improve student outcomes, we recommend that this study abroad module be adapted to be more applied, environmentally-focused, and place-based. Findings highlight the importance of teaching and learning to specific study abroad students, rather than applying unchanged curricula from local institutions.

This paper discusses the development and results of a new tool used for measuring shifts in students' perceptions of earth and ocean sciences called the Student Perceptions about Earth Sciences Survey (SPESS). The survey measures where students lie on the novice-expert continuum, and how their perceptions change after taking one or more earth and ocean science course(s). The survey is composed of 29 statements that have been validated with expert responses and student interviews. Factor analysis was used to group statements into seven categories, which provide instructors with valuable information to guide pedagogical change in their classes. Overall student perceptions in earth and ocean sciences show little change over the course of the term, in contrast to novice shifts in perceptions seen in other science disciplines. Students in earth and ocean sciences also do not display any gender differences, unlike those seen in these other disciplines. However, differences are seen between face-to-face and distance education versions of a course, between earth and ocean science majors and nonmajors, and between a community college and a large research institution. The former of each pair are more expert-like. Ó