iGeo 2010, Теренна работа — Задача 1. Field Work Test: Part I – Mapping Exercise
Field Work Test: Part I - Mapping Exercise. Instructions and Tasks / Analysis of a Geographical Issue. Answer Booklet. 8th International Geography Olympiad, Taipei, Taiwan, July 29 – August 4 2010 · 29 юли 2010 г.
Указания
Landcover/landuse change and conservation in Guandu
Fieldwork Test: Part I – Mapping Exercise
31 July, 2010
The theme of the Fieldwork Test is landcover/landuse change and conservation in Guandu. In the morning session (7:40am until 11:40am), students are expected to observe, record and map features that are related to this issue.
- In the file, there are index maps (source 1), a base map, (source 2), and other materials (sources 3 to 10; reference maps, short essays and photographs). Please check and report to the group leader if any of these items are missing.
- Students can use any maps to record field observations, to draw or to take notes. Important: The final map to be submitted has to be drawn on the plastic cover sheet with a base map in it. Use the markers (pen), provided by the group leaders, to complete the final version. This is the only map that will be assessed by the fieldwork jury. Write your name and team on the back of the plastic cover sheet NOW. Do not take the map out of the plastic cover sheet.
- Field observation should finish by 10:30. The file has to be returned to the Group Leader at the end of the field exercise at 11.10am. The file, except the final map from the morning, will be returned to students at the beginning of the geographical issue written test in the afternoon.
- In addition to what you have observed in the field, more information will be provided at the beginning of the geographical issue written test, and there will be 5 minutes reading time provided at the start of the test.
- In the field, we will stop at the sites marked A, B, and C on the base map (Source 2). Apart from making observations at these sites, please also make careful record of the vegetation, land use, and relief.
- In the Guandu Nature Park, please do not enter unauthorized areas. You should act responsibility at all times, and avoid dropping litter.
Условие
Tasks
Context: Part of the Guandu lowland used to be a natural wetland, but human use of Guandu has brought about a transformation from agricultural uses that characterized this area in 1965. Parts of the Guandu Nature Reserve and the Guandu Nature Park show evidence of significant change. For example building spoil has been deposited in parts of the Nature Park.
1. Annotate the map of the study area on the plastic cover sheet. Describe the types of vegetation, areas of raised relief and the major water management infrastructure that relate to the human use of the area. Your map should also show variations in house style.
2. On your map show the major boundaries between areas where natural changes have occurred and those in which human intervention predominate. Name the features along which these major boundaries are located.
Решение
Department of Geography
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
Te Kura Kete Aronui
The University of Waikato
Private Bag 3105
Hamilton, New Zealand
Lex Chalmers
Phone +64 7 838 4436
Fax +64 7 838 4633
lex@waikato.ac.nz
13 July, 2010
iGEO Colleagues in Taiwan
The iGEo Field Work Committee
iGEO Marking Panel
Kia ora tatou (Greetings to you all),
At the meeting we had after the announcement of the iGEO results I reported that I would like to comment on the field work assignment in some detail, and the following few pages contain most of the comments I would like to make. I felt the need to comment in this way because we had little time on the night, the field work exercise had a new formality based on the 2009 guidelines we agreed (see Appendix 1), and I was supervising the activity in place of Henk (who could not be with us).
I also wanted to thank colleagues on the Field Work Committee. Under Su-Min Shen’s guidance, Sheng-Chin Lin, Tsung-Yi Lin and Chia-Ng Hsu produced excellent resources for the field work, and advised on the setting and assessment of the field work tasks.
1. The mapping exercise.
1.1 I need to comment on the match between the guidelines and the activities/assignments we set in Guandu. The guidelines are just that, guidelines against which each field environment needs to be considered. The final choice of Guandu was made far enough ahead of the iGEO field work to allow excellent resources to be assembled; these will be made available on the web to provide subsequent field work designers with some idea about what will work with students.
1.2 A familiarity tour was scheduled before the assignments were signed off. I thought the environment was excellent; the saline mangrove area now provided only limited habitats for wading birds after the creation of the IUCN Class 1 Nature Reserve in 1986. The contrast with the Guandu Nature Park with the creation of artificial ponds was obvious, even if some of the subtleties were hidden (dumped spoil). The distinctiveness between the two environments was driven by the stop-bank/dike constructed after the 1963 flood (shown on the video). A variety of urban and agricultural uses were included in the mapping area.
1.3 The format of the question was derived from the guidelines. Students had up to 2.5 hours to observe in the field (in reasonably hot conditions: most arrived at the Centre after using little more than half the time available). Forty minutes were set aside for drawing the map on a plastic overlay on an aerial photograph. Students were required to work individually; they were monitored and I had to speak to several students who were about to share information. There were two questions that followed a context statement
1.5 Mapping outcomes were variable for two reasons. Because the instruction to use one side of the plastic sheet was verbal (several times), and not an absolute requirement written in the extensive instructions, I felt we could not penalise the small but significant minority that keyed their map on the reverse side. Many students did not appreciate that the pens they were given had fine and broad tips at opposite ends. Mapping using only a broad tip was quite difficult on an A4 sheet, but it may have been possible at A3.
1.6 Assessment guidelines. The mapping exercise assessment made up 30% of the Field work mark, and this in turn was 40% of the final mark for the iGEO. There were up two marks available for the effective location and documentation of each of the following features; mangroves, reeds, fields, mixed trees, artificial ponds, natural ponds, housing, flood gate, dike and raised land. Markers had the ability to give credit for well reported key detail, and to recognize good observation not included in the list above. The balance of the 30% was allocated to the boundaries; more than 50% students did not realize they were walking along the stop-bank, and that it was the critical point of separation in terms of both environmental data, and human use. The very first feature they say was a flood gate, but they did not recognize this boundary marker, despite the video they had seen.
1.7 Marker responses. It took a bit of time for panel members to build confidence in the task and the assessment schedule, and to work to a common standard. All maps were marked at least twice, and I personally check marked about half the maps, finding just a few anomalies. I did not have to take any matters to the Committee who signed off on both the activity and the mark schedule. My thanks to the six markers who spent perhaps five hours on this job. The best maps were very good, and there were just a few candidates who scored less than 5-6 out of 30.
2. The spatial analysis and geographical commentary
2.1 The intent of guidelines was written into the classroom test, for which a series of additional resources were provided. The resources include a map that provided a “ideal” map that showed clearly the dike and floodgates. The map complemented the students own maps, which were returned to students for the exercise to avoid “double jeopardy” of a poor map in the first part of the exercise.
2.2 The answers were written on an answer book, for which indicative spaces were provided for candidates’ answers. Five minutes were allowed for reading the test, and getting familiar with the new resources provided. The time available for the test was 2 hours for English speakers and 2.5 for those for which English is a second language.
2.3 The questions required two graphics (a time line and a cross section, each worth 10% of the final fieldwork mark). The spatial analysis (changes in space through time) required an understanding of the habitat relationships within the Nature Reserve (20% of the final fieldwork mark). The geographical commentary presented a context statement and then asked students to think about planning for the lowland, to identify the groups who might want to make statements on the future use of the lowland, and to link these interest groups more generally to those that are found in many urban environments where there is competition for land use.
3. Overall assessment
The marks for the field mapping and written field work assignment were lower than expected but the range (26.8-7.6/40) was approximately the same as for the written response test (34-13/40). The component marks for most candidates were consistent; if they scored well on one item, they scored well on most and vice versa. The markers did an excellent and collegial job; only one of the five tasks required extensive moderation, and only one task required Committee approval for a change in the assessment initially agreed.
For information, neither scripts nor marks for the components of the field work will be made available, and papers will not be returned to students.
Appendix 1. The Taipei Field work Exercise
(Important note, this is an adaption of the advised Guidelines to meet the specific field context of Taipei)
Format of the exercise
The field work assignment consists of three parts: a mapping exercise, spatial issue relating to the field area, and a geographical analysis and commentary
Part 1: the mapping exercise. Part 1 will take place in the field. Skills that are required during the mapping exercise are observation, naming observed phenomena, locating the phenomena on the map, describing the phenomena in a map key, using appropriate graphic symbols, including scale and orientation statements. Students could, for instance, be provided with a base map and asked to add information to it using cartographic skills.
Part 2: the spatial analysis exercise. Part 2 will take place in the classroom where a spatial problem will be presented to participants for analysis. The problem may relate to physical and/or environmental planning. The problem will be introduced and documented for participants and the procedures and conditions for working on the problem-solving exercise will be outlined. The introduction to this exercise can be done in a number of ways: a presentation, a workshop and/or short excursions to the field area for gathering additional data.
Phase 3: geographical analysis and commentary. On the basis of the mapping exercise and spatial analysis in the area, participants have to respond to the problem presented, and explain their responses. The commentary needs to show that the participant has understood the nature of the problem and made connections between the properties/qualities of the field area and the spatial analysis they have carried out. In the commentary, the use of pictures, statistics, tables and graphs is preferred over lengthy texts.
Assessment of the exercise
The field work assignment is worth 40% of the final mark.
The field work assignment is carried out by individuals not teams.
The mapping exercise and commentary are mandatory parts of the assignment
The nature of the additional information provided is determined by the host.
The following components will be assessed
- The map of (a part of) the fieldwork area,
- The problem-solving exercise, to include spatial analysis of the problem presented,
- The visualisation of the field work area,
- The commentary on a suggested plan/strategies/activities.
Required skills for the field work exercise
- mapping skills (read, analyse, interpret and produce maps)
- inquiry and problem solving skills that underpin geographical writing (thinking and writing skills)
- graphicacy skills (produce pictures, statistics, tables and graphs)
In May – July 2009 a draft of these guidelines was sent for comment to International Board members in all countries that participated in iGeo 2008. The guidelines were formalised by the iGeo Task Force on September 15, 2009. The local organiser of iGeo 2010 in Taiwan therefore had sufficient time to design the fieldwork exercise, and all team leaders time to prepare their participants for the fieldwork and related assignments. The guidelines will be reviewed for the 2012 iGEO field work test in Cologne, and any changes will be advised.
Оригинал в Архива: 2010iGeo_FWT_all_questions.pdf · официални решения: 2010iGeo_FWT_Commentary_MarkingScheme.pdf