How do students respond to the Global Change course?
Very favorably. The students we interviewed told us that this interdisciplinary course taught them not to analyze environmental phenomena in isolation, but rather as a set of interconnected parts of a whole.

Beth: If you really sit down and you look at how everything is connected to everything else, [you see] that there will be an effect. Sometimes it'll be positive, and sometimes things that we think are going to be the most negative might not turn out to be that negative at all. And everything just might end up working itself out just because of all the inter-relationships.

Amy: As a result of this course, you don't just hear something and assume that it's fact. You hear something and say, "Why would they say that? What does that mean? Where did they get that information?" And then, "What about the other side?"

The computer-enhanced features of the course received as favorable a review as the course overall. Students resoundingly affirmed that the course's computer-dependent activities fostered meaningful learning by allowing them to work with and manipulate data as opposed to just memorizing it.

Laura, Global Change alumna: I think that learning is enhanced by a student taking raw data and making a graph rather than just looking at the finished product. It'll mean less to them and they won't retain it. And I can tell you that because of my own experiences. I knew a lot more about the carbon cycle after constructing a model, playing with it, and manipulating it than I ever did by memorizing the relationships.
***

Ruth: If you're just in a science-based major and you don't like the way the results come out, well, "If I tweak this number a bit, it will come out to this number right here." Whereas if you're using something like a modeling program, you're saying, "Well, if I tweak that number, yeah, this will come out right, but it's still affecting how everything else is viewed as well." And if you're just using the pure common numbers, you're not going to see it.

Beth: I think [these activities] could have been done on paper. I just don't think it would have been as effective. When we did the STELLA models we actually put them together. Our GSI [graduate student instructor] would show us how, but we actually did it. We actually would connect things to what our GSI would ask us. If we would have done that on paper, it wouldn't have been us doing it. It would have been the professor.

Global Change students not only praised the course during our interviews, but also in their course evaluations. The results of these evaluations^a corroborate the Global Change faculty's notion that their course provides an environment in which students learn about global change in meaningful ways. For example, in their responses to the surveys, students report strong cognitive gains. In the Fall of 1999, over 90% agreed or strongly agreed^b that: a) they learned a good deal of factual material in the course, b) the knowledge they gained improved their ability to participate in debates about global change (Figure 1), and c) the course encouraged them to think critically about global change.

Figure 1. Responses to sample "cognitive gains" question
Global Change I, Fall 1999

The students also reported strong positive responses to the lab component of the course. Eighty percent of the respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that lab assignments were both carefully chosen and intellectually challenging. While only just over 50% of respondents indicated that laboratory assignments made an important contribution to their understanding of the topics discussed in lecture, over 60% agreed or strongly agreed that ArcView helped them understand Global Change concepts and principles (Figure 2). Over 90% agreed or strongly agreed that they felt confident in their ability to use ArcView to construct models. And over 80% agreed or strongly agreed that ArcView helped them understand the relationships among different variables.

Figure 2. Responses to sample laboratory question
Global Change I, Fall 1999

When asked about the personal growth experienced from Global Change, students once again responded favorably. Over 90% of the respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they had deepened their interest in the subject matter of the course (Figure 3). Over 80% agreed or strongly agreed that they were enthusiastic about the course material. Over 50% agreed or strongly agreed that they have had opportunities to help other students learn about global change issues. And over 80% said they felt empowered to act on what they learned.

Figure 3. Responses to sample "personal growth" question
Global Change I, Fall 1999

In short, students who take the Global Change course leave with a new way of thinking about, and acting on important environmental issues.

Wow!
How can I develop a course like that?
The Global Change faculty's story may sound simple, but the truth of the matter is that creating an interdisciplinary course like this entails a host of challenges. Through the following links, we offer you a more complete and comprehensive story of the U of M faculty's efforts to help students gain a new understanding about global change.

Note: For useful tips and information on how this case study is organized, please see the Reader's Guide.

This case features the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor's (Resource A: Institutional Context) interdisciplinary team-taught science course called "Introduction to Global Change I: Physical Processes (UC 110)^c To read a brief overview of the activities of the Global Change I course, see the introduction. This course is the part of the University of Michigan (U of M) "Global Change Program," which consists of three interdisciplinary, team-taught courses that examine the topic of global change from physical and human perspectives. All three Global Change courses are designed for first and second year students who want to understand the historical and modern aspects of Global Change. Global Change I, II, and III also comprise the three required courses in the University of Michigan's recently-approved 17-credit Global Change minor. The GC minor is open to all students except those minoring in Biology or the Residential College's Environmental Studies^d.

The Global Change I, II and III courses evolved through a grass-roots effort involving mostly senior faculty from five U of M schools and colleges (most notably the School of Natural Resources and Environment), some ten departments (most notably, the Department of Biology, Department of Atmospheric, Oceanic, and Space Sciences, and Department of Geological Sciences), the Space Physics Research Laboratory, and the national network of faculty known as the Earth Systems Science Education (ESSE) program funded by NASA.

A significant recent development for the Global Change Program is that it has recently been institutionalized. Originally, Global Change was designed without any departmental home in the University and, therefore, faced many obstacles to both funding and staffing. Because Global Change had no departmental home, its faculty had to cobble together a course budget each year, drawing heavily on external resources. Moreover, teaching in the courses for many faculty reflected an overload. However, when we last talked to Ben van der Pluijm, he told us that Global Change Program now receives "significant support from the University (line item in provost's budget for an initial 3 years)" and received a 100% match on external funding that the course obtained from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. The institutional support also includes some summer salary for long-term faculty recruitment and some teaching compensation.

Since the time we began researching this case study in the winter of 1999 (Resource A: Methods Used to Produce this Case Study), the three-course Global Change sequence was approved as the core of a minor at the U of M. Ben van der Pluijm, geology professor and director of the Global Change Program, calls the minor a "front-loaded" degree program, because it allows students to complete the requirements in the first few years of college. The program substitutes for a portion of the liberal arts requirements using an integrated natural and social sciences approach. As of Spring 2001, over 30 students were enrolled in the Global Change minor.

Dramatis Personae
The Global Change faculty seek to provide a team-taught course that "seamlessly integrates material." To this end, they maintain a high level of interaction with each other, attending weekly meetings with the GSIs, bi-weekly team meetings, and each other's lectures, and participating in summer workshops, among other things. They all have agreed to conform to a single format for presenting material, produce extensive web notes, and design hands-on experiences for the students.

In January 1999, when we studied their efforts, these instructors included:

Ben van der Pluijm, geology professor, College of Literature, Science and the Arts. Ben has been at U of M since 1985, where his research focuses on the deformation of minerals and rocks. His group uses state-of-the-art laboratory facilities to study the deformation of regions around the world. Whereas some projects are of immediate societal relevance, he is a strong proponent of curiosity-driven research. His professional efforts involve significant editorial duties, whereas his educational interests focus on science education to undergraduates.








Tim Killeen, professor of Atmospheric, Oceanic and Space Sciences, College of Literature, Science and the Arts. Dr. Killeen is the director of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colorado and Senior Scientist at NCAR's High Altitude Observatory. Prior to taking on this responsibility in July 2000, Dr. Killeen was a faculty member in the College of Engineering at the University of Michigan (UM), Ann Arbor, where he taught many undergraduate and graduate classes. He also served as UM's Associate Vice-President for Research, with responsibilities for integrating undergraduate research and education across the spectrum of disciplines. Dr. Killeen was the course director for the UM Global Change sequence from 1993 until his departure from the university.


Dave Allan, professor, School of Natural Resources and Environment. Dr. Allan received his B. Sc. (1966) from the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada, and his Ph.D. (1971) from the University of Michigan. He served on the Zoology faculty of the University of Maryland until 1990, when he moved to the University of Michigan where he currently is Professor in the School of Natural Resources and Environment. Dr. Allan specializes in the ecology and conservation of rivers. In his research he works with colleagues from other disciplines to examine how changes in land use affect the status of rivers and watersheds in both North and South America.


George Kling, biology professor, College of Literature, Science and the Arts. Dr. Kling received his Ph.D. from Duke University in 1988, where he studied the aquatic ecology of lakes in Africa, and worked at the Marine Biological Lab in Woods Hole from 1988-1991 as a postdoctoral researcher, where he studied aquatic ecology in arctic environments. He is interested in how the cycling of elements such as carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus underlie our understanding of the broad environmental problems of acid rain, eutrophication, species introductions, and climate change. The general goal of his research and teaching is to better understand what controls important ecosystem functions, to relate this understanding to major environmental problems, and to communicate this knowledge to students and the public at large.


Lisa Curran, Assistant Professor, School of Natural Resources and Environment. Dr. Curran received her BA in Anthropology from Harvard University and her Ph.D. in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology from Princeton University. Her professional experience includes over 15 years of interdisciplinary problem-solving and consultancies in South and Southeast Asia working for US Agency for International Development (AID), World Bank, Asian Development Bank (ADB), UNESCO-MAB and several international and regional non-governmental conservation organizations. Her research and teaching combines ecology, land use, resource economics and forestry policies with conservation of bio-cultural diversity primarily in Indonesia. She held an interdisciplinary faculty position at the University of Michigan (School of Natural Resources & Environment, Department of Biology and Center for Southeast Asian Studies). Currently, Dr. Curran is an Associate Professor at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies.


Patrick Livingood, graduate student instructor, School of Natural Resources and Environment. Patrick is a Ph.D. student in anthropological archaeology. He has a B.S. in Computer Science and a B.A. in anthropology. His primary research focus is on the prehistory of southeastern North America. Archaeologists are necessarily interdisciplinary, using physical science techniques to generate information, which they interpret as social scientists. In addition, he utilizes GIS and computer simulation in his own research, so he was familiar with both the tools and the goals of the course.


David Halsing, graduate student instructor, School of Natural Resources and Environment. Dave earned a Bachelor's Degree in Human Biology from Stanford University and is currently completing his Masters of Science degree in Resource Policy and Management at U of M. He is studying integrated approaches--science, economics, risk management, and optimization--to natural resource issues. He also spent several years as an on-site trainer for computerized medical technology systems. The experience he had teaching people how to use computers was a huge help in working with Global Change students.

Learning Problems and Goals

A. Problems Motivating U of M Faculty to Develop the Global Change Course

• Students are "running away" from science because it is not seen in a relevant context.
• Students have a fear of science.
• Academic community has overlooked global change issues for too long.
• Students do not see technology as an educational tool.

According to many of the University of Michigan faculty with whom we spoke, the Global Change course began as an attempt to provide a more relevant context in which students learn science. A group of U of M professors realized that there was a problem with teaching science as a series of titration labs^e, carbon cycles, and mathematical formulas that appear to have no relation to anything outside of the classroom. Ben van der Pluijm, a geology professor, told us that teaching these things in a setting void of relevant context contributes to what he calls "the running away as fast as students can from science."^f George Kling, biology professor, attributed this exodus to a fear^g and to students' misconception that science is just an amalgamation of abstract concepts and numbers. These U of M faculty decided that global change, an area that Dave noted had been ignored for too long by the academic community, could provide a more meaningful context for science instruction.^h

Lisa Curran, also a professor in the School of Natural Resources and Environment, told us that although the current generation of students is relatively technologically savvy, they are still not fully aware of the power technology has as an educational instrument.ⁱ

B. Learning Goals the U of M Faculty Seek to Achieve

• Provide a relevant context in which to teach science.
• Bring the previously neglected issue of global change to center stage.
• Dispel student fear of science by showing that it is just common sense.
• Get students to think independently and critically about global change issues.
• Provide technology as a tool to foster independent and critical thinking.

The U of M instructors established a set of goals to address the problems spoken of in the previous section. For instance, to address the problem of providing a meaningful context for science instruction,^j the faculty told us that they needed a new angle, something that "makes it relevant again, like it was in the sixties when we put a man on the Moon."^k The U of M faculty felt that by focusing on vital environmental problems, they could create a compelling, meaningful context for science education, and could also address the problem that Dave spoke about in the previous section-the academic community's failure to address global change issues.^l Tim Killeen, for example, thinks that the Global Change initiative will mitigate this failure and will, hopefully, inspire institutions like the University of Michigan to require students to take a course on environmental issues as a requirement for earning a degree.^m

Another problem that the U of M faculty pointed out in the "problems and goals" section is that students often express fear of science because they see it as just a series of abstract numbers and formulas. George Kling, therefore, made it his goal to "dispel that fear" by pointing out to students that, "in your daily life, certain things make perfect sense" and that is "exactly the same way science works."ⁿ Tim Killeen expressed a similar sentiment saying that the goal of the course is to open students' eyes to science so they would use science as a "tool" instead of a "club."^o

Finally, in order to address their students' failure to see technology as a useful educational tool, the Global Change faculty made it their goal to introduce their students to technology in ways that would facilitate meaningful learning^p by letting students "examine material...and come to conclusions on their own" with "essentially the same software and the same data that any professional social scientist would use."^q By putting the responsibility of learning into the hands of the students, they hope to make them more " independent, ^r critical thinkers."^s

Creating the Learning Environment

The U of M Global Change faculty are among the growing number of faculty who are designing their courses as learning environments^t. As such, we consider them to be bricoleurs^u: keeping their focus on their problems and goals, they scan their environment for, and then creatively combine, a set of resources that achieve their goals. To meaningfully examine the Global Change learning environment, we link the problems that motivate these faculty bricoleurs to create alternative learning environments with the goals for student learning that they believe will address their problems.

The majority of learning activities that the U of M Global Change faculty use to achieve their goals are informed by the following teaching principles:

In regard to their first teaching principle, the faculty members believe that students learn most effectively not when teachers act as "authority figures,"^v: but rather when students carry out their own investigation and critical thought processes. Dave Halsing and Patrick Livingood, graduate student instructors (GSIs), articulated this difference by describing an activity that deals with ozone depletion. Dave explained that the students "look at real world numbers concerning CFC production and ozone depletion and we ask them to tinker with the percentage reduction after a certain year. They're told that they have to keep ozone at a certain level and then they run the model to find out what point it can't dip below." Patrick Livingood then contrasted this hands-on method with what would be a more passive one, saying, "Someone could have said in lecture, 'We're going to have to reduce ozone by 99.5% to keep skin cancer rates below this certain number,' and students would have forgotten about it five minutes later. It would have been a meaningless number."

Regarding their second teaching principle of enabling learning to occur in diverse ways, the bricoleurs feel that teaching the course in an interdisciplinary way is crucial. As Tim Killeen, professor of Atmospheric, Oceanic and Space Sciences (now director of the National Center for Atmospheric Research), stated, an understanding of global change is shaped not by single, separate, tunneled view points but rather by a "panorama" of perspectives involving "a lot of complexity, a lot of issues."

To help students manage this complexity, the U of M faculty have incorporated interdisciplinarity in all of the Global Change learning activities, whether computer-dependent or computer-independent. The geographic modeling programs that students use in labs entail both social and scientific variables. The lecture sessions feature guest professors whose fields of expertise range from economics to geology. According to Lisa Curran, professor in the School of Natural Resources and Environment, the eclectic range of student interest can vary from those concerned with "community development" to those concerned with "international policy."^w:

See Discussion 1 for a student discussion of the interdisciplinary format. Having students run computer-based STELLA models is one of several activities that the U of M faculty use to create a learning environment that implements their teaching principles. These learning activities fall into three separate categories:

Computer-dependent activities are activities that would not be possible, or at least not feasible, without computers. In the University of Michigan Global Change course, these activities include labs in which students:
• conduct hands-on analysis with real-world data and geographic information models
• research and critically assess an array of global change issues using on-line literature and data.

Computer-improved activities are activities that faculty believe work incrementally better with technology, but can still be implemented without it. In this course, these activities include web-based lecture notes, simple animations, and other aids that give students material in a uniform format and help them manage the amount of content presented to them.

Computer-independent activities--that is, activities that do not involve the use of computers, include:

• group work
• lectures
• homework

A. Computer-dependent Learning Activities

The U of M faculty employ two learning activities in ways that would not be possible without computers. These activities are:

• Hands-on application of real-world data with dynamic modeling programs like STELLA^x and geographic information systems like ArcView^y

  This software allows students to extract global change information from data banks (for example, from the World Resources Institute, using the Internet), and, using this data, to "model global change phenomena and understand the human consequences of environmental change.^z Dave Allan, Professor of Natural Resources and the Environment, noted that, "the STELLA program is a terrific enabler of critical thinking about dynamic processes and the GIS software is a terrific enabler in thinking about patterns on the globe." As George Kling, biology professor, explained, the two interactive software programs allow students to experiment with the dynamic, interrelated factors that affect global change in a computer-enhanced, environmental "test tube."^aa This research gives students first-hand training in managing what one central administrator calls "an information explosion," a skill that is essential to the future of evaluating global change policies.

• Research and critical assessment of an array of global change issues using on-line literature and data. After analyzing this literature and data, Global Change students create their own website on environmental issues. This activity gives students training in managing the information explosion. It also provides them with insight about the credibility of on-line information by showing them how easy it is to put information on the World Wide Web.

The U of M instructors explained that having students use computer-dependent learning activi