A new quantitative assessment method for the geoeducational potential of the geodiversity

Nowadays, many geoscientists have been engaged in the promotion of areas of significant  geoheritage, which includes geosites that incorporate geological, paleontological and geomorphological features, together with cultural and historical features (Zafeiropoulos et al., 2021).Geosites can be used as outdoor classrooms, where students can learn about geology, geomorphology, and other earth sciences through direct observation and hands-on activities. Consequently, geosites constitute a valuable resource for educators, helping to engage students and enrich their learning experiences.The geoeducational value of a region refers to the educational opportunities and resources that it provides relatively to the earth and its processes. This may include the geosites and geoscientific features present in the area, as well as the educational programs and resources available for learning about these features. The geoeducational value of a site can be a valuable resource for educators, providing opportunities for hands-on learning and helping to engage students in the learning process. It can also be a valuable resource for the public, providing opportunities for people to learn about and appreciate the earth and its natural and cultural history.Geoethical value refers to the ethical considerations associated with the earth and its processes. This includes issues related to the conservation and protection of the earth's natural resources, the impacts of human activities on the earth and its ecosystems, and the responsible use of the earth's resources (Georgousis et al. 2021). In this work, we propose a new assessment method that will be a useful tool for highlighting the geoeducational and geoethical value of a geotope (Zafeiropoulos & Drinia 2021). This method takes into account 11 criteria (accessibility, frequency, geomythology, archaeological value, cultural-laographic value, religious value, geodiversity, geoethical value, ecological value, geo-educational activities, sustainable development) where each of them is scored on a five-point scale (0-0.25-0.25-0.50-0.75-1). This method was piloted in 8 geotopes of Kalymnos Island and 5 geotopes of Nisyros Island, SE Aegean, Greece (Zafeiropoulos & Drinia, 2021; 2022). The implementation of this assessment highlighted the geo-educational value of these geosites and made it clear that the implementation of geoducational programs may succeed in empowering the students in geocultural values. Furthermore, it appeared that students were reinforce in themes and values of geocultural heritage and sustainability, and that they developed feelings of environmental sensitivity.Zafeiropoulos, G.; Drinia, H.; Antonarakou, A.; Zouros, N. From geoheritage to geoeducation, geoethics and geotourism: A critical evaluation of the Greek region. Geosciences, 2021, 11(9), 381.Georgousis, E.; Savelides, S.; Mosios, S.; Holokolos, M. V.; Drinia, H. The need for geoethical awareness: The importance of geoenvironmental education in geoheritage understanding in the case of Meteora geomorphes, Greece. Sustainability, 2021, 13(12), 6626.Zafeiropoulos, G.; Drinia, H. Kalymnos Island, SE Aegean Sea: From Fishing Sponges and Rock Climbing to Geotourism Perspective. Heritage, 2021, 4(4), 3126-3146.Zafeiropoulos, G., & Drinia, H. Comparative Analysis of Two Assessment Methods for the Geoeducational Values of Geosites: A Case Study from the Volcanic Island of Nisyros, SE Aegean Sea, Greece. Geosciences, 2022, 12(2), 82.