the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 30 Jun 2026
GC Insights: Integrating Art and Geoscience through STEAM: Public Perceptions and Learning at a Cultural Festival
Abstract. GeoArte, an art-integrated geoscience initiative developed within the STEAM framework, was presented at the International Festival of Living Arts (FIAVL, Loja, Ecuador, 2025) and evaluated through a post-experience survey of 30 non-specialist visitors using a convergent parallel mixed-methods design. Physical geological specimens were the single most cited attraction (86.7 %), yet a comparable majority (83.3 %) rated artistic mediation as strongly facilitating their understanding of geological concepts, with high agreement also recorded for heritage learning and art–geology recognition. Given the exploratory design and absence of pre-test measures, these results are interpreted as preliminary evidence that authentic specimens and artistic representation operate as complementary rather than competing channels of engagement, supporting the applicability of STEAM methodologies in community-based geoscience outreach and geoconservation.
- Preprint
(672 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(40127 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 16 Oct 2026)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-2788', Karina Judd, 23 Jul 2026
reply
-
CC1: 'Reply on RC1', Renato Efren Gonzalez Zuñiga, 24 Aug 2026
reply
We sincerely thank Referee Karina Judd for her thoughtful and constructive comments. We apologize for the delayed response; we were away on vacation and we wanted to ensure a careful and considered reply rather than a hasty one.
We fully acknowledge the value of the suggestions raised. However, we must note that this manuscript was recently reclassified from a full research article to the GC Insights format, which imposes a strict limit of 1,500 words and a single display item. This reclassification required a substantial restructuring of the original work, and the resulting format leaves very limited room for the expansions requested, particularly the deeper engagement with the GeoArt literature, the extended thematic analysis in Results, and the additional reflective content in Discussion, without exceeding the format constraints.
The one revision we are confident we can implement is the update of the Braun and Clarke citation to their 2023 guidance on good practice in thematic analysis (https://doi.org/10.1080/26895269.2022.2129597), which better reflects the descriptive and preliminary nature of our qualitative approach.
We recognize that the remaining points raised by the referee represent genuine opportunities for deeper engagement, and we commit to addressing them fully in a future extended version of this work, where the format allows for the nuance they deserve.
-
CC1: 'Reply on RC1', Renato Efren Gonzalez Zuñiga, 24 Aug 2026
reply
-
CC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-2788', Alejandra Bermeo, 07 Sep 2026
reply
This manuscript presents an interesting and valuable approach to integrating art and geology in the context of Loja, Ecuador. Using the Festival Internacional de Artes Vivas de Loja (FIAVL) as an informal setting for geological communication offers a valuable opportunity to engage non-specialist audiences with geoscience and to highlight the importance of geological heritage in the region.
The research questions are relevant, and the results provide an interesting perspective on how visitors perceive the role of art in understanding geological concepts. For future work, it could be interesting to complement these self-reported perceptions with pre- and post-experience assessments, including objective questions on geological knowledge. This would help distinguish between participants’ perception of learning and actual changes in their conceptual understanding. A larger number of participants could also allow the authors to examine differences between age groups and to apply more detailed statistical analyses.
I also think a more detailed description of how the STEAM approach was implemented could be provided. In particular, it would be helpful to clarify how the artistic components were specifically related to geological concepts and the local geological heritage, and how these connections were incorporated into the activities and the participatory mural.
Overall, this is a very interesting and promising work that highlights the potential of combining art and geology as complementary approaches to promoting geoscience and promote public engagement with geological heritage.Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2788-CC2 -
CC3: 'Reply on CC2', Renato Efren Gonzalez Zuñiga, 16 Sep 2026
reply
Dear Alejandra, thank you so much for your kind and thoughtful review of our work. We truly appreciate the time and care you dedicated to reading the manuscript.We sincerely thank you for this generous and constructive assessment. We are pleased that the approach and its relevance to geoscience communication in Latin American contexts were well received.We fully agree with the suggestions raised. The points regarding pre- and post-experience assessments, a larger sample size, and more detailed statistical analyses reflect precisely the limitations we acknowledge in the Discussion section, and they align with the directions we envision for future work building on this preliminary study.
Regarding the description of the STEAM implementation and the connections between the artistic components and local geological heritage, we note that the original submission included a substantially more detailed account of these elements. However, following the editor's recommendation to reclassify the manuscript to the GC Insights format, which imposes a strict 1,500 word limit and a single display item, much of this contextual detail had to be removed to comply with the format constraints.
The current version necessarily prioritizes the core insight over methodological depth.We are grateful for your engagement and take these observations as valuable guidance for a future extended study where the format allows for the richness these suggestions deserve.Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2788-CC3
-
CC3: 'Reply on CC2', Renato Efren Gonzalez Zuñiga, 16 Sep 2026
reply
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 93 | 60 | 16 | 169 | 29 | 10 | 10 |
- HTML: 93
- PDF: 60
- XML: 16
- Total: 169
- Supplement: 29
- BibTeX: 10
- EndNote: 10
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
Thank you for this manuscript, it is fantastic to see a practice-based insight at the STEAM-geological interface including audience reflections, especially noting the difference between motivation and perceived learning. The authors described a geology-themed exhibit based on local geological features at an arts festival.
Overall this is a promising piece of work, though I felt it undersold the existing body of literature on art as a vehicle for science learning in both formal and informal settings, including GeoArt methods.
It was noted that a thematic analysis was performed, it would be great to see some more of this in the results. Please also consider whether referring to Braun & Clarke's updated methods would be more appropriate, see https://doi.org/10.1080/26895269.2022.2129597 for guidance.
One thing that I thought was missing was some more nuanced reflection from the authors on the "juxtaposition" noted on what visitors considered the most impactful part of the display. I wonder whether some existing expectations on how geology learning is "supposed" to look might be coming into play here.
Some final specific notes:
Lines 32-35: Please elaborate on why this gap is “especially consequential in Latin American contexts” as opposed to other places
Line 45: What are the STEAM principles followed? Unclear from the citations given