Page 29 - i1052-5173-31-3-4

Figure 1. Insta360 Pro panorama. (A) Viewed in Microsoft Pho-
tos as a flat, 2D image. (B) Viewed in PTGui as 3D virtual reality Figure 2. Responses to item on end-of-course questionnaire.
in which one can zoom in/out, look up/down, and turn left/right. IAs—in-class activities; PPT—PowerPoint.
Yellow rectangle in (A) represents the field of view shown in (B).
Red circles show the location of a plastic yellow number tent.
Red rectangles show locations of north-pointing markers.

would learn how to use the equipment in were formative assessments that revealed instruction developed and implemented in
upper-division courses as needed and, mean- overall improvement in students’ ability May 2020 is one way of supporting current
while, learn how to measure strike and dip to, for example, describe what they see and students during the pandemic and of increas-
using ROCKD (a phone app). draw inferences from those observations. ing the accessibility of field courses to future
students across a range of physical abilities.
LEARNING OUTCOMES LESSONS LEARNED ABOUT THE
Field assignments were designed so that IMPOSSIBLE REFERENCES CITED
components were independently completed Simulating the field environment was Hendrix, T.E., 1967, NAGT looks at summer field
prior to team-based work, which took place previously believed impossible; however, courses: Journal of Geological Education, v. 15,
in Zoom breakout rooms. In an end-of- technological advances made it possible to no. 2, p. 73–77, https://doi.org/10.5408/0022
course questionnaire, all but one student bring the field to my students in a way that -1368-XV.2.73.
(12 out of 13) found the team fieldwork satisfied all my instructional design goals Hendrix, T.E., and Suttner, L.J., 1978, An assess-
ment of field courses in geology: Journal of Geo-
“very helpful” to their learning (Fig. 2). and helped students achieve all but one of the logical Education, v. 26, no. 4, p. 160–164,
The results of a pre- and post-instruction course-level learning goals for an in-person https://doi.org/10.5408/0022-1368-26.4.160.
test revealed dramatic improvement in stu- version of the course. Additionally, students Petcovic, H.L., Stokes, A., and Caulkins, J.L., 2014,
dents’ knowledge of field-related geologic stated that not contending with physical Geoscientists’ perceptions of the value of under-
terms, including being able to differentiate aspects of field work (e.g., traversing uneven graduate field education: GSA Today, v. 24, no. 7,
between observations, inferences, inter- ground, coping with extreme heat, etc.) p. 4–10, https://doi.org/10.1130/GSATG196A.1.
pretations, and hypotheses. Students’ field helped them focus on developing cognitive Manuscript received 18 July 2020
notes and PowerPoint presentations were and teamwork skills they will use in any revised Manuscript received 23 oct. 2020
not only part of each field assignment, they field location. The model of remote field Manuscript accepted 12 nov. 2020

www.geosociety.org/gsatoday 29