[ If you were viewing a record and wish to return to it please use the back button on your browser ]

Contribute a good practice case study

Case studies of interesting teaching, learning and assessment practices in Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences (GEES) Higher Education

To all geography, earth and environmental sciences practitioners
Guidelines for contributors
How to Contribute
Examples of Case Study Abstracts

To all geography, earth and environmental sciences practitioners

The Subject Centre for Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences Resource Database¹ currently contains a number of case study summaries, mainly from the UK, North America and Australasia. We are seeking further examples of interesting teaching, learning and assessment practices in higher education, wherever in the world they may occur. This is proving to be an important way to promote our teaching to colleagues and the HE community in general. We would be very grateful if you would give us an example of a teaching, learning or assessment practice which may be of interest to staff in other Geography, Earth and Environmental Science departments.

We are interested in obtaining case studies that cover a wide range of teaching, learning and assessment practices. These include:

exercises to improve student learning in, for example, lectures, tutorials, laboratory classes, practicals and field courses
case studies detailing methods of assessment and examples of IT and resource-based learning support
methods used to teach difficult concepts, develop transferable skills, provide links with the world of work
ways in which the curriculum has been redesigned to respond to larger classes and declining resources

If you wish to view existing case studies in the Resource Database, simply type the search term "case studies of interesting" in the search box to find examples.

Guidelines for contributors

Each case study should be between 200 and 500 words (see examples below)

The case study summary should include:

Title
Name, department and institution of originator, along with telephone/fax number and E-mail address (in accordance with the Data Protection Act, you will be contacted prior to the publication of your case study to agree which information will be retained within the database)
Main features - What was the initial prompt/problem? What is the practice trying to achieve? How were your practices changed? What are the gains and losses?
Relevant references (where applicable)
Keywords

How to Contribute

You may wish to use our online case study contribution form

Case study summaries should be sent to:

Dr Yolande Knight,
The Higher Education Academy Subject Centre for Geography,
Buckland House,
University of Plymouth, Drake Circus,
Plymouth, PL4 8AA

email: yolande.knight@plymouth.ac.uk

Thank you for your co-operation

Professor Mick Healey - Subject Centre Senior Advisor for Geography (mhealey@glos.ac.uk)
Jenny Blumhof - Subject Centre Senior Advisor for Environmental Sciences (J.R.Blumhof@herts.ac.uk)
Dr Neil Thomas - Subject Centre Senior Advisor for Earth Sciences (n.thomas@kingston.ac.uk)

¹The original database of case studies was set up by the Geography Discipline Network (GDN), and was selected by The Scout Report for Social Sciences, funded by the National Science Foundation, which identifies the World's best social science Internet resources.

[ Top of Page ]

Examples of Case Study Abstracts

Using Seminars to Introduce Small Group Teaching into Large Classes

Originator: Nick Henry, School of Geography, University of Birmingham

The aim of the innovation is to introduce seminars into a large second-year class (80-90 students). Seminars are a highly effective method for producing students who are undertaking higher levels of independent study, actively using their intellect, and learning to debate and discuss as a prerequisite for situations they will experience in employment and their social lives more widely. This 'innovation' is driven by increasing student numbers, with large classes the norm until the third year when significant amounts of teaching are undertaken within a seminar format.

Within the module, nine weeks of a series of 2 x 1-hour lectures/video are followed by Week 10 when the second one hour slot is given over to an 'Introduction to Seminar'. In Week 11, students attend one hour-long seminar rather than the usual two-hour lecture slot.

Prior to the Introduction to Seminar, a double-sided A4 hand-out is created which explains how the seminars are organised and lists group members (8-9 per group), times and locations of their seminars. Each seminar group is provided with shared copies of 'readings'. No student is assigned to present but all are expected to do the reading. Seminars are run as open discussions 'chaired' by a staff member. In each seminar group, the third person listed is marked by an *, those marked in this way are assigned as 'rapporteurs'. Rapporteurs are not expected to read the article but have to produce a short list of points discussed from the seminar. Each rapporteur's list is photocopied and becomes a hand-out for all students the following week.

This is not a short-cut in terms of teaching resources. Student participation is voluntary with, on average, over 90% attending. Most feedback sheets appear. After initial consternation, students rate these seminars highly and request that more be offered.

Keywords: Independent study, large student numbers, rapporteurs, seminars, small group teaching

Integrating Technology and Collaborative Pedagogies into Introductory Human Geography

Originator: Susan W. Hardwick (Department of Geography & Planning, University of Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas 786666) and Elizabeth Renfro (Department of Geography and Planning, University Literacy and Learning Program, California State University, Chico 95929-0425)

The primary aim of this innovation is to integrate web-based instruction with student-centered, collaborative instructional methods into a general education introductory Human Geography course. Typically a large enrolment class, Human Geography attracts numerous students who are not planning to major in geography as their field of emphasis. Therefore, the methods listed below not only enhance student mastery of course concepts but are also designed to motivate non-majors to consider geography as a major.

Students enrolled in this class are also trained in applying geographic skills and techniques and to "think like geographers" who can employ critical thinking and problem-solving skills.

This fifteen week "model classroom" integrates the following blend of technology and collaborative pedagogy throughout the semester: web-based research projects; team journals and formal written reports; weekly e-mail discussion questions answered in pairs or individually; video reaction papers integrating text assignments, WWW homepage data; and in-class visual presentations; speculative writing assignments and debate of current global issues disseminated to student groups via e-mail and "chat group" software.

This is not a voluntary student participation project. All students enrolled in the course must have e-mail addresses and be web-literate to participate.

Minimal technological training is provided to students in the first two weeks of the semester to ensure their full participation.

Keywords: E-mail, presentation, video, World-Wide Web (WWW), written work

Hazard Mitigation Practical: Predicting a Volcanic Eruption

Originator: Phil Gravestock, GEMRU, University of Gloucestershire

This practical introduces concepts which are difficult for students to appreciate, such as the length of time involved during a volcanic crisis, from the onset of precursor activity to the actual eruption, and the levels of personal stress involved.

The student class is split into smaller groups (c.6-8 students), and each of these groups has to act upon information provided in a series of activity reports for one of four volcanoes; with a large class one volcano may be tackled by a number of groups. The activity reports may be daily, or may skip a couple of weeks depending upon the activity of the volcano. In order to receive the next report the students are required to assign an alert level to the situation and consider whether it is necessary to evacuate any of the local towns/villages. Each volcano differs in the amount of information which is supplied (i.e. not all have a hazard mitigation map, some do not have SO2 emission data, etc.). The examples are all based, loosely, around actual eruptions, but have been disguised so that the students cannot anticipate what may happen. One volcano does not erupt, despite reasonable precursor activity. In order to reproduce the 'stress' levels involved, the students have a limited time in which to make a decision.

The practical lasts for c.1½ hours and has always received a very positive response, with many students commenting specifically that they had not fully appreciated the time-scale involved, or the fact that it is not always possible to have all the information required to make an accurate prediction. The most common 'errors of judgement' which are made include predicting an eruption too early; evacuating local towns/villages too early; and reducing the volcanic alert level too quickly when it appears that nothing is happening.

Keywords: Group work, hazard mitigation, practicals, role play, volcanic crisis