 |
 |
I meant to note too that there's a gendered aspect to the problem, as Joe Henderson noted to me in an aside. That adds a whole 'nother layer of suckiness to the problem as many on this list know better than I. Cheers? Don On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 8:27 PM, Don Haas <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Hi All, > Great discussion. I have too many thoughts swirling to get them all down, > but I'll throw out a few. > > First, while I'd not be shocked if you could find examples where GER > projects advanced traditional geoscience research, I'd also not be > surprised if you couldn't make such connections. It's not where I'd focus > the argument. > > Instead, I'd note that we geoscientists know and can make a compelling > case, at least within our own community, that the most serious challenges > facing society in the coming decades are problems grounded in, and made > less horrible by, understandings of the geosciences. More specifically, > climate, energy, soil, and water are all geoscience issues and issues of > both current and future crises. > > As geoscientists, we have a civic duty to help every citizen understand > the import of these issues. We're largely failing at these tasks and > traditional educational research is failing to assist us. While at least > hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent on educational research > projects in the last 40 years, I'm not aware of a single improvement in the > outcomes of the system of science education that can be connected to an > advance in educational research. > > If educational research has led to advancements that improve outcomes on a > broad scale, it should be obvious in the scientific literacy of the general > population. It's not obvious. > > It's not obvious at all. I don't think we're more ignorant, though I do > think certain ignorant voices have more amplification. > > This is where I'd focus the argument. It's a civic duty. > > That alone may not win the day, unfortunately. So, we can take a more > selfish and self-promotional tack. Research studies that bring together two > or more well understood ideas in non-traditional ways are more likely to > advance the field and more likely to be cited (Uzzi, *et al*. 2013). > Likewise, innovations are more likely to broadly adopted and improve user > experiences if those innovations are "optimally distinct" (Berger, 2016). > Optimally distinct innovations are characterized by being different enough > from current practice to make a difference, but not so different that they > cannot be reasonably easily understood. They, like the impactful research, > also bring together two or more well understood ideas in novel ways. > > That is, bringing well understood finding from the geosciences together > with well understood findings from educational research has the potential > to both change the world *and *draw positive scholarly attention to your > department. > > I don't really care if you and your department advance this work for civic > or selfish reasons, just do it. Dammit. > Cheers, > Don > > *References:* > > Berger, Jonah. “The Goldilocks Theory of Product Success.” Harvard > Business Review, July 7, 2016. https://hbr.org/2016/07/the- > goldilocks-theory-of-product-success. > Uzzi, Brian, Satyam Mukherjee, Michael Stringer, and Ben Jones. “Atypical > Combinations and Scientific Impact.” *Science* 342, no. 6157 (2013): > 468–472. > > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 1:25 PM, Carol Ormand <000000987169a150-dmarc- > [log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> >> I echo Julie's sentiments... Great question, Glenn. >> >> You asked, "Have there been cases, published research where a GER project >> actually advanced traditional geoscience?" Tim Shipley, Basil Tikoff, I, >> and Cathy Manduca published some of our work in the Journal of Structural >> Geology, for reasons that sound similar to Julie's publication in >> Tectonophysics. Your colleagues might find the reference compelling: >> >> Shipley, Thomas F., Basil Tikoff, Carol J. Ormand, and Cathryn A. Manduca >> (2013). Structural Geology Practice and Learning, from the Perspective of >> Cognitive Science: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 54, pp. 72-84. >> >> cheers, >> Carol >> >> ----------------------------------------------------- >> Carol Ormand, Ph.D. >> She / Her >> Science Education Resource Center >> Carleton College >> (608) 213-1618 >> >> On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 11:46 AM, Libarkin, Julie <[log in to unmask]> >> wrote: >> >>> Glenn: >>> >>> >>> >>> Good for you for pushing the boundaries! >>> >>> >>> >>> Iris Totten and I came up with “geocognition” for this exact reason, >>> plus the fact that the work many of us do is not simply housed in >>> traditional educational spaces (although education can occur anywhere) nor >>> is it always focused on teaching/learning. I tend to speak about my work as >>> geocognition or “at the intersection of human dimensions and earth >>> science”. Generally, the level of interest over geocognition or human >>> dimensions is much higher than over GER. Do I think that is fair? No – I >>> value all work. Sadly, not everyone agrees that pedagogical research or >>> research on people is as valuable as traditional science. Personally, I see >>> this work as belonging to the disciplines as much as anything else. My >>> colleague who does geomicrobiology? He’s a geologist and a biologist and an >>> oceanographer. He still has PhDs in the Earth and Environmental Sciences. >>> >>> >>> >>> Have you shared the papers in the Geosphere Human Dimensions theme? >>> Since you have a paper and since these are quite broad and might be >>> persuasive: >>> >>> https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/geosphere/pages/humandimen >>> >>> >>> >>> I can’t answer to your other question about impacts on geoscience – >>> although, I did ultimately write a paper that appeared in Tectonophysics >>> because of my working out how best to teach geoid anomalies in a geophysics >>> course. >>> >>> >>> >>> Best of luck! Let me know if I can help in any way. My students get PhDs >>> in the Dept of Earth and Environmental Science, and I know many other folks >>> also have DBER PhDs run through the science department as well. So, this is >>> not an uncommon occurrence (as you know!). I’m happy to discuss more in >>> person or provide other guidance 😊 >>> >>> >>> >>> Julie >>> >>> >>> >>> Julie Libarkin >>> Professor >>> Director - Geocognition Research Lab >>> Michigan State University >>> 288 Farm Lane >>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=288+Farm+Lane&entry=gmail&source=g>, 206 >>> Natural Science >>> East Lansing, MI 48824 >>> >>> Phone: 517-355-8369 >>> Email: [log in to unmask] >>> >>> Website: https://geocognitionresearchlaboratory.wordpress.com/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> *From: *Glenn Dolphin <[log in to unmask]> >>> *Reply-To: *Glenn Dolphin <[log in to unmask]> >>> *Date: *Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 12:35 PM >>> *To: *"[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]> >>> *Subject: *Where GER has impacted traditional geoscience >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi all. >>> >>> I am in the process of trying to convince my Department of Geosciences >>> to welcome a geoscience education research specialization for a Ph.D. >>> awarded by the department. This has been an uphill battle and one of the >>> reasons seems to be that GER is not considered by many in the department as >>> traditional geoscience (by the bye, geophysics was in the same boat through >>> the 1930s to 1950s and look at it now). Anyway, during one extended >>> discussion, I made the supposition that GER had in some instances probably >>> advanced the field of geoscience and said that I would do some research to >>> see if this was, in fact, the case. >>> >>> >>> >>> So, I am reaching out to those who may have some knowledge of this. Have >>> there been cases, published research where a GER project actually advanced >>> traditional geoscience? >>> >>> >>> >>> Another thought I am having is that the phrase "education research" in >>> GER is also a bit of a stumbling block as some of my colleagues continue to >>> point out that "if it is education research, it belongs in the school of >>> education." "It's only pedagogical studies." "It's only done by people who >>> want to be better teachers, so why not just create a certificate program?" >>> >>> >>> >>> Anyway, this is a much larger discussion, but I bring it up now as an >>> idea for which I am seeking feedback. Might dressing the discipline a bit >>> differently help with its acceptance in traditionalist environments? I was >>> thinking of a name change from geoscience education research to geoscience >>> cognition research or geocognition research (credit to Julie Libarkin's >>> group for the name). I was thinking that since we are really studying the >>> interface of geology and the mind, how people think about geology, learn >>> in geology, do geology, this may be more accurate while still acknowledging >>> that there are educational implications to the research. I'm just sending >>> that out for some possible conversation. If you have any thoughts, please >>> send them my way, or, better yet, to the group. >>> >>> >>> >>> Best, Glenn >>> >>> >>> >>> Glenn Dolphin >>> >>> Tamaratt Teaching Professor >>> >>> Department of Geoscience >>> >>> University of Calgary >>> >>> 2500 University Drive NW >>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=2500+University+Drive+NW+%0D%0A+Calgary,+Alberta+T2N+1N4&entry=gmail&source=g> >>> >>> Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4 >>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=2500+University+Drive+NW+%0D%0A+Calgary,+Alberta+T2N+1N4&entry=gmail&source=g> >>> >>> [log in to unmask] >>> >>> 403.220.6025 >>> >> >> > > > -- > > <https://priweb.org/tfgcc> <http://bit.ly/DonsGiveGab> > Don Haas, Ph.D. > Director of Teacher Programming > The Paleontological Research Institution and its > Museum of the Earth & Cayuga Nature Center > President, National Association of Geoscience Teachers <http://nagt.org/> > (*Join now!* <http://nagt.org/nagt/membership/index.html>) > 1259 Trumansburg Road • Ithaca, NY 14850 • > museumoftheearth.org > > *Google Voice: (607) 288-2669* > > *My job is to help Earth & environmental educators kick butt at their > jobs. Here are some links related to how my colleagues and I are doing > that:* > > - *Teacher-Friendly Guides to Earth Science of the United States > <http://geology.teacherfriendlyguide.org/> - *a set of seven regional > guides that collectively cover the entire US > - On virtual fieldwork in the Critical Zone > <http://virtualfieldwork.org/CZO-VFE-Intro.html> > - The Science Beneath the Surface: A Very Short Guide to the Marcellus > Shale <https://priweb.org/marcellusbook> and > <https://priweb.org/marcellusbook>an associated presentation > - On connecting the field to the classroom > <http://bit.ly/SkypeNiagaraRising> > - A seven-minute video on our national outreach > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkGbDiQznPU> > - Explore the Critical Zone > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gW-Vy7zFdU> (6 and a half-minute > video) > > > -- <https://priweb.org/tfgcc> <http://bit.ly/DonsGiveGab> Don Haas, Ph.D. Director of Teacher Programming The Paleontological Research Institution and its Museum of the Earth & Cayuga Nature Center President, National Association of Geoscience Teachers <http://nagt.org/> (*Join now!* <http://nagt.org/nagt/membership/index.html>) 1259 Trumansburg Road • Ithaca, NY 14850 • museumoftheearth.org *Google Voice: (607) 288-2669* *My job is to help Earth & environmental educators kick butt at their jobs. Here are some links related to how my colleagues and I are doing that:* - *Teacher-Friendly Guides to Earth Science of the United States <http://geology.teacherfriendlyguide.org/> - *a set of seven regional guides that collectively cover the entire US - On virtual fieldwork in the Critical Zone <http://virtualfieldwork.org/CZO-VFE-Intro.html> - The Science Beneath the Surface: A Very Short Guide to the Marcellus Shale <https://priweb.org/marcellusbook> and <https://priweb.org/marcellusbook>an associated presentation - On connecting the field to the classroom <http://bit.ly/SkypeNiagaraRising> - A seven-minute video on our national outreach <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkGbDiQznPU> - Explore the Critical Zone <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gW-Vy7zFdU> (6 and a half-minute video)