Element contents
Series: Elements of Paleontology
Integrating Active Learning into Paleontology Classes
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 30 October 2018
Summary
The educational benefits of replacing in-class lectures with hands-on activities are clear. Such active learning is a natural fit for paleontology, which can provide opportunities for examining fossils, analyzing data and writing. Additionally, there are a number of topics in the field that are exciting to geology majors and non-majors alike: very few can resist the lure of dinosaurs, huge meteor impacts, vicious Cretaceous sharks or a giant Pleistocene land mammal. However, it can seem difficult to introduce these techniques into a large general education class full of non-majors: paleontological specimens provide a natural starting point for hands-on classroom activities, but in a large class it is not always practical or possible to provide enough fossil material for all students. The Element introduces different types of active learning approaches, and then explains how they have been applied to a large introductory paleontology class for non-majors.
Keywords
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Series: Elements of PaleontologyOnline ISBN: 9781108681698Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 15 November 2018
References
Ainsworth, S., Prain, V., and Tytler, R. (2011). Drawing to learn in science. Science, 333(6046), 1096–1097.Google Scholar
Auchincloss, L. C., Laursen, S. L., Branchaw, J. L., Eagan, K., Graham, M., Hanauer, D. I., Lawrie, G., et al. (2014). Assessment of course-based undergraduate research experiences: A meeting report. CBE Life Sciences Education, 13(1), 29–40.Google Scholar
Baber, L. D., Pifer, M. J., Colbeck, C., and Furman, T. (2010). Increasing diversity in the geosciences: Recruitment programs and student self-efficacy. Journal of Geoscience Education, 58(1), 32–42.Google Scholar
Bacon, D. R., Stewart, K. A., and Stewart-Belle, S. (1998). Exploring predictors of student team project performance. Journal of Marketing Education, 20(1), 63–71.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In Ramachaudran, V. S., ed., Encyclopedia of Human Behavior. New York, NY: Academic Press, 4, 71–81.Google Scholar
Bean, J. C. (2011). Engaging Ideas: The Professor’s Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Bonwell, C. C., and Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. 1991 ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education.Google Scholar
Carini, R. M., Kuh, G. D., and Klein, S. P. (2006). Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkages. Research in Higher Education, 47(1), 1–32.Google Scholar
Colley, K. E. (2016). Purposeful Engagement in Science Learning: The Project-Based Approach. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar
Connolly, P., and Vilardi, T. (eds.) (1989). Writing to Learn Mathematics and Science. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
Crouch, C. H., and Mazur, Eric. (2001). Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69(9), 970–977.Google Scholar
Daly, J. P., and Worrell, D. L. (1993). Structuring group projects as miniature organizations. Journal of Management Education, 17(2), 236–242.Google Scholar
Daniels, H. (1994). Literature Circles: Voice and Choice in the Student-Centered Classroom. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.Google Scholar
Dunlap, J. C. (2005). Problem-based learning and self-efficacy: How a capstone course prepares students for a profession. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(1), 65–85.Google Scholar
Fagen, A. P., Crouch, C. H., and Mazur, E. (2002). Peer instruction: Results from a range of classrooms. Physics Teacher, 40(4), 206–209.Google Scholar
Feichtner, S. B., and Davis, E. A. (1984). Why some groups fail: A survey of students’ experiences with learning groups. Organizational Behavior Teaching Review, 9(4), 58–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felder, R. M., and Brent, R. (1996). Navigating the bumpy road to student-centered instruction. College Teaching, 44(2), 43–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., and Wenderoth, P. M. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415.Google Scholar
Gilbert, L. A., Stempien, J., McConnell, D. A., Budd, D. A., van der Hoeven Kraft, K. J., Bykerk-Kauffman, A., Jones, M. H., et al. (2012). Not just “Rocks for Jocks”: Who are introductory geology students and why are they here? Journal of Geoscience Education, 60(4), 360–371.Google Scholar
Grey, K., and Koncz, A. (2017). Employers seek teamwork, problem-solving skills on resumes. National Association of Colleges and Employers. February 16, 2017. www.naceweb.org/about-us/press/2017/employers-seek-teamwork-problem-solving-skills-on-resumes/.Google Scholar
Guertin, L. A., Zappe, S. E., and Kim, H. (2007). Just-in-Time Teaching exercises to engage students in an introductory-level dinosaur course. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(6), 507–514.Google Scholar
Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74.Google Scholar
Hay, D. B., Williams, D., Stahl, D., and Wingate, R. J. (2013). Using drawings of the brain cell to exhibit expertise in neuroscience: Exploring the boundaries of experimental culture. Science Education, 97(3), 468–491.Google Scholar
Jalajas, D. S., and Sutton, R. I. (1984). Feuds in student groups: Coping with whiners, martyrs, saboteurs, bullies, and deadbeats. Organizational Behavior Teaching Review, 9(4), 94–102.Google Scholar
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., and Smith, K. A. (1998). Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.Google Scholar
Kelley, P. H., and Visaggi, C. C. (2012). Learning paleontology through doing: Integrating an authentic research project into an invertebrate paleontology course. In Maria, M. M. and Lockwood, R., eds., Teaching Paleontology in the 21st Century. The Paleontological Society Special Publications 12. New York: Cambridge University Press, 181–198.Google Scholar
Kelso, P. R., and Brown, L. M. (2009). Integration of field experiences in a project-based geoscience curriculum. In Whitmeyer, S. J., Mogk, D. W., and Pyle, E. J. eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches, GSA Special Paper, 461, 57–64. Denver: Geological Society of America.Google Scholar
Keys, C. W. (1999). Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: Connecting knowledge production with writing to learn in science. Science Education, 83(2), 115–130.Google Scholar
Kirchmeyer, C. (1993). Multicultural task groups: An account of the low contribution level of minorities. Small Group Research, 24(1), 127–148.Google Scholar
Koy, K. A. (2012). The taphonomy experiment: Reinforcing science process skills with a class-based student independent research project. In Maria, M. M. and Lockwood, R., eds., Teaching Paleontology in the 21st Century. The Paleontological Society Special Publications 12. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 199–220.Google Scholar
Kuh, G. D., Cruce, T. M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., and Gonyea, R. M. (2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 540–563.Google Scholar
Lasry, N., Mazur, E., and Watkins, J. (2008). Peer instruction: From Harvard to the two-year college. American Journal of Physics, 76(11), 1066–1069.Google Scholar
Laws, P., Sokoloff, D., and Thornton, R. (1999). Promoting active learning using the results of physics education research. UniServe Science News, 13, 14–19.Google Scholar
Layton, R. A., Loughry, M. L., Ohland, M. W., and Ricco, G. D. (2010). Design and validation of a web-based system for assigning members to teams using instructor-specified criteria. WSEAS Transactions on Advances in Engineering Education, 2(1), 1–28.Google Scholar
Lenox, R. A., and Subich, L. M. (1994). The relationship between self-efficacy beliefs and inventoried vocational interests. Career Development Quarterly, 42(4), 302–313.Google Scholar
Lent, R. W., Sheu, H.-B., Singley, D., Schmidt, J. A., Schmidt, L. C., and Gloster, C. S. (2008). Longitudinal relations of self-efficacy to outcome expectations, interests, and major choice goals in engineering students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73(2), 328–335.Google Scholar
Lerner, N. (2007). Drawing to learn science: Legacies of Agassiz. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 37(4), 379–394.Google Scholar
Linn, M. C. (1995). Designing computer learning environments for engineering and computer science: The scaffolded knowledge integration framework. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 4(2), 103–126.Google Scholar
Linn, M. C. (2000). Designing the knowledge integration environment. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 781–796.Google Scholar
Lujan, H. L., and DiCarlo, S. E. (2006). Too much teaching, not enough learning: What is the solution? Advances in Physiology Education, 30(1), 17–22.Google Scholar
Lyman, F. (1987). Think-pair-share: An expanding teaching technique. Maa-Cie Cooperative News, 1(1), 1–2.Google Scholar
Macdonald, R. H., and Korinek, L. (1995). Cooperative-learning activities in large entry-level geology courses. Journal of Geological Education, 43(4), 341–345.Google Scholar
McConnell, D. A., Steer, D. N., and Owens, K. D. (2003). Assessment and active learning strategies for introductory geology courses. Journal of Geoscience Education, 51(2), 205–216.Google Scholar
McManus, D. A. (2001). The two paradigms of education and the peer review of teaching. Journal of Geoscience Education, 49(5), 423–434.Google Scholar
Mello, J. A. (1993). Improving individual member accountability in small work group settings. Journal of Management Education, 17(2), 253–259.Google Scholar
National Research Council, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, Board on Science Education, Board on Testing and Assessment, and Committee on Defining Deeper Learning and 21st Century Skills. (2013). Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Novak, G. M. (2011). Just-in-Time Teaching. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 128, 63–73.Google Scholar
Oakley, B., Felder, R. M., Brent, R., and Elhajj, I. (2004). Turning student groups into effective teams. Journal of Student Centered Learning, 2(1), 9–34.Google Scholar
Olcott, M. A., and Bitting, K. S. (2016). Teaching through human-driven extinctions and climate change: Adding civic engagement to an introductory geology course for non-majors. International Journal of Science Education and Civic Engagement, 8(1), 30–34.Google Scholar
Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328(5977), 463–466.Google Scholar
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231.Google Scholar
Prothero, D. R. (2012). From memorization to inspiration: Teaching paleobiology in the twenty-first century. In Maria, M. M. and Lockwood, R., eds., Teaching Paleontology in the 21st Century. The Paleontological Society Special Publications, 12. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–10.Google Scholar
Quillin, K., and Thomas, S. (2015). Drawing-to-learn: A framework for using drawings to promote model-based reasoning in biology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 14(1), 1–16.Google Scholar
Redish, E. F., Saul, J. M., and Steinberg, R. N. (1997). On the effectiveness of active-engagement microcomputer-based laboratories. American Journal of Physics, 65(1), 45–54.Google Scholar
Rey-Rocha, J., Martín-Sempere, M., and Garzón, B. (2002). Research productivity of scientists in consolidated vs. non-consolidated teams: The case of Spanish university geologists. Scientometrics, 55(1), 137–156.Google Scholar
Roberts, J. A., Marshall, A. O., McLean, N., Baker, G. S., and Möller, A. (In review). Demonstrating the impact of classroom transformation on STEM inequality in DFW rates (“D” or “F” grade or withdraw) for first-time freshmen, females, and underrepresented minorities through a decadal study of introductory geology courses. Journal of Geoscience Education.Google Scholar
Ruhl, K. L., Hughes, C. A., and Schloss, P. J. (1987). Using the pause procedure to enhance lecture recall. Teacher Education and Special Education, 10(1), 14–18.Google Scholar
Savarese, M., and Schmidt, D. (2012). Engaging paleontology undergraduates in collaborative research experiences. In Maria, M. M. and Lockwood, R., eds., Teaching Paleontology in the 21st Century. The Paleontological Society Special Publications 12. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 221–230.Google Scholar
Schiappa, T. A. (2012). Teaching through investigative case studies: Lessons from invertebrate paleontology. In Maria, M. M. and Lockwood, R., eds., Teaching Paleontology in the 21st Century, The Paleontological Society Special Publications 12. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 169–180.Google Scholar
Seymour, E., Wiese, D., Hunter, A., and Daffinrud, S. M. (2000). Creating a better mousetrap: On-line student assessment of their learning gains. National Meeting of the American Chemical Society. http://t.salgsite.org/docs/SALGPaperPresentationAtACS.pdf.Google Scholar
Sheehan, P. M. (1977). A reflection of labor by systematists. Paleobiology, 3(3), 325–328.Google Scholar
Smith, M. K., Wood, W. B., Adams, W. K., Wieman, C., Knight, J. K., Guild, N., and Su, T. T. (2009). Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions. Science, 323(5910), 122–124.Google Scholar
Strayhorn, T. L. (2012). College Students’ Sense of Belonging: A Key to Educational Success for All Students. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sunderlin, D. (2012). Ideas for creating a stimulating undergraduate paleobiology course: Emphasis on student-directed learning, evolution, and the chronological succession of phanerozoic life. In Maria, M. M. and Lockwood, R., eds., Teaching Paleontology in the 21st Century. The Paleontological Society Special Publications 12. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 11–20.Google Scholar
Tewksbury, B. J. (1995). Specific strategies for using the “jigsaw” technique for working in groups in non-lecture-based courses. Journal of Geological Education, 43(4), 322–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Mental Process. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wiggins, G. P., and McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
Yacobucci, M. M. (2012). Using active learning strategies to promote deep learning in the undergraduate paleontology classroom. In Maria, M. M. and Lockwood, R., eds., Teaching Paleontology in the 21st Century. The Paleontological Society Special Publications 12. New York: Cambridge University Press, 135–154.Google Scholar
- 21
- Cited by