A Simple Group Work Approach for Effective Field Work: a Soil Sciences Case Study

Journal of Geoscience Education, Jan 2006 by Mooney, Sacha J

The students, according to their own preferences, were divided into groups of five and individual roles (specific to the soils exercise but loosely based on concepts hypothesised by Belbin (1981)) were assigned by their own choice from a list that included: group leader, soil profile describer, soil examiner, soil property measurer and sample collector. Further detail concerning the responsibilities of each role are listed in Table 2. The five members of each group were requested to visit five individual field sites enabling them to rotate the group roles so as to gain experience of each one. It was important for the timing and logistics of the exercise that groups were able to operate and inter-change between the group roles swiftly in order to be effective. The main body of the exercise involved identifying suitable sites, preparing soil profiles, describing and recording soil morphology, taking physical measurements and collecting samples. Following a detailed introductory lecture lasting one hour and covering the main soil physical properties to be examined, the students were given a short time period (a further hour) to acquaint themselves with procedure prior to the field work, which lasted approximately five hours. The students were from mixed academic backgrounds, although in general, most were unfamiliar with the required work program in advance. The groups were each provided with a field work equipment kit that consisted of an augur, spade, tape measure, sampling containers, a falling head permeameter for hydraulic conductivity and standard soil profile description sheets. Four instructors were available throughout the exercise for consultation, if required, although students were encouraged to try resolve problems within their given group in the first instance.

The exercise was completed by an individual 6000 word project report. The soils exercise comprised an individual 1500 word field report in the style of an academic paper submitted four months after site investigation. The final project report accounted for 60% of a 10 credit module with the remaining 40% allocated to a poster presentation (20%) and field notebook (20%). Immediately following the exercise, the students were asked for their opinions of the activity and their perceptions of the group working in general by means of a very simple questionnaire (Table 3). Given the small class size (40 students) and a previous response by the group to a numerically based questionnaire, it was decided a descriptive approach seeking actual comment would yield a more meaningful dataset.

RESULTS

Increased student motivation and enthusiasm in comparison to the other non-group exercises was noted. Even though the preparation time for the exercise was comparatively short, it appeared to provide the students with enough background knowledge from which to perform the required tasks. Student exhibited improved time management and individual commitment. In addition, an element of inter-group competition was identified which appeared to create a general increase in student morale (even in adverse weather). Instructor-student interactions during the exercise were minimised in comparison to the previous non-group activities, but when required, they suggested a deeper level of learning and understanding was taking place.