1. Results Both field and model experiences improved learning about estuaries, with no significant difference between them when comparing raw scores. Students with “high water activity” demographics scored higher than students with “low water activity” (p < 0.01). Field experience improves responses to field related questions for “low water activity” students (p <0.05). Data collected by students in the field VIRTUAL VS. REAL: HOW DO STUDENTS BEST LEARN ABOUT ESTUARINE CIRCULATION? Christian P. Sarason 1, Frederick R. (Fritz) Stahr 1, William Winn 2, Ruth Fruland 2, and Peter Oppenheimer 3 1 Ocean Inquiry Project, P.O. Box 23189, Seattle, WA 98102; 2 College of Education, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195; 3 Human Interface Technology Laboratory, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195 email: info@oceaninquiry.org Introduction Ocean Inquiry Project Concept Learning through Inquiry Field Experiences Stimulating Science Experiences Positive Science Experiences Interaction with Scientists Hands-on Learning Multi-disciplinary Learning Experiences RESEARCH COMMUNITY NEEDS Outreach and Public Education Increased sampling resolution in time and space Validation of Models Water Quality Monitoring Teaching Opportunities for Graduate Students Watch for Invasive Species Secchi Depth Measurements EDUCATION COMMUNITY NEEDS Stir Well EVERYBODY WINS!! Public Interest in Research Fun & excitement about Scientific Discoveries Effective Observations Sense of Ownership of Puget Sound Increases Likelihood of Good Stewardship Knowledge of Scientific Process Connections between Students and Researchers Increased Sampling Rates Students taking a close-up look at the CTD before deployment. Ocean Inquiry Project is an independent 501(c)(3) organization and all donations are tax deductible. For more information about our programs please see our web site at: http://www.oceaninquiry.org/ This work is supported by NOPP grant number N00014-02-1-0502. Many thanks to our volunteer field instructors, the University of Washington, and Seattle Central CC for providing the opportunity for this study. Future Directions Model and Data integration through Environmental Informatics Datastream a.k.a. “BloodStream” XML tagged environmental data OIP students collect data in the field; send to bloodstream PSMEM models assimilate data into next model run PSMEM models send model output to bloodstream OIP students view latest model results; adjust sampling plans for the future accordingly source sink CTD cast Model run Model run Historical data Historical data Comparing Learning Between a Modeling Exercise and Field Work on Puget Sound Teachers can view latest model runs in class before getting into the field. Puget Sound is a complicated estuary and an excellent place to learn oceanography. In a partnership program with educational researchers at the University of Washington, Ocean Inquiry Project (OIP) is using a virtual learning environment based on a numerical- model of Puget Sound in introductory college level classes. OIP also provides students field-based research experiences on Puget Sound, sampling the Sound at a number of monitoring stations during day-long field trips. The learning goals for either technique are the same: understanding and appreciation of tidally driven currents and stratification in the Sound. However, the data (and tools for accessing and rendering them) are quite different between the two techniques, one being generated by computer and the other measured by the students themselves. We are evaluating classes using each technique exclusively, as well as in combination, to understand which technique is most useful to understanding these concepts. The content of both classes is essentially the same, but students in one class learn the material by interacting with a computer model, and students in another class learn by interacting with instruments. The evaluation of each class is done identically with tests and concept maps and the design of this study allows us to elucidate the differences between learning via computerized curriculum and learning in the field. Catalyst: OIP Using Data to Teach Earth Processes: 46-5 Students interpret circulation using Virtual Puget Sound (VPS). Figure 1: The rated true/false quiz that we used for evaluation is shown above. Questions were apportioned into “field”, “model” and “classroom” groups for comparison (classroom questions are those not specific to either field or model experiences). Students rated each statement 5 (true) to 1 (false); 0 was used for “Don’t know”, a response seen mostly on pre-tests. Figure 2: a) Statistically significant differences were found for pre-test versus post-test scores for all students. However, no differences were found between the model and field groups. The most significant gains were made in model specific questions. (a p- value of less than 0.05 is statistically significant) b) A comparison of scores to demographic data shows that students in the model group who had little experience with water activities scored significantly worse on field specific questions than the field group. a) p < 0.05 for difference between model and field groups for “low water activity” Water activities: swimming, power boating, sailing, fishing, surfing, diving, riding ferries, and other. Low = 1 activity, Medium = 3-4 activities, High = 5+ b) Methods Created a 3-day curriculum for teaching general estuarine circulation consisting of an introductory class, a day in the field or working with a model, and a wrap-up class. Used the curriculum with two separate classes: one used a model visualization, Virtual Puget Sound (VPS), and one went into the field for direct observation. The introductory and wrap-up material was identical for both classes. Evaluated all students with pre- and post-tests (true/false); collected specific demographic data also. Evaluated students using concept maps. Compared results in three different categories: model, field, and classroom associated questions. Data collected by students in VPS One student’s conceptual change field model field model