Search for: All records

Abstract Undergraduate field experiences (UFEs) are key components of many biology, ecology, and geoscience programs and important steps to successful recruitment into careers. Through semistructured interviews of diverse field program leaders, we seek to understand how field program leaders conceptualize both their scientific disciplines and the intentional design factors they implemented within the UFE itself. Additionally, this study explores critical considerations these program leaders use to approach designing inclusive UFEs as well as the institutional and practical challenges of designing and implementing their UFEs. We acknowledge the limitations of the small sample of respondents, and our intent with this article is to explore these responses as a way to share critical design factors for designing and implementing inclusive UFEs with the broader geoscience community. Building an early understanding of these factors will help new field program leaders address multiple, simultaneous challenges that currently foment the underrepresentation of students from marginalized backgrounds in biology, ecology, and the geosciences. Through these explicit conversations, we hope to support the professional development of a scientific community that values the creation of safe, encouraging field experiences in which students can enhance their self-identity in the sciences, build peer and professional networks, and develop memorable field experiences that support their trajectories toward successful careers. 

Abstract Undergraduate field experiences (UFEs), where students learn and sometimes live together in nature, are critical for the field-based science disciplines. The Undergraduate Field Experiences Research Network (UFERN) brings together UFE educators and researchers to improve and broaden participation in field education. Integrating research on UFEs and general STEM education and the expertise of the UFERN community, we present a model and evidence that describes the impact of intended student outcomes, student context factors, and program design factors on UFE student outcomes. The UFERN model is relevant for a diversity of UFE formats and the diverse students potentially engaged in them, and it supports the field science community to consider a range of ways students can engage with the field. The UFERN model can be applied to guide the design, implementation, and evaluation of student-centered UFEs and to guide research on the mechanisms underlying outcomes across UFE formats and disciplines. 

Abstract Undergraduate field experiences (UFEs) are a prominent element of science education across many disciplines; however, empirical data regarding the outcomes are often limited. UFEs are unique in that they typically take place in a field setting, are often interdisciplinary, and include diverse students. UFEs range from courses, to field trips, to residential research experiences, and thereby have the potential to yield a plethora of outcomes for undergraduate participants. The UFE community has expressed interest in better understanding how to assess the outcomes of UFEs. In response, we developed a guide for practitioners to use when assessing their UFE that promotes an evidence‐based, systematic, iterative approach. This essay guides practitioners through the steps of: identifying intended UFE outcomes, considering contextual factors, determining an assessment approach, and using the information gained to inform next steps. We provide a table of common learning outcomes with aligned assessment tools, and vignettes to illustrate using the assessment guide. We aim to support comprehensive, informed assessment of UFEs, thus leading to more inclusive and reflective UFE design, and ultimately improved student outcomes. We urge practitioners to move toward evidence‐based advocacy for continued support of UFEs. 

Abstract Field experiences can provide transformative opportunities for many individuals who eventually pursue ecology, natural resource, and conservation careers. However, some of the same elements of field‐based programs that define and provide pivotal experiences for some represent barriers for others, especially students from underrepresented groups. Barriers may be financial, physical, cultural, or social. Issues of gender, identity, and race/ethnicity, for example, can be isolating or shut down learning during intensive field experiences when group leaders are not prepared to respond to interpersonal challenges. We explore some benefits and barriers presented by field learning experiences as well as some challenges and potential strategies to broaden inclusivity with the hope of encouraging further conversation on diversity and inclusion in field experiences.