Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interdisciplinary Development of Geoscience OER: Formative Evaluation and Project Management for Instructional Design

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Intersections Across Disciplines

Abstract

This chapter reports part of a multistage design-based research (DBR) project and focuses on the question: What are effective procedures for an interdisciplinary team to create low-cost, meaningful, and accessible open-access textbooks for laboratory methods in geosciences? Between August 2016 and May 2019, the researchers from multiple disciplinary areas studied the design and development of open educational resources (OER) for analytical methods in geoscience courses. The initial iteration of this DBR study consisted of analysis and exploration, followed by the OER design and development with formative evaluation. The analysis and exploration included identifying instructional and noninstructional problems based on a literature review, an analysis of context and resources, and formation of an interdisciplinary team. The formative evaluation included testing the developed OER usability by both faculty and students, reflecting on the design and development, and collecting peer review feedback. The findings provided recommendations for interdisciplinary team-based design and development of OER in a scientific laboratory environment. Suggestions included collaborative project management and data management for developing media-rich OER in STEM education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abdulwahed, M., & Nagy, Z. K. (2009). Applying Kolb’s experiential learning cycle for laboratory education. Journal of Engineering Education, 98(3), 283–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, A., Liyanagunawardena, T., Rassool, N., & Williams, S. (2013). Use of open educational resources in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(5), 149–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2014). Opening the curriculum: Open educational resources in US higher education, 2014. Babson Survey Research Group, Babson Park, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apedoe, X. S., & Reeves, T. C. (2006). Inquiry-based learning and digital libraries in undergraduate science education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(5–6), 321–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benson, L., Elliott, D., Grant, M., Holschuh, D., Kim, B., Kim, H., et al. (2002). Usability and instructional design heuristics for e-learning evaluation. In Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE) Proceedings of 14th ED-MEDIA World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications, pp. 1615–1621, Denver, CO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braund, M., & Reiss, M. (2006). Towards a more authentic science curriculum: The contribution of out-of-school learning. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1373–1388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bulte, A. M., Westbroek, H. B., de Jong, O., & Pilot, A. (2006). A research approach to designing chemistry education using authentic practices as contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 1063–1086.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. C., Mayer, R. E., & Thalheimer, W. (2003). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. Performance Improvement, 42(5), 41–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clements, K., Pawlowski, J., & Manouselis, N. (2015). Open educational resources repositories literature review–towards a comprehensive quality approaches framework. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 1098–1106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crowther, M. S., Keller, C. C., & Waddoups, G. L. (2004). Improving the quality and effectiveness of computer-mediated instruction through usability evaluations. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(3), 289–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • England, E., & Finney, A. (2002). Managing multimedia: Project management for web and convergent media (2nd ed.). Essex, UK: Pearson Education Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faulconer, E. K., & Gruss, A. B. (2018). A review to weigh the pros and cons of online, remote, and distance science laboratory experiences. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 19(2) https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v19i2.3386

  • Guest, G., MacQueen, K. M., & Namey, E. E. (2011). Applied thematic analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, D. (2011). Analytical chemistry 2.0—An open-access digital textbook. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry, 399(1), 149–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Healey, M., & Jenkins, A. (2000). Kolb’s experiential learning theory and its application in geography in higher education. Journal of Geography, 99(5), 185–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hewlett Foundation. (2019). OED defined. Retrieved from https://hewlett.org/strategy/open-educational-resources/

  • Hilton III, J., Wiley, D., Stein, J., & Johnson, A. (2010). The four ‘R’s of openness and ALMS analysis: Frameworks for open educational resources. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 25(1), 37–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoegl, M., & Proserpio, L. (2004). Team member proximity and teamwork in innovative projects. Research Policy, 33(8), 1153–1165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (1982). The role of the laboratory in science teaching: Neglected aspects of research. Review of Educational Research, 52(2), 201–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, E., Liu, J. C., Mao, J., & Kansal, R. (2018, November). Developing a protocol for filming, editing, and captioning videos in the laboratory. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, 50(6) https://doi.org/10.1130/abs/2018AM-315964

  • Kennelly, P. J. (2009). An online social networking approach to reinforce learning of rocks and minerals. Journal of Geoscience Education, 57(1), 33–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolb, D. A., Boyatzis, R. E., & Mainemelis, C. (2001). Experiential learning theory: Previous research and new directions. Perspectives on Thinking, Learning, and Cognitive Styles, 1(8), 227–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koretsky, C. M., Petcovic, H. L., & Rowbotham, K. L. (2012). Teaching environmental geochemistry: An authentic inquiry approach. Journal of Geoscience Education, 60(4), 311–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lane, A., & McAndrew, P. (2010). Are open educational resources systematic or systemic change agents for teaching practice? British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(6), 952–962.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, J. C. & Johnson, E. (2018, December). Analytical Methods in Geosciences (AMiGEO): Open educational resource modules for laboratory instruction. Workshop presented at American Geophysical Union (AGU) Annual Meeting, Washing DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, J. C., St. John, K., & Courtier, A. M. B. (2017). Development and validation of an assessment instrument for course experience in a general education integrated science course. Journal of Geoscience Education, 65(4), 435–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E., Bove, W., Bryman, A., Mars, R., & Tapangco, L. (1996). When less is more: Meaningful learning from visual and verbal summaries of science textbook lessons. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(1), 64–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, K., & Liu, M. (1996). A study of project management techniques for developing interactive multimedia programs: A practitioner’s perspective. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 29(1), 29–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. C. (2019). Conducting educational design research. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, S. (2017). Open educational resources: removing barriers from within. Distance education, 38(3), 369–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, K. G., Huysken, K., & Kilibarda, Z. (2010). Assessing the impact of geoscience laboratories on student learning: Who benefits from introductory labs? Journal of Geoscience Education, 58(1), 43–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nieveen, N., & Folmer, E. (2013). Formative evaluation in educational design research. Design Research, 153, 152–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, R., Reeves, T. C., & Herrington, J. A. (2005). Design research: A socially responsible approach to instructional technology research in higher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 16(2), 96–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popham, W. J. (2013). On serving two masters: Formative and summative teacher evaluation. Principal Leadership, 13(7), 18–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, T. C. (2000). Socially responsible educational technology research. Educational Technology, 40(6), 19–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, T. J., Fischer, L., Wiley, D., & Hilton III, J. (2014). The impact of open textbooks on secondary science learning outcomes. Educational Researcher, 43(7), 341–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt-McCormack, J. A., Muniz, M. N., Keuter, E. C., Shaw, S. K., & Cole, R. S. (2017). Design and implementation of instructional videos for upper-division undergraduate laboratory courses. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(4), 749–762.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scriven, M. (1996). Types of evaluation and types of evaluator. Evaluation Practice, 17(2), 151–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shoulders, C. W., & Myers, B. E. (2013). Teachers’ use of experiential learning stages in agricultural laboratories. Journal of Agricultural Education, 54(3), 100–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spector, J. M. (2002). Knowledge management tools for instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(4), 37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stearns, L. M., Morgan, J., Capraro, M., & Capraro, R. M. (2012). A teacher observation instrument for PBL classroom instruction. Journal Of STEM Education: Innovations & Research, 13(3), 7–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tessmer, M. (2013). Planning and conducting formative evaluations. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tuomi, I. (2013). Open educational resources and the transformation of education. European Journal of Education, 48(1), 58–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2012). 2012 Paris OER declaration. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/fileadmin/ MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CI/CI/pdf/Events/Paris%20OER%20Declaration_01.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • van Rooij, S. W. (2010). Project management in instructional design: ADDIE is not enough. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(5), 852–864.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Rooij, S. W. (2011). Instructional design and project management: Complementary or divergent? Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(1), 139–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, D. (2018). The evolving economics of educational materials and open educational resources: Toward closer alignment with the core values of education. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (4th ed., pp. 316–322). New York: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, D., Bliss, T. J., & McEwen, M. (2014). Open educational resources: A review of the literature. In Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 781–789). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, A. E., Pollock, J. L., Billick, I., Domingo, C., Fernandez-Figueroa, E. G., Nagy, E. S., et al. (2018). Assessing science training programs: Structured undergraduate research programs make a difference. Bioscience, 68(7), 529–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, C. S., Moore, D. M., & Burton, J. K. (1995). Managing courseware production: An instructional design model with a software engineering approach. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(4), 60–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaharias, P., & Poylymenakou, A. (2009). Developing a usability evaluation method for e-learning applications: Beyond functional usability. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 25(1), 75–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerer, C., Thiele, S., Salzer, R., Krauseneck, A., & Körndle, H. (2003). Internet teaching: Laboratory course in analytical chemistry. Microchimica Acta, 142(3), 153–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This research is part of a multi-year project funded by National Science Foundation (NSF), NSF#1611798. The project has also received technology support from the Libraries of James Madison University and data contribution from Dr. Erik Haroldson’s geosciences class in

Austin Peay State University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, USA

    Juhong Christie Liu & Elizabeth A. Johnson

  2. Wilkes University, Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA

    Jin Mao

Authors
  1. Juhong Christie Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elizabeth A. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jin Mao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juhong Christie Liu .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. College of Design, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN, USA

    Brad Hokanson

  2. Learning Design and Technology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA

    Marisa Exter

  3. Graduate Programs Office, Kent State University, Kent, OH, USA

    Amy Grincewicz

  4. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA

    Matthew Schmidt

  5. Instruction Curriculum Leadership, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, USA

    Andrew A. Tawfik

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Liu, J.C., Johnson, E.A., Mao, J. (2021). Interdisciplinary Development of Geoscience OER: Formative Evaluation and Project Management for Instructional Design. In: Hokanson, B., Exter, M., Grincewicz, A., Schmidt, M., Tawfik, A.A. (eds) Intersections Across Disciplines. Educational Communications and Technology: Issues and Innovations. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53875-0_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53875-0_17

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-53874-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-53875-0

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation