DRAFT May 2006

Developing Effective Inquiry-based Learning in Geography

Emerging draft has basic outline and some bits better fleshed out than others. Major issues to consider: The range of examples how many and to what level of detail? Main points we want to get across 1. Introduction

This paper has three main objectives: first to describe the characteristics of inquirybased learning (IBL); second to illustrate the different forms of IBL; and third to examine the institutional and departmental support required for IBL courses. The paper begins with an examination of the characteristics and forms of IBL, together with purported pros and cons of the approach. The focus then moves to case studies of IBL, with a range of examples from institutions around the globe. The final section investigates departmental and institutional support for IBL, with implications for management, teaching staff and students.

1.1 Characteristics of IBL

Inquiry-based learning (IBL) is a term that encompasses a range of educational approaches that focus on active engagement in learning by students (Kahn & ORourke, 2004). Effective IBL stimulates students curiosity, enabling them to formulate and seek answers to questions and progress is made by not only formulating ideas and responses, but also reflecting upon and learning from the experience (refs). One of the key tenets of IBL is that students take ownership of the understanding and experiences gained during the learning processes and as a consequence are more stimulated and motivated by their learning context. Consequently, IBL comprises student-centred learning techniques and lecturers are facilitators or guides who, amongst other things, promote discussion through the asking of questions, encourage students to reflect on their learning experiences, ensure the learning process has some element of progression (although not necessarily linear) and ensure that any assessment aligns with the intended learning outcomes of the IBL activity. The role

DRAFT May 2006

of the lecturer in IBL is very different from that during traditional style teaching, and often requires greater flexibility, planning, preparation and responsiveness (e.g. Hanson & Moser, 2003).

IBL is not a new approach to learning - its early development has been attributed to the American philosopher and educator John Dewey (1859-1952) who wrote widely on the links between thinking, reflection and experience and promoted learning by doing or active learning (Dewey, 1933) and has been widely adopted in some disciplines, for example, medical training. However over the past 5 (10?) years in particular, IBL has been incorporated into higher education programmes covering an increasingly wide range of subjects. This is, in part, because the inquisitive and flexible characteristics of the learning process are akin to the research process engaged in by academic staff, and hence IBL is research-oriented and can facilitate closer links between teaching and research in higher education than traditional lecture formats can often achieve (e.g. Jenkins et al. 2003; Healey, 2005).

1.2 Different forms of IBL

The contemporary scope of IBL is broad and covers a range of approaches to learning that are student-centred, active and driven by a process of enquiry. Kahn & ORourke (2004) provide a useful classification of these approaches which include problembased learning, small-scale investigations and project work (Figure 1). Within the pedagogic literature, the most widely discussed of these types of IBL is probably problem-based learning. This is more likely to be a reflection of the challenges associated with the successful implementation of PBL (for both students, staff and managers: Pawson et al. 2006) rather than indicative of its dominance in geography teaching programmes. Fieldwork (e.g. McKendrick, 2003), case studies (Hughes et al. 2001) and project work are probably more widely used in the discipline, but as tried, tested and familiar techniques the value of these approaches in the learning techniques portfolio has achieved a higher level of acceptance (even though empirical evidence to support some of these values remains surprisingly sparse: e.g. Panelli & Welch, 2005.

Where does Resource-based learning fit in?

DRAFT May 2006

[Figure 1 Kahn and ORourkes different forms of IBL]

1.3 Purported pros and cons

It is widely recognised that students who actively engage with the learning process gain more from their experience than those who receive information transmitted passively to them (e.g. Race, 1993; Haigh, 1996; Gibbs, 1992). The enduring challenge is to convince and encourage students that this more demanding, and often more time-consuming approach is worthwhile. This is one of the risks of adopting PBL that was identified by Pawson et al. (2006) in their critical assessment of PBL in geography. Chappell (2006) also documents the difficulties encountered by students in PBL courses and expressed through learning journals. Students were initially very resistant to the learning technique citing concerns about lack of guidance, no clear course content and questioning the role of the lecturer in their learning process. However, if students are given the time and space to develop their active learning skills, then IBL becomes a very attractive technique. Succcessful use of most types of IBL culminates in students improving their skills of learning how to learn and students who can recognise this improvement or transition gain a great deal, not only cognitively but also psychologically.

Whilst occasional use of IBL, for example occasional exercises over the course of a degree, are unlikely to facilitate major changes in student approach to learning (e.g. Fuller et al. 2000), more extensive use of IBL does enable students to develop more than just their cognitive abilities. Through closer interaction with peers and a reflective approach to learning students can also develop their physical (dexterity, personal presentation) and emotional, psychological and social skills. Again, the latter is well-illustrated by Chappells (2006) through their learning journals as students eventually made the transition from passive to active learners.

Pawson et al. (2006)s evaluation of the potential uses of PBL in geography draws upon experiences of the use of PBL, predominantly in medical education, to make a critical assessment of the benefits and risks of PBL in comparison with traditional teaching methods. They consider the benefits for students to include improved understanding, more enjoyable learning, a greater sense of achievement and improved

DRAFT May 2006

preparation for life-long learning. The disadvantages, or risks, associated with PBL include the increased time commitment required, lack of security (of format, content) and problems associated with group work. In addition, work with students at prehigher education levels (15-17 years) suggests that PBL in particular may be less suitable for disabled students than more traditional forms of learning (e.g. Knings et al. 2005). Many of these advantages and disadvantages have been explored specifically in the context of geographical learning by, amongst others SpronkenSmith (2006).

Most types of IBL, not only PBL, are ideally suited to students working as teams or groups. Whilst group work is often considered to be a good thing in terms of skills development, Pawson et al. (2006) do not include working as part of a group as a benefit to either students or staff, and group work is only listed as a potential risk through the failure and management of group dynamics. Kahn and ORourke (2004) primarily focus on the positive aspects of team-working, in terms of mutual student support and sharing of resources. Group work is often highly valued by employers (in terms of students developing skills of working with others, sharing resources, pooling ideas, working as part of a team) and by academic staff (encourages active engagement of topics through discussion, enables range of assessment modes, may reduce assessment load), but viewed with suspicion by some students (and staff) who may subscribe to some of the myths articulated by, amongst others, Parsons & Drew (1996) and Healey et al. (1996). This can be resolved in a range of ways (e.g. Livingstone & Lynch, 2000; Spronken-Smith, 2006)

2. Current use in geography

Documented use in Geography is limited when compared to that in other disciplines, however it is likely that IBL in its broadest sense is, in fact widely used. Most of the literature points to IBL taking place at the senior level of learning (ref needed). This is because, at lower levels there is a need for students to become familiar with a base of knowledge and to learn the associated jargon and concepts of the discipline. Once they have this platform knowledge base, the challenge is for students to develop their research skills. IBL can provide a multitude of ways to progressively develop these

DRAFT May 2006

research skills. Initially this could be through field work and cases studies that are focused on students applying their knowledge in a practical, hands-on environment. At higher levels, students are ready to tackle the challenges of pure PBL courses, where they are fully involved in group research, tackling professional problems. By developing a natural progression strategy early on, students would then be prepared to ask more relevant questions for a senior or masters thesis, or a doctoral dissertation. Since learning is a cumulative process, a strategy that cumulates in the best possible scenario for the learner should be employed. This could be true for the multi-faceted discipline of Geography. Following Kahn and ORourkes (2004) definition of different forms, this section describes examples of IBL from small-scale investigations (section 2.1), project work (section 2.2), and problem-based learning (section 2.3).

Major discussion point: how much to include for examples? e.g. an overview plus some evaluative data or In some cases I had suggested recommendations as well but now think these would be better placed in the last section drawing together recommendations as there is bound to be some overlap. Also mindful of growing wordcount!

2.1 Small scale investigations (field work, case studies or workshops)

Artimus do you have any evaluative data for these? What do students and staff think about these approaches?

2.1.1 Geography in News In the Geography Programme at Wittenburg University a small-scale IBL investigation involves a module called Geography in News. This module requires the student to follow a particular problem in the media and do develop a critical and analytical write up on how Geography plays a role in human events. This IBL study requires a map showing the distribution of the story as well as how it affects both those in the immediate area and around the world along with personal opinion. Problems such as physical catastrophes or major migrations are just two examples of media events that are problematic to a vast number of people. This IBL activity is carried out individually and aims to increase awareness of real world problems. The

DRAFT May 2006

problems are used to engage students' curiosity and initiate learning the subject matter. Further, this form of IBL prepares students to think critically and analytically, and to find and use appropriate learning resources such as newspapers, websites, journals and maps.

2.1.2 Hometown Survey I think this case would be good to elaborate upon. Do students work individually or in teams? Another example of IBL from the Geography Programme at Wittenburg University is in the form of a Hometown Survey. Students are asked to research their hometown, record the historical and contemporary features of it and then asked to reflect on how their early environment has shaped their perceptions of today. Although this is a structured approach to IBL, it is still used at the early introduction to geographic inquiry. An important part of IBL is that the learner notices something that intrigues, surprises, or stimulates a question. That then leads to the subsequent inquiry, to answer that question or point of interest. This project works in the reverse as the conclusive question is how did your early environment help formulate your perceptions today? Most learners respond that they now have some understanding of that process.

2.2. Project work

Project work involves a more sustained or focused use of IBL. Two examples are provided here the first from Wittenburg University and the second from the University of Canterbury, New Zealand.

2.2.1 Tackling environmental problems in Human Ecology This is another good example of project work. Can you elaborate a little on aims of this module? Also some feedback from students and staff would be great.

Another example used by this author at the lower levels of higher education is in a geography course titled Human Ecology, a 120 level course designed to show human/environment interactions. Again, first the DL method is used up until the semester midterm, to explain terms and systems that are impacted in part by human

DRAFT May 2006

activities. After about a month, students are asked to develop a personal project that they can implement that can show they can have a positive affect on environmental issues. The proposal is submitted first answering these three questions of their query: 1. Name an environmental problem that seriously irritates you on the local level {Again, although PBL is a group process, and not an individual endeavor, many students in this class tend to identify the same problem.} 2. Suggest some solutions to the problem based on research. 3. Select a solution that you can reasonably implement and that you can monitor and collect data on a daily basis. After this project is approved with sufficient feedback and suggestions, students are then required to monitor the problem and collect data for three weeks. They are then implement their solution and collect data for another three weeks. Based on their recorded data, they are asked to conclude what type of impact they had on the problem. For an assessment, they must hand in the entire package which includes the additional headings: 4. Data collection before and after solution implementation 5. Analysis of the impact on the problem. The class then concludes using a forum of debates on various wide-ranging, global environmental issues. Learners are asked to pick a global environmental issue and are assigned a partner based on interest. This forms a team to debate one side of the issue and another team is assigned the other viewpoint. Even though some teams are not fond of the pro/con side of the issue they are assigned, they are versed in the use of the debate technique. One thing to point out is that a successful debate draws upon knowing at least two sides to issue and that the common ground that may be used by both sides should be acknowledged up front. Both of these examples utilize an array of structured to semi-structured assignments that are introduced with the DL protocol. They then move on to a PBL format and are finalized with a self assessment. The use of the various strategies to achieve learning follows a linear progression that can be carried on into upper-level courses.

2.2.2 Group project work in physical geography Could use example from 201 at UC (gathering data currently)

2.3. Problem-based learning

DRAFT May 2006

PBL is the most explicitly documented form of IBL in pedagogic literature (e.g. see Chappell, 2001, 2006; Pawson et al., 2006; Spronken-Smith, 2006). Indeed the approach is finding increasing favour in geography and environmental science teaching. In this section we describe two cases: the first, field studies in physical geography, uses a hybrid PBL approach, while the second, from the online Center for Global Geography Education (CGGE) not only uses a PBL approach, but also the course is taught online and internationally!

2.3.1 Field Studies Course at the University of Otago Still in progress and need data probably needs a prune too! Gets back to the issue of how much to include!

Overview

Field Research Studies is a course in physical geography research methods at the University of Otago. It is for third year students and unlike most university courses at Otago, runs for the full year. The course is designed to prepare students for employment and for postgraduate study in the biophysical sciences. Consequently the teaching team e!pects students to achie"e professional standards in their team#or$ in the achie"ement of deadlines and in the quality of reports and presentations. The aims of the course are to:

design conduct and report on a research pro%ect in &hysical 'eography enhance your ability to effecti"ely communicate your #or$ de"elop s$ills in #or$ing #ith a team de"elop organisational and pro%ect management s$ills de"elop the capacity to reflect on and be critical of your o#n research.

(urther the course requires students to ta$e direct and immediate responsibility for their o#n learning. They must form effecti"e #or$ing relationships #ith their colleagues they must set their o#n #or$ agenda and ta$e responsibility for planning their #or$ schedule.

DRAFT May 2006

The focus for inquiry was closely tied into staff research interests in order to strengthen teaching-research links. Thus the tutors (ranging from a teaching fellow to a professor) posed broad research topics (Table 1). Table 1: Topics for inquiry in 2006 The influence of #eather and climate on air pollution in )unedin *elationships bet#een fine particulates and total suspended particulates +ssessing the frost ris$ in a "ineyard Temperate glacier landscapes ,lope instability ha-ards in alpine en"ironments &rocesses of Lupinus arboreus .tree lupin/ in"asion 0aitorete ,pit 1arram grass seed production and dispersal in a transgressi"e dune system ,te#art 2sland 3ea"y metal leaching in "ineyards of Central 4tago The main learning activity throughout the course was a group meeting facilitated by a tutor, held approximately weekly for the first seven months of the teaching year. Running alongside these meetings, were a series of about 12 lectures covering aspects of the research process from research design through to the practicalities of conducting fieldwork and data analysis, as well as skill-based seminars focusing on giving oral presentations, researching the literature and report writing.

Students were expected to dedicate about 180 hours over the semester to this course comprising: 24 hours of group meetings; 12 hours of lectures; about 40-60 hours of field and laboratory work and about 90 hours in self-directed study. Approximately 50-60 students take the course and in the first year (2005) there were 8 groups of about 8 students, while in 2006 there were 8 groups of 5-6 students. In previous years the course had run on a similar IBL model but had a residential fieldtrip for the whole class (as well as second year students). Due to growing student numbers (about 120 combined second and third years in 2004) the fieldtrip had become very unwieldly and the quality of teaching usually associated with residential fieldtrips, had seriously declined. Thus in a revamp of the course in 2005, it was decided to forgo the residential fieldtrip in favour of group-based and organized fieldwork. The rationale for this was to improve the quality of field teaching and to further develop projectmanagement skills in students. For example, in the new format students were

DRAFT May 2006

expected to play a major role in organising the logistical aspects of fieldwork including transport, accommodation and food.

The assessment is fully internal and consisted of a mixture of individual and groupbased assessment tasks (Table 1). Each of the group-based assessment tasks had an element of peer assessment. Table 15 +ssessment #eighting for (ield *esearch ,tudies course. 6eighting .7/ Individual coursework 8iterature analysis 2ndi"idual report Critique &eer assessment Group coursework ,eminar on research proposal Conference presentation 19 :9 19 19 5 5

Evaluation

In 2006 the course was evaluated using a standard University of Otago course survey questionnaire as well as seeking feedback via a small group diagnostic session. Feedback was also sought from teaching staff in both 2005 and 2006.

Perceived benefits/strengths

Need these

Perceived problems/weaknesses

Need these

Recommendations

Need these?

DRAFT May 2006

2.3.2 CGGE Waverly is currently reworking some of this

Overview of CGGE IBL course

The Association of American Geographers online Center for Global Geography Education (CGGE) offers three inquiry-based learning modules for international student collaborations appropriate for introductory and advanced undergraduate geography courses whereby teams of students from two countries collaborate on geographic problems using the Blackboard e-learning platform. The Population, Global Economy, and Nationalism modules are designed to support instructors who are interested in promoting the understanding of geographic concepts in their courses through expanding their students awareness of international perspectives. The key learning objectives of the modules include: a/ the ability to use the information, methods, and concepts of geography to examine global issues b/ knowing how to use Internet technology for effective learning and collaboration c/ being able to formulate and carry out strategies for asking and answering geographic questions in an international team, and d/ greater interest in the study of geography and appreciation for its perspectives on global issues (CGGE 2006).

Need to say something about the institutions and countries involved and how many tutors etc How many students and at what stage, what size are the groups? I can appreciate that the articles you refer to probably give all the details but I think it would be useful to describe them here.

Learning activities in each module include animations drawing on the Association of American Geographers Activities and Readings in the Geography of the World (ARGWorld) project, case studies, illustrations, and readings. Student collaborations revolve around inquiry-based lessons that require teams to work separately as local

DRAFT May 2006

groups before performing some sort of international collaborative activity (e.g. an online discussion of a map analysis) (Luna-Garca, Smith, Solem, and Ray, 2004: 2). Assessment items?

Evaluation of course

To evaluate the effectiveness of the CGGE modules in meeting the key learning objectives, nine trials were conducted between September 2004 and April 2005 (Klein 2005). Through pre-post tests, observations, analysis of student discussions, student interviews, and instructor questionnaires, the modules were found to: a/ improve student understanding of each modules learning goals b/ foster awareness of geographic issues through international collaboration c/ engage students in international collaborations, although the engagement of student groups in international discussions varied tremendously, and d/ be limited in effectiveness for encouraging intercultural communication that reveals international perspectives (Klein 2005). Can we more elaboration of benefits? Focus seems very much on issues arising. It would be great to balance this more so we get an overall more positive view of this great initiative!

Perceived benefits

Expand a little on these

Perceived problems

Recommendations

I wonder whether we can separate out the issues to do with IBL vs the issues to do with on-line learning or international collaboration? It seems that communication

DRAFT May 2006

(and personalizing it) & cultural and language differences are accentuated in the online environment. However, the nature of the questions is more centrally an IBL issue. It is all rather tangled isnt it and Im not sure if it is even practical/possible to separate them out! One way forward might be to flesh out the following from your discussion: 1. Initiating engagement here discuss imptce of personal introductions esp in on-line & international ; in establishing clear expectations for how teaching/learning occur in the course 2. nature of the questions 3. overcoming cultural and language differences esp in international and accentuated by on-line. 4. tutor input

Then use info below in these bullets? Based on the evaluation, Klein (2005) offers suggestions for module revision, which include editing the questions that serve as the basis for the geographic inquiry and creating an introductory activity so students will be acquainted with each other and thus feel comfortable in communicating their ideas. Many of these questions in the modules resulted in concrete, formal answers that did not promote international discussion. Critical to inquiry-based learning are clear questions, however some the modules questions confused students and need to be edited for clarity. To promote international communication, especially at the outset of the collaborations, Klein (2005, 60) suggests that there is a personal-scale introductory activity at the start of each module, to enable students to break the ice and begin to feel more comfortable exchanging ideas.

Klein (2005) identified cultural and language differences that worked as a deterrent to fostering insightful international communications. Students in some cultures are not encouraged to discuss their opinions openly, let alone with strangers. For some students, the student-centered approach to learning that they experienced within the CGGE modules may have been their first experience with such an approach. Language difficulties also arose, especially for student teams were both sides communicated in second languages (e.g., Chilean and Chinese students

DRAFT May 2006

communicated in English). Given the language constraints, conceptual ideas were especially difficult to convey (Klein 2005).

To be sure, the challenges associated with creating student-centered, inquiry-based international collaborative activities are many. Considerations of culture and language, previous experience with geography courses, aligning academic calendars, asynchronous electronic communications, time commitment from both students and instructors, encouraging open dialogue, and varying participation within groups, complicate matters.

3. Institutional and departmental support for IBL

Still in progressadd ideas/literature etc

3.1 For management

IBL is by necessity, resource intensive, and as such requires strong support especially at the departmental level. The approach, particularly in its purer forms, challenges traditional transmission mode of teaching and is resource intensive in terms of staff. This inevitably means increased staffing levels for IBL courses. If the inquiry involves fieldwork, then this is a further cost. From funding to technology to approval, institutional support can make or break a strategy for learning. In a perfect setting, students should challenge the instructor the same way the instructors should challenge the student. Monetary support for resources and technology are not equally available to various institutions, their faculty or students. Based on budgetary priorities, some Geography departments fall below the curve on institutional support. Faculty training in various methodologies should take place at all levels, but are hindered by the same problems. At a crucial time of budget crunching, many times the faculty to student ratio is much greater than it should be.

DRAFT May 2006

However, as the case studies illustrate, elements of IBL can be incorporated into a more traditional curriculum, at little cost to the department. The use of project work or small scale investigations can occur with little impact on resourcing..

3.2 For teaching staff The role of the facilitator in inquiry-based learning deserves special attention. It is vital that there is adequate training of tutors so that they embrace the student-centred approach. This can sometimes require a fundamental change in their teaching philosophy and care must be taken to facilitate this transition. Spronken-Smith and Harland (2006) have shown that often new tutors are in need of more support to make this transition. In a study of tutor transitions to problem-based learning in a geography research methods course, they found that new tutors have a tendency to dominate group processes and may be reluctant to relinquish control to the group. More experienced tutors found the transition easier although at times uncomfortable.

Initially the teaching team should be exposed to research on student learning theory and on IBL in particular. Ideally the teaching team should be fully involved in all stages of planning the IBL course, module or programme, so that they develop ownership of the resulting approach. Once the course is running there should be regular meetings of the teaching team at which tutors are asked to share feelings about how the group work and group dynamics are progressing. This open forum can be of immense help to tutors who are struggling with this approach to teaching.

Kahn and ORourke (2004, 6) delineate several responsibilities of inquiry-based learning facilitators that may prove worthwhile for professional development activities. These responsibilities include: a/ asking open-ended questions that provoke further discussion and stimulate deeper exploration b/ supporting students, motivating them to engage with the task and valuing their ideas and contributions c/ encouraging students to reflect on their experiences d/ monitoring progress and ensuring that students understand where they are in the process

DRAFT May 2006

e/ challenging student thinking, encouraging them to extend their boundaries and to seek new ways to work with problems and situations, and f/ developing an atmosphere of trust in which students are willing to share and exchange ideas or work co-operatively.

3.3 For students

Kahn and ORourke (2004) identify five key elements to successful inquiry-based learning that may serve to inform the revision of the CGGE modules. First, students need an introduction to this approach to learning so that they are familiar with what is expected of them. This introduction may help to lessen hesitations by students who are more comfortable in traditional, teacher-centered approaches to learning. Second, students need a clear yet open starting point to being their engagement with the inquiry-based lesson. An open-ended task that is clearly stated is essential for inquirybased learning to occur. Third, students need a hybrid of learning resources to support their inquiry, including lectures, Internet sources, seminars, and the like. Fourth, since inquiry-based learning is ideally suited to collaborative student team-working (Kahn and ORourke, 2004: 5), peer support is critical to the success of the inquiry.

Could use some stuff from paper on student perceptions of PBL (in Proceedings of IUT 2006)

4. Conclusions needed?

References (incomplete thus far) CGGE (2006) The online Center for Global Geography Education. URL: http://www.aag.org/Education/center/cgge-aag%20site/index.html (accessed date).

DRAFT May 2006

Chappell, A. 2006. Using the grieving process and learning journals to evaluate students responses to problem-based learning in an undergraduate geography curriculum. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 30, 1, 15-32.

Dewey, J. 1933. How we think. A restatement fo the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. D.C. Heath, Boston.

Hanson, S. & Moser, S. 2003. Reflections on a discipline-wide project: developing active learning modules on the human dimensions of global change. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 27, 1, 17-38.

Healey, M. 2005. Linking research and teaching to benefit student learning. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 29, 2, 183-201.

Healey, M., Matthews, H., Livingstone, I. & Foster, I. 1996. Learning in small groups in university geography courses: designing a core module around group projects. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 20, 167-180.

Hughes, P., Blair, D. Clear-Hill, H. & Halewood, C. 2001. Local sustainability and LA21: a vertically-integrated research, learning and teaching activity. Planet, 2, 5-7.

Jenkins, A., Breen, R., Lindsay, R. & Brew, A. 2003. Reshaping teaching in higher education linking teaching with research. Staff and Educational Development Series.

Kahn, P. and ORourke, K. 2004. Guide to curriculum design: enquiry-based learning. URL: www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources.asp? id=359&process=full_record&section=generic (accessed date)

Klein, Phil (2005) Summative Evaluation for Online Center for Global Geography Education. URL: http://www.aag.org/Education/center/cgge-aag%20site/CGGE_Evaluation.zip (accessed date).

DRAFT May 2006

Knings, K.D., Wiers, R.W., ven de Wiel, M.W.J. and Schmidt, H.G. 2005. Problembased learning as a valuable educational method for physically disabled teenagers? The discrepancy between theory and practice. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities. 17, 2, 107-117.

Livingstone, D. & Lynch, K. 2000. Group oroject work and student-centred active learning: two different approached. Studies in Higher Education, 25, 3, 325-345. Luna-Garca, A., Smith, J., Solem, M. and Ray, W. (2004) Nationalism. Instructors Guide. URL: http://www.aag.org/Education/center/cgge-aag%20site/Nationalism_Guide.pdf (accessed date).

McKendrick, J. 2003. Writing for research users: briefing papers as courswork, linking teaching and research in GEES case study. (http.//www.gees.ac.uk/linktr/McKendrick1.htm)

Panelli, R. & Welch, R.V. 2005. Teaching research through field studies: a cumulative opportunity for teaching methodology to human geography undergraduates. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 29, 255-277.

Parsons, D.E. & Drew, S.K. 1996. Designing group project work to enhance learning: key elements. Teaching in Higher Education, 1, 65-80.

Pawson, E., Fournier, E., Haigh, M., Muniz, O., Trafford, J. and Vajoczki, S. 2006. Problem-based learning in Geography: towards a critical assessment of its purposes, benefits and risks. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 30, 1, 103-116.

Race, P. 1993. Never mind the teaching, feel the learning. SEDA Paper 80.

Spronken-Smith, R. 2005. Implementing a problem-based learning approach for teaching research methods in Geography. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 29, 2, 203-221.

DRAFT May 2006

Spronken-Smith, R.A. and Harland, T. (2004) Tutor transitions to problem based learning not as difficult as it seems, In preparation for Active Learning.

DRAFT May 2006

Contribution from Artimus

We need to think how to incorporate this in the paper we can certainly discuss online. This piece is more about a range of approaches, and where IBL might be used, rather than focussing on IBL. This is not necessarily a problem, but it is harder to see how it fits with the thrust of the paper as is. Given that the team are doing blind contributions, the lack of fit in some cases is not surprising and something we can work through together as the paper takes shape. I have copied the section on institutional support and incorporated above. I have also copied bits of the case studies for use in project work.

Please Note: there are many statements that require references from the literature. This is a rough draft and these will be supplied upon finalization.

Introduction Among the many pedagogical approaches used to stimulate learning in contemporary geographic higher education programs, it seems an integrated approach would be the best method to incorporate. The continuum of approaches to student learning can run the gamut from didactic learning (DL) to problem based learning (PBL) to inquiry based learning (IBL). The trend today is to use the latter, although few instructors have been formally trained in this method, and the literature to guide self-development is sparse. Other methods, such as DL, PBL and field studies (FS), have their uses depending on the material presented and the dynamic of the learners. Basically, the selection of any one of the approaches to student learning centers on the content of the course. Learning the core content of any discipline is the first step towards using any of the other methods. Students cannot be expected to understand core concepts in Geography (such as diffusion, social stratification and availability and accessibility) without a core course based on lecture and assessment. There can, however, be assignments and projects that utilize the material presented, once it is understood, to reach a final analysis with a spatial perspective. Instructors as well need to understand the material they are presenting. Using a linear progression model, instructors must focus on and have a clear focus of what they hope to accomplish and how they wish to reinforce concepts to the learners. This can be done in both a structured and unstructured format. It seems, according to the

DRAFT May 2006

literature and past experience, that depending on the level of the material, an instructor is well-served to use a multi-method approach over the course of several offerings on the same topic. In doing so, a natural progression through the available pedagogical resources would enforce and help stimulate learning of the highest caliber. This means that, in introductory classes, the DL method would help introduce learners to the jargon and concepts of the discipline; the PBI would reinforce those concepts and learners would use the jargon to establish and answer problems; structured FS would allow learners to apply their knowledge in a practical, hands-on environment; and finally, the use of IBL would stimulate learners to find their own questions to answer since they are now equipped with the tools necessary to collect data, assess trends and analyze their outcomes with a geographic bent.

Developing a Strategy Most of the literature points to IBL taking place at the senior level of learning. This would be the natural progression across the continuum. A good instructor, skilled in various pedagogical tools, could utilize all four approaches at the beginning levels, thus preparing students in the discipline to adequately design a question based on their level of motivation, to inquire into an area that is of interest to them. The literature also suggests that using this method, an instructor will need more preparation time and takes on more responsibility in the initial phase of learning. By developing a natural progression strategy early on, students would then be prepared to ask more relevant questions for a senior or masters thesis, or a doctoral dissertation. Since learning is a cumulative process, a strategy that cumulates in the best possible scenario for the learner should be employed. This could be true for the multi-faceted discipline of Geography. For example, this author teaches a Geography 101 course in Introduction to Cultural Geography at a private, liberal art university in the U.S. The class is offered to incoming freshman, seniors fulfilling a general education requirement and is required for majors and minors in Geography. Due to the diverse pool of students, it cannot be assumed that a basic geographic awareness is brought into the classroom by the students. Therefore, a general DL approach is used to begin the course. Students are given a list of concepts that will be covered during the semester, and they are advised their final assessment will include these as a take-home component of their final exam.

DRAFT May 2006

This material in the next few paragraphs could be well placed in the section on case studies. Artimus do you have any evaluative data for these? What do students and staff think about these approaches? Given we already have a couple of PBL examples, can we focus on the IBL example and get some more detail about this? I see this as fitting into the project work category. What do you think?

Next, a PBL module called Geography in News requires the student to follow a particular problem in the media and do develop a critical and analytical write up on how Geography plays a role in human events. This project requires a map showing the distribution of the story as well as how it affects both those in the immediate area and around the world along with personal opinion. Problems such as physical catastrophes or major migrations are just two examples of media events that are problematic to a vast number of people. Although Barbara Duch states that PBL is an instructional method that challenges students to "learn to learn," working cooperatively in groups, or in this case individually, to seek awareness of real world problems. These problems are used to engage students' curiosity and initiate learning the subject matter. PBL prepares students to think critically and analytically, and to find and use appropriate learning resources such as newspapers, websites, journals and maps.

I think this case would be good to elaborate upon. Do students work individually or in teams?

An IBL approach is used next in the form of a Hometown Survey. Students are asked to research their hometown, record the historical and contemporary features of it and then asked to reflect on how their early environment has shaped their perceptions of today. Although this is a structured approach to IBL, it is still used at the early introduction to geographic inquiry. An important part of IBL is that the learner notices something that intrigues, surprises, or stimulates a question. That then leads to the subsequent inquiry, to answer that question or point of interest. This project works in the reverse as the conclusive question is how did your early environment help formulate your perceptions today? Most learners respond that they now have some understanding of that process.

DRAFT May 2006

This is another good example of project work. Can you elaborate a little on aims of the course and assessment items? Also some feedback from students and staff would be great.

Another example used by this author at the lower levels of higher education is in a geography course titled Human Ecology, a 120 level course designed to show human/environment interactions. Again, first the DL method is used up until the semester midterm, to explain terms and systems that are impacted in part by human activities. After about a month, students are asked to develop a personal project that they can implement that can show they can have a positive affect on environmental issues. The proposal is submitted first answering these three questions of their query: :. Name an environmental problem that seriously irritates you on the local level {Again, although PBL is a group process, and not an individual endeavor, many students in this class tend to identify the same problem.} ;. Suggest some solutions to the problem based on research. <. Select a solution that you can reasonably implement and that you can monitor and collect data on a daily basis. After this project is approved with sufficient feedback and suggestions, students are then required to monitor the problem and collect data for three weeks. They are then implement their solution and collect data for another three weeks. Based on their recorded data, they are asked to conclude what type of impact they had on the problem. For an assessment, they must hand in the entire package which includes the additional headings: =. Data collection before and after solution implementation 19. Analysis of the impact on the problem. The class then concludes using a forum of debates on various wide-ranging, global environmental issues. Learners are asked to pick a global environmental issue and are assigned a partner based on interest. This forms a team to debate one side of the issue and another team is assigned the other viewpoint. Even though some teams are not fond of the pro/con side of the issue they are assigned, they are versed in the use of the debate technique. One thing to point out is that a successful debate draws upon knowing at least two sides to issue and that the common ground that may be used by

DRAFT May 2006

both sides should be acknowledged up front. Both of these examples utilize an array of structured to semi-structured assignments that are introduced with the DL protocol. They then move on to a PBL format and are finalized with a self assessment. The use of the various strategies to achieve learning follows a linear progression that can be carried on into upper-level courses.

Structured vs. Unstructured Content Although there are various levels of learning through various techniques, all require some sort of initial structure. Even in universities where students are required to be self directed, some type of structure has to be in place to facilitate an unstructured format. This is important, obviously, for accreditation and for efficiency. On a different scale, in a structured classroom setting, a strategy for learning must also be employed. This structuring can be structured in a lecture/assessment format, or antiintuitive in a PBL or IBL approach. The use of either a structured or unstructured field analysis can be used. On the other hand, a true IBL format would use a structured/unstructured approach and perhaps a field component that would be unstructured. Here is where the learner must make the real decision as to their responsibility for organized learning. Once again, the continuum from an instructor-centered to a learner-centered education can be enforced with a hands-on field study component. The dynamic of the course content and the class demographic can either enforce or hinder the learning ability of individual students. This is where the instructor must be flexible enough to make decisions as to which way the course should go based on the responsibility and desire to learn given the various factors. And, as the literature shows, a good mix of various methodologies by the instructor reflecting on what has been presented is the key ingredient. Learner-driven tactics can be very effective, as opposed to rote memorization, as content knowledge is generally retained for a longer time. In todays educational system, however, the use of such pedagogical methods must be carefully weighed in view of the overall mission of the school.

Institutional Support

DRAFT May 2006

Support for various teaching techniques is important. From funding to technology to approval, institutional support can make or break a strategy for learning. Generally, in lower-level classes, a conceptual core of knowledge is dictated by the department. The department is also responsible for petitioning for a particular course to be taught in order to fulfill the mission within the overall framework of the school, as well as developing specialized tracts in the curriculum, some with an interdisciplinary focus. Success of this formula is reflected in the student evaluations of a particular class as well as the success of graduates of a particular program. At some institutions, this type of control over instructional methods is exerted by the administration, who can dictate teaching. In a perfect setting, students should challenge the instructor the same way the instructors should challenge the student. Monetary support for resources and technology are not equally available to various institutions, their faculty or students. Based on budgetary priorities, some schools, especially state schools, fall below the curve on institutional support. Faculty training in various methodologies should take place at all levels, but are hindered by the same problems. At a crucial time of budget crunching, many times the faculty to student ratio is much greater than it should be.