Testing for misconceptions in the classroom

I came across this web site when trying to pick a geologic misconception to discuss. It was interesting and I thought I would point it out. It is a 73 question test designed to assess student learning in Earth Science classes. The questions have been carefully designed and modified after many student and teacher interviews.

What specifically brought this to my attention is one of the sample questions they provided. The students had to have a misconception of how geology worked in order to get the sample question wrong.
Sample GCI Question #2. The following maps show the position of the Earth's continents and oceans. The o's on each map mark the locations where volcanic eruptions occur on land. Which map do you think most closely represents the places where these volcanoes are typically observed?
A surprising number of students chose the equator/tropics “because it’s warmer there.” This demonstrates that some students often have misconceptions about how geology works. However, I wonder if this portion of students are those that don’t pay attention in class and don’t do their homework? Any rudimentary discussion on plate tectonics covers the Ring of Fire (which was one of the choices) and so they should be able to answer this question. If these are legitimate “studying” students, why are they getting this question wrong?

Assessment tests like this can be useful in finding out what concepts students are not understanding (especially if they are observed in a large portion of the class) and help make us better instructors. But when would you apply this test? The 73 question set is designed for you to make into a 15 question test. I think I would try this test during the middle of the class to see if there are any concepts I need to clear up before continuing. I don’t think it would replace my normal exams with this test because I don’t agree with a bunch of the questions on the test. It may be because I am over-thinking some of them. For example:

3. If the single continent in #73 did exist, how could scientists estimate the time needed for the single continent to break apart and form the arrangement of continents we see today?

(A) Scientists do not yet have a valid method for estimating the time needed to break continents apart.
(B) Through comparison of fossils found in rocks
(C) Through analysis of carbon in rock
(D) Through analysis of uranium and lead in rock
(E) Through comparison of different layers found in rocks

I am guessing the correct answer is (B) fossils and they are using examples like Lystrosaurus that are found in South America and Africa. However, the rifting phase also generates a lot of igneous rock so U/Pb dating is also possible. While (E) is a little more ambiguous and doesn’t give us time (without fossil or isotope data), it’s exactly what geologists do. We compare layers of rocks and we can compare those in South America and Africa and find similarities that tell us they used to be together.

They designed this multiple-choice test to have answers that are ambiguous along with the correct answer. I find those tests particularly difficult because you can over-think them. You can usually think of a reason to include another answer (especially frustrating if it’s choose all that apply), but you don’t have any way to explain your choices. I think that’s what demonstrates real knowledge, having to explain why you chose those answers. I understand they chose multiple-choice for ease of grading, but I think tests where students have to demonstrate their knowledge are better (but much more time consuming to grade).

Where on Google Earth #74

Since I found Ron's Star Dunes here is the next Where on Google Earth Challenge #74.

We've been a little desert heavy in WoGE, but I just couldn't help myself. Let's just say I was inspired by March of the Penguins... No, it's not Antarctica. If the person who solves this can't explain, I'll be sure to post about it. I've been a little light on posts lately anyway.



Again, the Schott Rule is in effect. Good luck everyone. Remember to try and explain something about the geology and/or how you found it.

(I am not sure how to create a .kmz file for the last WOGE #73, but if I figure it out I will add the file.)

Judgement Day...

Last week we had a Judgement Day party for PBS's release of Judgement Day: Intelligent Design on Trial. We had a potluck meal before the show, plenty of beer during, and then a lively discussion afterwards.
But, now everyone can watch it online. Just go here and it is broken up into twelve chapters.
Oh, and if you haven't read the Judge Jones' decision, it is worthwhile.

Best invention?

Time Magazine has listed what they think are the best inventions of the year. In particular, this one bothered me. The idea is to inject the microbe Bacillus pasteurii, urea, and calcium into the ground in order to precipitate calcite. But, they want to use this technique to solidify sandy soil for earthquake hazard mitigation by turning sandy soil into sandstone.
I just don't see this as a reasonable hazard mitigation strategy. Why not better buildings? Better zoning? What do you think?

http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1677329_1678027_1677996,00.html

How and why I became a geologist...

For my contribution (and after reading Laelaps' struggles) I decided to post on how and why I became a geologist… It’s a long and convoluted path with many lessons learned, so bear with me.

          Truth be told, as I kid, I really wanted to be a paleontologist. [I also wanted to be a fashion designer at one point, but thankfully that didn’t happen. My wardrobe consists of jeans and t-shirts, not exactly trend setting.] In my quest as a 7 year old to become a paleontologist I read all the kids dinosaur books and I could pronounce all those long scientific names. I remember reading Zoobook’s (remember those?) and doing all my science reports on “strange” animals like snails. In high school I took all the science classes offered and when it came to discussing my career plans with my parents, I still proclaimed, “I want to be a paleontologist!” Well, after some practical talks about the number of PAID paleontologists I started to consider other options. I decided that what I really liked was science and that’s what I wanted to be doing. I really liked my biology and chemistry classes, so I decided to go into biochemistry. It seems really juvenile now, to just smack the name of my two favorite classes together, but it worked…
          It worked until I figured out what biochemistry was in my third year of undergraduate college. Proteins, protein pathways, protein chemistry, and what proteins were in which microbes/organisms. To study for exams I was mostly memorizing proteins! Where were the “strange” organisms I was so interested in? Where was the fieldwork? What the heck was I doing here? So, in my third year I had figured out that I did not want to be a biochemist. Again, I wanted to be a paleontologist.
          I went to an expensive school, and it did not offer a paleontology program (it was mostly an engineering school). Before I started panicking about how much more money it was going to cost me to switch majors or schools, I spoke with an ESCI professor who I had taken a couple of classes with. He suggested that if I took a bunch of Earth Science classes that I would be set up to go to graduate school for paleontology (diverse backgrounds are a very good thing these days). And that is precisely what I did.
          For many reasons, my interest in paleontology slowly switched to sedimentology (a sub-discipline of geology). I became more interested in the rocks that held the fossils than what the fossil was eating for breakfast. Whenever we discussed a process that formed sedimentary rocks I would think, “Of course that’s how it would work.” Sedimentary geology just made sense to me and I wanted to know more about it. So I switched to our fledgling PhD program and decided to study deserts. The work I do now incorporates my interest in science (testing hypotheses), doing fieldwork, thinking about chemistry (but not being stuck in a lab doing chemistry), and I still get to think about paleontology a lot.
          But my story about becoming a geologist doesn’t end there. My mother was in town on vacation recently and she brought up a childhood event that I didn’t remember. As a child, we had a long dirt driveway with lots of different kinds of rocks. So on my way to school or waiting at the bus stop at the top of my driveway, I remember looking at them. Well my mom told me the story about how one day my teacher called her up and said “You have to make her stop.” My mother inquired about what needed to stop. The teacher replied “You have to stop letting Melody bring rocks into school. She fills her pockets and bag with them. There are just too many!”
          Now, I don’t remember any of this, but as a geologist I feel reassured that even in my childhood, I liked rocks. I remember having a few geology books on how to identify rocks, but looking up names among all those pictures was boring. And it IS boring identifying rocks that way! (This brings up a side note about how we teach undergrad geology, but I’ll save that for another post.) What isn’t boring is thinking about the processes that needed to occur to form that kind of rock. Volcanoes erupting, mountains building, rivers flooding. That is what is really interesting to me about geology, all the different processes that occur to make rocks. Some processes aren’t as exiting as glowing red lava flowing and creating jets of steam when it hits the ocean, but I enjoy them nonetheless. Sed Rocks Rule!
          Maybe my life would have been smoother if there were some cool kids geology books out there or if my high school had taught Earth Sciences. But, that is my past (it made me what I am today!) and I can only work to change the future. I have found out several states do teach Earth Sciences in high school, but my state is not one of them. Maybe one day I will get back there and work to change all that. The basics of Earth Sciences are important to teach to our kids! In the mean time I am trying to work on some kids activities for Earth Science Week Oct 14-20th. Anyone have any ideas? I’m hoping to convert a few students to “the dark side”…

MT Education Competitiveness Act

Senator Max Baucus has introduced an incentive package that will set aside an additional $25 Million dollars for education (Education Competitiveness Act). Some of the funding will be set aside to give full college scholarships to graduating high school students planning to major in math, science, engineering or technology if they agree to teach for 4 years after they graduate. While I think this is a good idea in some regards, I do not think it will have the effect they are hoping for.

The US is trying to increase they’re competitive edge in research and development by encouraging people to become scientists and mathematicians (American Competitiveness Initiative – Bush’s State of the Union). However, Baucus’s Act requires them to teach for four years after they graduate rather than putting them directly into the work force. This will likely improve the teaching quality of math, science, and engineering in MT (yeah!), but it delays their entry into the work force. By delaying, for example, an engineer’s entry into the work force I think this decreases their ability to compete with those engineers who enter the work force immediately. This puts Montana workers at a disadvantage if they make use of the scholarship. There are also other parts of the Act that I whole-heartedly agree with like funding for preschool education (currently Montana has no state-funded preschool) and increased pay for rural teachers. Like I said, I can see a lot of benefit to this bill, but will it have the expected benefit of making Montana workers more competitive? What are your thoughts?

First of many?

I have been reading some fantastic science blogs lately and decided to try and start my own. I am a PhD candidate studying Sedimentary Geology. I plan to post on geologic topics I find interesting or relevant to my research (deserts).



The purpose of my blog is twofold. 1) To communicate science to the public and 2) To study for my PhD Comps (more on those later). While the second reason may seem selfish, I think it is an efficient use of my time. I get to study topics I am interested in, communicate these ideas to others (which is the best way to learn), and hopefully generate discussion among peers. While some posts will truely be written for the general public, others may require some background in the subject under discussion. I'll try to explain complex concepts as simple as possible and answer questions if there is some confusion.



My first science post will follow this one. I just thought I should get some sort of mission statement out there - to post on geology and study for comps. I think its a good goal for this blog. I'd be interested in what other people think about it.