The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Learning in the field: Synthesis of research on thinking and learning in the geosciences
Abstract
Learning in the field has traditionally been one of the fundamental components of the geoscience curriculum. In light of the historical value that has been ascribed to field instruction, there is a surprising paucity of scholarly studies that provide the direct evidence to support these claims. The preponderance of literature is descriptive and anecdotal, but in aggregate, these reports reveal a communal experience, which we recognize as “practitioners' wisdom,” that places a high value on field instruction in the training of geoscientists. We initially review the attributes of learning in the field environment, instructional goals for field instruction, the place of field instruction in the modern geoscience curriculum, and the value that has been ascribed to learning in the field in terms of cognitive and meta-cognitive gains, aspects of the affective domain, impacts on learning through immersion in nature, and the role of field instruction in providing the foundation for development of skills and expertise in the geosciences. The theory and practice of the cognitive, learning, and social sciences provide further insights into thinking and learning in the field setting in three important domains: (1) embodiment, how body and mind are integrated through interactions within the natural and social environments in which geoscientists work; (2) creation and use of inscriptions (i.e., constructed representations of natural phenomena such as maps, sketches, and diagrams) to explain, confirm, rationalize, and externalize our understanding of Earth; and (3) initiation into the community of practice that has established accepted norms and practices related to language and discourse, selection and use of tools, ethics and values, and a common understanding of the assumptions, limitations, and uncertainties inherent in the discipline. These insights on how people learn in the field have important implications for what and how we teach in the geoscience curriculum, and they provide a framework to guide future research. Our initial findings indicate that learning in the field results in cognitive and metacognitive gains for students; produces affective responses that have a positive impact on student learning; affords types of learning that cannot be easily achieved in other, more controlled environments; facilitates creation and use of representations of nature (inscriptions) in learning; helps initiate novices into the community of geoscience practice; and provides a solid foundation for development of geoscience expertise.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Singer, S., & Smith, K. A. (2013) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/jee.20030 · Cited by 835
Making geoscience fieldwork inclusive and accessible for students with disabilities
Stokes, A., Feig, A. D., Atchison, C. L., & Gilley, B. (2019) · Geosphere · doi:10.1130/ges02006.1 · Cited by 113
Fieldwork and disability: an overview for an inclusive experience
Chiarella, D., & Vurro, G. (2020) · Geological Magazine · doi:10.1017/s0016756820000928 · Cited by 70
Metadata
- Authors
- Mogk, D. W., & Goodwin, C.
- Venue
- Earth and Mind II: A Synthesis of Research on Thinking and Learning in the Geosciences
- Publisher
- Geological Society of America
- Published
- 2012
- DOI
- 10.1130/2012.2486(24
- OpenAlex
- W2411623764
- Cited by
- 231
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 27.63
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Learning in the field: Synthesis of research on thinking and learning in the geosciences. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1130/2012.2486(24
- The paper
- Mogk, D. W., & Goodwin, C. (2012). Learning in the field: Synthesis of research on thinking and learning in the geosciences. Earth and Mind II: A Synthesis of Research on Thinking and Learning in the Geosciences. https://doi.org/10.1130/2012.2486(24
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.