 |
 |
Dear Roger, You have a big challenge! I have some fairly obvious advice to add to the already excellent suggestions and discussion. Apologies for the long email! I co-lead a trip to NW Scotland with 30 end-of-first-year undergraduates. Whilst we go in the summer, the weather is frequently very wet, freezing, and windy (the opposite of your problem but a problem nonetheless). The elevation change is similar to yours, and the terrain is rough, boggy, and sometimes precarious. We have some fairly stringent health and safety rules in the UK - including risk assessment, the use of hard hats, hi-visibility vests (SO helpful when 30 students are scattered over 2 km^2 mapping area), and very little hammering due to how popular the field areas are for UK geology students and amateurs. These rules are easy and cheap to enforce once you set them up. My advice for dealing with the physically unfit: (1) If your field day involves leading the students around the area in a big group, always make sure you wait until everyone has arrived to start lecturing the group. I've been on trips where this wasn't done, and the slow students who arrive last are at a huge disadvantage and it just ruins their self esteem. Whilst you're waiting, the first-to-arrive students can look at the outcrop. The slower students are still at a disadvantage (less time to look at the rocks), but much better than the 'arrive late to the outcrop lecture' situation. (2) I don't know if this is possible for you, but I always make sure there is a member of staff/teaching assistant/demonstrator who brings up the rear of the group. This person should be as encouraging as the situation warrants, and able to explain anything the students at the back may miss along the way. Heck, if you want to really encourage them, you as trip leader can always bring up the back. (3) When mapping independently, I encourage students to never sit down while they are working (except for lunch and proper breaks after the bigger hills, if needed!). The shear act of sitting down just slows them down even more - I know this sounds counterintuitive for helping students with fitness problems, but try to get them to just stand still when looking at rocks/making notes. This is still a rest from walking/climbing but they will at least be getting work done and not taking the opportunity to have an extended break at every outcrop. The ticks in Scotland help my case but I think the fear of snakes/etc could help in dry environments. Finally, for the problem of having so many female students who are not keen on field geology... (4) Encourage female staff and female teaching assistants/demonstrators to teach in the field! I cannot stress enough how much it helps an undergraduate female geologist to have a female role model in the teaching staff. As I said, this is all obvious but the small things can help. We are always under so much pressure to cover everything possible in the field (and I am still in favour of trying to do so) but if you are really being faced with having to cut field programs because the students can't keep up, then it seems better to try and accommodate the slower students and just cover less ground (as much as I hate to suggest it and only as a last resort!). I tend to find that when they map independently, they go into pairs that work at similar pace (you can definitely encourage this), and sometimes going slower is better in the end because they see more rocks. Good luck! Laura On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Roger Gibson <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Dear All, > > > > My apologies for the rather rambling message below. Please ignore, except > for the bit that I am trying to explore ways to “help students help > themselves”. Field schools appear to be particularly stressful and > exhausting and I would like the learning experience to be so much more > positive. The message from many of you has been that self-starters will > always prepare fitness-wise; I think that those who are battling in other > areas in class may gain great self-belief from improving fitness and, as a > result, be able to handle the mental challenges of fieldwork more readily, > thus improving confidence further, on top of enhancing their learning > experience. Fieldwork is, of course, what makes the theory come alive. > > > > Regards, > > > Roger > > > > *From:* Roger Gibson > *Sent:* 18 January 2018 01:57 PM > *To:* Tectonics & structural geology discussion list > *Subject:* RE: Pre-fieldwork fitness programs for students > > > > Hi All, > > > > Thanks for the input so far, and for the broadening of the question to > Health and Safety aspects. Some aspects of our situation may be unfamiliar > to you, so I am going to fill in a couple of gaps and make some very > general statements that I hope won’t be misconstrued. > > > > South Africa has a barely functioning public school education system and a > society that is undergoing a massive transition that affects higher > education in that a university degree is seen as the best way out of > historic poverty. In geology more than 70% of our undergrads are > first-generation university students and come from poor backgrounds. 90% of > our students are Black and, although the gender split is close to equal in > First Year, in higher years of study it is 70% female. If you ask most > students why they are studying geology it will be because they wanted to be > a doctor or an engineer but they did not qualify for those programs, or > because mining is perceived as a source of wealth (starting with providing > bursaries). So there are a lot more negatives in our system from the > perspective of student attitudes to their studies and, in this case, > fieldwork. Of course, this is not universal – we have the real enthusiasts, > and we pick up many more along the way who fall in love with geology (with > fieldwork being the most-cited reason for doing so). > > > > My original question thus comes from the perspective that the overwhelming > majority of our students come from backgrounds where working outdoors is > seen as a sign of poverty (hiking is NOT a recreational activity for most > of our population) and there is an expectation that a degree means that you > should NOT have to do physically demanding work (in fact, such work carries > an historic stigma). From nearly 30 years of running field trips I can > pretty confidently say that many of our female students perform better in > the classroom than in the field, whereas certain male students thrive on > the physical challenges of the field (even if this does not necessarily > translate into higher marks compared with their campus-based work). > > > > Add in a layer of widespread unrest across campuses related to demands > for free higher education (see #FeesMustFall if you are interested), I feel > that our fieldwork programmes are under considerable pressure as student > resistance to the physical demands of such a learning environment mixes > with resistance to authority/”the system”. Without boring you all with > penny psychoanalysis on how the root of all this is a feeling of > disempowerment and therefore lack of ownership of their learning brought > about by South Africa’s apartheid history and current schooling and > economic problems (with a little help from the Millennial mindset that sees > the thumb as the most important learning tool), I am thus looking for ways > to empower students to take responsibility for their learning. This is one > of the ways of getting them to take control of something that is within > their power to do. > > > > Just as a matter of information, geology graduates have historically been > predominantly employed in South Africa’s large mining industry, but with > the shift towards a predominantly female graduate population a new problem > has arisen with graduates meeting the stringent fitness requirements for > working underground. Principal among these is the heat tolerance test (in > which women experience a disadvantage). If we applied the mining industry > benchmarks at undergraduate level, I fear we would severely reduce our > available student population! > > > > (We are instituting options for First Aid course qualifications, again > because it is an empowering option as well as assisting us by providing > more qualified First Aiders on courses.) > > > > All the best, > > > Roger > > > > *From:* Tectonics & structural geology discussion list [ > mailto:[log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>] *On > Behalf Of *FERNANDEZ BELLON, OSCAR > *Sent:* 18 January 2018 10:45 AM > > *To:* [log in to unmask] > *Subject:* Re: Pre-fieldwork fitness programs for students > > > > As Janos points out, oil companies tend to take this very seriously, and > rightly so. For us this falls under occupational health, and prior to work > in the field, in offshore facilities or countries with specific health > risks, there exist specific assessments. These assessments normally fall > under the name of ‘fit for work’, and they are conducted by specifically > trained medical staff. I have not been able to find specific guidelines > from the health perspective, but IPIECA (www.ipieca.org) and IOGP ( > www.iogp.org) tend to be refence bodies for this. There are also > documents such as British Standard BS 8848 which you might want to check > (if your uni doesn’t mind paying for the download). Finally, industry > training organizations such as Nautilus tend to have guidelines which you > might also want to check: https://www.nautilusworld.com/ > FieldWorkSafety?category=Home > > > > > > cheers > > > > oscar > > > > > > > > *Oscar Fernandez Bellon* > > <http://www.repsol.com/> > > Structural Geology Advisor > > Structure & Tectonics Group > > > > Tel.: (+34) 91 7530954 <+34%20917%2053%2009%2054> > > [log in to unmask] > > > > > > > > > > > > *De:* Tectonics & structural geology discussion list [ > mailto:[log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>] *En > nombre de *Urai, Janos > *Enviado el:* 18 January 2018 09:29 > *Para:* [log in to unmask] > *Asunto:* Re: Pre-fieldwork fitness programs for students > > > > I am one of those who actually had a big accident. A student walked off a > footpath in the Alps, fell 15 m and was very close to dying. I was lucky to > have very experienced first aiders in the group, who helped to keep him > alive, arrange helicopter rescue and keep the group safe. > > > > I try to take field safety very seriously, especially after working for a > large oil company in the past, and at the same time I realise that we in > academia do not have the funding to take field safety to the levels large > companies require. > > > > (the student completely recovered after two months in hospital and 8 > operations) > > > > kind regards, > > > > Janos > > > > Prof. Dr. Janos L. Urai > > Structural Geology, Tectonics and Geomechanics > > RWTH Aachen University, Lochnerstrasse 4-20 > <https://maps.google.com/?q=Lochnerstrasse+4-20&entry=gmail&source=g> > > D-52056 Aachen, Germany > > T: +49 241 809 5723 <+49%20241%208095723> e-mail: > [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> > > www.ged.rwth-aachen.de > > > > > > > > > > (The student survived and has completely recovered). > > > > On 17. Jan 2018, at 2319:, Richard Styron <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > > > > The safety issues that Elisabeth brings up are pretty important to me. > > > > If I was putting together a field camp curriculum, I would have Day 1 (or > maybe Day -1, before leaving campus) be an all-day wilderness first aid > class—maybe even one that is Red Cross or NOLS certified (in the US, these > are usually done in 2 days but can be taught in one longer one). The basics > of hydration, dressing wounds, stabilizing joints, CPR etc. are pretty > straightforward to apply when the knowledge is fresh. To me, this knowledge > should be mandatory for any field geologist, and I would prefer not to do > much remote fieldwork with a partner who hasn’t had instruction in this. I > would submit that this knowledge and skills are more important and > information-dense than any single day of field camp, and are more likely to > be used ever again… > > > > However, regardless of whether the students actually have to use these > skills at field camp (and we surely hope they don’t), these courses > increase environmental and self-awareness as well as self-confidence. If > you just had a course instructing you on how to prepare against and treat > heat exhaustion/dehydration, sprained ankles, and snakebites (what I would > consider the big 3 things for students to watch out for in the western US), > you might just pack a little more water and look before you leap, but also > be less afraid of rough terrain because you practiced taking care of the > bad situations instead of just hearing about the dangers. You might even > pack a little first aid kit and know what stuff is in it! > > > > Oh, and this counts double for professors and TAs, who have actual > responsibility to administer care... > > > > —Richard > > > > > > > > On Jan 17, 2018, at 12:48 PM, Elisabeth Nadin <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > > I really love this conversation thread, it's a topic I haven't thought > about in particular (fitness test or training), but it's very relevant to > the field camp that we run. We often have students with poor joint issues, > meaning that by the end of 6 weeks they are taking painkillers every day > due to bad knees (even the young ones). > > > > I don't have an answer, but rather another set of questions, related to > safety: > > how many of you teaching field camp have grappled with safety issues at > outcrops? do you require helmets, or have them as an option? how many are > rigorously checking that students are wearing eye protection while using a > hammer? do you allow sunglasses as a substitute for lab glasses? what other > safety issues do you address that I may not have even thought of? > > Elisabeth > > > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 11:31 AM, Douwe van Hinsbergen < > [log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > My two cents: I run a 4 week, 1st year undergrad fieldwork in Spain. Often > with temperatures around 30C, bushy slopes, ~400 m elevation differences, > and with full day, 10 km hikes on a 6-day-a-week basis. We normally have > about 50 participants. We have no compulsory fitness courses, we only > mention that we expect that they are physically fit enough to participate. > Unfitness of students happens of course and is normally linked to being > overweight, or heavy smoking. Our experience is that such students become > fitter during the fieldwork. We don’t really see a structural problem with > fitness, nor a trend towards bigger unfitness (more the opposite, with > decreasing smoking and alcohol intake in the last decade). Students tend to > like fieldwork, and know that they’re gonna get sweaty, some more than > others. > > Incidentally, we have students with ‘real’ physical or mental challenges > (e.g. autism). We have students always working in the field in teams of 2. > Students with disabilities are then typically in teams of 3 (and they > design their own teams, we don’t assign this), with their two mates doing > the physically more challenging parts. Although this sometimes gives some > tension, it works generally very well. > > > > Cheers! > > Douwe > > > > > > > > -- > *Dr. Douwe J.J. van Hinsbergen *| Associate Professor | Department of > Earth Sciences | Utrecht University| Heidelberglaan 2 > <https://maps.google.com/?q=Heidelberglaan+2,+3584+CS+Utrecht&entry=gmail&source=g>, > 3584 CS Utrecht > <https://maps.google.com/?q=Heidelberglaan+2,+3584+CS+Utrecht&entry=gmail&source=g> > | Room 8.09 | tel. (030) 253 6712 | [log in to unmask] | > http://www.geologist.nl | > > > > On Jan 17, 2018, at 9:06 PM, Christie Rowe <[log in to unmask] > <[log in to unmask]>> wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > I think it's important to mention here that there is a lot of difference > in attitudes and practices of fitness between students of different > cultural and economic backgrounds. In my own field teaching I spend a ton > of time trying to help students feel comfortable just being out of doors, > learning about hygiene and safety while camping, respect and be very aware > of the rattlesnake but don't let fear of it stop you from leaving the > trail, etc. Even my mostly Canadian students who have spent lots of time > outdoors are not prepared for the desert environment in our Nevada field > course and can be caught unawares by the specific challenges. It's been > documented that students who don't grow up doing a lot of outdoors > activities can find this element of field geology a real turn off, which > might be keeping some people, particularly from under-represented groups, > from giving us a try. We can't afford to make fear/inexperience in the > field be a bottleneck that reduces our talent pool! > > > > There is no easy solution to making the boots-and-compass field work > accessible to everybody, but there are lots of ways to encourage students > and help them ease into it so they can fully enjoy the geology. Fear of > the unknown might be a big deterrent, so anything you can do to introduce > students with short trips before long trips, tell them when to buy boots > and break them in, suggest specific preparation routines, etc. will help > the students who didn't grow up in scouts to catch up with their outdoor > skills and comfort (and fitness). > > > > Christie > > > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 11:52 AM, John Wakabayashi < > [log in to unmask]> wrote: > > This is indeed an interesting subject, so I'll throw in some rambling > thoughts (no solutions, though), because I've been teaching field courses > for awhile and my main mapping exercise I've taught for the last 13 years > is in a moderately rugged area of the Coast Ranges of California with 550 m > of relief. Distances covered by a student in one day in the field exceed > 10 km for the longer field days with gross cumulative elevation gain of > >700m. Many slopes are steep, but not potentially lethal, and there is > some bad brush although most of the brushy areas are so bad they are > avoided. Has poor fitness of some students made this exercise difficult > and unpleasant for them? Yes. Would such students have benefitted from > some sort of fitness regimen prior to going into the field? Certainly yes, > but the difficult question is how to encourage such a program because it in > most educational systems such a program would have to be voluntary. In my > department, knowledge of the physical rigors of the above project has > prompted several students to do various sorts of training prior to it, but > in nearly all cases it has the most physically fit students who done this > rather than those that need it the most. > > > > My perception is that average level of physical fitness among geology > students (in California, USA) has declined over the last 4 decades or so, > since I was an undergrad taking my field classes. This seems to mirror > national trends in physical fitness, more than it does the decrease in > field training in geology departments. In any case, I do not have > solutions, but I am very interested to see what ideas folks have about > this. I think this is not so much a geologically-specific problem, so much > as it is a general question of how one convinces students about the > benefits of physical fitness. I would not be getting out in the field at > all--in fact I would barely be able to walk-- were it not for fairly > intense training that has overcome mild asthma, two knee operations (and > many more injuries that didn't end up with surgery), multiple ankle > injuries (very bad sprains, and one break), and three decades of back > problems (which were more or less erased by a new training regimen begun in > my early 50s). > > > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 7:31 AM, Alan Gibbs <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Hello Roger, apart from the obvious students who are physically challenged > that Terry mentions I don’t think that what you describe should be a major > challenge for students. > > My gut feel is that the flagging participation level is due to some other > cause, maybe they don’t see the relevance, are lacking the group cohesion > that often makes field course great fun for students, or just need more > beer afterwards. Anyway sounds like boredom rather than a real physical > issue and a “fitness regime” would probably add to problem. > > Take a step back and see if you can see a different picture rather than > one of snowflakes. > > > > All the very best, > > > > Alan Gibbs > > > > *From:* Tectonics & structural geology discussion list [mailto: > [log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Pavlis, Terry L > *Sent:* 17 January 2018 14:06 > *To:* [log in to unmask] > *Subject:* Re: Pre-fieldwork fitness programs for students > > > > This question is an interesting contrast to other discussions in the forum > about field work that are the absolute opposite—what do we do with students > who are physically challenged and can’t do even a field class where the > physical demands are less rigorous? > > I don’t think there is an easy solution in this case or the other one. > We’ve always dealt with these situations on a case by case basis, but it > makes a lot of work for the instructor and a lot of agony for students. > The worst is to have a student enter a field course thinking they can > handle it, but then have to drop out because they can’t handle the physical > demands—clearly what you’re trying to avoid here. Were I in your shoes, I > think I’d probably do something like develop a student questionare where > they could give you an evaluation of their fitness, then meet with those > you have concerns over individually. Then develop some kind of alternative > for those who you fear might be either a problem, or even in danger, > because of their fitness. There are a lot of talented people who have > physical challenges who would make spectacular geologists, and we’ve been > bad at dealing with this as a profession. I feel your pain about student > fitness (I’m almost 65 and still can outwalk most of the students who take > my field class) but you might question your own procedures in that the > statement “flagging participation levels by students” might reflect a > problem in course logistics where the class has gotten a reputation. > > As an aside, many of us here in NA have 5-6 week field courses that are > required. (this is no longer universal, however, as many have lowered this > requirement) We actually divide our class into two 3 week segments. In my > case, 200m of relief doesn’t really sound all that bad physically—we just > ran a 3 week winter course in an area with that much relief and I thought > it was a pleasant changef from some classes where we’ve worked in 400-500m > of relief. We didn’t have brush though, so the comparison is poor. > > Hope this is useful. > > Terry Pavlis > > Univ. Texas El Paso > > > > *From:* Tectonics & structural geology discussion list [ > mailto:[log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>] *On > Behalf Of *Roger Gibson > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 17, 2018 4:40 AM > *To:* [log in to unmask] > *Subject:* Pre-fieldwork fitness programs for students > > > > Dear List Members, > > > > I am interested in finding out if anyone has set up a required/recommended > 4-6 month fitness regimen for students engaging in summer field camps, and > whether any input has been obtained from sports scientists or fitness > experts about what is reasonable and what range of expectations needs to be > factored into evaluation of such a program in terms of individual health > profiles of students. I would also be keen to hear from anyone about > experiences with regard to incentivising/enforcing fitness compliance; > i.e., whether evaluation of pre-mapping fitness is done, and how > non-compliance with minimum levels is dealt with. > > > > As background, I am interested in developing minimum recommended fitness > levels for a ca. 10-day field mapping trip that is a compulsory component > of an undergraduate course. The mapping area is relatively small (3-4 km2) > but physically very demanding (~200 m relief, with dense thornveld > vegetation; daytime temperatures can reach 25-30 °C) and I am trying to > address flagging participation levels by students who appear to be > experiencing difficulties completing a full day’s work to the recommended > levels. I am aware that Summer Camps in the US, which may last more than 4 > weeks in remote areas, may set fitness levels and require prior proof > thereof, but I think these may be voluntary/optional courses, so one would > expect participation to be more enthusiastic. > > > > Thanks in advance, > > > > Roger Gibson > > > > Roger L. Gibson > > Professor of Structural Geology and Metamorphic Petrology > > Head, School of Geosciences > > University of the Witwatersrand > > P O WITS > > Johannesburg 2050 > > SOUTH AFRICA > > > > Tel. +27 11 7176553 <+27%2011%20717%206553> > > Sec. +27 11 7176547 <+27%2011%20717%206547> > > Fax. +27 11 7176579 <+27%2011%20717%206579> > > Email: [log in to unmask] > > > > > > This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. > If you have received this communication in error, please notify us > immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or > disseminate this communication without the permission of the University. > Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into agreements on > behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content > of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may > contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not > necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, > Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are > subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the > contrary. </table<> > > > > > > > > > > -- > > *********************************************** > Christie Rowe > Associate Prof & Wares Faculty Scholar > > Canada Research Chair in Earthquake Geology > Earth & Planetary Sciences, McGill University > 3450 University St., Montreal, QC H3A 0E8 > Office: 514 398 2769 <(514)%20398-2769> > http://eps.mcgill.ca/~crowe > > > > > > > > > > AVISO LEGAL: > Esta información es privada y confidencial y está dirigida únicamente a su > destinatario. Si usted no es el destinatario original de este mensaje y por > este medio pudo acceder a dicha información, por favor, elimine el mensaje. > La distribución o copia de este mensaje está estrictamente prohibida. Esta > comunicación es solo para propósitos de información y no debería ser > considerada como una declaración oficial de Repsol. La transmisión del > correo electrónico no garantiza que sea seguro o esté libre de error. Por > consiguiente, no manifestamos que esta información sea completa o precisa. > Toda información está sujeta a alterarse sin previo aviso. This information > is private and confidential and intended for the recipient only. If you are > not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any > review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly > prohibited. This communication is for information purposes only and should > not be regarded as an official statement from Repsol. Email transmission > cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free. Therefore, we do not > represent that this information is complete or accurate and it should not > be relied upon as such. All information is subject to change without > notice. > > LEGAL ADVERTISEMENT: > This information is private and confidential and intended for the > recipient only. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you > are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying > of this message is strictly prohibited. This communication is for > information purposes only and should not be regarded as an official > statement from Repsol. Email transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure > or error-free. Therefore, we do not represent that this information is > complete or accurate and it should not be relied upon as such. All > information is subject to change without notice. Esta información es > privada y confidencial y está dirigida únicamente a su destinatario. Si > usted no es el destinatario original de este mensaje y por este medio pudo > acceder a dicha información, por favor, elimine el mensaje. La distribución > o copia de este mensaje está estrictamente prohibida. Esta comunicación es > solo para propósitos de información y no debería ser considerada como una > declaración oficial de Repsol. La transmisión del correo electrónico no > garantiza que sea seguro o esté libre de error. Por consiguiente, no > manifestamos que esta información sea completa o precisa. Toda información > está sujeta a alterarse sin previo aviso. > > > > This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the permission of the University. Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary. > > -- Dr Laura C Gregory NERC Independent Research Fellow Institute of Geophysics & Tectonics School of Earth & Environment University of Leeds Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK [log in to unmask] +44 (0)113 343 1335 <+44%20113%20343%201335> (office) +44 (0)113 343 6714 <+44%20113%20343%206714> (lab)