1. Integrating Research into Geochemistry Jeanette Pope DePauw University Using Local Resources

2. Premise: Maybe students should do something while they are doing something What is the purpose of teaching (undergraduate) geochemistry? What is the content that students need to know? What are the skills? **How will the students best learn this information?**

3. Students learn best by doing…..

4. ….why not in class, too? Purpose of undergraduate science education  teach & develop skills  develop critical thinking  apply scientific method Purpose of undergraduate research  teach & develop skills  develop critical thinking  apply scientific method

5. Integrating research into geochemistry labs Important (aqueous) geochemistry skill set  field test pH alkalinity D.O. measurements  lab skills acid - base titrations alkalinity hardness  instrumental analyses IC AA XRD } ICP

6. Field Samples One Approach:  tell students that bottles must be rinsed three times to collect a high quality sample  demonstrate proper technique Another Way:  ask students to consider what will affect the quality of the samples they collect  how can they assure that their sample will be representative?  how might they learn what constitutes good technique?

7. Possible outcomes of option 2  student generated field protocol  get into literature  better comprehension  investment in the process  **critical thinking about purpose of methods**

8. Lab Techniques Traditional development of lab skills:  give students a series of “known” unknowns  grade based on whether the correct answer was found Alternative method  let students generate their own, “new” data while learning a technique  grade based on observed technique +/or reproducibility of results  may involve generating your own key before/after lab

9. Value of alternative approach  students learn the skill  opportunity for meaningful statistics  reproducibility of data  relevant discussion of QA/QC  **critical thinking about technique**

10. Analytical Techniques Research scientists often use sophisticated instruments to gather data  water chemistry  mineralogy  surface properties How will most students learn how to use these “black boxes” if not in class? ?

11. Student learning with instruments  application of theory  learn complex interface with automated systems  useful skill for grad school & future employment  implications for data quality and sources of errors  $60K price tag impresses students!

12. (other) benefits of research in class  develop important geochemical skill set  learn reasons behind methods, process  improve engagement, enjoyment  become active participants in science  hypothesis development & testing  practice interpretation of data

13. So….how is it done? Developing research projects for class  pick something relevant to you and the students  consider the goals of the course  guide through questions  be reasonable! pick projects that are manageable! The practicalities  what is the class format?  what support do you have?  are there local resources available?

14. An Example…. Q:Are there differences btwn the influences on water chemistry in the Nature Park Quarry Pond and Big Walnut Creek? Q:What do we need to know to answer this question? Q:How can we find out?

15. The Approach  Students collected samples first needed to develop protocol - class discussion on importance - went to EPA, USGS sampling techniques - turned in lab report of their protocol field tested protocol to develop techniques considered sampling scheme as class temporal and spatial variation field measurements of pH, temp, etc.

16. The Approach  Students learn lab methods several techniques - alkalinity - acid/base - hardness each individual worked alone but data was shared used Excel to analyze data lab report grade based on both value and discussion of error/variation

17. The Approach  Students learn instruments different techniques - IC for anions - AA for metals, cations introduced theory to class and scheduled individual meetings to run machines used Excel to statistically analyze data report on the method, including limitations

18. The Approach  Students analyzed data observable trends - internal variability - similarities, difference btwn samples possible explanation of the data asked to consider future projects that would test their observations last two points appeared on final exam

19. Warts and all Some drawbacks….  LOTS of time investment  kind of chaotic  need to be creative, think on your toes  if the project is sincere, than the outcome truly is unknown…..that’s scary! Geochemistry Lab  students can get frustrated  colleagues may not understand

20. “The Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy nor Roman nor an Empire…discuss” Much thanks to…  Carl Kirby, Bucknell  Bill Casey, UC Davis  NSF DUE  Innocent bystanders, I mean students Erica Amt Andrew Turner Christina Houston Andie Wyatt Troy Wyss Chris Myrvold Kelly Fransted Laura Stevens