An empirical methodology for investigating geocognition in the field

Journal of Geoscience Education

Volumn 57, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 316-328

  Petcovic, Heather L ^a   Libarkin, Julie C ^b   Baker, Kathleen M ^a  

^a WESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COGNITION; DATA INTERPRETATION; EARTH SCIENCE; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; FIELD METHOD; GEOLOGICAL MAPPING; STUDENT;

EID: 70450161298     PISSN: 10899995     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5408/1.3544284     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Abel, M., Mastella, L.S., Lima Silva, L.A., Campbell, J.A., and De Ros, L.F., 2004, How to model visual knowledge: a study of expertise in oil-reservoir evaluation, Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Berlin, Springer, p. 455-464.
2. Anderson, K.C., and Leinhardt, G., 2002, Maps as representations: Comparison of expert/novice projection understanding: Cognition and Instruction, v. 20, p. 283-321.
3. Barkowsky, T., and Freksa, C., 1997, Cognitive requirements on making and interpreting maps: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, v. 1329, p. 347-361.
4. Bond, C.E., Gibbs, A.D., Shipton, Z.K., and Jones, S., 2007, What do you think this is? "Conceptual uncertainty" in geoscience interpretation: GSA Today, v. 17, p. 4-10.
5. Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., and Cocking, R.R., 2000, How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School: Washington, D.C., National Academy Press.
6. Brodaric, B., and Gahegan, M., 2001, Learning geoscience categories in situ: Implications for geographic knowledge representation: Proceedings GIS'01, p. 130-135.
7. Chi, M.T.H., 2006, Two approaches to the study of experts' characteristics, in Ericsson, K.A., N., C., Feltovich, P.J., and Hoffman, R.R., eds., The Cambridge Handbook of Expert Performance: New York, Cambridge University Press, p. 21-30.
8. Chi, M.T.H., Feltovich, P., and Glaser, R., 1981, Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices: Cognitive Science, v. 5, p. 121-152.
9. Creswell, J.W., 2009, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method Approaches: Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications, Inc.
10. Donovan, S.M., and Bransford, J.D., 2005, How Students Learn History, Mathematics, and Science in the Classroom: Washington, D.C., National Academies Press.
11. Eley, M.G., 1991, Selective encoding in the interpretation of topographic maps,: Applied Cognitive Psychology, v. 5, p. 403-422.
12. Ernst, W.G., 2006, Geologic mapping - where the rubber meets the road, in Manduca, C.A., and Mogk, D.W., eds., Earth and Mind: How Geologists Think and Learn about the Earth, Volume 413: Geological Society of America Special Paper, Geological Society of America, p. 13-28.
13. Feltovich, P., Ford, K., and R., H, 1997, Expertise in context: Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.
14. Frodeman, R., 1995, Geological Reasoning: Geology as an Interpretive and Historical Science: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 107, p. 960-968.
15. Hmelo-Silver, C.E., and Nagarajan, A., 2002, "It's harder than we thought it would be": A comparative case study of expertnovice experimentation strategies: Science Education, v. 86, p. 219-243.
16. Hoffman, R.R., Shadbolt, N., Burton, A.M., and Klein, G.A., 1995, Eliciting knowledge from experts: a methodological analysis: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, v. 62, p. 129-158.
17. Hoz, R., Bowman, D., and Kozminsky, E., 2001, The differential effects of prior knowledge on learning: A study of two consecutive courses in earth sciences: Instructional Science, v. 29, p. 187-211.
18. Kastens, K.A., Agrawal, S., and Liben, L., 2009, How students and field geologists reason in integrating spatial observations from outcrops to visualize a 3-D geological structure: International Journal of Science Education, v. 31, p. 365-394.
19. Kastens, K.A., and Ishikawa, T., 2006, Spatial thinking in the geosciences and cognitive sciences: A cross-disciplinary look at the intersection of the two fields, in Manduca, C.A., and Mogk, D.W., eds., Earth and Mind: How Geologists Think and Learn about the Earth, Volume 413: Geological Society of America Special Paper, Geological Society of America, p. 53-76.
20. Kuhn, W., 2001, Ontologies in support of activities in geographical space: International Journal of Geographical Information Science, v. 15, p. 613-631.
21. Libarkin, J.C., 2006, Geoscience Education in the United States: Planet, v. 17, p. 60-63.
22. Libarkin, J.C., and Anderson, S.W., 2007, Development of the Geoscience Concept Inventory, National STEM Assessment Conference: Washington, D.C., p. 148-158.
23. Lobben, A.K., 2004, Tasks, strategies, and cognitive processes associated with navigational map reading: A review perspective: The Professional Geographer, v. 56, p. 270-281.
24. Macdonald, R.H., Manduca, C.A., Mogk, D.W., and Tewksbury, B.J., 2005, Teaching Methods in Undergraduate Geoscience Courses: Results of the 2004 On the Cutting Edge Survey of U.S. Faculty Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53, p. 215-219.
25. Manduca, C.A., and McDaris, J., 2007, The NAGT teaching in the field website: Sharing pedagogy and resources: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 39, p. 544.
26. Parunak, H.V.D., Brueckner, S.A., Matthews, R., and Sauter, J., 2006, Swarming methods for geospatial reasoning: International Journal of Geographical Information Science, v. 20, p. 945-964.
27. Patel, V.L., Kaufman, D.R., and Arocha, D.F., 2002, Emerging paradigms of cognition in medical decision-making: Journal of Biomedical Informatics, v. 35, p. 52-75.
28. Patton, M.Q., 1990, Qualitative evaluation and research methods: Newbury Park, Sage 523 p.
29. Petcovic, H.L., and Libarkin, J.C., 2007, Research in Science Education: The Expert-Novice Continuum: Jounal of Geoscience Education, v. 55, p. 333-339.
30. Pick, H.L., Heinrichs, M.R., Montello, D.R., Smith, K., Sullivan, C.N., and Thompson, W.B., 1995, Topographic map reading, in Hancock, P.A., Flach, J.M., Caird, J., and Vicente, K.J., eds., Local Application of the Ecological Approach to Human- Machine Systems: New York, Erlbaum, p. 255-284.
31. Raab, T., and Frodeman, R., 2002, What is it like to be a geologist? A phenomenology of geology and its epistemological implications: Philosophy & Geography, v. 5, p. 69-81.
32. Raubel, M., 2001, Ontology and epistemology for agent-based wayfinding simulation: International Journal of Geographical Information Science, v. 15, p. 653-665.
33. Riggs, E.M., Lieder, C.C., and Balliet, R.N., 2009, Geologic problem solving in the field: Analysis of field navigation and mapping by advanced undergraduates: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 57, p. 48-63.
34. Sabers, D.S., Cushing, K.S., and Berliner, D.C., 1991, Differences among teachers in a task characterized by simultaneity, multidimensionality, and immediacy: American Educational Research Journal, v. 28, p. 63-88.
35. Schlieder, C., 2005, Representing the meaning of spatial behavior by spatially grounded intentional systems, in Rodriguez, M.A., Cruz, I.F., Egenhofer, M.J., and Levashkin, S., eds., Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Volume 3799.
36. Turner, A., and Penn, A., 2002, Encoding natural movement as an agent-based system: an investigation into human pedestrian behaviour in the built environment: Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, v. 29, p. 473-490.
37. Van Heuvelen, A., 1991, Learning to think like a physicist: a review of research-based instructional strategies: American Journal of Physics, v. 59, p. 891-897.
38. Wilson, M., 2002, Six views of embodied cognition: Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, v. 9, p. 625-636.
39. Zeilik, M., Schau, C., and Mattern, N., 1999, Conceptual astronomy. II. Replicating conceptual gains, probing attitude changes across three semesters: American Journal of Physics, v. 67, p. 923-972.