the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 24 Jul 2026
Teaching soil as a system: interactivity, place, plural knowledge, and AI
Abstract.
Competing interests: At least one of the (co-)authors is a member of the editorial board of SOIL.
Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.- Preprint
(730 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
- RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-3957', Meine van Noordwijk, 06 Aug 2026
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-3957', Anonymous Referee #2, 05 Oct 2026
Teaching soil as a system: interactivity, place, plural knowledge and AI addresses the challenge of teaching soil science from a systemic perspective within multidisplinary study programs, where contact time for soil science is often limited. The authors propose a pedagogical design that integrates interactivity, place-based learning, plural knowledge and AI discernment as a fromwork for treaching process understanding, and they demonstrate its application in an undergraduate lecture unit.
Strengths:
The manuscript is well written, clearly structured and accessible
The pedagogical concept is sound and directly repsonds to a real challenge in soil education: conveying systemic understanding with multidisciplinary programs with limited study hours.
The integration offers a transferable framework that could be valuable to other educators.
Providing a concrete implementation strengthes the practical relevance of the paper
Concerns:
- Introduction to plural knowledge: The terms plural knowledge/two-way science are central to the proposed design, but the manuscript does not introduce them for readers who may not share this background. I recommend a short introductory passage defining what plural knowledge/two-way science is.
- Specification of AI systems in use. The manuscript speaks of AI in general terms, but the teaching scenario actually involves a chatbot/LLM. Please specify: i) which LLMs the students use, and whether all students use the same system; ii) how and if the model is grounded in the lecture content, either via RAG or long-context, or is it relying on its pre-existing training data only, and iii) whether the model has web acces. These details are important, as the design of the “AI discernment” activities and their transferability depends on the capabilities and grounding of the system used.
- The lecture is only referred to as ENST2007. Please include the full course name and sufficient context for readers unfamiliar with this institution.
- It is not clear what background the students in this course already know about soil at this point in their degree. This is essential, as the design, as the proposed deisgn depends heavily on the learners prior knowledge.
- Although tab.1 lists some content, the reader does not get a clear picture of the full scope, learning outcomes and objectives of the entire lecture. Please makte the consctructive alignment explicit: learning outcomes, the instructional activity described, and the intended assessment.
- The overall workload of the lecture (contact hours, ECTS, independent study time , e.g.) is not stated. This matters for judghing whether the proposed design is feasible in other programs with limited hours for soil science.
- Suggestion: I would remove fig.1, as in my opinion it does not add to the manuscript. Instead, a figure would be welcome that shows concrete examples from the lecture content for each of the four design elements. Such a figure would make the framework tangible and help readers transfer it to their own teaching.
Minor comments:
Line 25: To my knowledge, at least in Europe, soil science has traditionally been embeeded within broader curricular (e.g., agricutulural science, biology, geography) rather than offered as a standalone discipline. Could the authors clarify what situation they are referring to here: is the trend of limited soil science courses specific to their region? If so, this would be worth stating explicitly, as it affects how readers interpret the motivation of the paper.
Line 29: The sentence “several strands of curriculum literature document this..” does not add content. I would recommend removing it as filler.
Line 30: How can modelling be not part in 96-98% of lectures? I suggest to note that 96% of bachelor-level and 98% of master-level lectures do not include computer works and modelling.
Line 47: The abbreviation InTeGrate is used but never expanded.
Line 104: Typo in “development
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3957-RC2
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 221 | 65 | 38 | 324 | 33 | 30 |
- HTML: 221
- PDF: 65
- XML: 38
- Total: 324
- BibTeX: 33
- EndNote: 30
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
The manuscript is well-written, based on recent experience and offers many insights. I especially like the mature discussion on strengths and weaknesses of AI and how is availability should change the way soil science is taught.
If space allows, it may be good to start at an earlier stage of 'curriculum design' rather then 'course design within established curriculum', as the current text appears to be. Curriculum design typically includes an analysis of the type of professional careers and jobs that are available/expected-to-become-attractive and what that means for
Knowledge/understanding
Skills
Values
Your current text starts from existing Soil Science teaching traditions; it may help readers if the changes in soil science careers for example: In an expanding phase of agriculture soil mapping and land suitability for targeted crops employed many graduates with a profile of fieldwork, soil classification, mapping and targeted soil analysis; 'reading a landscape' became intuition, validated theories of place the signs of success. Where intensification on existing agricultural lands became the focus, soil management, precision farming and quantified environmental impacts increased the need for 'system thinking' and 'process-based models'. In an era of climate change adaptation, regenerative agriculture and re-discovered circularity, the expectations once again shift.
For Indonesia a brief historical overview of topics along with a dramatic gender shift in soil science student bodies was provided in Hairiah, K. et al. 2022. Hundred fifty years of soil security research in Indonesia: Shifting topics, modes of research and gender balance. Soil Security, 6, p.100049. For other countries similar analyses may be available and could add further depth to your manuscript.