College Students' Conceptions of the Role of Rivers in Canyon Formation

ABSTRACT

Rivers are important surficial geologic processes that shape Earth's landscape. Students' conceptions of river features and processes serve as a foundation for their learning of new river concepts. Despite the importance of rivers and students' conceptions of them, little research has focused on identifying students' river conceptions. This study investigated students' conceptions of the role of river processes in canyon formation. In-depth interviews with 18 college students were conducted, and students' responses were analyzed using a modified version of constant comparative analysis. Students' conceptions fell into three categories: incomplete scientific conceptions, alternative conceptions, and incomplete scientific–alternative conceptions. Students with incomplete scientific conceptions thought that rivers carved canyons and did not recognize the connection between surficial processes and base level changes in forming a canyon. Students with alternative conceptions thought that catastrophic processes such as earthquakes form canyons or that canyons do not undergo a formation process at all (i.e., they have always been there). Students with incomplete scientific–alternative conceptions thought that catastrophic processes initiated canyon formation (similar to those students who held alternative conceptions) but also thought that rivers contributed to the process of canyon formation (similar to those students who held incomplete scientific conceptions). These findings add to the growing knowledge base of geoscience conceptions and have implications for improving geoscience teaching strategies.

Key words::

• conception
• college student
• river
• stream
• surficial process
• geomorphology
• qualitative research

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank the students who participated in this research. I would also like to thank Erin Dokter, Ingrid Novodvorsky, Becky Morlier, two anonymous reviewers, the Associate Editor, and Editor-in-Chief for providing feedback to improve this article. This study was approved by the Colorado State University Human Research Committee (Protocol 04-269H).

FIGURE 1: Example of coding process. During open coding, initial categories (e.g., “canyon formation”) were developed. During axial coding, subcategories of “canyon formation” were developed. Also, the dimensions of the subcategories were delineated. The delineation of the dimensions allowed for coding students' conceptions into conception categories.

TABLE I: Elementary and middle-school students' conceptions of the formation of rivers.

TABLE II: Participant demographic characteristics.

TABLE III: Example of interview protocol.

TABLE IV: Processes described by participants and conception categories and descriptions associated with the processes.

TABLE V: Processes described by participants and number and the frequency percentage of students in each conception category.