GC Insights: Diversifying the geosciences in higher education: a manifesto for change

Hall, Caitlyn; Illingworth, Sam; Mohadjer, Solmaz; Roxy, Mathew Koll; Poku, Craig; Otu‐Larbi, Frederick; Reano, Darryl; Freilich, Mara; Veisaga, Maria‐Luisa; Valencia, Miguel; Morales, Joey

doi:10.5194/gc-5-275-2022

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, learnings from the Arctic, be they technological, pedagogical or both, can also be adapted at more temperate latitudes to improve accessibility (Whitmeyer et al, 2020;Atchison and Libarkin, 2013). We are also strong proponents that active and targeted digital geoscience tool usage in both education and outreach can significantly improve the diversity challenge faced by the geosciences (Hall et al, 2022).…”

Section: Transforming Geoscience Education Through Hands-on Digital T...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Arctic Tectonics and Volcanism: a multi-scale, multidisciplinary educational approach

Senger,

Shephard,

Ammerlaan

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Geologically, the Arctic is one of the least explored regions of Earth. Its significance, in terms of indigenous populations, resource extraction, tourism, shipping and a rapidly changing climate, is increasing. The Arctic offers geological diversity encompassing onshore and offshore environments, include active subduction zones in Alaska, deep sedimentary basins on the Siberian and Barents Sea shelves, widespread ancient Arctic volcanism and magmatism, the world’s slowest spreading mid-ocean ridge (Gakkel Ridge in the Eurasia Basin), as well as world-class examples of extensional and compressional basins exposed onshore Svalbard. Obtaining data is logistically, economically and environmentally expensive in the high Arctic, but the township of Longyearbyen at 78° N represents a relatively easily accessible gateway to Arctic geology. The year-round settlement on Spitsbergen, the main island of the Svalbard archipelago is home to The University Centre in Svalbard (UNIS). Reached by a year-round airport with regular connections to mainland Norway, Svalbard provides a foundation from which to teach and explore Arctic geology via the classroom, the laboratory, and the field. In this contribution, we present a new graduate course (Masters and PhD level) on Arctic Tectonics and Volcanism that we have established and taught annually at UNIS since 2018. We outline the course itself, before presenting student perspectives based on both an anonymous questionnaire (n = 27) and in-depth perceptions of four selected students. The course, with an intake of up to 20 MSc and PhD international students, is held over a 6-week period, typically in Spring or Autumn. The course comprises modules on field and polar safety, Svalbard/Barents Sea geology, wider Arctic geology, plate tectonics, mantle dynamics, geo- and thermochronology, and geochemistry of igneous systems. All modules include individual and group-based exercises in addition to introductory lectures. A field component, which in some years included an overnight expedition, provides an opportunity to appreciate Arctic geology and gather own field observations and data. Digital outcrop models and photospheres viewed with state-of-the-art visualization in the classroom facilitate efficient fieldwork through pre-fieldwork preparation and post-field work quantitative analyses. The course assessment is centered on an individual research project that is presented orally and in a short and impactful Geology journal-style article. Apart from the course at UNIS we have jointly initiated several one-off research and education-based events at partner institutions, and briefly outline these.

show abstract

Section: Transforming Geoscience Education Through Hands-on Digital T...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Arctic Tectonics and Volcanism: a multi-scale, multidisciplinary educational approach

Senger,

Shephard,

Ammerlaan

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is important to take stock and leverage what is being learned from climate services (Boon et al, 2022). While climate services are largely English-dominated, it may be important to ensure that regional climate communication is also delivered in regional languages to break through the language barriers and to make sure that climate services and engagement happen at a grassroot level (Hall et al, 2022).…”

Section: Improved Regional Climate Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regional climate change: consensus, discrepancies, and ways forward

Shaw,

Arias,

Collins

et al. 2024

Front. Clim.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change has emerged across many regions. Some observed regional climate changes, such as amplified Arctic warming and land-sea warming contrasts have been predicted by climate models. However, many other observed regional changes, such as changes in tropical sea surface temperature and monsoon rainfall are not well simulated by climate model ensembles even when taking into account natural internal variability and structural uncertainties in the response of models to anthropogenic radiative forcing. This suggests climate model predictions may not fully reflect what our future will look like. The discrepancies between models and observations are not well understood due to several real and apparent puzzles and limitations such as the “signal-to-noise paradox” and real-world record-shattering extremes falling outside of the possible range predicted by models. Addressing these discrepancies, puzzles and limitations is essential, because understanding and reliably predicting regional climate change is necessary in order to communicate effectively about the underlying drivers of change, provide reliable information to stakeholders, enable societies to adapt, and increase resilience and reduce vulnerability. The challenges of achieving this are greater in the Global South, especially because of the lack of observational data over long time periods and a lack of scientific focus on Global South climate change. To address discrepancies between observations and models, it is important to prioritize resources for understanding regional climate predictions and analyzing where and why models and observations disagree via testing hypotheses of drivers of biases using observations and models. Gaps in understanding can be discovered and filled by exploiting new tools, such as artificial intelligence/machine learning, high-resolution models, new modeling experiments in the model hierarchy, better quantification of forcing, and new observations. Conscious efforts are needed toward creating opportunities that allow regional experts, particularly those from the Global South, to take the lead in regional climate research. This includes co-learning in technical aspects of analyzing simulations and in the physics and dynamics of regional climate change. Finally, improved methods of regional climate communication are needed, which account for the underlying uncertainties, in order to provide reliable and actionable information to stakeholders and the media.

show abstract