Statement on Teaching and Seminar
I have designed (and redesigned!) nine courses and short term units, all with labs in my seven years at Bates College. Those course range from first year seminars to upper level geology courses. I teach courses offered in the Geology Department and cross-listed with the Environmental Studies Program.

But it's not about teaching anymore; learning is the real issue. I have listened to excellent lectures that were well thought-out, logically constructed, intriguing and adventuresome; and about which I remembered very little the next day. I learned very little even though I thought I was learning a lot during the lecture. My own learning style requires my direct interaction with the material. Students also learn in multiple and different ways. It is a part of my task to determine how I can best cause each student to know that which I think important in my courses rather than to pour facts into them.

Our world will change in ways that I can't begin to imagine, the most important things I do for my students is to connect their classroom learning with the world and to ensure that they learn to examine issues with a hydrogeologic component methodically.

Science literacy or scientific literacy?
Over that last several years the National Science Foundation and various policy groups have called for significant redesign of undergraduate education of potential scientists (see for example Boyer, 1990; NSF, 1995, 1999; George et al., 1996; and Moore et al., 1997). In addition, the science focused reports (NSF, 1995, 1999; George et al., 1996; and Moore et al., 1997) note a significant need to encourage a scientifically literate citizenry. Each of the four reports calls for a change from a teaching paradigm to a learning paradigm (i.e. from a faculty centered to a student-centered system) where inquiry-based learning replaces much of the lecture regurgitation of the older pedagogical methods. The most recent NSF document notes the need to "develop the capacity for excellence in all segments of society, whether or not they have been part of the scientific and engineering tradition." I find it very interesting that these calls for reform echo those of feminist scientists seeking more minority and female participation in the sciences (Davis and Humphreys, 1985; and Rosser, 1986 for example) who have encouraged an inquiry based learning paradigm since Vetter (1980) documented differences in the fractions of men and women seeking careers in scientific fields.

In my mind, introductory classes should work to help educate scientifically literate persons while classes for majors add the task of science literacy education. Maienschien et al. (1998) contrasted the terms scientific literacy and science literacy very well in an editorial in Science. They define scientific literacy as emphasizing "scientific ways of knowing and the process of thinking critically and creatively about the natural world." Science literacy, on the other hand, "emphasizes practical results and stresses short term instrumental good, notably training immediately productive members of society with specific facts and skills." The editorial further notes that not everyone needs science literacy but that effective citizen participation in present-day society and informed decision making requires scientific literacy.

I agree with Maienschien that there is a difference between scientific literacy and science literacy. Scientists need to be both. Non-scientists need to be scientifically literate, particularly if you also consider Conant's (1952) definition of scientifically literate, which included the ability "to communicate intelligently with men (sic) who were advancing science and applying it." This includes understanding the limits of one's own knowledge and being able to find an expert when necessary.

There is a corollary to this. If we ask that citizens be scientifically literate, then scientists must interact with the citizenry. This applies to me, it does not necessarily apply to all geologists or all scientists but as a hydrogeologist, I deal with water supply and quality issues. I have a responsibility to be responsive to the needs of my communities if my expertise is requested. For this reason, I have Incorporated service learning projects into several of my courses and into my research.

Courses
Although I prefer a particular pedagogical style (combining some traditional lecturing with other engaging learning activities), obviously the societal implications, course goals, and objectives change depending on the level at which the course is offered. As we examine a sequence of three of the courses I teach, I think you'll see what I mean.

Geo 106: The Hydrosphere
The Hydrosphere is fundamentally a detailed analysis of the water cycle and the interaction of water with rocks, sediments, and minerals. This is my first (sometimes only) opportunity to help students understand the significance of water-related issues in their lives. I focus on three questions in addition to the course content: How should a problem like "this" be analyzed? Are there any assumptions inherent in the analysis? Where can we find reliable information on the topic? In this course I worry as much about scientific literacy as it pertains to water related issues as I do about content. Not only what is the 100-year flood but, also, where can you find the 100 flood maps to help you select a location for a home not in the flood plain. In addition, during one of the labs students calculated the magnitude of the 100-year flood in a watershed of their choice. This involves them in the science on a personal level.

Furthermore, this offers an unparalleled opportunity to show students how ingrained assumptions no longer seem like assumptions. One student emailed an unsolicited comment more than a year after she graduated:

"I enjoyed your class, even though I battled trying to turn my non-scientific brain to considerations of hydrology! I thought that you brought a wide perspective to your subject and taught it in the context of the larger world in which we exist, which is very different from most professors, who seem too mired in their specialty. So a belated thanks!"

Geo 266: Groundwater Hydrology
This course begins the business of science literacy in the hydrogeology sequence. Although groundwater hydrology is taught at the senior or graduate level in most institutions (requiring at least two semesters of calculus as prerequisites), at Bates, I was required to teach it as a sophomore level course for Geology majors with no math requirement.

Not only do I cover the fundamental information for such a course (water budgets, hydrographs, flood frequency calculations, hydraulic head, Drake's Law, groundwater flow, and some water contamination issues), the students begin to use the equipment and techniques used by professional hydrogeologists (water level recorders, geochemical testing equipment, Global Positioning Systems, Geographical Information Systems, permeameters, map analysis, systems analysis based on conservation of mass, and numerical ground water models).

A significant component of this course is the laboratory project. Over the last few years, I have included a semester long service learning project as the lab portion of the course. In 1997, Geo 266 students studied the Garcelon Bog in Lewiston along with Envr 302: Wetland Science and Policy taught by Curtis Bohlen. Our classes evaluated the impact of a road through the wetland, analyzing the water table, geochernistry and other aspects of the work. At the end of the semester, both classes presented their work in a public meeting at City Hall (see Ongley et al., 1999). In Fall, 1998 with twenty-one students, the class took on two projects: an evaluation of the hydrogeology of Androscoggin Lake at the request of the Androscoggin Lake Homeowners Association and of several ponds in Turner at the request of the Turner Conservation Commission. We found acceptably high arsenic concentrations in water from one well. At my request, the homeowner verified the result at a state-certified lab and then, chose to install a point of use remediation system. We presented our results at a public meeting and have been asked to return and perform more tests in 1999.

Heather Piper, now a consultant, (a Colby College '98 grad who came to Lewiston three times each week during Fall'97 to take Geo 266) recently emailed me and said:

" I thought of you yesterday as I was putting together a constant head permeameter. We were sent a really old setup so that we can possibly start doing sand perms right from our office instead of having them sent to Bangor. No one in the Caribou office knew what to do with the setup though so I brought in Fetter and my lab report and did some assembling. We will have to test for leaks and then see if results are accurate, but regardless I was pretty excited I could do that on my own. And thankful I attended your lab that day!"

Geo 362: Contaminant Fate and Transport on Geologic Systems
Students in Geo 362 are usually senior geology majors (although I have had physics and biology majors as well). I expect students here to integrate all their prior coursework in order to consider issues of ground water contamination. In this course students learn some of the fundamental terminology of organic chemistry, research the use and physio-chemical properties of a contaminating chemical of their choice, engage in comprehensive discussions of professional papers and select and lead the discussion of a paper of their choice. This course could easily become a graduate level offering.

The lab portion of this class is devoted to a semester-long project. Here I expect the students to design at least portions of the investigation we will undertake. In 1997 (the last time I taught this), we set out to determine if it were possible for leachate from the Gracelawn landfill to contaminate Lake Auburn. This was a service learning project undertaken at the request of the Lake Auburn Watershed Commission. The students examined existing reports, designed and built seepage meters to install in the lake, decided which geochemical parameters to measure, installed the meters, sampled various wells (with the assistance of the consultant in charge of the monitoring wells), analyzed the water, wrote a joint report and presented the report to the Lake Auburn Watershed Commission.

One student who took the course a few years ago told me:

I have been "…in contact with Weston, Inc., an environmental rehab company that works in Penn. N.J., and West Va. A job with Weston would have something to do with SuperFund site evaluations. It sounds really exciting. And you can remember how excited I was to visit the Winthrop Landfill … the majority of the jobs listed in the paper and with the USGS are related to some aspect of what we covered in class. A perfect example of this is the SuperFund job. But there are also several technical and research/problem solving jobs listed … And I tell you their descriptions are like repetitions of class goals and tasks … you did a great job of including enough of everything that I feel confident applying for these jobs."

Conclusion
The level of sophistication and required technical expertise to successfully complete my courses increases as students progress through the sequence of hydrogeology courses. From basic scientific literacy through a high degree of science literacy and technical expertise, I lead students in learning experiences from which they emerge as capable entry-level hydrogeologists; and/or citizen-scientists.

Literature Cited
Boyer, E. L. , Scholarship reconsidered – Priorities of the professoriate: Princeton, NJ, The Carnegie

Conant, J. B., 1952, General Education in Science Cambridge, MA, Harvard Univ. Press.
George et al., 1996, Shaping the Future - New expectations for undergraduate education in science,

Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 147 pp.

mathematics, engineering, and technology_: report to the National Science Foundation from the EHR Advisory Committee, NSF 96-139,76 pp.

Maienschein, Jane et al., 1998, Scientific literacy: Science, vol. 281, no. 5379, p. 917.

Moore et al., 1997, Science teaching reconsidered – a handbook: National Academy
of Sciences, Washington, DC, 88 pp.

NSF, 1995, NSF in a changing world – The National Science Foundation's Strategic Plan Washington, DC,

The National Science Foundation, 38 pp.

NSF, 1999, Environmental Science and Engineering for the 21' Century hiterim Report, NSB 99-1333, 80 PP.

Ongley, L.K., Bohlen, C., and A. Lathrop, 1999, Evolution of the consultant model of environmental service learning, Bates College, Lewiston, Maine, Harold Ward, (volume editor), Acting Locally,

Service Learning in Environmental Studies part of American Association of Higher Education's Series on Service Learning in the Disciplines.

Typical Schedule
This preliminary schedule may change as required by our progress. In addition, if there are topics you wish to particularly discuss in class, we may be able to do that.

The readings listed by chapter are from your book. The others are on reserve in the library and the reserve number is listed in parentheses after the author's last name.

Week 1 – Introduction
Reading – Syllabus, Chapter l.
Monday – Introduction to the course. Logistics. What is science?
Wednesday – Condonts and the Scientific Method, Systems Analysis and
Some Earth Systems
Friday – Dynamic Earth Systems
Just for Fun – The Mars Trilogy ( Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars) by
Kim Stanley Robinson, Bantam Books. Terraforming Mars and
creating a humanophile atmosphere. You may have to buy copies.

Week 2 – Earth Systems
Reading – Chapter 2, LaRiviere (7612), Spiedel and Agnew (7659) Monday – MLK Day. Homework I Wednesday – Water Cycle and Budgets, Global and Watershed

Friday- Water budget discussion. Do the reserve reading before class. Read both articles. Prepare a paragraph summarizing one of them. Just for Fun – In the Path of the Killer Volcano video. Shows interaction of scientists and politicos. Awesome footage of volcano creating its own weather systems and consequent mud slides.

Week 3 – The Atmosphere
Reading – Chapter 9, Davis and Dolan (7764)
Monday – Energy Budget of the World, Mechanisms of Energy Transport
Wednesday – Climate and Weather Systems
Friday – Severe Storms
Just for Fun – Secrets of Ice, video, QC981.8.C5 S43 1991 (using ice cores
from the Arctic to determine global climate change)

Week 4 – Surface Water Systems
Reading – Chapter 7 (206 – 216), McPhee (7824), Cobb (7763)
Monday – Watersheds
Wednesday – Stream Flow and Hydrographs. Using Russian River Data
Friday – Floods and Flood plain Management.
Just for Fun – The River (video) F354.R584. A 1930 documentary on the
devastating Mississippi River floods prior to the Federal Emergency
Management Flood protection system. This won a Pulitzer Prize.

Week 5 – Surface Water Systems
Reading – Chapter 7 (216 – 229) Myers and White (7822) Monday – Impact of Urbanization Wednesday – Role Playing Exercise: County Commissioners Meeting, Harris County, Texas. Application of Jane Developer's Proposed Nature's Own Subdivision Friday – Drinking Water and Waste Water, Use and Treatment Just -for Fun – The 1993 Mississippi River Flood US Army Corps of Engineers video

Week 6 – Groundwater
Reading – Chapter 8 (not on exam) Monday – Midterm Exam Wednesday - Aquifers, Hydraulic Head Friday – Water Table, Groundwater flow Just for Fun – Jean de Florette. 1988 video (PQ263 LA26 J43 5) in French where water is of major importance in the plot. Based on Pagnol, M., 1963, L'eau des Collines PQ263 LA26 E2. English translation of the book, The Water of the Hills, PQ263 LA26 E213 1988.

Week 7 – Groundwater
Reading – Dolan and Goodell (7728) Monday – Aquifers and Problems, Water Quality Lab Preparation Wednesday – Aquifers and Problems 2 Friday – Water in Orange County, CA Just for fun – Marion des Sources. 1988 video in French (PQ263 LA26 M356) sequel of Jean de Florette.

Week 8 – Groundwater
Reading – Chapter 8 (pp 233 – 248 Monday – Aquifer Over-exploitation Wednesday – Water in the Mexico City Basin Friday – Aquifer Pollution Reading – Chapter 8 (248 – 257), Dolan and Goodell (1986)

Week 9 – Time Rocks
Reading – Chapters 3 and 4 (90-100, 111-119) Monday – Geological Scale, Time Wednesday -Sequencing Geologic Events Friday – Rocks

Week 10 – Mineral Resources and Weathering
Reading – Chapters 5 (122-138) and 6 (158-178)
Monday – Ores
Wednesday – Natural Processes and Water Pollution Friday – Arsenic Contamination around the World

Week 11 – Energy
Reading – Chapter 11 (3 26-3 3 8)
Monday – Fossil Fuels
Wednesday – Course Evaluation, Sustainable Energies
Friday – "Midterm" Exam

Week 12 – Where'd the water go?
Reading – Chapters 12 and 13, Gleick (7836), Postel (7872)
Monday – Past Changes
Wednesday – Future Hopes
Friday – Sum-up