proof edited

7/29/2019 Proof Edited

1/35

Publisher: GSAJournal: GSABK: GSA Books

Article ID: 461-07

Page 1 of 35

Thomas and Roberts1

Experience One: Teaching geoscience curriculum in the field using experiential immersion2

learning3

4

Thomas, R.C., and Roberts, S., 2009, Experience One: Teaching geoscience curriculum in the5

field using experiential immersion learning, in Whitmeyer, S.J., Mogk, D.W., and Pyle, E.J.,6

eds., Field Geology Education: Historical Perspectives and Modern Approaches: Geological7

Society of America Special Paper 461, p. XXXXXX, doi: 10.1130/2009.2461(07). For8

permission to copy, contact [email protected]. 2009 The Geological Society of America.9

All rights reserved.10

11

The Geological Society of America12

Special Paper 46113

200914

15

Experience One: Teaching geoscience curriculum in the field16

using experiential immersion learning17

Robert C. Thomas18

Sheila Roberts19

Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Montana Western, Dillon, Montana 59725,20

USA21

ABSTRACT22


2/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 2 of 35

At the University of Montana Western (UMW), geoscience classes are taught primarily23

through immersion in field research projects. This paper briefly describes: (1) why and how we24

achieved a schedule that supports immersion learning, (2) examples of two geoscience classes25

taught in the field, (3) assessment, and (4) the challenges of this model of teaching and learning.26

The University of Montana Western is the first public four-year campus to adopt immersion27

learning based on one-class-at-a time scheduling. We call it Experience One because classes28

emphasize experiential learning and students take only one class for 18 instructional days. The29

system was adopted campus wide in the fall of 2005 after a successful pilot program funded by30

the U.S. Department of Education. The geoscience curriculum has been altered to reduce lecture31

and focus on field projects that provide direct experience with the salient concepts in the32

discipline. Students use primary literature more than textbooks, and assessment emphasizes the33

quality of their projects and presentations. Many projects are collaborative with land-34

management agencies and private entities and require students to use their field data to make35

management decisions. Assessment shows that the immersion-learning model improves36

educational quality. For example, the 2008 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)37

showed that UMW has high mean scores compared to other campuses participating in the38

survey. Of the many challenges, none is more important than the need for faculty to change the39

ways in which they interact with students.40

INTRODUCTION41

Seeds of Change42

Authentic field experiences are at the heart of the study of Earth. However, it is difficult43

to incorporate extended fieldwork into geology classes in the semester system due to time44

constraints and conflicts with other classes. This has long been recognized and resulted in the45


3/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 3 of 35

inclusion of a required summer immersion field camp in most undergraduate geology46

programs. During the regular school year, field geology is typically accomplished primarily47

through lecture-based field trips, short-duration field exercises, and spring- or fall-break trips.48

In order to engage students in authentic experiential research projects in the field, more49

time is needed, and conflicts with other courses must be eliminated. A scheduling system that50

provides this kind of immersion opportunity was successfully developed and implemented in the51

late 1960s by Colorado College (i.e., their block plan) and is still in use on that campus today.52

This system immerses students in one class at a time for 18 instructional days, followed by a 4 d53

break. It provides scheduling flexibility and an opportunity to concentrate on the subject at hand54

without distractions from other classes. Their schedule is ideal for field-based experiential55

learning.56

Unfortunately, this scheduling approach is rare in North American higher education57

outside of between-semester interim sessions and summer sessions. Other than Colorado58

College, only a handful of campuses have adopted this system or a modified version of it, and all59

of them are private. So, why is this the case? The answer is undoubtedly complex; certainly, the60

inertia inherent in long-established educational methods and the fact that the burden is on faculty61

to fundamentally change how they interact with students are major factors. The longer time62

blocks cannot be effectively filled with traditional lecture presentations. Faculty must engage63

students in experiential applications or the larger time blocks can become an impediment to64

learning.65

A Need for Change at the University of Montana Western66

The University of Montana Western (UMW) was founded in 1893 as the state normal67

school. By the early 1990s, most campuses in Montana were training K12 teachers, and UMW68


4/35


5/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 5 of 35

confident that this was the right thing to do (e.g., Dewey, 1938; Kolb, 1984; Rogers and92

Freiberg, 1994; Johnson et al., 1998; Kolb and Kolb, 2005; Beard and Wilson, 2006). The next93

step in this process involved a recognition that the academic schedule itself was the primary94

impediment to engaging students in authentic practice in the discipline, our working definition95

of experiential learning (Thomas and Roberts, 2003).96

For geologists, teaching experientially requires time to transport students to field97

locations and engage them in extended project work, and we were still delivering most classes98

via the traditional 50 min lectures and 2 h laboratory sessions. Environmental sciences faculty99

needed a practical solution that would facilitate our growing dependency on field-based courses100

to deliver experiential learning. We made several experimental attempts to free our department101

of this restriction (see Challenges section).102

The campus discussion turned to adapting the scheduling system pioneered by Colorado103

College. Colorado College adopted this system primarily to eliminate the problem of students104

prioritizing classes (Loevy, 1999; Taylor, 1999). For UMW, it was a comprehensive solution that105

benefited experiential learning and, it was hoped, might prove attractive enough to improve106

campus enrollment. So, during the winter of 1997, we traveled to Colorado College with the107

UMW dean of faculty to investigate the feasibility of adopting block scheduling. The report that108

circulated soon after the visit sparked in-house debate on the merits of making UMW the first109

public university in the United States to fully adopt block scheduling.110

Faculty support for the transition to block scheduling was strong from the start, but there111

were many skeptics as well. To facilitate a change of this magnitude, a grant was obtained from112

the U.S. Department of Educations Fund for the Improvement of Post-Secondary Education113

(FIPSE) to run a 3 yr pilot program (Roberts et al., 2001). The pilot program consisted of 75114


6/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 6 of 35

first-year students who volunteered to take their general education requirements one class at a115

time. In total, 16 professors from all general education disciplines volunteered to teach the116

classes, and the grant paid for temporary replacements so they could devote an entire semester to117

the pilot program. By every measure, the pilot program was very successful (Mock, 2005).118

After 3 yr operating the program with freshmen only, rigorous assessment of the results,119

vigorous campus discussion, contentious and exhaustive approval processes at meetings of the120

Board of Regents, and a unanimous vote in favor of adopting the system by the UMW Faculty121

Senate, the transition was approved. In 2005, the University of Montana Western became the122

first public, four-year campus in the United States to adopt one-class-at-a-time immersion123

scheduling for the majority of classes.124

HOW DOES EXPERIENCE ONE WORK?125

Experience One works across the curriculum. At UMW, students take the vast majority126

of their courses one at a time (i.e., a block) over 18 instructional days, four credits per class.127

Most classes attain their required hours by meeting five days per week for an average of three128

hours per day, but there is flexibility in the way class time is distributed. At the end of each class,129

there is a 4d break for students before the next class begins. Students typically take four classes130

per semester for a total of 16 credits. They register for all classes at the beginning of the131

semester, but they can drop or add classes up to the second day of each block without penalty.132

Block classes are typically not scheduled after 3:15 p.m. to allow students to participate133

in athletics and work afternoon and evening jobs. However, flexibility in the distribution of time134

during each block, particularly for upper-division courses, provides educational opportunities135

during class time that is not typically available in the semester system. For example, in project-136

based courses, students may be immersed in data gathering all day long for a week or more,137


7/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 7 of 35

possibly preceded by a few days of preparatory lectures and reading and usually followed by138

less-structured time to analyze data and process information. Some classes involve extensive139

national and international travel that can consume several weeks of time for total immersion.140

Although the majority of classes are blocked in this way, some are scheduled for the141

entire semester (stringer classes), and some are scheduled for short periods of time during the142

semester. These allow flexibility, particularly for classes that require skill development over143

more than 18 instructional days (e.g., some art, music, and language classes). Many of the144

continuing education courses are taught as stringer classes, since the students who take these145

classes are commonly off-campus (e.g., online students) and taking classes while working full146

time. Students in block classes can add various one- or two-credit classes to a semester.147

Professors at UMW meet their 24-credit annual teaching obligation by teaching three of148

the four blocks per semester, and the fourth block is utilized for research, grant writing,149

professional travel, and course development. Breaks between classes provide time for grading150

and class preparation, although it is not uncommon for faculty to work through the weekend of a151

break in order to submit grades before the next class begins. The schedule is intense but152

satisfying.153

EXAMPLES FROM THE GEOSCIENCES154

The geosciences are well suited for Experience One. The entry-level classes at UMW are155

typically capped at 2025 students, and the rest of the geoscience classes typically range from 10156

to 20 students. The small classes and large blocks of time allow for field- and project-based work157

that is difficult to achieve in most geology classes on the semester and trimester (quarter)158

systems. Although not every class is taught completely in the field, they all have a large field159

component. The geoscience classes that do not have major field research experiences are the160


8/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 8 of 35

entry-level courses and a few upper-level courses (e.g., rocks, minerals and resources, and161

geology seminar). However, all classes have field experiences, including weekly trips in the162

entry-level courses to expose students to in-class concepts and projects that require students to163

work independently in the field (Thomas, 2001). The rocks, minerals, and resources class is164

primarily laboratory based, with several field trips (sometimes multiple days).165

The geoscience program at UMW was designed to provide specific content emphases166

within interdisciplinary baccalaureate degrees in Environmental Science (proposed to be changed167

to Environmental Geoscience in the fall of 2009) and Environmental Interpretation. Although the168

geology class descriptions look familiar on paper (UMW Course Catalog, 2009), the majority of169

them are structured very differently from comparable geology classes taught elsewhere. Lectures170

tend to be short and are used to introduce foundational aspects of the discipline and the field171

projects, and to expand on issues that arise during the applied experiences. Students often use the172

research literature more than textbooks. The emphasis is on field projects that provide students173

with direct experience with the most salient concepts and tools of the discipline.174

Students are typically assessed using authentic assessment practices (Ames and Archer,175

1988), including the quality of their project participation, reports, and presentations. Beyond the176

entry level, the importance of exams and quizzes is much reduced, or these assessment vehicles177

may not be used at all. Many projects require students to use their data to make land-178

management decisions, sometimes in collaboration with land-management agencies or private179

consulting firms. The professor/supervisor job is different with groups of undergraduate students180

on a tight timetable than it is with individual graduate students working on a project over several181

years. Nonetheless, undergraduate students can accomplish a tremendous amount of meaningful182

research with careful supervision (Roberts et al., 2007; Thomas and Roberts, 2007).183


9/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 9 of 35

In order to provide examples of the ways that traditional geology courses have been184

altered at UMW to take advantage of the Experience One system, we describe two classes in our185

curriculum that are taught primarily in the field through research and management projects: (1)186

structural geology and (2) surficial processes.187

Structural Geology188

The Dillon area is ideal for teaching structural geology in the field. In fact, many189

universities from around the globe use the area each summer to teach field geology because of190

great access to a variety of rock types and structural environments. To take advantage of this191

natural laboratory, the structural geology class at UMW does two projects over the course of 18192

days that are centered on two different structural settings: (1) a convergent tectonic environment193

(see Block Mountain), and (2) a divergent tectonic environment (see Timber Hill). The class194

concludes with a field final that is intended to challenge the students to work independently, test195

their skills, and most importantly, prove to themselves that they can synthesize and interpret the196

data they have collected without the need for help (see Dalys spur).197

The class does not include a traditional lecture, but a small dry-erase board is used in the198

field to provide sketches, terminology, and other pertinent information. The class has no199

traditional laboratory, yet the students have office days to construct structural cross sections,200

process field data, conduct analyses, and write reports. The class does not have a textbook, but201

several copies of a structural geology text (Davis and Reynolds, 1996) are made available in the202

laboratory for students to look up information as needed, and they use pertinent published203

literature and web resources. In addition, students have the option to purchase a copy of the204

Geological Society of London handbook series on mapping geological structures (McClay,205

1995), which many students choose to do even though the book is relatively expensive.206


10/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 10 of 35

Block Mountain207

Block Mountain is an extraordinary fold-and-thrust belt structure and a keystone mapping208

project for the many field camps in the Dillon area. The project lies within an area designated by209

the Bureau of Land Management as a Research Natural Area, and the structure consists of a210

north-plunging fold pair with a major folded thrust fault (and many minor thrust faults) within211

the stratigraphic sequence (Sears et al., 1989). Most field camps use the project to learn the skill212

of mapping and cross-section construction, but they rarely apply the data to solving geologic213

problems. At UMW, the structural geology students not only learn field skills (Fig. 1), but they214

also learn about the physical and chemical processes that form the structures by conducting215

descriptive, kinematic, and dynamic analyses on the data they have collected. Most importantly,216

they apply their understanding to solving geologic problems, such as interpreting the stresses that217

produced the deformation or determining the logical sequence of folding and thrust faulting.218

Students also apply their structural data to making land-management decisions and219

writing reports that assess economic resources. In the final report, they are required to include an220

analysis of the potential geologic resources within the map area, including a thorough221

explanation of why particular resources might occur within the map area and the probability that222

they occur at economic levels. In addition, they research the federal and state regulations223

required to develop these resources and make decisions about which resources to develop based224

on all of these factors. Their findings are compiled into reports that are modeled after the225

Environmental Assessment (EA) reports constructed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management.226

The project takes a minimum of six field days and three on-campus office days to complete. The227

students get a day off after the exercise and before they start the Timber Hill project.228

Timber Hill229


11/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 11 of 35

The Timber Hill area exposes mostly Paleogene and Neogene terrestrial sedimentary230

rocks that are cut by an active (but historically dormant) normal fault called the Sweetwater fault231

(Sears et al., 1995). The fault has ~700 ft [[Q: Please convert to m here.]] of offset and is part232

of the northwest-trending normal fault system in southwest Montana that lies within the233

Intermountain seismic belt (Stickney, 2007). The area contains a remarkable record of drainage234

systems that came off of the track of the Yellowstone hotspot (Sears and Thomas, 2007) and is235

an ideal environment for students to learn about extensional structures and paleogeomorphology.236

A 6.0 Ma basalt flow, which can be traced for many kilometers toward its source on the Snake237

River Plain, holds up the topography in the area and provides a textbook example of inverted238

topography.239

The project requires the students to map a 1 mi2[[Q: Please convert to km

2here.]] area,240

and heavy emphasis is placed on mapping surficial deposits and landforms like landslides, rock241

falls, valley-fill alluvium, and alluvial fans. Students also identify areas of potential liquefaction242

and surface rupture related to the Sweetwater fault. The students not only map the area, but they243

also draw several cross sections and work out the geohistory of the area. They also take244

structural data, particularly from the joints and foliation in the underlying Archean metamorphic245

rocks in order to determine potential groundwater resources and flow paths. The land-246

management component requires the students to use these data to identify seismic and other247

geohazards associated with a proposed (fictitious) subdivision on the property. The students are248

asked to consider these natural hazards in placing a house, water well, and septic tank on 20 lots249

located throughout the map area. They investigate and describe techniques used to stabilize250

landslides, rock falls, and other slope instabilities (e.g., areas of soil creep) that occur in the map251


12/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 12 of 35

area, and they are asked to determine the appropriate state and federal regulations for developing252

the property.253

The results are written up in a report format that is typical of those produced in the254

geotechnical consulting industry, examples of which are provided to the students for appropriate255

language and layout. This project takes a minimum of four field days and two on-campus office256

days to complete. The students get a day off at the end of the project to rest up for the final257

exam at Dalys spur.258

Dalys Spur259

This exercise serves as the final exam in structural geology. The 1 d project involves260

mapping a


13/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 13 of 35

quality of their geologic maps (inked and colored), cross sections, geological histories, and275

analyses of the potential economic resources and geohazards on the property.276

Surficial Processes277

We use this class to integrate students understanding of the complex processes that278

interact to form the dynamic surface of Earth. The textbook emphasizes applied process279

geomorphology and provides a review of essential concepts of historical geomorphology. In the280

course of the class, students read and discuss most of the textbook and are tested only if281

participation appears to be lagging. The textbook is used to introduce the most important general282

concepts of the field and the project and as a discipline-related conversation backdrop during the283

class. The class field project usually has a major component that engages the whole group and284

supportive subunits accomplished by smaller groups. So far, each class has had a new field285

research project, but they all have a similar general dynamic:286

Week 1287

Students learn general introductory geomorphological principles using the textbook,288

student-lead discussions, lectures, and short laboratory exercises. The basic scientific goals of the289

field project are presented to students, who then participate in defining the actual scientific290

investigation, with hypotheses, methods, data collection and fieldwork plans, expectations for291

analyses, and presentation of the results. They also consider the professional audience for whom292

the results are intended, including reviewing examples of similar work. The class then293

investigates more specific geomorphic principles and applications that relate to the field project294

and reviews published methods for studying these landscapes in the field. Toward the end of the295

week, they began to research relevant recent primary literature. With professorial input, students296


14/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 14 of 35

then choose their individual and group segments and produce their fieldwork plans, which may297

be approved or returned for modifications.298

Week 2299

Students work in the field, 6 to 8 h most days, supervised by the professor, often in300

cooperation with outside professionals (Fig. 2). Sometimes laboratory analyses are included, and301

groups usually begin to create their data tables and figures.302

Week 3303

Students compile and analyze their data and create reports. They meet with the professor304

in the classroom or computer laboratory at the usual time to discuss progress and problems, but305

otherwise students work wherever and whenever they want. Students sometimes return to the306

field briefly to acquire more data or correct obvious errors. Literature searches continue, and the307

professor may provide short lectures and/or suggest readings. On Thursday or Friday, there is a308

preliminary run through the oral presentations with all students presenting and critiquing. At this309

point, they organize and compile the separate sections into a single report, discuss overall310

conclusions, forge connections between different segments of the project, and assign completion311

activities. Additional textbook readings and related activities during class time break up and312

enhance the third-week project activities. The third week is always exciting for everybody; the313

professor becomes a cheerleader, critic, and editor.314

Week 4315

The final oral presentation (with interested outside personnel present) occurs on Monday316

or Tuesday, and the final written report is due on Wednesday. If the work warrants it, it is later317

presented at the spring campus Research Symposium and/or there may be a collaborative318

presentation at a professional meeting. Making an original contribution is always the goal, and319


15/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 15 of 35

the work is often publishable. In the last week, students also read papers and discuss the human320

impact on the global landscape.321

Taylor Creek Project (Fall 2006)322

Nine students worked with a U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) archaeologist and323

a surveying engineer on a geomorphic analysis of a segment of a local creek valley. Amateurs324

had previously collected assorted archaeological artifacts at the surface, without any attention to325

their stratigraphic or geographic context. The archaeologist had requested our assistance locating326

sites where an excavation might discover materials of different ages stratigraphically separated327

by continuous or episodic deposition. We were recruited to help him understand the ways in328

which the people and the processes that formed the landscape might have interacted in the past329

and to locate places that might preserve a long, readable record.330

Together, we defined a study with seven reportable activities: (1) a topographic survey331

(all students), (2) an analysis of the geomorphic and geologic setting (all students), (3) a stream-332

reach classification (two students), (4) a reconnaissance field study of the larger area333

geomorphology (one student), (5) relative dating of high-level surfaces east of Taylor Creek (two334

students), (6) a vegetation survey comparing different geomorphic features (two students), and335

(7) a statistical investigation of lithic artifacts at the ground surface at a proposed ancient336

quartzite quarry on the site (two students).337

The first week of the class included the usual introductory readings and activities. We338

gave special attention to fluvial geomorphology and landslides and students began to research339

recent primary literature on archaeological geomorphology in fluvial environments. A guest340

lecture by the BLM archaeologist provided background about the study site and what we might341

add to his investigation. He described examples of the use of geomorphology to enhance342


16/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 16 of 35

archaeological investigations from his own experience and explained how to protect the cultural343

value of this sensitive area. He also critiqued the research plan and assisted in its finalization.344

The second week began with a walk-around in the field with the BLM archaeologist and345

surveying engineer to narrow the specific area for the survey. With the professor and these346

professionals, students confronted line-of-site problems related to vegetation in the creek bottom,347

picked a central surveying station, and discussed the apparent geomorphic divisions they wanted348

the surveyed locations to define. Students also started their other projects, most of which349

required more specific definition and revision in response to what they found on that first day.350

During the rest of the second week, students worked in teams to complete the survey (Fig. 2) and351

gather data for their other field projects.352

On Monday of the third week, the class traveled to the Butte, Montana, BLM office to353

observe and participate in geographic information system (GIS) analysis of the survey data.354

Students chose the map contour interval (2 ft [[Q: Provide m equivalent here.]]) that best355

delineated the geomorphic units of the land surface for our purposes, looked for the best cross-356

section lines to show important geomorphic features, and observed the strengths and limitations357

of the survey data they had acquired. Printed maps were returned with the students for further358

analysis, and they made cross sections by hand later.359

In the next few days, students worked up their data from the other projects and shared360

their findings. The reconnaissance study and geomorphic interpretation of the survey data361

documented landslide aspects of the east side of the drainage and erosional hillslopes and362

alluvial-fan topography on the west side. Stream terraces were narrow and asymmetrical.363

Relative dating of surface exposures on the east side suggested that the landslide topography was364

created at about the same time (not the separate episodic movements we were looking for). The365


17/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 17 of 35

vegetation survey, which hoped to document the usefulness of vegetation for geomorphic366

mapping, was inconclusive. Students analysis of the stream in the area of investigation (pool-367

riffle) supported the conclusion that it is in relative equilibrium, probably not experiencing368

significant net erosion or deposition. The artifact investigation strengthened the interpretation369

that ancient people were using parts of the western hillslope as a quarry, based on variations in370

the degree of working of lithic fragments.371

Finally, combining all the data, students chose three sites on the west side of the drainage,372

on the lower slopes of small alluvial fans, downslope from quarry areas but closer to the creek373

and on flatter surfaces that might have been more attractive as sites for human shelters. In their374

presentation to the BLM staff on Monday, they presented all their work and recommended the375

three sites for exploratory excavations as areas where episodic debris flows or dilute debris flows376

onto the fans might have buried a succession of human artifacts of different time periods and377

where creek erosion seemed minor. We were invited to present this work at the Montana378

Archeological Society meeting the following April, and four of the students chose to invest extra379

time on that professional talk (Roberts et al., 2007).380

Linking Field Projects381

In spring 2007, the soil science class participated in archaeological excavations of two of382

the three sites recommended by the surficial processes class. They dug the pits, sifted for383

artifacts, and mapped and described the soils, discovering four paleosols that correlated between384

the two pits and with occurrences of artifacts. The 2009 environmental geochemistry class, just385

completed, worked with interpreting a14

C date acquired on charcoal collected at the site. Results386

from the three classes are being compiled and will be submitted for publication. This linking of387

classes, which included many of the same students, provided a genuinely interdisciplinary field388


18/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 18 of 35

experience. Students gained a deeper understanding of interdisciplinary interaction in geoscience389

research, and more significant research was completed, which is more satisfying for the390

professor too. Field-project linking is just another possibility of teaching in Experience One391

(Roberts, 2007).392

ASSESSMENT393

Assessment begins with projected outcomes. Outcomes in our geoscience classes are394

guided by the principal that authentic practice in the discipline is the best possible learning395

experience for our students. That is, if we can show that students are fully and successfully396

participating in a variety of professional geological activities, then their learning is, by definition,397

authentic and may require no further justification as an educational process. The proof of398

professional quality comes from the oral and written reports, the usefulness of these projects to399

the public and the land management agencies, and the peer-review publication process. The400

relevant assessment question becomes, is our program producing graduates who can address401

important geological problems in a professional manner?402

We are collecting these types of data for the geosciences classes, and we will eventually403

be able to produce this type of assessment, but the program is young, and we have had little404

support for innovation in assessment. Within a few years, there should be enough data for405

statistical analysis. In addition, students success in competition for employment and graduate406

school positions will provide a reality check on the quality of their education, and these data are407

also being collected.408

In the meantime, assessment of Experience One has been conducted at both the campus409

level and at the disciplinary level. At the campus level, a Cornell Critical Thinking Test given at410

UMW in 2006 showed a marked increase in performance over an exam given in 2002, prior to411


19/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 19 of 35

the adoption of immersion scheduling. In addition, a 2006 Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction412

Inventory (SSI) survey showed a significant increase in multiple categories of student413

satisfaction from a survey conducted in 1998, well before the adoption of Experience One414

(UMW Accreditation and Assessment Information, 2009). In areas such as instructional415

effectiveness and student centeredness, the Noel-Levitz data show significant improvements416

associated with the change to Experience One scheduling.417

Most recently (i.e., 20072008 academic year), the campus participated in the National418

Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). The survey, which was prompted by The Pew419

Charitable Trusts, was designed to query undergraduates directly about their educational420

experiences and to determine the degree of engagement in their education. The premise of NSSE421

is that student persistence and subsequent success in college is directly related to the level of422

challenge and time on task (NSSE, 2009). It also contends that the educational research literature423

shows that the degree to which students are engaged in their studies impacts directly on the424

quality of student learning and their overall educational experience. As a result, NSSE contends425

that student engagement can serve as a proxy for educational quality (NSSE, 2009). If true, the426

UMW survey data show that our educational quality is very high. Unfortunately, UMW did not427

participate in the survey prior to the adoption of Experience One.428

The following graphs (Figs. 3, 4, and 5) are NSSE comparisons of the arithmetic average429

of student scores (weighted by gender, enrollment status, and institutional size) in three430

important benchmarks of student engagement. For more information about the survey and431

statistical analyses of the data, readers are invited to visit the NSSE Web site432

(www.nsse.iub.edu). UM Western students scored higher than other institutions in our Carnegie433


20/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 20 of 35

classification and higher than the grouped participating institutions in all three benchmarks, with434

moderate to high significance in each category.435

The level of academic challenge (see Fig. 3) at UMW is slightly above both our436

Carnegie class and the average for all institutions that participated in the 2008 survey. This437

benchmark evaluates students perceptions of how hard they are working and, probably more438

importantly, the conceptual level at which they are operating. These results are very encouraging439

because some educators have questioned our ability to maintain a high level of academic440

challenge in our more applied learning environment.441

The student-faculty interaction benchmark (see Fig. 4) at UMW is clearly higher than442

the average of our Carnegie class and the average for all institutions that participated in the 2008443

survey. This is important because it tests whether students perceive that they are learning first-444

hand from faculty mentors, both in and out of class, and it is possibly the most important445

benchmark in terms of expected outcomes related to the transition to Experience One for the446

campus as a whole.447

UMW scored highest, relative to our Carnegie class and the total 2008 institutional448

average, in active and collaborative learning (see Fig. 5). For the geosciences, this rating is449

especially significant because our students spend a large proportion of their time working in450

collaborative teams with professors and other students, interacting in the field and on451

presentations. Many of our projects are community-based and demand significant effort outside452

class time. It is gratifying to see that UMW students, in general, are aware of this aspect of their453

education.454

Experience One has also greatly contributed to the fiscal health of the campus in a455

number of measurable ways. Since no other public university uses Experience One, it has456


21/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 21 of 35

provided the UMW campus with a crucial marketing niche to recruit new students, and since the457

adoption of Experience One, the UMW campus has experienced record enrollments. In 2000,458

prior to the adoption of Experience One, campus full-time equivalency (FTE) was 940; it is now459

at 1205 FTE (UMW Enrollment and Institutional Research, 2009). Although these numbers460

might seem small, campus FTE has never been over 1200, and the head-countbased funding461

model used in Montana makes these numbers significant in terms of resources available to the462

campus instructional budget.463

It is difficult to draw a direct correlation between Experience One and new-student464

enrollment growth because the admissions office does not conduct entrance interviews.465

However, the data show very clearly that Experience One did not hurt campus enrollment, as466

was feared by some members of the Dillon community prior to adoption of the system. More467

importantly, first-year student persistence rates rose from 58% in 2004 (preExperience One) to468

73% in 2008 (UMW Registrar, [[Q: Please provide year.]] personal commun.). These data469

illustrate the power of the immersion-learning scheduling method to improve student persistence.470

Assessments of the impacts of Experience One at the disciplinary level have not been as471

thorough and tend to be more anecdotal, but the data are no less compelling (e.g., Thomas and472

Roberts, 2008). Across campus, faculty report anecdotal evidence that students are doing better473

on whatever types of assessments they are utilizing.474

In the geosciences, the only class for which we have not made significant changes in475

student-performance assessment vehicles is the introductory geology course. This class was476

taught annually by co-author, Dr. Robert C. Thomas from 1995 to 2008. From 1995 to 2008, no477

changes were made in the assessment tools used in this class. The assessment consisted of ten478

laboratory exercises, three short-answer exams, and an independent, field-based rock project479


22/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 22 of 35

(Thomas, 2001). It is therefore the only class for which we can compare student success in terms480

of final grades. The ten-year average final grade (calculated as the percentage of the total points481

earned) in this course during the period of time between 1995 and 2005 (preExperience One)482

was 74%. From 2005 to 2008 (during Experience One), the average final grade increased to483

82%. The only variable that changed was the scheduling model. Between 1995 and 2005, the484

students went from juggling four to five classes at the same time to immersing themselves in just485

one class at a time. As a result, these data provide evidence that Experience One improves486

academic performance.487

Class attendance has also dramatically improved. Prior to the adoption of Experience488

One, faculty reported up to 40% of the students not attending class on a regular basis. After489

Experience One, an average day has more than 90% attendance, and most students never miss a490

class. When queried informally, students list their reasons for improved attendance as (1) fear of491

missing important information or activities, (2) an appreciation of their responsibility toward492

other students and the professor (especially when working on projects), (3) an understanding that493

what they are learning applies to the real world, and (4) a reduced level of apathy (even494

excitement) that comes with engagement in project work. Students also quickly understand that495

missing one day of Experience One scheduling can be equivalent to missing approximately a496

whole week in the semester system.497

The environment for teaching and learning is dramatically different when we can assume498

that students will not miss class. Continuity or flow, already better because of extended hours499

and the absence of interruption by other classes, is probably the biggest improvement. Continuity500

at least partially offsets the sacrifice of content lecture time and exams in favor of field501

activities. We do not have to spend a lot of time repeating information and directions. Fjortoft502


23/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 23 of 35

(2005) showed that one of the most important variables motivating students to attend class was503

the chance that faculty might apply information to solving real problems. Since Experience504

One centers on solving real problems, it is likely that this is a very important factor in the near-505

perfect attendance we experience in geology classes at UMW.506

Since students in many of the geoscience courses are now assessed on the quality of507

project work, it is difficult to quantitatively compare students understanding of content in our508

classes versus the lecture-based approach. Reduced lecture time means students must take509

increased responsibility for learning terminology and concepts, or they simply have less510

exposure to those aspects of lecture. In trade, they gain far more direct experience with concepts,511

and they most likely gain a better understanding of the scientific process through research in the512

geosciences (Huntoon et al., 2001; Elkins and Elkins, 2007). In addition, students learn field and513

laboratory skills that can be very difficult to incorporate into traditionally scheduled classes. The514

practical benefits for our graduates are resumes filled with experiences and skills, and usually515

one or more professional presentations or papers.516

Another revolution is occurring in the area of procrastinationthere simply is not any517

time for it. We have received positive feedback on this from internship supervisors and518

employers, cooperating agencies, and even parents. Evidence of this comes from the fact that the519

students actually accomplish so much work of high quality in the three and a half weeks. As an520

example, a representative from the Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks noted the professional521

quality of a restoration assessment report on the upper Big Hole River that was produced by522

students in an Environmental Field Studies class in the fall of 2008 (Thomas and Roberts, 2008).523

He pointed out that his agency did not have the resources to do the assessment work, so the524

UMW students were providing an essential service that would otherwise not have been525


24/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 24 of 35

completed. Several students involved in the class have gone on to do internships with the526

agencies involved in the upper Big Hole River project, and all of the students have utilized their527

copies of the 150-page assessment report as a keystone document in their portfolios for528

employment.529

CHALLENGES530

Attempting a Hybrid531

Initially, science faculty imagined we could overcome the scheduling impediment to532

immersion learning without involving the entire campus. The administration approved offering533

some courses with 1 h of lecture and 4 h of laboratory over 2 d each week, but that created534

enormous scheduling conflicts with other classes. We also tried blocking all 4 h of single classes535

into 1 d per week, where each faculty member chose a different day and paid careful attention to536

within-department conflicts. This sometimes worked for avoiding conflicts among upper-537

division classes, but it was impossible with lower-division classes. There was also an538

unavoidable loss of students and professors attention during the days between classes. Of539

course, we tried working with professors across campus to make allowances for our students540

absences from their classes, and, in some cases, we even took turns with extended time blocks.541

This occasionally worked, but it was ad hoc and lacked any institutional strength and continuity.542

As more environmental sciences faculty switched to field-based courses, more scheduling543

conflicts arose with nonscience classes and within the program as well. In addition, as long as544

professors were distracted by obligations to other classes, the idea that we might be545

accomplishing immersion learning was an illusion.546

We do not recommend any of the partial approaches that we tried. For those considering547

a hybrid, be aware that unsuccessful attempts at rescheduling may erode student and548


25/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 25 of 35

administrative confidence in the entire process. We suspect that a large university might be able549

to create an immersion college within the university, or some students in some programs might550

complete their senior year this way. However, transfer students and students who have changed551

their majors are often making up missed classes all the way to graduation and do not have years552

when they are only taking classes in their majors. Students with double majors have similar553

issues.554

Finally Getting Started555

The most difficult issue, by far, was the processes by which the campus decided to adopt556

Experience One. Faculty support was strong from the start, something that the FIPSE grant557

administrator and administrators from other campuses found hard to believe. There was a great558

deal of trust between UMW faculty, and most of us certainly recognized the need for change.559

Experiential teaching and learning already had a strong foothold on the campus, extending across560

most disciplines. For example, faculty in the Education Department had been taking students off561

campus for extended field experiences and student teaching for many years, so they immediately562

saw the benefits of the large blocks of time provided by Experience One. In addition, the563

conceptual framework of the education program is social constructivism with a heavy emphasis564

on experiential learning (UMW Education Department Homepage, 2009).565

The resistance from staff, the UMW Foundation, alumni groups, and community566

members was much more intense and complex. Many people expressed concern that block567

scheduling would increase the cost of education, since only a few private universities had568

adopted it (it didnt). A member of the local press asserted that the student population at569

Colorado College consisted of elite students, and therefore the system would not work for UMW570

students, many of whom are first-generation college students. There was community concern that571


26/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 26 of 35

the change would result in decreased enrollments, which would jeopardize the campus and hurt572

business in town.573

Without the FIPSE-funded pilot project, the opposition would have certainly prevailed.574

The grant gave us an opportunity to carefully assess an experimental program without much risk575

or major additional cost to the campus. The pilot demonstrated an irresistible combination of576

better learning and improved student retention, which gave our administrators the courage and577

ammunition they needed to facilitate the change.578

Faculty Burnout579

Experience One is not only an intense experience for the students, but it is for the faculty580

as well. Faculty who fully engage in experiential, immersion teaching find it to be very much581

more intense than the traditional semester system, requiring them to ignore illness, work around582

poor weather conditions, and be vigilant about the myriad of problems that can arise when583

students are working on projects. A few faculty see the fourth block each semester as a means by584

which to make extra money. This is a ticket to burnout, since the professional development585

block is a needed opportunity for professional development and time to prepare for upcoming586

classes. Faculty who choose to teach in their fourth block to obtain overtime pay express being587

physically and mentally exhausted.588

Transportation589

Availability and affordability of transportation is a continuing problem, although590

moderate student laboratory fees can usually accommodate vehicle rental fees, mainly because591

the field locations are usually within a 50 mi [[Q: Convert to km.]] radius of campus. The need592

for vans to transport students to field sites is extreme, and our campus fleet is small, but growing.593

Classes that need two vans require two state-certified van drivers. We have not found a594


27/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 27 of 35

satisfactory solution for the costs of longer trips. So far, we have paid for them with one-time595

administrative money, departmental resources, increased student fees, one-time Student Senate596

funds, and even fundraisers like raffles, especially for international trips.597

Safety and Physical Disabilities598

Safety is always a concern in the field. We do not allow students to work alone in the599

field, and we go over emergency procedures and make sure that first-aid kits are available close600

to where fieldwork in being conducted. Fortunately, the UMW campus has a dry policy that601

extends to field trips (with the ability to request a waiver for special circumstances), which helps602

the professor to ban alcohol from the field-based courses.603

Students with physical disabilities may simply not be able to do some of the more604

physically demanding courses (e.g., structural geology). We make accommodations for these605

students to either participate in ways that are less demanding physically, or we provide another606

option, like a complementary independent study. This has the potential to be abused by students607

who are looking for ways to get out of class (especially when it is cold outside), but up to this608

point, we have not experienced any such abuse.609

Field Technology and Equipment610

When we made the change to Experience One, we suddenly needed more surveying611

equipment, global positioning system (GPS) and GIS technology, all sorts of field collection and612

analysis materials, and students who were trained in their use. Some of this training we provide613

on site. We require a map, compass, and GPS class and are revising our degree to add an614

introductory GIS seminar. In addition, field classes require an ever-increasing inventory of615

everything from hip boots and shovels to flow meters and orange vests. It could have been616


28/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 28 of 35

overwhelming, but we are gradually acquiring what we need for classes as they come up in617

rotation for campus funds, and we revise classes as equipment becomes available.618

Rapid Access to Literature and Analyses619

It was good timing and good luck that our change occurred simultaneously with the620

incredible advances in access to professional literature online, but it is still daunting. Although621

students usually have some exposure to searching out literature on their own, we often provide622

much of it. A luxurious and thorough literature search is just not possible during the field classes.623

All students take a geology seminar to reinforce their literature research skills.624

Students have to rapidly analyze their data; produce tables, maps, cross sections, charts,625

and graphs; acquire the right illustrative photographs; organize all this clearly and concisely; and626

construct conclusions that are based on the data. In addition, if chemical or other analyses are627

required, we must be able to do them at UMW or contract with others to deliver results rapidly628

without huge extra charges. This is the best training imaginable for students professional lives629

after UMW, but it can become hectic for the professor. It is a tribute to the flexibility of students630

working in a project-based format that, after a few years of this experience, they become631

proficient and some seem to actually look forward to the challenge of scrounging resources to632

get the job done. We hear from employers and graduate schools that this is one of the greatest633

assets of our students.634

Presentation of Project Results635

In the (usually) short time left after analysis of their data, students must produce written636

and oral reports for presentation. Often, these reports are delivered to an audience that includes637

members of federal, state, or county agencies or interested private parties who have supported638

the work and who expect a professional job because a professor supervised it. Effective639


29/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 29 of 35

PowerPoint presentations constructed and delivered in very limited time by student groups640

require a major effort. Like everything else, motivated students learn scientific and technical641

presentation skills experientially, but it is a bigger time commitment for both the professors and642

the students than we initially realizedand also a source of great satisfaction. To help out, the643

geology seminar class was designed to have the students give a minimum of three professional644

(20 min) PowerPoint presentations, so some of them come into project-based classes with645

advanced presentation skills, reducing the workload on the faculty.646

Students Adjustment to Experiential Immersion Learning647

Most students need some time to adjust to this new way of learning. They may resist648

taking more responsibility and need a lot of assistance scheduling their time and effort. Group649

interactions can be messy, and it does not help that most professors have had no real training650

managing student group projects. Many undergraduate students are initially quite uneasy when651

they realize the professor does not already know the results of the research or (maybe worse) that652

the students are going to have to investigate and choose research methods themselves. However,653

students are truly motivated by doing real field research, and most illustrate growing654

metacognitive skills throughout the process. We can see incremental mastery of new equipment655

and procedures improves their confidence to go on to the next level. Having a data set that they656

gathered themselves for a reason they helped define motivates them to analyze it. They express657

justifiable pride in the various presentations of their work. Students eventually come to expect658

this opportunity from us and complain if they do not get it.659

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS660


30/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 30 of 35

We thank all of our colleagues at UMW for helping to make Experience One a reality.661

We also thank Dave Mogk and two anonymous reviewers for helpful suggestions that greatly662

improved this manuscript.663

REFERENCES CITED664

Ames, C., and Archer, J., 1988, Achievement goals in the classroom: Students learning665

strategies and motivation processes: Journal of Educational Psychology, v. 80, p. 260267,666

doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.80.3.260.667

Beard, C., and Wilson, J.P., 2006, Experiential Learning: A Best Practice Handbook for668

Educators and Trainers (2nd ed.): London, Kogan Page Ltd., 314 p.669

Davis, G.H., and Reynolds, S.J., 1996, Structural Geology of Rocks and Regions (2nd ed.): New670

York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 776 p.671

[[Please clarify year of publication: 1938 or 1991?]]Dewey, J., 1938, Logic: The theory of672

inquiry, in Boydston, J.A., ed., 1991, John Dewey: The Later Works, 19251953:673

Carbondale, Southern Illinois University Press, v. 12, 576 p.674

Elkins, J.T., and Elkins, M.L., 2007, Teaching geology in the field: Significant geoscience675

concept gains in entirely field-based introductory geology courses: Journal of Geoscience676

Education, v. 55, p. 126132.677

Fjortoft, N., 2005, Students motivations for class attendance: American Journal of678

Pharmaceutical Education, v. 69, p. 107112.679

Huntoon, J.E., Bluth, G.J.S., and Kennedy, W.A., 2001, Measuring the effects of a research-680

based field experience on undergraduates and K12 teachers: Journal of Geoscience681

Education, v. 49, no. 3, p. 235248.682


31/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 31 of 35

[[Please provide state of publication.]]Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., and Smith, K.A., 1998,683

Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom: Edina, Interaction Book Co., 140 p.684

Kolb, A.Y., and Kolb, D.A., 2005, Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential685

learning in higher education: Academy of Management Learning & Education, v. 4, no. 2,686

p. 193212.687

Kolb, D.A., 1984, Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and688

Development: Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, 288 p.689

Loevy, R.D., 1999, Colorado College: A Place of Learning (18741999): Colorado Springs,690

Colorado College, 501 p.691

McClay, K., 1995, The Mapping of Geological Structures: Geological Society of London692

Handbook Series: Chichester, UK, John Wiley and Sons, 168 p.693

[[AU: GSA does not generally allow citations to unpublished material, however, I see no694

way to cite this as a personal communication. Where can the reader access the report?695

Is it available online (if so, where) or in some archive? Thanks.]]Mock, R.S., 2005,696

Report on the Experience One Pilot Project at the University of Montana Western:697

Unpublished report submitted to the U.S. Department of Education Fund for the698

Improvement of Post-Secondary Education (FIPSE) program, 14 p.699

[[Please provide date site was last accessed.]NSSE, 2009, Using NSSE data: National Survey700

of Student Engagement: www.nsse.iub.edu, p. 117.701

Roberts, S., 2007, Linking field projects in different classes to maximize interdisciplinary702

interaction: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 39, no. 6, p. 543.703

[[AU: GSA does not generally allow citations to unpublished material, however, I see no704

way to cite this as a personal communication. Where can the reader access this report?705


32/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 32 of 35

Is it available online (if so, where) or in some archive? Thanks.]]Roberts, S., Easter-706

Pilcher, A., Krank, H.M., and Ripley, A., 2001, Facilitating Experiential Learning with707

Immersion Scheduling: Unpublished grant proposal to the U.S. Department of Education708

Fund for the Improvement of Post Secondary Education, 25 p.709

[[Please provide volume number.]]Roberts, S., Hill, J., Herman, K., Cox, G., and Brewer, J.,710

2007, Reconnaissance landscape analysis at an archaeological site, Taylor Creek,711

Beaverhead County, Montana: Montana Archaeological Society Abstracts with Programs, p.712

3.713

Rogers, C., and Freiberg, H.J., 1994, Freedom to Learn (3rd ed.): Upper Saddle River,New714

Jersey, Prentice Hall, 352 p.715

Sears, J.W., and Thomas, R.C., 2007, Extraordinary middle Miocene crustal disturbance in716

southwest Montana: Birth record of the Yellowstone hot spot?, in Thomas, R.C., and717

Gibson, R.I., eds., Introduction to the geology of the Dillon area: Northwest Geology, v. 36,718

p. 133142.719

Sears, J.W., Schmidt, C.J., Dresser, H.W., and Hendrix, T., 1989, A geologic transect from the720

Highland Mountains foreland block, through the southwest Montana thrust belt, to the721

Pioneer batholith: Northeastern Geology, v. 18, p. 120.722

Sears, J.W., Hurlow, H., Fritz, W.J., and Thomas, R.C., 1995, Late Cenozoic disruption of723

Miocene grabens on the shoulder of the Yellowstone hotspot track in southwest Montana:724

Field guide from Lima to Alder, Montana, in Mogk, D.W., ed., Field Guide to Geologic725

Excursions in Southwest Montana: Northwest Geology, v. 24, p. 201219.726


33/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 33 of 35

Stickney, M., 2007, Historic earthquakes and seismicity in southwestern Montana, in Thomas,727

R.C., and Gibson, R.I., eds., Introduction to the geology of the Dillon area: Northwest728

Geology, v. 36, p. 167186.729

Taylor, M.F., 1999, Colorado College: Memories and Reflections: Colorado Springs, Colorado730

College, 325 p.731

Thomas, R.C., 2001, Learning geologic time in the field: Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 49,732

no. 1, p. 1821.733

Thomas, R.C., and Roberts, S., 2003, One class at a time: Overcoming obstacles to incorporating734

experiential learning into the undergraduate geoscience curriculum: Geological Society of735

America Abstracts with Programs, v. 37, no. 7, p. 194.736

Thomas, R.C., and Roberts, S., 2007, A progress report on the field-based immersion learning737

model at the University of Montana Western: Geological Society of America Abstracts with738

Programs, v. 39, no. 6, p. 543.739

Thomas, R.C., and Roberts, S., 2008, The impacts of immersion-learning scheduling on the740

geoscience curriculum at the University of Montana Western: Geological Society of741

America Abstracts with Programs, v. 40, no. 6, p. 307.742

Thomas, R.C., Kirkley, J., Mock, S., Roberts, S., Ulrich, K., and Zaspel, C., 1996, The743

integration of the sciences at Western Montana CollegeUM, Dillon, Montana: Geological744

Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 28, no. 7,p. A400.745

[[Please provide date site was last accessed.]]University of Montana Western (UMW)746

Accreditation and Assessment Information, 2009, UMW student response to Noel-Levitz747

Student Satisfaction Inventory (1998 & 2006):748

http://hal.umwestern.edu/administration/vcaa/accreditation.749


34/35


Article ID: 461-07

Page 34 of 35

[[Please provide date site was last accessed.]]University of Montana Western (UMW) Course750

Catalog, 2009, 20082009 catalog: http://www.umwestern.edu/registrar/catalogs/.751


Education Department Homepage, 2009, Conceptual framework:753

www.umwestern.edu/shares/education/.754


Enrollment and Institutional Research, 2009, 10-year enrollment reports:756

www.umwestern.edu/registrar/.757

758

MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY 5MAY 2009759

Printed in the USA760

761

CAPTIONS762

Figure 1. Students in structural geology learning field skills at Block Mountain. [[Subject763

release forms needed.]]764

765

Figure 2. Student in the surficial processes class learning surveying with a professional engineer766

from the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. [[Subject release forms needed.]]767

768

Figure 3. The University of Montana Westerns performance in the 2008 NSSE survey in the769

level of academic challenge benchmark. In addition to the kinds and amount of class preparation770

and assignments, number and length of written reports, it queries the coursework emphasis on771


35/35


Article ID: 461-07

analysis, synthesis, and application of theories and concepts to practical problems, and making772

value judgments.773

774


student-faculty interaction benchmark. Items include prompt feedback about their academic776

progress, working on research projects with faculty, discussing class material outside of class777

time, discussing career plans, and participating on committees.778

779


active and collaborative learning benchmark. Items include how students see themselves in781

classes in terms of recalling asking questions, making class presentations, working with other782

students in or out of class, tutoring others, participating in community-based projects, and783

discussing ideas with others outside class.784

785

proof edited

Documents