Oceanography The Official Magazine of
The Oceanography Society
Volume 28 Issue 01

View Issue TOC
Volume 28, No. 1
Pages 134 - 141


Sharing the Importance of Ocean Salinity Beyond the Scientific Community

By Annette deCharon , Carla Companion, Ryan Cope, and Lisa Taylor 
Jump to
Article Abstract Citation References Copyright & Usage
Article Abstract

The Aquarius satellite mission and Salinity Processes in the Upper-ocean Regional Study (SPURS) are providing the scientific community with new insights into the role seawater salinity plays in the Earth system. Aquarius and SPURS scientists and engineers, working with the University of Maine-based Salinity Public Engagement and Communications team, developed webinars that focused on how these programs’ findings increase knowledge about topics such as the water cycle, ocean circulation, and climate. Direct involvement of research scientists and engineers was key to the success of these efforts. These experts learned how to use interactive concept maps to “deconstruct” scientific content into simpler graphical formats for their presentations. A benefit to webinar participants, presenters, and facilitators was that they honed their critical thinking skills. In addition, the webinars allow people traditionally not represented in science, technology, engineering and math to gain better access to high-quality NASA materials. Post-event audience evaluation data provide valuable feedback on the impacts of sharing the results of ocean salinity research beyond the scientific community.


deCharon, A., C. Companion, R. Cope, and L. Taylor. 2015. Sharing the importance of ocean salinity beyond the scientific community. Oceanography 28(1):134–141, https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2015.16.

    Ausubel, D.P. 2000. The Acquisition and Retention of Knowledge: A Cognitive View. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 212 pp.
  1. Bailin, S. 2002. Critical thinking and science education. Science & Education 11:361–375, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016042608621.
  2. Bailin, S., R. Case, J.R. Coombs, and L.B. Daniels. 1999. Conceptualizing critical thinking. Journal of Curriculum Studies 31:285–302, https://doi.org/10.1080/002202799183133.
  3. deCharon, A. 2014. Mapping out scientists’ messages: Models that support collaborative critical thinking. Pp. 466–493 in Cases on Teaching Critical Thinking Through Visual Representation Strategies. L. Shedletsky and J. Beaudry, eds, https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-5816-5.ch018.
  4. deCharon, A., J. Albright, C. Herren, A.H. Cline, and J.T. Repa. 2009. Online tools help get scientists and educators on the same page. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union 90(34):289, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009EO340002.
  5. deCharon, A., L. Duguay, J. McDonnell, C. Peach, C. Companion, C. Herren, P. Harcourt, T. Repa, C. Ferraro, P. Kwon, and others. 2013. Concept mapping workshops: Helping ocean scientists represent and communicate science. Oceanography 26(1):98–105, https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2013.08.
  6. Ennis, R.H. 1985. A logical basis for measuring critical thinking skills. Educational Leadership 43(2):44–48.
  7. Facione, P.A. 1990. Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction. Research Findings and Recommendations. Millbrae, CA, The California Academic Press, 112 pp.
  8. Fonseca, A.P., C.I. Extremina, and A.F. Fonseca. 2004. Concept mapping: A strategy for meaningful learning in medical microbiology. Poster presented at the First International Conference on Concept Mapping, September 2004, Pamplona, Spain.
  9. Halpern, D.F. 1998. Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains: Dispositions, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. American Psychologist 53(4):449–455, https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.53.4.449.
  10. Joint Ocean Commission Initiative. 2009. Changing Oceans, Changing World: Ocean Priorities for the Obama Administration and Congress. Report, Meridian Institute, Washington, DC, 38 pp, http://www.jointoceancommission.org/en/policypriorities/Reports/changing-ocean-changing-world.aspx.
  11. McPeck, J.E. 1990. Critical thinking and subject specificity: A reply to Ennis. Educational Researcher 19(4):10–12, https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X019004010.
  12. NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), Office of Education and the National Marine Sanctuary Foundation. 2013. Ocean Literacy: The Essential Principles of Ocean Sciences Grades K–12, http://www.coexploration.org/oceanliteracy/documents/OceanLitChart.pdf.
  13. NRC (National Research Council), Committee on Conceptual Framework for the New K–12 Science Education Standards. 2012. A Framework for K–12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 400 pp.
  14. Paul, R.W. 1992. Critical thinking: What, why, and how? New Directions for Community Colleges 77:3–24, https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.36819927703.
  15. Paul, R.W., and L. Elder. 2006. Critical thinking: The nature of critical and creative thought. Journal of Developmental Education 30(2):34–35.
  16. PCAST (President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology). 2012. Engage to Excel: Producing one million additional college graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-engage-to-excel-final_2-25-12.pdf.
  17. Preszler, R. 2004. Cooperative concept mapping: Improving performance in undergraduate biology. Journal of College Science Teaching 33(6):30–35.
  18. Sternberg, R.J. 1986. Critical Thinking: Its Nature, Measurement, and Improvement. National Institute of Education, Washington, DC, 37 pp.
  19. The Ocean Project. 2009. America, the Ocean, and Climate Change: New Research Insights for Conservation, Awareness, and Action. Report, 226 pp, http://theoceanproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/AOCC_SummaryOfData_Jun09_2MB_version.pdf.
  20. US Commission on Ocean Policy. 2004. An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century. Final Report, Washington, DC, 676 pp., http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/oceancommission/documents/full_color_rpt/000_ocean_full_report.pdf.
  21. US Department of Education. 2007. Report of the Academic Competitiveness. Washington, DC, 81 pp., http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED496649.pdf.
  22. Yarden, H., G. Marbach-ad, and J.M. Gershoni. 2004. Using the concept map technique in teaching introductory cell biology to college freshmen. Bioscene: Journal of College Biology Teaching 30:3–13.
Copyright & Usage

This is an open access article made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format as long as users cite the materials appropriately, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate the changes that were made to the original content. Images, animations, videos, or other third-party material used in articles are included in the Creative Commons license unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If the material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission directly from the license holder to reproduce the material.