PROBLEM-SOLVING IN EARTH HISTORY
(GEO 204)
FALL, 2015
Instructor: D. E. Fastovsky; Office: 313 Woodward Hall; Hours: Anytime MWF that you can catch me; T,Th are
research days; generally, disturb only when necessary.
T.A. TBA
Email: defastov@uri; Phone: 401-874-2185; FAX: 401-874-2190
Time: 11:00 – 11:50 am MWF; Laboratory W 2:00 – 3:50 pm
Sakai: Virtually all class business will be carried out in Sakai. This means that copies of all assignments, hand-outs,
and notices will be archived in Sakai. Submission of papers, however, will be directly to me via email.
Required Texts (Bookstore):
Gastaldo, R.A., Savrda, C.E., and Lewis, R.D., 2006, Deciphering Earth History: Exercise in Physical Geology (4th
ed): Contemporary Publishing Company of Raleigh, Raleigh, NC.
Required Texts (You buy (used?) on Amazon [much more cheaply]):
Winchester, S., 2001, The Map the Changed the World: William Smith and the Birth of Modern Geology:
Harper Perennial, NY, 368 p.
Sobel, D., 1995, Longitude: Fourth Estate Publishing, NY, 228 p.
Bjornernud, M., 2005, Reading the Rocks: The Autobiography of the Earth: Basic Books, NY, 2006 p.
Also:
Any decent historical textbook that you can find; thirteen + are available for your use in rm. 327!
Grading:

Oral presentations (Group): 25%

Synthesis paper (Group): 40% of grade

Laboratory (Individual): 12.5% of the grade

Quizzes (Individual): 12.5% of the grade

Book Reviews (2) 10% of grade

Grades will not be curved.
Attendance: Mandatory; BUT everybody gets 1 unexcused absence; each subsequent unexcused absence costs
1%/problem in which absence occurs; absence on a presentation day costs 3%/problem/day.
Late Work: Late work is not accepted.
Laboratory (including field trips): All students are expected to participate; full participation is required to pass the
course. Laboratory projects are all due at the beginning of the following laboratory.
Field Trip: This class involves two field trips! Full participation is mandatory (which means that it will be very hard
to pass this class if you miss the trips). The trips are necessary, but not sufficient, for passing this class.
Check the dates carefully and be available.
Make-up Policy: There will be no make-ups. In the case of legitimate conflicts, notification required at least one
week in advance. In the case of deaths, accidents, or sickness, notification required within a week of the
regularly scheduled due date. All excuses must be in writing.
Note: Any student with a documented disability is welcome to contact me as early in the semester as possible so
that we may arrange reasonable accommodations. As part of this process, you’ll need to be in touch with
URI’s Office of Disability Services, located in Room 330 of the Memorial Union (874-2098).
General Note: This syllabus is an outline of proposed events. It is subject to change; however, never without
meaningful advanced notification.
GEO 204 Problem-Solving in Earth History (Fall, 2015): Syllabus & Guidelines
Page 2
GEO 204
THE POINT OF THIS COURSE
GEO 204 emphasizes three geologically significant content areas:
 Geological time;
 The logic of scientific thought; and
 Stratigraphy.
GEO 204 emphasizes other critical skills:
 Expository writing;
 Problem-solving;
 Research techniques;
 Teamwork; and
 Oral presentation of scientific results.
General.
GEO 204 is taught using four problems, corresponding to geological time, the logic of scientific thought, and
stratigraphy. Here’s how it will happen:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Your group will be presented with a problem;
First, you define the nature of the problem (e.g., make sure you understand what is being asked for);
Then, you construct a strategy for solving the problem;
Implement that strategy, assigning tasks where appropriate; and
Finally, you present your solutions to the problem orally and in writing. In the written part, content;
written expression, and format are most important. Three iterations of corrections and resubmissions –
one, each, for content, written expression, and format – for each paper may be necessary per problem set.
In the oral part, content, presentation style, and delivery, will be most important. Rubrics (below, p. 11 –
12; 14) highlight the key criteria.
Justification.
Content and written expression require no justification; their importance is self-evident. Format is important
because as a professional (either an academic or working in the private sector), each of your work products
will need to conform to somebody else’s template. You must learn, therefore, to imitate other styles and
conform to other formats.
How Does this Course Work?
The class is divided into randomly selected, but permanent groups. The work is divided into Group Activities and
Individual Activities.
Group Activities:
1.
Work through the problem set in your group. Solve it over the course of the problem set. Because this
course has no lectures, you have time in class; however, you will need to take time out of class to get all
the work done. I am here to help you.
2.
Produce a Synthesis Paper that introduces the problem, and describes the approach and presents its
solution. One of you will take the lead as Synthesizer; that person is expected to take the lead in putting
together the paper based upon group discussions, input from individual group members, and feedback
from group presentations. The role of Synthesizer must rotate within the group with each project until
everybody has done one synthesis paper. For any paper, the group can either accept the grade or have a
Reviser – a group member different from the Synthesizer – edit the paper within one week after receiving
it to improve the grade. I then review it again, checking to see how the group has responded to peerreview and to my review. Everybody takes his/her turn in these roles.
GEO 204 Problem-Solving in Earth History (Fall, 2015): Syllabus & Guidelines
3.
Page 3
Give a 15-minute PowerPoint presentation (12 minutes, talk; 3 minutes, questions; see pages 13 - 14)
explaining and defending the group’s solution to the problem. Again, one member of the group (the
Presenter) is expected to take the lead in presenting the material. Everybody takes his/her turn in this
role a well.
Individual Activities:
a)
b)
c)
d)
There will be quizzes periodically. These will cover material that has been dealt with in the most
recent problem set, as well as any assigned readings. You will not be quizzed on material from
an ongoing problem set.
As the projects are presented, each person will be expected to participate in the general
discussion. You will be graded based upon the quality/quantity of your contribution to that
discussion.
You will be asked to provide an evaluation of the other members’ contributions to the group for
that problem. The scores from each group member will be averaged to generate an evaluation
factor (ranging from 0.7 – 1.05). The final grade for the synthesis paper and presentation will be
obtained by multiplying those grades by the evaluation factor (as determined by the other
members of the group).
There are three books to read; one is to be read by everybody; the other two are chosen from
the reading list provided here. There will be a quiz on the first of these books towards the end of
the semester; I am requesting written book reviews of the other two books; please check the
Timetable for all of these due dates (the quiz and the book reviews).
The Group Dynamic:
Among the goals of this class are building skills in working together, assuming the leadership role in, and
responsibility for, a project, and equitably apportioning tasks.
Occasionally it comes to pass that one member consistently does not pull his/her weight in the projects,
and thus relies upon the efforts of the rest of the group. Such a person could obviously let a group down
by taking responsibility for work and then not carrying it out. Two solutions are available for this problem
(both to be implemented at my discretion):
1.
The Synthesizer or Presenter alone receives credit for what is submitted; the rest of the group is given
a specified length of time to revise the work and present it as representative of their group. This
option can only occur once;
2.
The group may elect to vote a member “off the island” (e.g., to expel a member). This can only occur
(a) by unanimous vote; (b) after the completion of the 2nd problem set; and (c) with my prior
approval. The person voted out of the group must then fend for him/herself for the rest of the
course. This is obviously not a decision to be taken lightly, nor is it a good place to be for either
the original group or the individual voted off. Individuals “voted off the island” can and should
consider banding together.
Please note:
 In this course there is far too much work for one person to do alone. Get smart: the way to “beat”
this course is to divide the labor up, and contribute total. That’s the teamwork aspect of this;
you’ll need it to get by.

You and your group are not in competition with anybody or anything. It’s all about the quality of the
work that you do; compete against yourself and better your best effort!
GEO 204 Problem-Solving in Earth History (Fall, 2015): Syllabus & Guidelines
Page 4
University (and my) Policy on Original Work:
Students are expected to be honest in all academic work. A student’s name on any written work, quiz or exam shall
be regarded as assurance that the work is the result of the student’s own independent thought and study. Work
should be stated in the student’s own words, properly attributed to its source. Students have an obligation to
know how to quote, paraphrase, summarize, cite and reference the work of others with integrity.
The following are examples of academic dishonesty:
• Using material, directly or paraphrasing, from published sources (print or electronic) without appropriate citation;
• Claiming disproportionate credit for work not done independently;
• Unauthorized possession or access to exams;
• Unauthorized communication during exams;
• Unauthorized use of another’s work or preparing work for another student;
• Taking an exam for another student;
• Altering or attempting to alter grades;
• The use of notes or electronic devices to gain an unauthorized advantage during exams
• Fabricating or falsifying facts, data or references;
• Facilitating or aiding another’s academic dishonesty; and
• Submitting the same paper for more than one course without prior approval from the instructors.
GEO 204 Problem-Solving in Earth History (Fall, 2015): Syllabus & Guidelines
Page 5
TIMETABLE
Fall, 2015
Week
1
1
Date
09/09
09/11
Problem
2
2
09/14
09/16
2
09/18
3
3
3
09/21
09/23
09/25
4
4
09/28
09/30
4
10/02
5
5
5
10/3-4/15
10/05
10/07
10/09
6
6
6
10/12
10/14
10/16
7
7
7
10/19
10/21
10/23
8
8
8
10/26
10/28
10/30
Presentations 2
Presentations 2
GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA
(GSA) NATIONAL MEETING – no class
9
9
9
11/02
11/04
11/06
GSA NATIONAL MEETING – no class
GSA NATIONAL MEETING – no class
Quiz no. 2 (Problem no. 2)
11/07-08/15
11/09
11/11
11/13
Overnight field trip to Early Jurassic of CT
10
10
10
Problem I: Science and the Kraken
Lab & Readings
No lab this week!
Rosh Hashana – class cancelled
Lab 3: Relative time and the sequence of
events
Lab 4: Lithostratigraphy
Yom Kippur – class cancelled
Lab 5: Biostratigraphy
Lab 6: Radioisotopic dating techniques
(two weeks)
Problem 1, v. 1 Due
Problem 2: The Age of Rocks
Overnight Field Trip to Devonian of NY
Presentations 1
Presentations 1
Quiz no. 1 (Problem no. 1)
Guest Speaker: Jon Grant, Smithsonian
Institution, Washington, D.C.
Lab 1: Sedimentary rocks I
Lab 2: Sedimentary rocks II
Book Review 1 due (8:30 am,
electronically, in DEF email)
Paleontology I
Problem 2, v. 1 due
Problem 3: Breaking up is hard to do
NO CLASSES; VETERANS’S DAY
Paleontology II
Paleontology III
Book Review 2 due (8:30 am,
electronically, in DEF email)
GEO 204 Problem-Solving in Earth History (Fall, 2015): Syllabus & Guidelines
11
11
11
11/16
11/18
11/20
12
12
12
11/23
11/25
11/27
Presentations 3
Presentations 3
Thanksgiving recess; no classes
13
13
13
11/30
12/02
12/04
Quiz no. 3 (problem no. 3)
14
14
14
12/07
12/09
12/11
Quiz 4 (on Bjornerud book) – open book
Problem 3, v. 1 due
Problem 4: Dinosaur Digs
Problem 4 due (no quiz on this problem)
Page 6
GEO 204 Problem-Solving in Earth History (Fall, 2015): Syllabus & Guidelines
Page 7
SYNTHESIS PAPER GUIDELINES
You should think of this paper as you would a research or term paper; it should be a full write-up of the complete
solution to the problem, especially including up-to-date, peer-reviewed references.
The synthesis paper should summarize the approach, assumptions, solution(s), and sources of information used by
the group in addressing the problem. The form of this paper must exactly follow the attached directions (p. 7 - 9).
The synthesis paper is due on the dates posted in the Schedule and should be submitted electronically.
I will read and evaluate the Synthesis Paper based upon the criteria outlined in the Synthesis Paper Rubric (p. 12 13; but see pages 7 - 11 as well). Each of my reviews of your paper will have a different focus (content, language;
format) and you should respond to each of the reviews. The idea is to allow you to focus on each of these
different qualities of manuscripts and make the suggested changes. Just like a published manuscript, therefore,
your paper will go through several iterations as it finally gets where it needs to be.
So how does the Synthesis Paper part work?
1.
Submit Synthesis Paper (due 8:30 am in my mailbox ([email protected]); no exceptions
without prior permission from me);
2.
Evaluations of first drafts by me, usually within a week of submission;
3.
Read and returned;
4.
First revision is due 1 week after first drafts have been returned;
5.
The cycle (1 – 4) repeats twice more; and
6.
Your final grade for this work will be an average of the original and the revisions.
.
General:
Use current pertinent literature.
 Use scientific or technical journals for your report. Do NOT use encyclopedias (including Wikipedia),
or re-chewed popular journals (like Discovery, Natural History, or Earth). Avoid using the
rehashes of original work in scientific journals by science writers. Read the original, pertinent
literature in the original scientific publications by the people that did the science in the first place.
 Books generally - but not always - should be avoided. Most of the information in them is out of date.
 The web. The web can be helpful, but the web is a double-edged sword- use it sparingly. It is useful
for a lot, but it also misleads. Progress in science is based on peer-reviewed publications, that is,
work that has been read by other scientists qualified in that field, and identified by them as
valuable and worthy of publication. It is peer-reviewed publications that you ultimately must use
to support your work.
 A good, effective way to use the web is:
1. Get on the web, look up the subject in question, and get the general “lay of the land;”
2. Obtain peer-reviewed citations in professional journals to actually learn about the subject and
to justify the claims that you make in your papers and presentations.
3. Do not quote blogs, popular magazines, or web pages; they are not peer-reviewed and do not
qualify.
 Interlibrary loan is very strong in the age of computers. However, you almost certainly will find that you
need to use either the GSO library or perhaps even the Brown University library to obtain the
journals you need.
 Ad hominem attacks are never acceptable. That is, you quibble with the science, not the scientist
(his/her personality, integrity, etc.). This isn’t politics, and you can’t strengthen your argument
by impugning the personal qualities of the scientist.
Format:

It should be on a computer written in MS Word. I although I more or less hate this program, it is the
industry standard.
GEO 204 Problem-Solving in Earth History (Fall, 2015): Syllabus & Guidelines

















Page 8
It should be no longer than 5 pages of text including figures (but excluding references).
It should be double-spaced, with 1” margins.
Text should be left justified.
It should be in 12-pt font with a conventional typescript.
Citations and headings should be in Geological Society of America format. You can find examples of this
format by reading GEOLOGY, GSA Bulletin, and GSA Today. There are copies of these common
journals in rm. 312. N.B. Students go on the website sometimes, and look for the journal’s format.
This can be extremely confusing; I do NOT recommend it.
Subheadings within the paper are of your choosing (see “Contents” below).
Sub-headings should be left-justified.
Abstract should be bold-faced.
Citations should be in a section entitled “References Cited,” which will include only those references
that you cite. The References Cited section can be single-spaced, and hanging indents must be used.
Here you must follow GSA format; the best way to do this is to imitate it by using examples from GSA
journals (found in rm. 312)
All pages should be numbered in the upper right-hand corner as “Page #.”
Indent paragraphs;
Do NOT leave a line or any extra space between each paragraph (Word automatically does this; you
need to undo that command which is under Format Paragraph Spacing). Indentation should
NOT be accomplished using the spacd or tab keys.
The first page should contain the Problem Title (centered), the names of the group members (with that
of the Synthesizer underlined), and the date (both, right justified). In the remaining space the text
should begin. The first page should NOT be numbered. In short, there is no cover page.
Formal Linnaean groups should be capitalized, except when not in formal form (e.g., Bivalvia; bivalves;
and Dinosauria; dinosaurs)
Genera and species are always italicized (or underlined); Genera are capitalized; species are not (e.g.,
Tyrannosaurus rex).
Use of quotes: Quotes are only acceptable to use if (1) you introduce the author of the quote in some
meaningful way, (e.g., D.E. Fastovsky, the worst professor in the history of the planet, was often
heard to say, “Always introduce quotes!!”); (2) the quote says something in a way that isn’t really
duplicable by paraphrasing; and (3) the citation includes the page number from where the quote was
derived.
Synthesis papers due electronically to [email protected] on or before 8:30 am on the day that they are
due. The Subject Heading in the email should give your Group number, the Synthesis Paper number,
and the Revision number (e.g., Group 1, Synthesis Paper 2, Revision 3). The paper should be attached
as a MS Word document.
Contents:

Abstract
 Brief statement describing what the problem was about, your approach, and what you concluded
(one paragraph). This is an abstraction of your paper; it says in very brief format what your
paper says in extended format. It is not an introduction!
 Common error: people often say what they did, or how they will solve the problem in the abstract.
Don’t do it! Tell us instead your results. A word to the wise: Abstract ≠ Introduction!
 Hint: Write the abstract after you have written your paper.
Introduction
 Introductory material sets the stage for the work that follows. Along with presenting background, it
should pique the busy reader’s interest (“Why should I care about this?”) and bring the reader to
the level at which the paper will be comprehensible to the audience at which it is aimed.

Exposition – the guts of your paper
GEO 204 Problem-Solving in Earth History (Fall, 2015): Syllabus & Guidelines






Page 9
The word “Exposition” is NOT a subtitle (like “Introduction” or “Conclusion”; it is a description of this
part of your paper. Use subtitles of your choosing.
Describe how you went about solving the problem and answering the questions associated with the
problem.
Be specific about assumptions made, the facts that support them, and the sources of information
used.
Lay out explicitly all calculations (when used). Remember to use and list appropriate units, and keep
them straight. Equations when appropriate are expected; please number them.
Use appropriate terms throughout.
Conclusions
 Describe what you can and cannot conclude regarding the answer(s) to the problem. Identify
possible approaches to those parts of the problem for which you could not reach conclusions.
DO NOT summarize your paper (e.g., write a second Abstract) in the Conclusions section.
Other
Do not make dumb grammatical errors. For example:
1. Data are plural; datum is singular.
2. It’s is a contraction for “it is;” its is possessive.
Mistakes of this type will be grounds for a week in the stocks, keel-hauling, hanging from a yardarm,
execution by firing squad (without cigarette), drawing and quartering, walking the plank, breaking on the
Wheel, a year in Solitary, a month in a Tiger Cage, water torture, death-by-a-thousand cuts, being thrown
from a parapet, 10 years’ hard time, boiled in hot oil, and confiscation of your half-filled beer can and
iPhone (not necessarily in that order).
3. Species and generic names are italicized. All formal names are capitalized. Other nouns are not (this is not
German). Thus the group called “archosaurs” is not capitalized; however, if you refer to its formal name –
Archosauria – then it is capitalized! How easy is that?!
GEO 204 Problem-Solving in Earth History (Fall, 2015): Syllabus & Guidelines
Page 10
TIPS ON HOW TO WRITE WELL
Here are some really basic, good tips that will significantly improve any writing you do for the rest of your life:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Write a thesis statement (that is the focal point or raison d’etre) of your entire work.
This statement should be at or very near the last sentence of your first paragraph.
Outline your work. The outline should be composed of the topic sentences of each paragraph.
Each paragraph should have a topic sentence at the beginning; the rest of the paragraph should be an
explication of that topic sentence.
Each sentence must precisely follow from the one before.
Each paragraph must precisely follow from the one before, and relate directly to the thesis statement.
Read lots of well-written literature (i.e., books) before bed each night.
N.B. Good basic advice: Write succinctly, choosing your words thoughtfully and carefully. Remember the old
adage:
“If I had more time I’d have written it shorter!”
Extra words ≠ extra quality. Nobody believes this but it’s true. And that’s why poetry is so hard to write. Write
skillfully, not voluminously.
HOW TO WRITE GOOD
Frank L. Visco
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
Avoid alliteration. Always.
Prepositions are not words to end sentences with.
Avoid clichés like the plague (They’re old hat).
Employ the vernacular.
Eschew ampersands & abbreviations, etc.
Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are unnecessary.
It is wrong to ever split an infinitive.
Contractions aren’t necessary.
Foreign words and phrases are neither de rigeur, nor apropos, even if they give your writing that certain je
ne sais quoi (but I don’t know what it is).
One should never generalize.
Eliminate quotations. As Ralph Waldo Emerson once said, “I hate quotations. Tell me what you know.”
Comparisons are as bad as clichés.
Don’t be redundant; don’t use more words than are necessary; it’s highly superfluous.
Profanity sucks.
Be more or less specific.
Understatement is always best.
Exaggeration is a billion times worse than understatement.
One-word sentences? Eliminate.
Also one-clause paragraphs.
Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake.
The passive voice is to be avoided.
Go around the barn at high noon to avoid colloquialisms.
Even if a mixed metaphor sings, it should be derailed.
Who needs rhetorical questions?
GEO 204 Problem-Solving in Earth History (Fall, 2015): Syllabus & Guidelines
Page 11
SYNTHESIS PAPER RUBRIC
Format (20%)
95
Abstract; Introduction;
text body, conclusions,
and citations all
present. Formatting as
stipulated above (p. 79 above) incl. spacing,
paragraph style, page
numbering, section
titles, quotations
introduced. Package
neat and well
presented with no
spelling errors. Figures
attractive; well
integrated into text;
appropriately placed;
appropriate captions.
In proper order.
Whole package
seamless.
Citations and
appropriate to ideas;
citations correctly
formatted in text and
in back of paper; peerreviewed articles
emphasized; with
minimal use of
websites dominate key
ideas in text.
85
Abstract; Introduction;
text body, conclusions,
and citations all
present. Formatting as
stipulated above (p. 79 above) incl. spacing,
paragraph style, page
numbering, section
titles, quotations
introduced. Figures
appropriately placed;
good captions. In
proper order. Package
very presentable, with a
few minor glitches of
formatting.
Complete and
appropriate to ideas;
citations correctly
formatted in text and in
back of paper; mix of
websites and peerreviewed articles
75
Paper missing one
of the required
elements (p. 7- 9
above).
Nearly complete
and more or less
appropriate to
ideas; citations
generally correctly
positioned; mix of
websites and
peer-reviewed
articles
65
Paper missing
more than one
of the required
elements (p. 7- 9
above).
Incomplete
and/or not
appropriate to
ideas; overreliance on
websites and
articles that are
not peerreviewed.
GEO 204 Problem-Solving in Earth History (Fall, 2015): Syllabus & Guidelines
Language (including
geosciences
conventions and
general correctness;
35%)
Content
and Ideas; Science
(45%)
Language fluent.
Paragraphs have topic
sentences; paragraphs
well-connected; worduse precise; minimalist
(not padded); no
jargon or
colloquialisms; not
awkward or clumsy.
Word use refined;
sophisticated. Figures
well-integrated in text.
See p. 8 - 9 above.
Good introductory and
explanatory material
(“Why we care!”);
well-developed,
detailed exposition;
reaches reasonable
conclusions in context
of exposition. Figures
present, well-chosen.
Manuscript well
illustrated. Point of
view well argued;
sophisticated
reasoning. Topic
approached and
researched creatively
and completely;
evidence of original
thought. Wellsupported by
literature research.
Generally suggests
profound insights into
the problem.
Page 12
Language
communicative.
Paragraphs have topic
sentences; paragraphs
well-connected; worduse precise; minimalist
(not padded); no jargon
or colloquialisms; not
awkwardly written.
Complete
sentences not
used. Paragraphs
not wellconnected; worduse imprecise;
with extraneous
words; jargon or
colloquialisms
used; awkwardly
written.
Language fails to
communicate
ideas. Words
not used
properly.
Paragraphs
lacking links;
topic sentences.
Complete
sentences not
used.
See p. 8 - 9 above.
Good introductory and
explanatory material
(“Why we care!”); welldeveloped exposition;
reaches reasonable
conclusions in context
of exposition. Figures
present, well-chosen;
illustrative of points
made in text. Topic
approached
conventionally, but
completely. Wellsupported by literature
research Treatment
shows some depth.
See p. 8 - 9 above.
Introductory and
explanatory
material (“Why we
care!”) minimal or
irrelevant;
exposition not
strong;
conclusions not
well-supported in
context of
exposition.
Figures absent,
not supportive of
ideas, or not
germane. Lacking
evidence of
original thought.
Literature
research cursory.
Subject
incompletely
treated.
Treatment
generally
superficial and
marginally
adequate
See p. 8 - 9
above.
Introductory and
explanatory
material (“Why
we care!”)
irrelevant or
absent;
exposition weak;
conclusions not
supported in
context of
exposition.
Figures absent,
or not germane.
Treatment
missing a lot of
information.
Literature search
inadequate.
Subject
treatment
superficial and
inadequate
GEO 204 Problem-Solving in Earth History (Fall, 2015): Syllabus & Guidelines
Page 13
PRESENTATION GUIDELINES
General








12-minute maximum (3 min. for questions)
Q & A afterwards from instructor and audience
Presentation must be in PowerPoint or equivalent program
Only one Presenter (to rotate among group members)
All members of Group expected to participate in Q & A
Presenter must inform instructor about any extra audiovisual needs (e.g., needs beyond PowerPoint) at
least two days in advance of presentation;
It is the group’s responsibility to bring a laptop that will satisfactorily run PowerPoint and can be used to
drive the projector.
Presentations will be videoed to show you see how you appear to others.
Content
The appropriate and effective of visual aids is expected. Presentation should contain the following:


Introduction
Brief description of problem and group’s understanding of problem


Solution
An explanation of how the group’s approach solved the problem. This should include a description of the
assumptions that had to be made, as well as substantiation of such assumptions. Be explicit!


Conclusion:
A summary of what was solved and what remains unsolved.
GEO 204 Problem-Solving in Earth History (Fall, 2015): Syllabus & Guidelines
Page 14
PRESENTATION RUBRIC
Format (15%)
Technical
Presentation
(20%)
Speaker (25%)
Content and
Ideas; Science
(40%)
95
Introduction, Exposition,
and Conclusions separate
and complete and clearly
demarked. Audience has
clear sense of talk
organization and where
they are in talk.
Slides are aesthetic; writing
is clearly visible against
background; letters
correctly sized for viewing
at back of room; not too
much writing on page;
slides not too complicated
or cluttered; not too many
or too few slides (about
1/minute of talk); a single
point/slide; Presentation
visually striking and
effective
Talk delivered smoothly; at
right speed and volume;
effective use of slides as
illustrations of points;
pointer highlights key
features of slides as related
to talk; speaker grabs
attention of audience;
ultimately compelling;
85
Introduction,
Exposition, and
Conclusions separate
and complete.
75
Introduction,
Exposition, and
Conclusions
muddled;
unclear.
65
Introduction,
Exposition, and/or
Conclusions missing
from talk.
Slides are not ugly;
writing is visible
against background;
letters visible; pages
not too cluttered; not
too many or too few
slides (about
1/minute of talk); a
single point/slide;
Presentation effective
Slides not
attentiongrabbing; maybe
some problems
with visibility,
clutter; about 1
slide/minute;
presentation OK
but perhaps not
arresting.
Slides unattractive;
consistent
problems with
visibility, and/or
clutter; slide
number not
correct; visual
aspects of
presentation
generally
inadequate.
Talk delivered
smoothly; appropriate
speed and volume;
general use of slides
as illustrations of
points; good use of
pointer; speaker
reasonably clear and
comprehensible.
Delivery a bit
rough or halting;
speed and/or
volume perhaps
not properly
adjusted; general
use of slides OK;
somewhat
comprehensible
Clear relevant introduction;
ideas excellent; well
supported both logically
and by literature. Shows
creativity and profound
insight into the problem.
Conclusions riveting.
Introduction
satisfactory;
treatment shows a
little original thought
some depth of
understanding of the
problem. Conclusions
appropriate.
Introduction
inadequate;
treatment
generally
superficial,
lacking in
creativity, and
marginally
adequate.
Conclusions
marginally
satisfactory.
Delivery rough;
possibly many
“uhs” breaking the
flow of the lecture;
speed and/or
volume perhaps
not properly
adjusted;
ineffective use of
slides; ideas not
completely clear.
Introduction
inadequate.
Subject treatment
superficial, lacking
in creativity, and
inadequate.
Conclusions
insufficient and/or
not particularly
interesting.
GEO 204 Problem-Solving in Earth History (Fall, 2015): Syllabus & Guidelines
Page 15
GEO 204
Readings
Everybody must read:
Bjornernud, M., 2005, Reading the Rocks: Westview Press, NY, 237 p.
There will be a quiz on this book late in the semester (see revised Timetable in Syllabus
– posted in Sakai)
Please pick two of the following books, and read them. You will then be asked to write a
review of each book. The due dates for each of these reviews – as well as some
guidelines for them – will be posted in the revised Timetable in the Syllabus – and
available in Sakai.
Repcheck, J., 2003, The Man Who Found Time (James Hutton and the Discovery of the
Earth’s Antiquity): Perseus Publishing, Cambridge, MA 247 p.
Winchester, S., 2001, The Map that Changed the World: Harper Collins, NY, 329 p.
Cutler, A., 2003, The Seashell on the Mountaintop (A Story of Science,Sainthood, and
the Humble Genius who Discovered a New History of the Earth): Dutton, NY,
228 p.
Sobel, D., 1995, Longitude (The True Story of a Lone Genius Who Solved the Greatest
Scientific Problem of His Time): Walker Publishing Company, NY, 184 p.
Fara, P., 2003, Sex, Botany, & Empire (The story of Carl Linnaeus and Joseph Banks):
Columbia University Press, NY, 168 p.
Lewis, C., 2000, The Dating Game (One Man’s Search for the Age of the Earth):
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 53 p.
Bryson, B., 2003, A Short History of Nearly Everything: Broadway Books, NY, 544 p.
All of these books are available on Amazon very inexpensively, if bought used.
GEO 204 Problem-Solving in Earth History (Fall, 2015): Syllabus & Guidelines
Page 16
GEO 204
Writing Your Book Reviews
There are two book reviews due in this course. Please regard them as seriously as you might
regard a synthesis paper; these are opportunities for you to work on individual writing skills.
Format
 It should be on a computer.
 It should be no longer than 2 pages (including citations); it could be less if it covers its
subject completely.
 It should be double-spaced (with the exception of the citations, which can be single
spaced) with 1” margins.
 Text should be left justified.
 It should be in 12-pt font with a conventional typescript.
 It should be in GSA format.
 Citations should be at the end of the text, in a section entitled “Literature Cited.” At a
minimum, you need to cite the book you are reviewing.
 All pages should be numbered in the upper right-hand corner as “Page #.”
 Indent paragraphs; do NOT leave a blank line (or any extra space between each [be
careful; MSWord does this automatically]).
 The first page should contain the Title (left justified, which will be “Review of…”). In
the remaining space the text should begin. The first page should NOT be numbered.
In short, there is no cover page.
 Your name, the date, and the name of the class (GEO204) should appear left justified,
but to the right side of the page, just under the title.
 All the basic standards of good writing, discussed on p. 9 – 10, apply here.
Content
Your book review should be written like an essay, without headings, or sections demarked in
the text. I distinguish between a book report, which in essence summarizes what a book is
about, and a review, which is minimizes summary and maximizes analysis. There are lots of
places you can find high-quality book reviews (New York Review of Books, New Yorker, Atlantic
Magazine, as well as many technical journals such as Quarterly Review of Biology; Paleobiology,
Evolution) and if you are unsure where to begin, such places will give you a good sense of what
constitutes a high-quality review. Check them out.
You can assess books on their readability and their content. In the case of the former, you
should be explicit and show in which way the book is well-written (or not); in the case of the
latter, it should be about the treatment of the subject offered by the book. None of you is an
expert in these fields, of course, but you might ask questions like whether the book left you
with more questions than it answered; whether in the case of particular individuals, you
developed a sense of the character (i.e., you learned something more than you would have
GEO 204 Problem-Solving in Earth History (Fall, 2015): Syllabus & Guidelines
Page 17
from a Wikkipedia description of names, dates, and events); whether you obtained good
historical context; whether the subject really merited a biography, and etc.
This work is strictly individual; however, you – individually or in a group – are welcomed and
encouraged to come talk to me about this work.
The rubric will follow the guidelines on p. 11 and 12.
Deadlines
Due dates are listed in the Timetable of your syllabus; like everything else in this class, these
should be turned in by email ([email protected]) by 8:30 am on the day that they are due.
GEO 204 Problem-Solving in Earth History (Fall, 2015): Syllabus & Guidelines
Page 18
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
Name_____________________________
Problem no. 1
Please evaluate members of your group (including yourself – do NOT forget yourself) for Problem no. 1.
Numerically rate their contribution as 0.7 (Never); 0.8 (Seldom); 0.9 (Sometimes); 1.0 (Consistent); or 1.05
(Exceptional). Only one exceptional/group/question, please. Feel free to add any explanations or
comments; these are appreciated.
1. Contribution to the discussion:
2. Asking relevant questions:
3. Good listening:
4. Contribution to overall organization and group conclusions:
5. Is there anyone who worked exceptionally well on this project, doing more than his or her share, that should be
singled out? Please explain.
6. Likewise, is there anyone who let the group down? Please explain.