Introductory Oceanography in the Earth and Environmental Science Department at the University of Pennsylvania has moved from a traditional lecture-based course to a Structured Active In-class Learning (SAIL) model, where students individually acquire the basics of the material before class, and in-class activities are designed to help students reach the higher order learning objectives through collaborative exercises. In implementing tools such as online modules, data-driven, quantitative in-class activities, pre- and post-lecture exercises, reflective writing assignments, and peer review, we aim to increase the science literacy of the student population, enhance their critical thinking skills, and correct common scientific misconceptions. This course is the product of three years of refinement via an annual SAIL university seminar with other faculty, the National Association of Geoscience Teachers Introductory Course Workshop at the 2014 American Geophysical Union conference, and surveys conducted by the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL). While implementing active learning techniques with college students is not without complications, in this case study we explore how a SAIL course that utilizes technology to flexibly and creatively account for class size and STEM experience can foster an inquisitive classroom dynamic and knowledge acquisition, particularly as it relates to science literacy and increased interest in earth and environmental science. Results from pre- and post-instruction surveys, course reviews and student performance indices illustrate this objective. In addition to a summary of our assessment, readers will see examples of student exercises focused on ocean renewable energy and seafloor spreading that help students to understand fundamental concepts of plate tectonics, ocean tides and waves. Readers will also gain insight into the design and implementation of innovative teaching tools in introductory earth and environmental science courses.

Atmospheric Science Literacy Framework. (2007). Atmospheric science literacy—Essential principles and fundamental concepts of atmospheric science. Retrieved on 10 December 2015 from http://eo.ucar.edu/asl/pdfs/ASLbrochureFINAL.pdf 

Bergendahl, C., & Tibell, L. (2005). Boosting complex learning by strategic assessment and course design. J. Chem.Educ, 82, 645. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed082p645

Bransford. J. D., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (1999). How people learn: Mind, brain, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Research Council.

Climate Literacy. (2009). U.S. Climate Change Science Program: Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). Retrieved from http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/literacy/climate_literacy.pdf

De Winter, J. C., & Dodou, D. 2010. Five-point Likert items: t test versus Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 15, 1-12.

Deslauriers, L., Schelew, E., et al. (2011). Improved learning in a large-enrollment physics class. Science, 332, 862-864. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1201783

Ebert-May, D., Brewer, C., et al. (1997). Innovation in large lectures: Teaching for active learning. Bioscience, 47, 601-607. https://doi.org/10.2307/1313166

Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., et al. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111, 8410-8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111

Gormally, C., Brickman, P., & Lutz, M. (2012). Developing a Test of Scientific Literacy Skills (TOSLS): measuring undergraduates’ evaluation of scientific information and arguments. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 11, 364-377. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-03-0026

Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American journal of Physics, 66, 64-74. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809

Hake, R. R. (2007). Six lessons from the physics education reform effort. Latin american journal of physics education, 1, 24-31.

Heller, P., & Hollabaugh, M. (1992). Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 2: Designing problems and structuring groups. American Journal of Physics, 60, 637-644. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.17117

Heller, P., Keith, R., & Anderson, S. (1992). Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 1: Group versus individual problem solving. American journal of physics, 60, 627-636. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.17118

Hoskinson, A., Caballero, M. D., et al. (2013). How can we improve problem solving in undergraduate biology? Applying lessons from 30 years of physics education research. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 12, 153-161. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-09-0149

Jin, G., & Bierma, T. (2013). STEM for non-STEM Majors: Enhancing Science Literacy in Large Classes. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42, 20-26. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/jcst13_042_06_20

Johnson, D. W. (1991). Cooperative Learning: Increasing College Faculty Instructional Productivity. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 4, 1991. ERIC.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1998). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. ERIC.

Kitchen, E., Bell, J. D., et al. (2003). Teaching cell biology in the large-enrollment classroom: methods to promote analytical thinking and assessment of their effectiveness. Cell Biology Education, 2, 180-194. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.02-11-0055

Kober, N. (2015). Reaching students: What research says about effective instruction in undergraduate science and engineering. ERIC.

Leech, M. L., Howell, D. G., et al. (2004). A guided inquiry approach to learning the geology of the US. Journal of Geoscience Education, 52, 368-373. https://doi.org/10.5408/1089-9995-52.4.368

Loucks-Horsley, S. and Olson, S., 2000. Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning.

Marburger, D. R. 2001. Absenteeism and undergraduate exam performance. The Journal of Economic Education, 32, 99-109. https://doi.org/10.2307/1183486

Marques, L. & Thompson, D. 1997. Misconceptions and conceptual changes concerning Continental Drift and Plate Tectonics among Portuguese students aged 16‐17. Research in Science & Technological Education, 15, 195-222. https://doi.org/10.1080/0263514970150206

McConnell, D. A., Steer, D. N., et al. 2003. Assessment and active learning strategies for introductory geology courses. Journal of Geoscience Education, 51, 205-216. https://doi.org/10.5408/1089-9995-51.2.205

McKeachie, W. J., Lin, Y., et al. 2002. Creationist vs. evolutionary beliefs: Effects on learning biology. The American Biology Teacher, 64, 189-192. https://doi.org/10.2307/4451275

McKenney, R. & Webster, J. 2004. Magnetism, the Earth as a Magnet, and Seafloor Banding—How Much Magnetism is Enough? Journal of Geoscience Education, 52, 352-362. https://doi.org/10.5408/1089-9995-52.4.352

Miller, J. D. (1983). Scientific literacy: A conceptual and empirical review. Daedalus, 29-48.

Moore, R. (2003). Attendance and performance. Journal of College Science Teaching, 32, 367.

National Research Council. (1999). Transforming undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. National Academies Press.

Norman, G. (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Advances in health sciences education, 15, 625-632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y

Ocean Literacy Network. (2013). Ocean Literacy: The essential principles of ocean sciences for learners of all ages. Silver Springs, MD: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Riffell, S., & Sibley, D. (2005). Using web-based instruction to improve large undergraduate biology courses: An evaluation of a hybrid course format. Computers & Education, 44, 217-235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.01.005

Romer, D. (1993). Do students go to class? Should they? The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7, 167-174. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.7.3.167

Rutherford, F. J., & Ahlgren, A. (1991). Science for all Americans. Oxford university press.

Sandi-Urena, S., Cooper, M. M., et al. (2011). Students’ experience in a general chemistry cooperative problem based laboratory. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12, 434-442. https://doi.org/10.1039/C1RP90047A

Thurman, H. V., Trujillo, A. P., et al. (1999). Essentials of oceanography. Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Tlhoaele, M., Hofman, A., et al. (2014). Using clickers to facilitate interactive engagement activities in a lecture room for improved performance by students. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 51, 497-509. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.796725

U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Literacy: Essential Principles and Fundamental Concepts for Energy Education, energy.gov, Version 5.0: March 2017.

Wieman, C. E., Rieger, G. W., & Heiner, C. E. (2014). Physics exams that promote collaborative learning. The Physics Teacher, 52, 51-53. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4849159

Wysession, M. E., LaDue, N., et al. (2012). Developing and applying a set of earth science literacy principles. Journal of Geoscience Education, 60, 95-99. https://doi.org/10.5408/11-248.1