GSA Annual Meeting in Seattle, Washington, USA - 2017

Paper No. 17-2
Presentation Time: 8:15 AM

PIXELS: HOW CLASSROOM-BASED AND FIELD-BASED LEARNING IMPACT STUDENTS’ SENSE OF SCALE AND UNDERSTANDING OF REMOTE SENSING IMAGERY


PETCOVIC, Heather L., Department of Geosciences and The Mallinson Institute for Science Education, Western Michigan University, 1903 W Michigan Ave, Kalamazoo, MI 49008-5241, TINIGIN, Laura, Department of Geosciences and the Mallinson Institute for Science Education, Western Michigan University, 1903 West Michigan Ave, Kalamazoo, MI 49008, POPE, Allen, National Snow and Ice Data Center, University of Colorado Boulder, 216 UCB, Boulder, CO 80309, BURSZTYN, Natalie, 800 N. State College Blvd., California State University - Fullerton, 800 N State College Blvd, Fullerton, CA 92831, ORMAND, Carol J., Science Education Resource Center, Carleton College, 1 North College St, Northfield, MN 55057 and LADUE, Nicole, Geology and Environmental Geosciences, Northern Illinois University, 302 Davis Hall, Normal Road, DeKalb, IL 60115, heather.petcovic@wmich.edu

Scale is critical in the geosciences, and is particularly important in understanding and interpreting remotely sensed imagery. Sense of scale, referring to how an individual quantifies space, is thought to develop through kinesthetic experiences. Thus field-based learning may be important for helping students develop their sense of scale. Yet often fieldwork is neither feasible nor economical. So can a classroom activity that mimics fieldwork also contribute to students’ sense of scale? And does sense of scale relate to student understanding of key remote sensing concepts?

We address these questions in this continuing study, in which we compare student performance in a field-based and classroom-based remote sensing activity on two measures: 1) a sense of scale instrument, and 2) a closed-response remote sensing concepts questionnaire. Items on the remote sensing questionnaire were developed from open-ended student responses. Students at the Juneau Icefield Research Program (n=7) completed a 3-hour activity in which they skied the perimeter of a 1 m square (representing a WorldView sensor’s pixel), a 30 m square (a Landsat pixel) and a 500 m square (a MODIS pixel). Students (n=19) in a geoscience education class at California State University Fullerton interrogated field radiometry data in a GIS representation of the same three types of pixels, using imagery from the Juneau Icefield.

In both settings, students underestimate the size of large objects and overestimate the size of small objects. As predicted by the research literature, students are most accurate with sizes of everyday objects, though many struggle with the metric system. Although students gained an understanding of how large a pixel is and what data it contains, they continue to struggle with understanding the variability of data contained within a pixel. Continuing analysis will compare student performance between the field-based and classroom-based activities.