Field Sketching and Ecology:

Using sketching to better understand the local environment

Kate Job, University of Idaho, 2019.

Introduction

Humans have been creating drawings ever since the first cave paintings were dabbed on
rock over 30,000 years ago (Saptomo et al., 2014). Long before pens, pencils or oil paints,
humans drew to tell stories, to keep records, and to share information about their environment.
We still tell stories, keep records, and share information about our environment, but the use of
drawing or sketching as a daily means of
communication has diminished (Dowd, 2018).

Sketching remains a valuable skill despite its

reduced use. It encourages careful observation and
intimate study of subjects─ both practices also
essential in scientific fields. By using sketching as a
tool to more closely observe the natural world,
environmental scientists and ecologists can find new
ways to explore their studies and communicate
findings. Additionally, individuals with a less formal
science background can use the same sketching tools
to expand their knowledge. An example of this could
be middle school science students who are taught to
directly observe their environment by recording it
through drawings.

Previously, researchers curious about the use of art as a means to enrich scientific
learning have conducted a variety of studies. Some of these projects have attempted to directly
incorporate art into traditional lesson plans and observe the results (H. Inwood, 2018). In other
studies, drawing has been recognized as a device to improve mental encoding and memory
recall, both in and outside of science fields (Hardiman, JohnBull, & Carran, 2017; Landin, 2016;
Wammes, Meade, & Fernandes, 2016). A third study even looked at doodling specifically, and
found that the simple act of aimless drawing may be linked to increased engagement (Schott,
2011).

To further explore methods of using art in congruence with science, I designed a field
sketching workshop that emphasizes the importance of both backgrounds. The goals of the
workshop are:
● To foster participants' development of a sense of place within their local environment

● To teach sketching skills that will encourage careful observation of nature

● To increase ecological knowledge of Idaho

Introducing art as a scientific tool hosts its own challenges. The stand-out issue is that
drawing and sketching are often considered skills only required or used by professional artists
(Booth, Taborda, Ramani, & Reid, 2016). This preconception can result in an aversion to art, or a
reduced willingness to engage with it. In addition to building a sense of place and improving
ecology knowledge, it's important that this workshop also emphasizes activities that reduce
inhibitions and build confidence. These activities exist for the purpose of developing a
comfortable setting where participants feel empowered to attempt their own sketches.

Using pens, pencils, paper and paints, participants will observe and explore the natural
world they share. The workshop environment of this program creates space for participants to
contribute knowledge from their own experience to the group, as well as space to explore new
ideas. Through the course, participants will gain an improved artistic skill set, as well as a more
holistic understanding of local ecology.

Literature Review

The intentional use of art as a tool to facilitate learning within other disciplines is not an
entirely new concept. Past attempts have been made to explore the value in using sketching in a
number of fields, many with enriching results (Gurnon, Voss-Andreae, & Stanley, 2013). In one
study, four elementary school teachers in Toronto developed a compilation of art lessons paired
with ecology units with the purpose of deepening students' development of their own sense of
place while increasing content understanding (H. Inwood, 2018; H. J. Inwood, 2013) Examples
include molding clay insect homes while learning about ecosystems, or making potato print art
based on lessons about agriculture and human impact. The teachers dubbed their approach "eco-
art", and also introduced conversations about the importance of making sustainable art in the
classroom.

Another study directly investigated the way our brains catalog new information while
drawing, as opposed to writing. Students at the University of Waterloo were presented with a
series of vocabulary words and instructed to write some down and to draw pictures of others.
After the test, participants could recall more than twice as many of the words they had drawn
than the words they had written out (Wammes et al., 2016). A college biology teacher at North
Carolina State University had students use this phenomenon to their advantage in her class.
Instead of using flashcards or other mnemonic devices, students in her anatomy lab were
encouraged to hand draw topics of study, resulting in improved long-term recall (Landin, 2016).

In directly addressing the hurdle of artistic

inhibitions, a college engineering department designed a
series of exercises to reduce anxiety brought on by
drawing, while highlighting its usefulness in learning.
The researchers included activities like using finger
paints, drawing an upside down image, looking for
patterns in scribbles made with crayons, and teaming up
for partner drawings. Survey responses from the study
expressed the exercises relaxed students, and allowed
them to use their mind more creatively (Booth et al.,
2016).

There is also increasing research into the benefits

of interdisciplinary learning, and the weaknesses of
building single-subject knowledge (Ivanitskaya, Clark,
Montgomery, & Primeau, 2002). By looking at an issue
through the lens of a traditionally unrelated discipline, opportunities for new perspectives are
created, often leading to a broadened understanding and creative thinking (Maura Borrego &
Lynita K. Newswander, 2010). Increased creativity is essential to innovative thinking, and can
lead to unique solutions for complex problems (DeHaan, 2011) ─ something science has a lot of.

Students participating in a college level field trip in Florida experienced the value of
interdisciplinary learning first hand, through the lens of climate change. The outing was
organized for biology and art students, and was designed to expose each group to lecturers and
learning activities within the others' discipline. Students from each class also had the opportunity
to collaborate on ideas for solutions, using their broadened perspectives. Resulting feedback was
positive, and both student groups expressed appreciation of a more profound understanding of
the topic (Jacobson, Seavey, & Mueller, 2016).

In the workshop I've designed, I continue to put into practice the importance of
interdisciplinary learning by studying the ways that sketching encourages scientific learning
through creativity. By using sketching to explore the development of a sense of place, to improve
memory recall of local ecological knowledge, and as a tool to lower inhibitions held by
participants coming into the course, I have applied existing research and gathered new
information that can be added to the topic's current body of knowledge.
Methods

The methods used to develop and implement this proposed field sketching course result
from the research of the previous studies discussed above, and are laid out in order of the
following steps:

1. Designing the curriculum, 2. Advertising and seeking participation, 3. Conducting the

workshop, 4. Evaluating assessment materials. Each step is described in greater detail below,
including explanations of learning activities and deliverables.

1. Designing the curriculum

The workshop curriculum was created using existing research, elements of past studies,
personal experience and instructor input. The first set of activities were a series of inhibition-
reducing exercises designed to create a relaxed and comfortable environment, allowing
participants to be better able to creatively engage (Booth et al., 2016).

Following the warm-up activities, sketching lesson were designed to blend content
delivery and new information seamlessly into personal exploration of local ecology. Each lesson
was centered around one new skill and allowed time for practice and application, utilizing the
increased concept understanding that comes from making a visual representation (Felton &
Petkewich, 2003).

For example, during an observation activity

course participants learned about gesture and
scaling. Then, they were given time to collect a
plant they were not familiar with to draw. They
used their new skills to complete their field
drawings, and were encouraged to keep their
recordings as accurate as possible. After their
entries were complete, participants used field
guides and their own representation of their plant
to identify the species. This exercise ensured
participants are creating a deeper connection to
their local ecology through the plant they chose to
sketch, and also solidifies the importance of the
gesture and scaling skills introduced.

In second activity, students were introduced

to color matching and practiced mixing paint. To
apply color matching as an observational tool, they were instructed to take their new
understanding of color into a local garden and create exact color swatches of flower blooms of
their choosing. Again, students were fine-tuning a new field sketching skill, but were also being
encouraged to look at their natural surroundings in a new way.

2. Advertising and seeking participation

The workshop was taught at Palouse-Clearwater Environmental Institute in Moscow,

Idaho. It was part of a series of STREAM (science, technology, religion, engineering, art, math)
activities making up a Women in Science week, and was advertised by PCEI through social
media and mailing lists. The workshop was open to girls going into 6th, 7th, 8th or 9th grade.

3. Conducting the workshop

The workshop took place at PCEI, on a Tuesday during the STREAM week, from 10am -
4pm. The lessons were attended outdoors, and the workshop moved around the PCEI campus,
utilizing different plants and spaces.

4. Deliverables

Students participating in the workshop used their plant illustrations to create a final
product: a field guide to the PCEI campus. This field guide included 10 plants, illustrations of
each, and three pieces of information about each plant. Each student was presented with a bound
copy at the end of the week, as a physical example of how their art and observation created
something that could be valuable to a community.

5. Evaluating assessment materials

Each workshop participant received a survey at the beginning of the course, asking
questions about their relationship with their local ecology and with sketching. The survey
questions were:

1. On a scale of 1-10, how interested are you in the ecology or environment of PCEI and
northern Idaho (1 being very little and 10 being very much)?
Please circle one:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2. About how many different kinds of native plants local to this area would you say
you're confident in identifying? Please circle one:

0 1-4 5-9 10+

3. You are primarily interested in outdoor field sketching as a (check all that apply):
□ hobby
 □ means of scientific recording
□ means of self expression
□ way to get outside
□ way to improve artistic skills
□ way to learn about the environment
□ Other ________________
□ I'm not interested
The purpose of the survey was not explained in depth. At the end of the sketching course,
students took the survey a second time. If their relationship to their environment had changed
after spending time drawing, observing and exploring Ponderosa State Park, this gave them an
opportunity to record those new responses. By comparing the responses from before and after the
course, a better understanding of the effects of the workshop can be observed.

Data and Analysis

Survey results collected during the field sketching course do illustrate some changes
between the before and after responses. I've included a breakdown of the answers from each
question below.

Answers from the first question look as follows:

Question 1: On a scale of 1-10, how interested are you

in the natural environment of PCEI (1 being very little
and 10 being very much)

Average Answer Before Average Answer After

Workshop Workshop
8.2 9.1
 The increased average response is exciting because it suggests that participants felt more
interested in their surrounding natural environment once they'd spent some time sketching and
painting it.

Answers to the second survey question returned the following results:

Question 2: About how many different kinds of native

plants (plants that grow naturally around Moscow)
would you say you could confidently identify?

Before After
Workshop Workshop
0 1 to 4 5 to 9 10+ 0 1 to 4 5 to 9 10+

22% 22% 29%

22% 57%
34% 14%

These comparison graphs show specifically the change in the percentage of responses
before and after the workshop. The amount of students who said they could identify ten or more
native plants increased 35%. At the same time, the 22% of students who reported they could not
identify any plants disappears, indicating these students learned to recognize at least 1-4 plants
with confidence. The decrease in quantity of students choosing the middle two categories (1-4
and 5-9) is related to the increase in students who said they could identify more than ten native
plants after spending the afternoon sketching.

Finally, the third and final question yielded the following data:
 Question 3: You are mainly interested in field sketching
as a (check all that apply):

4
Before
3
After
2

0
Hobby Way to make Way to Reason to go Way to Way to learn Other
scientific express outside improve or about the
recordings yourself practice art environment
skills

These response groups are worth discussing more closely. It appears that participants
became more interested in using field sketching as a way to make scientific recordings and as a
reason to go outside, which supports the idea that art is useful tool to get students engaged in
their local ecology. The number of surveys that indicated interested in using field sketching as a
way to learn about the environment went down by one point after the course, though. While it
would be helpful to follow up with whichever student changed their answer, the nature of the
anonymous survey prevents that. One possible explanation might be that the student did not
enjoy the activity, and felt less inclined to use it as a tool in the future. Another possibility is that
the student simply felt her desire to learn about the environment through art had been fulfilled,
and she no longer needed to include it in her list of main interests. Both are speculations, but the
decrease is a fact.

Conclusion

While this topic of research will still benefit from future studies, this field sketching
workshop accomplished the goals it set out to achieve. Students were given tools and taught
skills that encouraged them to look at their environment closely, and build their own relationship
with it in a new way. By learning to identify more local plants, participants knowledge of Idaho's
 ecology increased. Most importantly, survey results
suggest that workshop participants experience an increased
interest in their natural surroundings,

This first workshop focused most specifically on

increasing the ecological understandings of individuals
with a less formal science background. Going forward,
content and skill level could also be advance to cater to
professional or collegiate natural scientists. By repeating
similar workshops to student groups yearly (or even more
often), one could continue to broaden the community's
concept of using art to study science, as well as increase
interest in local surroundings.

On this final page, I've outlined the structure of the

workshop using the Logic Model, which also notes the
program's goals, needed resources, and intended outcomes.

Situation Inputs Outputs

Context and Outcomes
Goals Participants Activities Products

Development 1 instructor 10 6th, 7th, or Development Workshop Short term: Participants will
of a field 8th grade of course curriculum feel more connected to the
sketching Field Guides students curriculum local environment, and will
workshop that Before and feel empowered to use art as
uses illustration Art supplies Development after survey an observation tool.
to deepen of before and responses
connections PCEI after participant Medium term:
with natural campus survey PCEI Field Growth in field sketching
surroundings Guide interest, and survey results
Field Sketching will provide insight into what
Teach skills to Workshop works and doesn't.
improve quality
of sketching Long term:
and observation Increased research into the
value of using art to develop a
Increase sense of place and deepen
ecological ecological relationships, and
knowledge of a continued spread of interest in
local emphasizing field sketching in
environment science programs.
References
Booth, J. W., Taborda, E. A., Ramani, K., & Reid, T. (2016). Interventions for teaching
sketching skills and reducing inhibition for novice engineering designers. Design Studies,
43, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2015.11.002
DeHaan, R. L. (2011). Science education. Teaching creative science thinking. Science (New
York, N.Y.), 334(6062), 1499–1500. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1207918
Dowd, D. B. (2018). Stick Figures: Drawing as a Human Practice.
Felton, M. J., & Petkewich, R. A. (2003). with C r B e o A t e nds. Analytical Chemistry.
Gurnon, D., Voss-Andreae, J., & Stanley, J. (2013). Integrating Art and Science in
Undergraduate Education. PLoS Biology, 11(2), e1001491.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001491
Hardiman, M., JohnBull, R., & Carran, D. (2017). The Effects of Arts-Integrated Instruction on
Students’ Memory for Science Content: Results from a Randomized Control Trial Study.
Johns Hopkins University, (April), 1–24.
Inwood, H. (2018). Artistic Approaches to Ecological Literacy: Developing Eco-art Education in
Elementary Classrooms. Marilyn Zurmuehlen Working Papers in Art Education, 2007(1).
https://doi.org/10.17077/2326-7070.1399
Inwood, H. J. (2013). Cultivating artistic approaches to environmental learning : Exploring eco-
art education in elementary classrooms *, 3(2), 129–145.
Ivanitskaya, L., Clark, D., Montgomery, G., & Primeau, R. (2002). Interdisciplinary learning:
Process and outcomes. Innovative Higher Education, 27(2), 95–111.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021105309984
Jacobson, S. K., Seavey, J. R., & Mueller, R. C. (2016). Integrated science and art education for
creative climate change communication. Ecology and Society, 21(3), 1–6.
https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08626-210330
Landin, J. (2016). Perceptual Drawing as a Learning Tool in a College Biology Laboratory,
(North Carolina State University).
Maura Borrego, & Lynita K. Newswander. (2010). Definitions of Interdisciplinary Research:
Toward Graduate-Level Interdisciplinary Learning Outcomes. The Review of Higher
Education, 34(1), 61–84. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2010.0006
Saptomo, E. W., Kinsley, L., Ramli, M., Brumm, A., Morwood, M. J., van den Bergh, G. D., …
Sutikna, T. (2014). Pleistocene cave art from Sulawesi, Indonesia. Nature, 514(7521), 223–
227. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13422
Schott, G. D. (2011). The art of medicine: Doodling and the default network of the brain. The
Lancet, 378(9797), 1133–1134. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61496-7
Wammes, J. D., Meade, M. E., & Fernandes, M. A. (2016). The Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology The drawing effect: Evidence for reliable and robust memory
benefits in free recall, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2015.1094494