GEOSCIENCE EDUCATION AND DIVERSITY:
VISION FOR THE FUTURE AND
STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESS
REPORT OF THE SECOND GEOSCIENCE EDUCATION
WORKING GROUP
SEPTEMBER 2005
Draft Compiled by:
Jacqueline Huntoon, Cheryl Peach and Jenelle Hopkins
Directorate for Geosciences
National Science Foundation
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 1
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 3
SECTION 2. STATUS OF THE GEOSCIENCE EDUCATION AND DIVERSITY
COMMUNITY ............................................................................................................................... 5
SECTION 3. VISION FOR THE FUTURE: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE
COMMUNITY AT LARGE........................................................................................................... 9
3.1. Promoting and Publicizing the Synergy Between Geoscience Education and National
Priorities...................................................................................................................................... 9
3.2. Increasing the Breadth, Scope and Quality of Geoscience Education at All Levels ......... 10
3.3. Developing a Vibrant, Diverse, Innovative, Geoscience Community............................... 12
3.4. Expanding Community Goals............................................................................................ 13
SECTION 4. STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESS: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NSF
GEOSCIENCES ........................................................................................................................... 14
4.1. Characteristics of Successful Projects in Geoscience Education—Models for Success ... 14
4.2. Criteria for Identifying Potentially Successful Projects..................................................... 14
4.3. The Role of GEO in Encouraging Development of Projects with High Potential for
Success...................................................................................................................................... 15
4.4. Issues for Specific Target Populations............................................................................... 16
4.5. Future Actions for the Directorate for Geosciences .......................................................... 18
SECTION 5. MEMBERS OF THE SECOND GEOSCIENCE EDUCATION WORKING
GROUP......................................................................................................................................... 23
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
More than eight years ago, a group of scientists and educators came together in a working group
to discuss the need for a strong emphasis on geoscience education within the Directorate for
Geosciences (GEO) at the National Science Foundation (NSF). This group outlined a set of
geoscience education priorities and strategies for GEO that have served to define and guide the
Directorate’s education and diversity (E&D) efforts to date. Since that first working group met,
remarkable progress has been made in advancing geoscience education, in large part as a result
of the clear thinking and dedication that went into the conception, design and implementation of
the NSF/GEO E&D programs. Nearly a decade has passed since the first report and, although
many of the issues articulated by that group remain relevant, the landscape for geoscience
education and science education in general has changed in response to changes in national
priorities, advances in technology, progress in science education research and changing US
demographics. Recognizing the need to assess the impact of GEO investments in E&D and
where the community stands with respect to the goals articulated in the original working group
report, NSF/GEO convened a second working group to evaluate the current status of the GEO
E&D endeavor and to make recommendations for the next phase of NSF/GEO E&D activities.
The second Geoscience Education Working Group (GEWG II), meeting on October 25-27, 2004
at the National Science Foundation (NSF) in Arlington, Virginia, reviewed 4 programs managed
through the office of the Assistant Director for Geosciences (GEO): Awards to Facilitate
Geoscience Education (AFGE), Geoscience Education (GeoEd), Global Learning and
Opportunities to Benefit the Environment (GLOBE) and Opportunities for Enhancing Diversity
in the Geosciences (OEDG). The working group was charged with identifying emerging needs
and opportunities related to geoscience E&D, developing new goals and standards for GEO E&D
programs and recommending a future course for GEO E&D efforts. From more than two days of
intense discussion and debate emerged a report that includes a discussion of the overall status of
the geoscience E&D community, recommendations for how the community can best promote
improvements in the geoscience education enterprise and a set of strategies for strengthening
GEO E&D programs.
The GEWG II concluded that the emergence of a coherent and growing geoscience E&D
community constitutes the primary strength of the geoscience education enterprise. An
increasing number of prominent members of the geoscience community are advocating for
geoscience education within government, industry and academia. Moreover, opportunities now
exist to integrate research and education through large-scale NSF research projects. Members of
the community are increasingly active in scientific professional societies and are capitalizing on
the reach and breadth of these organizations to disseminate effective practices in education.
Geoscience curricula are being designed to align with national priorities in research, education
and workforce development, and have great potential for inspiring students to pursue geoscience-
related careers. Community interest in scholarly research on E&D is growing rapidly.
Major objectives identified as beneficial to the future success of the geoscience education
enterprise include: promoting and publicizing the synergy between geoscience and national
priorities; increasing the breadth, scope and quality of geoscience education at all levels; and
developing a more diverse geoscience community. To achieve these objectives, the community
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
2
should become more proactive in disseminating information about the geosciences to the media,
teaching geoscience well and broadly in formal settings at all grade levels as well as in diverse
informal settings, using education research to inform effective pedagogical practices in the
geosciences, disseminating and promoting effective practices, and focusing resources on
recruitment and retention of members of underrepresented groups into the geosciences.
The working group recommends that NSF/GEO enhance the impact of current programs by
encouraging proposals with a high potential for success. Demonstrable, lasting impact is a key
element of successful projects. Well-articulated needs, goals and objectives, a strong
implementation plan and an evaluation plan that is aligned with the goals and objectives are
hallmarks of proposals with high potential for success. GEO should provide easily accessible
information on effective practices, exemplars or models of successful projects and assist PIs in
learning about and implementing best practices.
In addition, GEO should fund an externally managed enterprise assessment for the geosciences
to document current national needs in the geosciences, including job market trends, relations
between geoscience education and national priorities, current major initiatives in geoscience
education, and gaps in geoscience education and training.
Seven longer-term actions recommended by the working group include: 1) periodically
evaluating the results of GEO’s funded projects in order to identify best practices; 2) requiring
proposers to adhere to a clearly defined set of project guidelines; 3) improving the system of
project oversight, management and reporting; 4) continuing to fund development of creative new
approaches in geoscience education; 5) encouraging direct involvement by professional societies
in GEO funded projects; 6) promoting the inclusion of scholarly educational research in future
projects; and 7) continuing efforts to integrate basic geoscience research with education.
Recognizing that a better and broader public understanding of geoscience and its significance is
truly essential, and that education is the only route to achieving this goal, the first Geoscience
Education Working Group paved the way for the strong and growing geoscience education
community that now exists. The GEWG II has endeavored to provide guidance for building
upon this excellent foundation and to define a pathway for the next decade of GEO E&D
activities.
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
3
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION
The second Geoscience Education Working Group (GEWG II) met on October 25-27, 2004 at
the headquarters of the National Science Foundation (NSF) in Arlington, Virginia. The GEWG
II evaluated the effectiveness of prior and ongoing geoscience E&D programs in the Directorate
for Geosciences. The GEWG II also developed recommendations for the Directorate for
Geosciences (GEO) at NSF regarding its programs and future funding decisions. Members of the
GEWG II were invited to participate because of their unique qualifications, prior contributions in
the areas of geoscience education and/or diversity enhancement in science, technology,
engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields, and their potential to make a substantive
contribution to the group.
The GEWG II was convened in response to the recommendations of an NSF Committee of
Visitors (COV) for Education and Human Resource Development in the Directorate for
Geosciences, which met at NSF headquarters on September 10-12, 2003. The COV conducted a
thorough review of the Directorate for Geosciences’ E&D programs. Their report is available
online at:
<http://www.geo.nsf.gov/geo/adgeo/advcomm/fy2003_cov/GEO_ED_2003_COV_report.doc>.
The COV recommended that the GEWG II be convened to further examine previously funded
geoscience E&D projects and guide the Directorate for Geosciences in planning for the future.
The GEWG II is a Subcommittee of the NSF Directorate for Geosciences Advisory Committee.
To decrease the amount of time needed by the GEWG II to address its charge, an external
contractor, the American Institutes for Research (AIR), was hired by NSF during the spring of
2004 to collect retrospective data related to four E&D programs conducted at the level of the
Office of the Assistant Director for Geosciences at NSF. The four programs are: Awards to
Facilitate Geoscience Education (AFGE), Geoscience Education (GeoEd), Opportunities for
Enhancing Diversity in the Geosciences (OEDG) and Global Learning and Observations to
Benefit the Environment (GLOBE). These programs are broadly representative of the entire
suite of E&D related programs and projects conducted by GEO. The Digital Library for Earth
System Education (DLESE) Program Center and Core Services were not specifically analyzed
by the GEWG II, but the GEWG II was encouraged to make recommendations related to DLESE
as appropriate.
The official charge to the GEWG II:
1. Using summary materials provided by NSF and its contractor, assess accomplishments of
the Awards to Facilitate Geoscience Education, Geoscience Education, Opportunities to
Enhance Diversity in the Geosciences and GLOBE programs since 1996.
2. Collaborate with members of the NSF Geoscience Education Team (GET) to accomplish the
following tasks:
• Identify emerging needs and opportunities related to geoscience E&D.
• Develop new goals and standards for GEO E&D programs.
• Recommend the future course for GEO E&D programs.
• Prepare a report.
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
4
The members of the GEWG II agreed that the overall state of geoscience E&D has significantly
improved since the time that the first Geoscience Education Working Group met at NSF on
August 29-30, 1996. One of the most significant accomplishments of the first Geoscience
Education Working Group was its report (Geoscience Education: A Recommended Strategy,
NSF 97-171), which led to development of a community of geoscientists dedicated to promoting
and improving E&D. The report is available online at:
<http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/1997/nsf97171/nsf97171.htm
>.
The members of the GEWG II hope that their current report will contribute to continued growth
and strengthening of the geoscience E&D community in the future. The GEWG II members
anticipate that a third Geoscience Education Working Group will be convened in the future.
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
5
SECTION 2. STATUS OF THE GEOSCIENCE EDUCATION AND
DIVERSITY COMMUNITY
As part of the effort to address the charge to the committee, the members of the GEWG II
analyzed the current state of the geoscience E&D community in terms of current strengths on
which to build, current weaknesses that need to be addressed in the future, opportunities for
future growth and improvement, and existing or potential threats. A summary of this discussion
is outlined in Exhibits 2.1., 2.2., 2.3. and 2.4. of this section.
The primary strengths of the geoscience E&D community are its growing size and its diverse,
knowledgeable and dedicated members (Exhibit 2.1). The geosciences are relevant, intriguing
and integrative. The geosciences provide context and concrete examples of the application of
concepts and skills from all of the STEM disciplines. NSF is perceived by the geoscience
community at large as willing to facilitate continued growth and improvement in efforts to
advance geoscience education and increase diversity in the geosciences.
Exhibit 2.1. Current strengths of the geoscience education and diversity community.
(Information is not presented in prioritized order)
• Wide variety of interests and specialties among geoscientists concerned with E&D.
• Strong and growing community of geoscience E&D researchers.
• Sufficient proposal pressure in geoscience E&D programs.
• Fascinating and relevant subject matter that is integrative. Geoscience is a good
content area for delivering content and meaning (relevance) in all STEM disciplines.
• Existence of high-quality “best-practice” models.
• Broader impacts review criterion emphasizes the importance of E&D.
• Geoscientists in prominent positions in government, industry and the academy are
advocating for inclusion of geoscience in curricula at all educational levels.
• NSF Geoscience Program Managers make an exceptional effort at cross-divisional
and cross-directorate relationships that result in effective collaborations.
• Geoscience has promoted itself well within the STEM community. STEM experts
now recognize that STEM is more than just physics, chemistry and biology.
The critical current weaknesses identified by the GEWG II (Exhibit 2.2) stem mainly from a
need for coordination and collaboration within the geoscience community at large. Best
practices in pedagogy, including methods developed for use in large, introductory-level courses,
need to be identified, communicated and implemented broadly. Geoscience is a fascinating topic
that can be perceived as boring and irrelevant if it is not presented in an effective way.
Geoscience curricula at all educational levels need to embrace the Earth system science
approach. Workforce skills need to be emphasized, including (but not limited to) quantitative
expertise, the ability to communicate complex information in writing and verbally and the ability
to work on interdisciplinary teams. The need for sufficient numbers of highly qualified Earth
Science teachers in the K-12 workforce is a problem that has contributed to a lack of awareness
of, and interest in, the geosciences among students. Perhaps even more importantly, there is a
noticeable lack of diversity among practicing geoscientists, as well as NSF Principal
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
6
Investigators (PIs), reviewers and panelists, which limits the geosciences’ ability to effectively
engage major segments of the US population.
Exhibit 2.2. Current weaknesses of the geoscience education and diversity community.
(Information is not presented in prioritized order)
• Low-level of racial/ethnic and gender diversity among geoscientists, including NSF
PIs, reviewers and panelists.
• A need for accountability for funded projects.
• A need for much greater community college participation (0.5% of applicants are
from community colleges). PIs from minority serving institutions (MSIs) and PIs
drawn from the pool of senior research faculty are also poorly represented.
• A need for more effective public outreach and communication to promote the
geosciences as exciting and relevant.
• A need for effective mechanisms for dissemination/recognition of best-practice
models.
• Quantitative skills, soft (writing and speaking) skills and teaming skills are not
currently well integrated into most geoscience curricula. These skills are needed in
the workforce.
• A need for up-to-date pedagogy at four-year universities (and other institutions).
Although financial considerations typically dictate class-sizes, effective teaching
strategies need to be implemented in all classes so that future geoscientists are more
likely to be attracted to and retained in the discipline.
• A need for knowledge or broad awareness about best practices related to E&D.
• A need for a large number of well-trained K-12 Earth science teachers.
There are currently numerous opportunities available to the geoscience E&D community
(Exhibit 2.3). At K-12 levels, high-stakes testing in multiple grades should lead to increased
emphasis on the quality of teaching and learning of science in pre-college settings. Because the
geosciences focus on application of concepts and techniques from the other sciences to problems
related to the Earth and the environment, the geosciences can provide nearly unlimited real-
world, hands-on and inquiry-based opportunities for enhanced learning in a variety of
disciplines. Effective dissemination of geoscience curriculum products can help the geosciences
become more effective at drawing students into the field from other related disciplines. Venues
for dissemination (e.g., DLESE) already exist and are available for use by all geoscientists.
Information about careers in the geosciences also needs to be made widely available.
Geoscience-related careers include opportunities in K-12 teaching; there is a critical and ongoing
need for high-quality K-12 Earth science teachers. Information about best practices in teaching
and ways in which fundamental concepts can be taught within an Earth system science
framework should be disseminated widely using as many venues as possible.
NSF has the opportunity to use existing programs to further its efforts to enhance education and
increase diversity in the geosciences. Large-scale projects should provide opportunities for
students and educators to participate in research and develop programs and products that fill
gaps. The NSF CAREER Program should be used as a vehicle to highlight the potential of
promising new geoscience faculty within their home institutions and ensure that best practices in
education are broadly implemented. PIs who are typically involved in basic research have the
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
7
opportunity to learn more about E&D when they work with experts from the E&D community to
develop education and outreach programs.
Exhibit 2.3. Opportunities for future growth and improvement of the geoscience education
and diversity community. (Information is not presented in prioritized order)
• Geoscience researchers (especially those associated with new or emerging NSF
research centers) have the opportunity to learn more about effective educational
practices as they conduct education and outreach activities.
• Inclusion of science testing at high, middle and elementary school levels (grades 4,
8 and 10) provides an opportunity for geoscience to reach more students.
• CAREER can be used as a vehicle to involve additional new PIs in geoscience
education efforts. For this to occur, reviewers need to be educated to recognize that
“innovative” education plans can either use new approaches or apply existing best
practices in a new setting.
• The geosciences have the potential to form interdisciplinary teams with other
disciplines as departmental reorganizations occur.
• The number of talks and poster presentations related to education is rapidly growing
at national geoscience meetings. There is an opportunity to undertake nationwide
reform of geoscience education because a critical mass of concerned educators is
emerging.
• Information about workforce needs and careers can be used to effectively recruit
students into the discipline.
• Highly qualified Earth science teachers are in demand at the K-12 level.
Additionally, the impending retirement of senior faculty may result in new positions
at post-secondary institutions.
• Large-scale NSF research projects offer a plethora of opportunities to integrate
geoscience research and education. These projects should provide opportunities for
undergraduates and educators (particularly from low-income or underrepresented
populations) to participate in research. Educational products (e.g., curricula)
produced by the projects should be developed to address gaps in current educational
materials and made available to the community at large.
• Special sessions, special issues of journals related to geoscience education,
workshops at NSF and in conjunction with society meetings, and the world-wide-
web can be used to disseminate best-practice information to the geoscience
community.
• Align curriculum with national priorities to increase impact and perceived
importance of geosciences.
• Earth system science approaches to teaching geoscience are ideal for integrating
quantitative, soft (writing and speaking) and teaming skills into curricula.
Most of the threats to the geoscience E&D community relate to the need for increased
recognition of the importance of geoscience E&D programs to the long-term health of the
geoscience enterprise (Exhibit 2.4). Many geoscientists involved in basic research are
uninformed about the critical role that high-quality educational practices, tailored to meet the
needs of diverse groups, can play in advancing student and public understanding of geoscience
research. While NSF and other funding agencies have made enormous strides over the past 10
years, the GEWG II felt that there needs to be continued and increased emphasis on E&D when
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
8
funding decisions are made by NSF and other federal agencies. Professional societies should
take a more proactive role by uniting their memberships to work together to improve the quality
of geoscience education and increase diversity in the geosciences.
Exhibit 2.4. Existing or potential threats to the health of the geoscience education and
diversity community. (Information is not presented in prioritized order)
• There is a need for awareness within geoscience research community that
education-related projects are fundamentally important to the health of the
geoscience enterprise.
• There is a need for increased recognition of geoscience education as an important
emerging field of research by the geoscience community at large and by the
scientific societies.
• There is a need for sufficient financial support for geoscience education projects
within the Directorate for Geosciences and NSF as a whole. The Divisions of GEO
should promote geoscience education by consistently stressing the importance of the
broader impacts criteria to PIs, reviewers and panelists.
• Declining enrollments in geoscience disciplines continues to threaten the overall
health and productivity of the discipline. Geoscience may suffer from a loss of
identity due to closing and merging of geoscience departments in the future.
• Employers are looking to non-US citizens to supply needed skills to the workforce
rather than work with the US educational system to improve the skills of US
citizens.
In summary, the current strengths and opportunities of the geoscience E&D community are
numerous and should be acted upon to promote the future health of the geoscience research
enterprise.
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
9
SECTION 3. VISION FOR THE FUTURE: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE
The continued growth and improvement in the geoscience E&D enterprise depends in large part
on community-wide actions. Reflecting on the discussion of the current status of geoscience
education, the GEWG II articulated four major issues perceived as critical to the future vitality of
the community:
1. Promoting and publicizing the synergy between geoscience education and national
priorities;
2. Increasing the breadth, scope and quality of geoscience education at all levels;
3. Developing a vibrant, diverse, innovative geoscience community; and
4. Regularly assessing and expanding community-wide goals if necessary.
Although these issues have bearing on how NSF/GEO promotes and supports community-wide
efforts, they are most appropriately characterized as issues that will require community-based
action to promote systemic change within the community at large.
3.1. Promoting and Publicizing the Synergy Between Geoscience Education
and National Priorities
Alignment with national research and development and STEM education priorities is essential to
the long-term success of geoscience education enterprise. That the geosciences are widely
applicable to problems of national interest is one of the key strengths of our community and
should serve as the cornerstone of efforts to promote the importance and relevance of
geosciences to the public. Key priority areas that can be addressed by geoscientists include:
• Strengthening science, technology, engineering and mathematics education
• Supporting technological innovation to enhance economic competitiveness and new job
growth
• Addressing national workforce needs to ensure a scientifically literate population and a
robust supply of qualified experts
• Advancing fundamental discovery to improve quality of life in the future
• Enhancing our understanding the global environment
Professional societies such as the American Geophysical Union (AGU) have begun exploiting a
variety of avenues for “getting the message out” about important contributions that the
geoscience community is making to national safety, health and prosperity. Publications, press
releases, media events and public service announcements all present opportunities for
highlighting the importance of the geosciences in addressing national priorities. A clear and
understandable message about the value and importance of the geosciences must be created and
marketed effectively. To this end, members of the geoscience community should generate a
greater media presence either through cooperative efforts with NSF and other federal agencies,
professional societies or on their own.
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
10
Education has always been vital to the success of the science and engineering enterprise. In the
technology- and knowledge-based economy of the 21
st
century, STEM education is an investment
in the United States collective future as a nation and as a society. The geoscience community
has a pivotal role to play in the pursuit of the nation’s STEM education goals. Key opportunities
exist because geoscience provides context for chemistry, physics and biology and solutions to
many of the economic and environmental challenges facing the nation. The geoscience
community needs to work collectively to promote geoscience as a vehicle for strengthening
STEM education and for attracting students to STEM careers.
For lasting systemic change to take place, policy changes must be enacted at the district, state
and national levels. The geoscience community should encourage projects or initiatives that
establish communication with entities that make or guide policy decisions, focus on
communicating the importance of geoscience to various constituent groups, or develop aligned
geoscience curricula. Consortia that include education-oriented and geoscience-oriented
1
professional societies will be most effective in promoting systemic change. Entities such as
NSF, the Office of Naval Research (ONR), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the United States
Geological Survey (USGS) and geoscience-oriented professional societies need to partner in a
coordinated effort to promote the inclusion of geoscience content in K-12 education.
3.2. Increasing the Breadth, Scope and Quality of Geoscience Education at All
Levels
Quality and breadth constitute important pillars of geoscience education programs. Geoscience
must be taught well and broadly, in formal settings at all grade levels, as well as in diverse
informal settings including science centers, museums, parks and via the Internet. The geoscience
education community needs to continue to perform education research and to avail itself of the
results of educational research conducted in other STEM fields. There is a continuing need to
identify and promote pedagogical approaches that work and to communicate information about
why some approaches work while others do not. As evaluation becomes an increasingly
prominent component of geoscience education projects, greater numbers of geoscience educators
will be able to identify and disseminate information about effective pedagogy.
As effective practices are identified, the geoscience community needs to work together as a team
to overhaul geoscience education. Improvements in geoscience education that result from
coherent, coordinated efforts will benefit the entire community. Improved educational practices
at all grade levels will contribute to increased competency among future researchers. Geoscience
1
Examples of some of these organizations include: the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
<www.ASCD.org
>, International Society for Technology in Education <www.iste.org>, National Association of
Elementary School Principals <www.naescp.org
>, National Education Association <www.nea.org>, National
Association of Elementary School Principals <www.naesp.org> and the Council of Great City Schools
<http://www.cgcs.org
>.
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
11
professional societies can provide leadership and assistance in many ways and their participation
must be a key component of any plan to implement systemic change.
Relevant and exciting presentations within informal education venues will lead to improved
understanding and appreciation of the natural world among the general public. The growing
number of partnerships between the geoscience research community and informal science
educators should be used to disseminate up-to-date geoscience information to the general public.
Many of the issues facing the geosciences are impacting other STEM disciplines as well. There
must be effective communication and collaboration among all disciplines (e.g., physics,
chemistry, etc.) and relevant stakeholders (e.g., employers, funding agencies, government, etc.)
involved in the STEM enterprise to ensure that a strong science and engineering workforce
continues to exist. Geoscience applications provide context and concrete meaning that can be
exploited by educators in other disciplines. Geoscience educators (particularly those involved
with the K-12 system and/or teacher training) should collaborate with colleagues in other
disciplines to incorporate geoscience examples throughout STEM curricula. The integration and
inclusion of geoscience into a wide variety of STEM courses at the pre-college level must be
encouraged.
Members of the community need to be proactive in seeking out opportunities for expanding the
reach of geoscience curricula (for example, into other university departments). While care
should be taken to preserve the identity of the geosciences, it is imperative that the community
embrace opportunities for inclusion in interdisciplinary programs. Geoscience research is
becoming increasingly dependent on technologic innovations and students who wish to perform
geoscience research need to have strong quantitative skills. The use of geoscience examples in
mathematics education would benefit both the geoscience and mathematics communities.
Applications of quantitative skills should be emphasized at all levels of geoscience education.
The typical undergraduate geoscience curriculum does not match the needs of industry and
academia. Students entering the workforce don’t have sufficient quantitative preparation, a
sufficiently robust Earth system perspective, or essential soft skills. Three alarming trends are
evident. First, at many colleges and universities across the country, geoscience departments are
decreasing in size and in some cases being eliminated altogether. Second, industry is
increasingly looking to other countries to meet their workforce needs. Third, the technical
complexity of problems being addressed in the commercial and mainstream research
environment is increasing, while undergraduate programs in general do little to prepare students
to deal with such complexity. The geoscience community must work together to develop ways
to mitigate these trends. Industry representatives are increasingly interested in finding
individuals that have a broad, interdisciplinary technical focus, combined with the ability to work
as a member of a team. Unfortunately such students are becoming hard to find in the U.S. and
the quantitative skills of U.S. students fall short of those possessed by students who were trained
in other countries.
The requirement that all proposals to the NSF explicitly articulate the broader impacts (i.e.
communication of the findings and methods of research in a broader context and to a larger
audience) of the project has been very effective in raising the research community’s awareness of
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
12
the importance of E&D. Universities should implement similar criteria in their evaluations of
faculty, administrators and programs. Positive outcomes should be rewarded appropriately.
Employers and/or professional societies could benefit from including a modified ‘broader
impacts’ criterion during external reviews or when developing rankings.
3.3. Developing a Vibrant, Diverse, Innovative, Geoscience Community
To promote future development of a vibrant, diverse, innovative geoscience community,
including researchers, educators, students, employers, policymakers and interested individuals
among the general public, geoscience must be broadly perceived as important and relevant.
Members of the geoscience community must therefore be more proactive in disseminating
information about the geosciences to the media
2
. An effort to promote geosciences in the media
could be tremendously efficacious in enhancing the geosciences’ ability to recruit members of
underrepresented groups.
Members of groups that are underrepresented in all STEM fields need to become foci of
recruiting and retention efforts conducted by formal and informal geoscience educators and
businesses that employ geoscientists. Members of underrepresented groups are an untapped
resource for the geosciences; increased participation by diverse segments of the population will
lead to increases in enrollment in formal geoscience education programs. Engineering has been
more successful than the geosciences at recruiting and retaining members of underrepresented
groups in part because the population at large views an engineering education as a pathway to
high-paying, rewarding, white-collar employment. Broad promotion of career opportunities in
the geosciences would help with recruiting efforts. Geoscientists need to use a variety of
marketing techniques to demonstrate to students that careers in geoscience are exciting, relevant,
challenging and available. If the community can successfully elevate public awareness of the
importance of the geosciences, geoscience careers will emerge as viable career options that will
directly benefit society. Representatives from the business community could take a leadership
role in this effort by featuring geoscientists in their company’s promotional materials.
Recruiting of students needs to take place at the local, regional and national level. The effort to
recruit students should begin early (at the elementary level, including promoting awareness of
the geosciences among families and communities) and continue through the secondary,
undergraduate and graduate levels. Explicit involvement of geoscience employment sectors will
be required if efforts at broadening participation are to be successful. Opportunities for
internships and research experiences should ideally be made available to all students.
2
For example, the Shifting Baselines public outreach approach is very effective at communicating science
information to the general public (see: <www.shiftingbaselines.org
>).
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
13
3.4. Expanding Community Goals
Standing major goals for the community based on two major reports are outlined below.
• Goals from Geoscience Education: A Recommended Strategy:
− Increase numbers of women and minorities in the geosciences
− Improve content-area preparation for K-12 teachers
− Update undergraduate courses and programs
− Prepare graduate students broadly to ensure their flexibility in the future
− Reward faculty at colleges and universities for teaching excellence
− Educate the public about geoscience.
• Goals from Revolution in Earth & Space Science Education:
− Increase the number of students learning about Earth and space science at K-12
levels and the amount of time spent on Earth and space science in K-12 curricula
− Increase the diversity of geoscientists
− Develop science-literate citizenry.
These goals continue to be appropriate. To remain effective, however, the geoscience education
community must respond to an ever-changing national landscape and additional community
goals must be embraced. The GEWG II suggests the following additional goals:
1. Improve preparation of students so that they have the skills to enter and compete
successfully in the workforce. Students need to possess the following:
• Strong quantitative skills
• Ability to work on interdisciplinary teams
• An Earth systems perspective
• The ability to communicate complex information to many types of audiences,
using multiple tools and methods.
2. Implement the use of an Earth system science perspective in education at all levels.
• Train a cadre of Earth science teacher professionals to use Earth system science as
a framework for instruction (K-12, college and university levels).
3. Inspire students to enter the geoscience profession.
• Emphasize challenges and opportunities open to highly trained, technologically
savvy geoscientists
• Develop networks to help students find satisfying employment upon graduation.
4. Revise, as a community, the duration and structure of undergraduate geoscience
programs.
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
14
SECTION 4. STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESS: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
NSF GEOSCIENCES
In the interest of building on the excellent foundation that now exists for geoscience E&D at
NSF/GEO, the working group endeavored to define a set of strategies that can be used by the
directorate to enhance and expand the impact of the programs it currently sponsors. The
recommendations fall into two broad categories: 1) general suggestions for encouraging
proposals with a high potential for success and 2) a set of specific recommendations for future
E&D activities within the Directorate.
4.1. Characteristics of Successful Projects in Geoscience Education—Models
for Success
Demonstrable lasting impact is a key element of successful projects. Impact is typically gauged
based on the size of the group affected, but a focused effort that dramatically improves
performance for a few individuals is also important. While there are many approaches and
strategies that lead to success, projects are most likely to be successful if they have well
articulated needs, goals, objectives, a strong implementation plan and an evaluation plan that is
aligned with the goals and objectives. The effective use of formative and summative evaluation
is the hallmark of successful projects.
Two strategies that are particularly common in successful projects deserve special mention:
making use of information gained during prior projects conducted by the PIs or others and
making use of partnerships. Education projects, like research projects, must make use of the
most up-to-date information available during project design phases. Partnerships should be well
developed and truly collaborative. Real partners share resources, governance and decision-
making responsibilities. University researchers involved in K-12 education should collaborate
with K-12 teachers and administrators to fully understand K-12 education issues.
4.2. Criteria for Identifying Potentially Successful Projects
Proposals should include data and rationale that indicate need and identify the specific audience
to be targeted. Goals and objectives for individual projects should be few in number, but clearly
stated. Progress toward stated goals and objectives must be measurable by quantitative or
qualitative means. A well-articulated evaluation plan that is aligned with the project’s goals
must be included with each proposal. Project evaluation plans should include a rigorous research
design appropriate to the type of project. Evaluation data should form the foundation of any
proposal requesting a continuation of funding from NSF or any other agency.
Proposals should include an implementation plan with timelines and benchmarks that are tied to
the project’s objectives. Proposals to work with a specific target population must include
evidence of strong partnership, with members of that target population actively involved in the
planning, implementation and governance of the project.
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
15
Proposals should include a plan for dissemination of results. The dissemination plan should reach
out to the largest possible audience for which the results may be important. PIs should consider
multiple avenues for dissemination. A successful dissemination plan provides venues and
opportunities for a wide audience to learn and potentially adapt or adopt the project’s products
for their own use. Workshops can play a particularly important role in dissemination.
4.3. The Role of GEO in Encouraging Development of Projects with High
Potential for Success
Effective projects in geoscience education adhere to the same standards of excellence as quality
research endeavors. Knowledge of pertinent literature, sound theoretical design and
implementation driven by best practices are touchstones of high-caliber activities. Inquiry-
based, authentic instruction supported by the use of appropriate technology is typically a part of a
quality geoscience education project.
By emphasizing the characteristics of successful projects in Program Solicitations, NSF can
encourage adoption of best practices. The following information should be included in
Geoscience Education Program announcements:
• Exemplars demonstrating broad impacts of GEO projects as well as successful project
management, evaluation and dissemination plans
• Links to tutorials that showcase successful grant writing tips
• Information to support the transition from GEO E&D funding to funding from the NSF
Directorate for Education and Human Resources (EHR) and other funding agencies.
NSF should give preference to proposals that show evidence of meaningful collaboration with
professional societies. These partnerships ensure that an initiative will have a high degree of
sustainability as well as wide professional recognition and community involvement.
There is a need for mentoring of proposal writers in all venues, including PIs from
underrepresented groups. NSF should have a white paper on the GEO website describing the
types of activities that can satisfy the broader impacts review criterion.
Annual reports are an important management tool for both the PI and NSF. NSF should pay
attention to the impact of its programs by requiring sections in the annual report devoted to both
the intellectual merit and the broader impacts of each project. Final reports are valuable to NSF
in identifying and disseminating information about successful projects as well as identifying best
practices. At present the final report form is not well designed for showcasing the outcomes of
projects or identifying lessons learned. It may be that a customized set of reporting questions is
required for educational projects (as is done in EHR). NSF should consider how final reports
could be made more effective as vehicles to promote dissemination.
The working group believes that PIs do not understand the importance of reports and how NSF
uses PI’s information for its own internal reports. Reporting instructions should be provided to
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
16
PIs to stress the importance of submitting thorough annual and final reports. There is an
important role for NSF to play in assisting with dissemination of effective practices. The world-
wide-web is a natural tool for organizing digital products and materials. An extension to the
reporting system promoting use of DLESE or some other site could be a powerful tool to help
promote a culture of reuse rather than reinvention.
All education efforts within the Directorate should unify behind broad goals that are aligned with
workforce goals. Industry perceives students as lacking quantitative skills. Today’s students
must also possess qualitative skills such as working in culturally diverse teams. To allow our
students to remain competitive with the global workforce, development of effective teaching
strategies that strengthen these skills should be encouraged.
There needs to be a standard approach to data collection that can be used by all PIs and NSF
Program Officers to critically evaluate projects. Evaluation results should be used to refine
ongoing projects and design new projects. Program Solicitations should guide PIs’ development
of evaluation plans. The PI should be encouraged to continually communicate with the
evaluator, seeking formative feedback to inform potential revisions in the implementation plan.
Evaluation data must be included in the annual and final project reports to NSF. Final project
reports must include a final evaluation report that documents project performance relative to
original objectives. Evaluation data are necessary for identification of best practices and for
determination of the collective impact of GEO education programs. PIs may need assistance to
effectively incorporate evaluation into their projects. NSF should provide this assistance.
To assist overburdened faculty members, the results of NSF-funded geoscience E&D projects
that involved development of new courses, curricula, or other educational materials should be
shared with the community. Ideally, new materials will be made available for testing and
previously tested materials will be made available for broad implementation. This would
increase the impact of GEO’s investment in geoscience education. Furthermore, GEO needs to
develop tutorials and examples that will assist PIs in planning and developing transitions from
proof-of-concept to full-scale educational projects. GEO PIs also need information about other
potential sources of funding (e.g., EHR).
GEO needs to facilitate the geoscience community’s understanding of the ‘Broader Impacts’
criterion. NSF Program Officers need to ensure that the potential broader impacts of projects are
fully addressed in proposals, as well as annual and final reports. Information about new
opportunities, priorities and focus areas need to be widely shared with the community. DLESE
may be an ideal place for dissemination of information to prospective PIs.
4.4. Issues for Specific Target Populations
Grades K-8
At primary grades geoscience content should be incorporated into math and reading instructional
materials. Projects that support development of geoscience-specific activities and develop young
children’s understanding of Earth systems should be encouraged. Some examples of potentially
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
17
effective practices include: alignment of children’s literature with geoscience-related activities;
development of a standards-based scaffold for geoscience concepts for preschool through grade
six; and dissemination of kits and web-based resources for teachers.
Non-science teachers can support the geosciences through interdisciplinary instruction in which
the geosciences play a prominent role. Professional societies should be partners in the
development of content-rich interdisciplinary instruction.
Grades 9-12
Efforts should be made to provide students and teachers with authentic research experiences that
make use of appropriate technology. Classroom activities and materials should be aligned with
National and/or State Standards. The working group felt that place-based instruction could be an
especially important catalyst for minority student participation and success.
Geoscience teachers need opportunities to gain content-area knowledge so that they have the
confidence to make changes in their lessons, going beyond the facts given in textbooks.
Teachers should be shown how to integrate math and language arts into a science lesson. The
end result will be richer instruction for their students.
There are substantial research data on characteristics of high quality professional development
for K-12 science teachers. Critical best practices include: addressing state standards, sustaining
professional development over sufficient time to allow for complete integration of new skills and
developing strategic partnerships to provide for follow-up and sustainability. Multi-level
mentoring can provide the extra support that teachers need in their classrooms. Teachers should
be introduced to the geoscience professional organizations in their area. Projects targeting
teachers should utilize previously identified best practices. Exemplar models that illustrate best
practices in teaching and learning in the geosciences at all grade levels and with all types of
audiences should be promoted (e.g., via DLESE).
Undergraduate Education
Geoscience is an excellent platform for presenting context and meaning for physics, chemistry,
mathematics and engineering at the undergraduate level. In the past, GEO has supported a broad
range of projects targeting undergraduates. As a group, these projects lacked coherency, other
than a continuous and growing emphasis on pre-service teacher training. Progress has, however,
been achieved in student learning because of development of new courses and degree programs
and updating of existing degree programs. The use of financial incentives and multiple
interventions has also increased and these have been effective in attracting, engaging and
retaining students.
Unfortunately, the progress made has not produced a significant increase in the number of
undergraduates pursuing majors in the geosciences. The geosciences have problems recruiting
students due to the perception that the field is not relevant and that it offers few career options.
This perception must be changed among the general population if issues pertinent to
undergraduate education are to be addressed.
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
18
Graduate Education and Faculty Professional Development
Very few projects reviewed by the working group had faculty and/or graduate students as the
primary target audience even though these groups play an important role in the development and
dissemination of high-quality geoscience education materials. Projects that support faculty in
their professional growth contribute to the intellectual base of geoscience education. The
GLOBE Program in particular has had a major impact on faculty and graduate students by
providing an opportunity to mentor and work closely with K-12 teachers and students. NSF
should encourage faculty to play an important role in workforce development and in increasing
understanding of geoscience among the general public.
There should be efforts made to provide grant-writing workshops for K-12 and community
college teachers during their own professional association meetings. NSF currently underserves
these groups. The grant writing workshops should help teachers understand that they can apply
for grants, can be partners in basic research projects and can serve as peer mentors for one
another.
Informal Education and Public Outreach
Far too few proposals come from the informal science education community. Feedback from
working group members representing this community indicates that some informal education
centers would have to change their mission and goals to focus on geoscience. Informal science
contributes to the general public’s geoscience literacy. Informal science venues can be very
effective in promoting interest in geoscience among diverse populations.
Adult Education/Literacy Programs
An enormous pool of eager learners exists within adult education and literacy programs. This
audience has remained largely untapped by the geoscience education community. Geoscience
topics and information can be readily incorporated into adult literacy program materials.
Another target audience includes adult learners seeking vocational training, often as a means of
changing careers. Many technical and engineering fields of study require a knowledge of, or
even expertise in, one or more geoscience disciplines.
4.5. Future Actions for the Directorate for Geosciences
As a result of the Second Geoscience Education Working Group process, it is recommended that
one immediate and seven longer-term actions be taken by GEO in support of the vision outlined
above.
As soon as possible, GEO should fund an externally managed enterprise assessment for the
geosciences that will define and document the current national context for geoscience education.
Four specific areas for quantitative and qualitative assessment are identified below. GEO may
opt to measure other indicators as well.
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
19
• What current job market needs and opportunities are relevant to geoscientists?
• What is the current relationship between the goals and practices of geoscience research
and education, and national scientific, technological, educational, social, economic and
defense priorities?
• What major efforts to improve geoscience education are currently underway and how do
they relate to one another?
• Where are the gaps in geoscience education and training and which gaps need to be
addressed in the short and long terms?
The results of the enterprise assessment should be accounted for in the following longer-term
actions:
• GEO should consistently evaluate the results of its funded projects in order to identify
best practices. This can be done proactively by:
– Embedding specific evaluation metrics into project reporting requirements
– Clearly identifying evaluation metrics in program announcements
– Requiring all investigators to perform formative and summative evaluations and
include evaluation reports in annual and final reports to NSF
– Working to improve the online project report system to support meaningful
reporting.
• GEO should provide examples of strong education projects to the community.
Additionally, examples of types of projects that are not appropriate for support will be
valuable to the geoscience community if explanations of undesirable characteristics are
included.
• GEO should require proposers to clearly define and thoroughly describe the scientific and
educational objectives, action plan, evaluation plan and deliverables for each proposed
project.
• GEO should improve its system of project oversight, management and reporting. In
particular, online communication and reporting should become simpler and more
intuitive for PIs; the progress of projects (as defined by their research or teaching
objectives) throughout their funding periods should be tracked more closely; and project
reports should be made more useful and accessible for dissemination and programmatic
assessment.
• GEO should continue to do what it has been doing well: funding development of creative
new approaches in geoscience education.
• GEO should encourage direct involvement by professional societies in projects,
especially for the purpose of dissemination of best practices. Professional societies are
uniquely positioned to advocate for and sustain innovative approaches and actions within
the global geoscience community.
• GEO should write and publish on the GEO website an aligned white paper about how the
geoscience community can address the NSF broader impacts criterion with strategic
education-related activities.
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
20
Recommendations for Specific GEO Programs
GLOBE: Although GLOBE has global recognition and a well-developed infrastructure (which
should be preserved), it has not been successful at advancing geoscience research due to poor
data quality and preparation of few peer-reviewed publications. The program also appears to
have stopped growing. Recently, addition of new teachers and students has been offset by loss
of existing teachers and students. Data from recent DLESE workshops indicate that teachers are
often unable to comply with data collection protocols, suggesting that protocols need to be
subjected to greater amounts of testing and evaluation prior to implementation. Recognizing that
any change to the GLOBE structure will impact a broad group of stakeholders outside of GEO,
we recommend that either the success criteria for GLOBE be modified, or GEO reduce or curtail
its support for the program. Potential modifications to the specified criteria for success of
GLOBE projects include:
• Projects should not focus on ‘rigid’ data collection protocols but rather be open to
accommodating new potential collaborations. GLOBE should be a broad pathway
between the classroom and the scientific community that can be used to promote
participation by scientists from across GEO who have developed educational approaches
of proven effectiveness.
• GEO should facilitate a modification of the GLOBE Program so that it can eventually
serve as a “clearing house” for data and educational materials produced by large GEO-
funded projects.
• GLOBE materials and support structures should be disseminated broadly.
• GLOBE scientists and teachers should develop easy-to-use tools to facilitate
dissemination of GLOBE protocols and data.
• GLOBE projects should emphasize high-quality learning experiences. Hypotheses,
experimental designs, data collection protocols, analyses and scientific conclusions
should all be aligned with the National Science Education Standards.
• GLOBE projects should include rigorous formative and summative evaluations.
Evaluation reports should be required components of annual and final reports to NSF.
NSF should investigate the feasibility of developing a standard reporting structure for all
projects supported by the GLOBE Program.
GeoEd: This program should fund innovative projects that can potentially be scaled up or
replicated on a large or national scale. Proposals should clearly articulate the proposers’ long-
term (beyond the GeoEd funding period) goals for the project, identify a timeline and action plan
that are aligned with the long-term goals and specify milestones that must be achieved to attain
the long-term goals. Proposals should also describe how projects would contribute to the overall
enhancement of geoscience education. In summary, this program should support only proposals
that communicate a vision that is consistent with the overall goals of the geoscience education
community. All GeoEd projects must include evaluation components. The scale of the
evaluation should match the scale of the project. Ideally, an individual or group other than the
one that is developing the educational product should conduct the evaluation. GeoEd awards
should not exceed a maximum of approximately $100,000/year. Proposers should be encouraged
to link with projects supported by other funding sources whenever possible, to maximize the
impact of the funding provided by GEO.
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
21
OEDG: The two-track approach being used in this program is appropriate and should be
preserved. For Track 2 OEDG awards, the Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation
(LSAMP) program may provide a good model for success. As indicated in the OEDG Program
solicitation, OEDG projects should align with existing LSAMP structures to leverage resources
wherever possible. As currently indicated in the solicitation, OEDG awardees should continue to
be encouraged to take a longitudinal approach to increasing diversity in the geosciences.
Awardees should continually look for ways to link their projects with other efforts to leverage
resources and increase the number of opportunities for participants.
Distribution of Funds
GEO is able to commit a fairly limited amount funds to support projects related to geoscience
E&D. The working group feels that the goals and interests of the geoscience education
community are still maturing and undergoing rapid change. At the time the first Geoscience
Education Working Group was convened in 1996, a true community of geoscience education
professionals did not exist. One of the greatest achievements of GEO during the last decade has
been to nurture and help the geoscience education community develop its own identity. During
the next decade, the geoscience education community will be best served if NSF continues to
allow for maximum flexibility in its funding portfolio. The working group recommends that
GEO create and maintain a balanced portfolio of projects that fall into one of two categories:
• Experimental, innovative projects that may lead to creation of new exemplars
• Implementation projects that will put proven approaches into practice in new
settings.
Overall funding for each of the two categories should be approximately equal. Projects in both
categories should address one or more of the recognized weaknesses in current geoscience
education: lack of emphasis on quantitative skills, lack of information about careers and lack of
appreciation of the relevance of geoscience in modern society. Funding high-risk projects should
be emphasized under the GeoEd Program. A mixture of high-risk and proven approaches should
be supported by the GLOBE and OEDG Programs. Projects supported by GEO should be
designed so that the GEO support can be used to leverage future funding from other sources, or
promote full integration of the award activity into the normal course of business at the awardees’
sites.
Durations of projects are controlled primarily by their objectives, which vary widely from project
to project. Therefore, we do not recommend any specific duration of funding for a given
program, except that it should be longer than the single year normally needed for organization
and startup. The working group feels that a mix of long-term vs. short-term funding is
appropriate for GEO. The working group strongly recommends that site visits be conducted by
GEO for any long-term project (e.g., any GeoEd projects that are being considered for renewals,
all Track 2 OEDG projects and all four-year GLOBE projects). The working group encourages
the site visitors to evaluate projects on their individual merit as well as their contribution toward
overall GEO objectives.
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
22
Modern scholarship in geoscience education encompasses both research (e.g., cognitive science,
content development, evaluation) and delivery (e.g., course and curriculum design, technology,
pedagogy). The working group recommends that GEO promote the integration of scholarly
educational research in future projects. This goal should be addressed in conjunction with
continuing efforts to integrate basic geoscience research into education venues.
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
23
SECTION 5. MEMBERS OF THE SECOND GEOSCIENCE EDUCATION
WORKING GROUP
Claudia J. Alexander, Project Manager and Research Scientist, Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
Ph.D. in Space Plasma Physics from University of Michigan; M.S. in Geophysics and
Space Physics from University of California, Los Angeles; B.A. in Geophysics from University
of California, Berkeley.
Michelle K. Hall, President, Science Education Solutions; Executive Director, Digital Library for
Earth System Education. Ph.D. in Geosciences from University of Arizona; M.S. in Geosciences
from University of Arizona; B.S. in Geological Engineering from South Dakota School of Mines
and Technology.
Michael W. Howell, Associate Professor, College of Marine Science, University of South
Florida. Ph.D. in Marine Science from University of South Carolina; M.S. in Oceanic Science
from University of Michigan; B.S. in Aquatic Science from Cornell University.
Caesar R. Jackson, Interim Dean, College of Arts and Sciences, North Carolina A & T.
Ph.D. in Physics from North Carolina State, M.S. in Electrical Engineering from University of
Florida; B.S. in Electrical Engineering from Florida A & M University.
Margaret Kelly, Associate Dean, California State University, San Marcos. ED.D. in Math
Education from (joint degree) University of California, Los Angeles and University of Utah;
M.S. in Math and Reading Education from San Diego State University; B.S. in Math and Social
Sciences from San Diego State University.
Michael G. Loudin, Manager, Global Geoscience Recruiting and New Hire Development,
ExxonMobil Exploration Company. M.S. in Geophysics from Penn State University; B.S. in
Geology from University of Cincinnati.
Cathryn A. Manduca, Director, Science Education Resource Center, Carleton College.
Ph.D. in Geology from California Institute of Technology; M.S. in Geology from
California Institute of Technology; B.A. in Geology from Williams College.
George I. Matsumoto, Senior Education and Research Specialist, Monterey Bay Aquarium
Research Institute. Ph.D. in Biology from University of California, Los Angeles; B.A. in Marine
Biology from University of California Berkeley.
Cheryl Peach, Co-Director, Scripps Center for Educational Outreach Connections, Scripps
Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego. Ph.D. in Geology from
Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University; M.S. in Oceanography from
University of Washington; B.A. in Environmental Sciences from University of Virginia.
Member of the NSF Directorate for Geosciences Advisory Committee.
Geoscience Education and Diversity: Vision for the Future and Strategies for Success
24
Robert W. Ridky, National Education Coordinator, USGS. Ph.D. in Geology/Science Education
from Syracuse University; M.S. in Geology/Science Education from Syracuse University; B.S. in
Biological Science/Science Education from State University of New York.
Steven C. Semken, Assistant Professor, Department of Geological Sciences, Arizona State
University. Ph.D. in Ceramics from Massachusetts Institute of Technology; M.S. in
Geochemistry from University of California, Los Angeles; B.S. in Earth and Planetary Sciences
from Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Lisa D. White, Chair, Department of Geosciences, San Francisco State University. Ph.D. in Earth
Sciences from University of California, Santa Cruz; B.A. in Geology from San Francisco State
University.
Vivian A. Williamson, CEO Educational Consultation. ED.D in Administration and Supervision
from University of Houston; M.A. in African American Studies/Modern European Studies from
Southern Methodist University; B.S. in General Studies Human Development from University of
Texas, Dallas.
