Cited by 113Disability Education and EmploymentInclusion and Disability in Education and SportCareer Development and Diversity

Making geoscience fieldwork inclusive and accessible for students with disabilities

Open access
Stokes, Alison, Feig, Anthony D., Atchison, Christopher L., Gilley, Brett·2019·Geosphere

Abstract

Fieldwork is a fundamental characteristic of geoscience. However, the requirement to participate in fieldwork can present significant barriers to students with disabilities engaging with geoscience as an academic discipline and subsequently progressing on to a career as a geoscience professional. A qualitative investigation into the lived experiences of 15 students with disabilities participating in a one-day field workshop during the 2014 Geological Society of America Annual Meeting provides critical insights into the aspects of fieldwork design and delivery that contribute to an accessible and inclusive field experience. Qualitative analysis of pre- and post-fieldwork focus groups and direct observations of participants reveal that multisensory engagement, consideration for pace and timing, flexibility of access and delivery, and a focus on shared tasks are essential to effective pedagogic design. Further, fieldwork can support the social processes necessary for students with disabilities to become fully integrated into learning communities, while also promoting self-advocacy by providing an opportunity to develop and practice self-advocacy skills. Our findings show that students with sensory, cognitive, and physical disabilities can achieve full participation in field activities but also highlight the need for a change in perceptions among geoscience faculty and professionals, if students with disabilities are to be motivated to progress through the geoscience academic pipeline and achieve professional employment.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1130/ges02006.1

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stokes, A., Feig, A. D., Atchison, C. L., & Gilley, B.
Affiliations
  • University of Plymouth (GB)
  • Central Michigan University (US)
  • University of Cincinnati (US)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
Venue
Geosphere
Published
2019-11-08
Volume
15
Issue
6
Pages
1809-1825
ISSN
1553-040X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2988792133
Cited by
113
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 9
FWCI
19.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Geosphere (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PEARL (University of Plymouth) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (1464189)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Education and Employment
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Inclusion and Disability in Education and Sport
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Career Development and Diversity
Keywords
students with disabilities, accessibility, inclusion, inclusive education, multisensory engagement, self-advocacy, sensory disabilities, cognitive disability, physical disability, social integration

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