Taiga Water Quality:
Investigating Our Waterways
Quest Atlantis
http://www.questatlantis.org
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation Grant# 0092831.
Water Quality: Investigating our Waterways
Table of Contents
Taiga Unit Overview ........................................................................ 1
Sample Timeline........................................................................................... 2
Background & Goals .................................................................................... 3
Taiga Lesson Plans......................................................................... 4-10
Other Taiga Implementation Examples........................................................ 11-12
Appendices.pdf (separate file)
Letter from Ranger Bartle ...................................................................
Taiga Field Notebook..........................................................................
Taiga Map...........................................................................................
Quest 2 Feedback Rubric and example responses ...........................
Domain Content Guide .......................................................................
Overview of the Taiga Scenario
Taiga is a small state park with a river running through it, in which fish populations are
declining. Taiga is populated by several groups of people who use or depend on the
river in some capacity. These groups are:
People
Park Administration: Ranger Bartle (chief ranger), Jesse (intern), Lab Technician
Mulu (indigenous) Farmers: Norbe, leader of the Mulu, and his wife Ella
Build-Rite Timber Company: Lisa and Hidalgo at the logging camp, Manager Lim at
the timber mill
Park Visitors: Sara (is dating a logger), Jose (loves fishing and hiking in the park),
Maria (lives near the park, is collecting some relevant data on her own).
K-Fly Fishing Tour Company: Markeda, Tom (managers), Anna (a customer talking
with Tom)
Council of Atlantis: Salik (introduces new activities, can help students figure out what
to do next), Lan (Environmental Awareness council member; students eventually use
what they learn in Taiga to help Lan with some ‘real’ problems he needs to solve on
Atlantis)
Students: Students are in the role of Questers helping Ranger Bartle to figure out how
he can reverse the fish decline and save the park. Afterwards, they give expert advice to
Lan when he asks for help solving problems on Atlantis.
Synopsis
Before entering Taiga, students read and discuss a letter from Ranger Bartle asking for
their help. Students then enter Taiga and interview everyone in the park about their
opinions on the fish decline, and form a hypothesis (Mission 1). They collect water
quality data to test the hypothesis and write up their analysis of the cause(s) of the fish
population decline (Mission 2). Then they help Ranger Bartle to choose one culprit to
blame for the fish decline, and travel forward two years in time to see the result of their
choice. They explore the future and describe what happened (Mission 3). Ranger Bartle
then gives them the opportunity to write up a more nuanced solution, and they travel
twelve years into the future to see the result of the ranger’s decision. They explore this
future and write about what happened, and which of their suggestions Ranger Bartle
followed (Mission 4). Students who finish early can continue to participate as Junior
Rangers, finishing an additional two optional Quests by helping classmates in Taiga.
1
Water Quality: Investigating our Waterways
Sample Timeline
2
Water Quality: Investigating our Waterways
Background
This Quest Atlantis Water Quality unit presents an innovative way of approaching the
complexities in decision-making that exist in all communities. Your students will be
embedded in a rich narrative about a world with ecological problems. These worlds are
presented as computer-based, simulated aquatic habitats to be explored by your
students. As part of this experience, your students will take on the role of an expert
helper, interviewing people, collecting data, and developing hypotheses about the
problem and posing possible solutions. Students will be led through a “Scientific
Investigation.” Additionally, a number of reflective activities are suggested along the way
to both facilitate deep engagement with the core issues as well as provide you informal
data about their understanding. Lastly, you can help students apply what they learned to
address a real problem in your local community. This unit was designed to reflect the
educational concerns of parents and teachers by addressing a wide range of important
issues, such as social commitment, the inter-connectedness of all life, the socio-political
factors that underlie scientific inquiry, and responsibility for the environment.
Goals
Students will be able to:
•
effectively use computer technologies to communicate with others, and to investigate
scientific issues (technology fluency);
•
understand the fragile nature of our various ecological systems and that these
systems are interconnected, recognizing that one change impacts the entire system
(system dynamics);
•
appreciate that decisions about use of natural resources must balance the needs of
many stakeholders, and that one solution may create problems in other areas (sociopolitical factors);
•
recognize that inquiry involves identifying the problem, gathering data, generating
hypotheses, recognizing perspectives and needs of various stakeholders, analyzing
data, proposing solutions, and reflecting and revising on each of the these (science
inquiry);
•
know that various organisms and chemical factors indicate the health of an
ecosystem, highlighting temperature, turbidity, pH, and macro-invertebrates (water
quality concepts);
•
recognize that what affects the balance of the food web will ultimately affect humans
and their quality of life (food web);
•
interpret maps and know that land/water are limited geographic resources
(topography);
•
demonstrate appropriate presentation of scientific data in various formats, such as
scientific reports, graphs, and charts (mathematical interpretations); and
•
adopt a disposition towards social action with respect to environmental issues
(attitude).
3
Water Quality: Investigating our Waterways
Taiga Lesson Plans
The following two activities are proposed as scaffolding for students new to virtual
worlds, mapping and note taking. Teachers may fold these activities into one lesson and
begin with Fish Kill Project Quest 1: What’s the Cause? for more experienced students.
Activity 1: Identifying the Problem
It is advised that students do this activity the day before entering the 3D space, for it will
help them grasp the different issues involved in solving a complex environmental
problem. With the entire class listening,
• Read the letter from Ranger Bartle.
• Divide your class into groups of 3-4; assign or ask for volunteers in each group who
will
o see that each one in the group participates. A round-robin approach works well,
with each person taking a turn to speak on the issues mentioned.
o write down what is said by each person or who will summarize what is said.
o be aware of the time factor and keep everyone on task
o present the final set of responses when their group is asked to give input on the
three sections of the activity.
• Ask them to talk about and any new words they encounter in the letter
• Ask for the groups to share their answers and thoughts before entering the 3D
space. These may be placed on the wall with the Taiga map for reference throughout
this investigation. You might like to reread the document once the groups are
established.
Activity 2: Introduction to the Field Notebook
In this lesson the teachers will pass out copies of the Taiga Field Notebook (template in
back of teacher manual) to each student. Students should familiarize themselves with
the Taiga Field Notebook, concentrating on the first part.
The Field Notebook contains the following student materials:
• exercises
• information sheets
• charts
• reports
• glossary
4
Water Quality: Investigating our Waterways
Activity 3: Introduction to the Taiga Virtual World
Students enter the virtual world and begin to explore the space. Using the matching
exercise form in the Field Notebook they individually identify people and match them to
their activities in the forest.
As they move about in the virtual world they will come to better understand who the
people in the park are and where they are located.
Reflective Activity One: Opinion or Fact
During their orientation to the virtual world, students begin adding notes containing
opinions or facts to the wall space. On each note, they should include the name of the
character they encountered and a brief statement in their own words of what was written
or said. They must decide whether it was opinion or fact to be able to place it. At
different times teachers might review the additions and have the class talk about
whether the statements are opinion or fact, why and whether the notes they are correctly
located.
1. Place an enlarged copy of the Taiga Map (see appendices) on the classroom
wall. Students as a class, will use this chart throughout Quest 1 to note where
people, objects and groups are located in the virtual world.
2. Create a wall space for students to add information as they find it in their
exploration. The space will require 2 areas; one for Onions and one for Facts.
Using Postit notes or index cards students will under each heading as an
ongoing activity.
OPINIONS
FACTS
Activity 4: Taiga Mission 1
Students begin by interviewing everyone in the park about the fish decline. There is a
form in the field notebook where they can take notes if desired. Salik gives them a quiz
from Ranger Bartle on everyone’s position in the park and what they believe about the
fish decline.
5
Water Quality: Investigating our Waterways
Salik’s Quiz:
Salik states: “You have now spoken to each person in the park. You probably see why this is a
difficult problem to solve. Everyone has different opinions. Before you investigate more of Taiga,
Bartle wants to make sure you understand who makes up the different groups in the park. Can
you match the name to the group?”
Park Administration: Ranger Bartle
Fishing Company: Markeda, Tom and
Anna
Mulu: Norbe, Ella
Lumber Company: Lisa, Hidalgo
Logging Mill: Manager Lim
Visitors: Sara, Jose, Maria
This person’s job is to manage the park. He tries to
balance everyone’s needs.
This group brings in visitors to the park. They also
have an annual fishing tournament.
This group raises animals and crops. They also fish
the river to maintain their way of life.
This group cuts down trees in the park, floats them
down the river, and even replants trees.
This group processes the trees from the lumber
company and sells them for profit.
This group comes to the park for recreation, and to
enjoy the peaceful surroundings.
“Great job. You seem to be getting a handle on the different groups in Taiga. The next set of
questions are about people’s opinions. These are a little harder to match up. If you felt shaky on
the last set, then you might want to talk to everyone again before starting. You only get one
chance to get them all correct. I have some trading cards for you if you get them all correct on the
first try.”
Ranger Bartle
The fish decline problem is a complicated one. My job is to help
solve it so the park can survive.
Markeda:
I don’t believe that our fishing tournament is causing any
problems, but the Mulu are obviously over-fishing the river,
maybe even using gill nets.
I feel that acid rain from nearby factories lowers the pH in the
river and kills the fish.
As a native of this land, I know that my people care about the
river and would not harm it in anyway.
As leader of the Mulu, I’ve noticed that the loggers are cutting
down more trees than in the past.
As a visitor to this park, I believe that the fishermen are fishing
the river too much, making it “unhappy.”
As an outsider to this problem (my boyfriend works for the
lumber company), I feel that the logging company is very
responsible and not the problem.
I have been collecting data in the park. There is less forested
area in the park now than a few years ago.
Logging only has positive outcomes, like more jobs for local
people.
The water by the Mulu is probably polluted from fertilizers the
Mulu use, which could hurt the fish.
Manager Lim:
Ella:
Norbe:
Jose:
Sara:
Maria:
Lisa:
Hidalgo:
It can help for students to do these activities in groups of 2 or 3 so they have to negotiate
their answers.
After taking the quiz, students interview everyone a second time, and finally write a
hypothesis (Quest 1). Characters have conflicting opinions about the cause of the
problem, and support those opinions with their observations. The text of Quest 1 is
viewable in the Teacher Toolkit.
6
Water Quality: Investigating our Waterways
Class Discussion Prompts during Mission 1:
™ You’ve talked to a lot of people in Taiga now. What do you think is going on
there? [Students can discuss what each character says is going on – ideally they
will notice conflicting character opinions. This prompt can be used on multiple
days, since they talk to the characters a second time to find out more about what
they believe is happening before submitting Quest 1]
™ What do you think a hypothesis is? [discuss ‘testable statement’ as a type of
prediction]
™ If you were going to make a hypothesis about what was going on in Taiga,
what would you base it on? … And then, what would be the next step? [A
student should design a hypothesis knowing that while the guess is based on the
characters’ casual observations (tinted with opinion), it must be tested by
collecting data from the river.]
Reflective Activity Two: Prioritizing Fact or Opinion
After students submit their quest response, draw the class together to examine the chart
of fact and opinion.
Ask them to consider whether all these facts and opinions are equally important to the
problem they are trying to solve. Have them suggest what might be done to decide
which facts and opinions might be most important, and which might be less important or
relevant.
Here is one way that you might have the students prioritize these…
Remove the post-it notes to either side of the Fact and Opinion area and add them to a
new chart. This new chart would again have the two columns of fact or opinion, as well
as an additional set of rows that distinguish the importance of the task. The top row
could be “Most Relevant, the next row could include those items that are “Somewhat
Important,” and the last row would be those items that are “Not Important.”
Most Important Facts
Most Important Opinions
Somewhat Important Facts
Somewhat Important Opinions
Not Important Facts
Not Important Opinions
7
Water Quality: Investigating our Waterways
Have students propose where each of the original items might be placed. Students may
also choose at this stage to remove items from the board altogether if they have proven
to be irrelevant.
This is an important exercise and the students should justify where and why each item is
is placed. Students negotiating this with their peers will allow the students to explicitly
express their understanding of the science they have encountered and surface any
misconceptions that students might hold.
Activity 5: Taiga Mission 2
•
•
•
•
Jesse’s Mission (optional) is a side activity that helps to review some key
concepts; students can speak to Jesse to begin.
Students collect water samples from three places; one just downstream of the
Mulu on the west fork, one just downstream from the loggers on the east fork,
and one by the fishing dock, downstream of both sites. Working with the Lab
Technician, they analyze the samples with respect to six common water quality
indicators in order to identify the source(s) of the fish population decline (Quest
2):
o dissolved oxygen (certain levels must be maintained for healthy fish
populations; causes of low DO can be pinpointed by some of the other
indicators)
o pH
o turbidity (cloudiness caused by suspended sediments, which can irritate
fish gills and raise water temperature)
o nitrate (found in fertilizer and animal waste, contribute to eutrophication)
o phosphate (found in fertilizer and animal waste, contribute to
eutrophication)
o temperature (fish are sensitive to temperature variation, and warm water
can retain less DO)
The indicator values at each site identify ecological processes (like
eutrophication or erosion) occurring at that site. The location of the site then ties
the process to the people in Taiga who may be causing it. Students can also
corroborate their identification of the problem(s) by finding visual evidence of the
process at that site.
Many students will need to revise Quest 2. As they wait for feedback, they can
work on Jesse’s Mission if they have not already finished it. Students who are
asked to revise can be directed to a tutorial with the Lab Technician.
A scoring and feedback rubric is available for Quest 2 (see Appendices.pdf).
Class Discussion Prompts During Mission 2
™ Has anyone started working with the Lab Technician yet? What is he
talking about? … Did you find out anything about water quality at anywhere
in Taiga yet? … Which site? … What kinds of things are you measuring
with the Technician? … So at that site, is ‘X’ a problem? … Why do you
think ‘X’ might be bad/good there? [This is an opportunity to see what the
students are picking up about the water quality indicators they will use as
evidence to test their hypothesis (complete Quest 2). Students can refer to notes
8
Water Quality: Investigating our Waterways
they take in their field notebook about what the Technician says and the data
they collect.]
™ Did the Technician say what that’s called? [When students describe erosion
or eutrophication but don’t use the formal term, this can help them to condense
that information by reminding them of the term.]
™ What is erosion? ... Why is it bad for dirt to get into the water? … Aside
from clogged gills, is there another way suspended sediment can be bad
for fish? …Where on the map of Taiga do you see evidence of erosion
affecting water quality? … If you go to that place in Taiga, do you see other
evidence of erosion? Do you see what’s causing it? [This reiterates what
they’ve briefly read about the process of erosion. Students often focus on
clogged gills mentioned by several characters and miss the more complex effect
taught by the Technician: suspended sediments lower levels of dissolved oxygen
in the water by absorbing heat from sunlight and warming up the water as they
give off that heat (warmer water can hold less DO).]
™ What is eutrophication? … Why are there algae blooms? …What do you
know about how plants breathe? (should know plants produce more oxygen
than they use up while photosynthesizing) So why isn’t eutrophication good
for fish? … Where on the map of Taiga do you see evidence of
eutrophication affecting water quality? … If you go to that place in Taiga,
do you see other evidence of erosion? Do you see what’s causing it? [Algae
and other aquatic plants that grow must also die. Decomposition of dead plants
uses up DO. Sometimes in such areas water is high in DO during the day (but
only at the surface where the algae are) but very very low at night when oxygen
is not being replenished by photosynthesis. Fertilizers don’t poison the fish;
rather the DO is too low because the fertilizers are causing eutrophication.]
™ The Technician talks about what is good and bad for fish. What indicators
have a direct effect on fish? … What indicators tell us indirectly about an
effect on fish? [Indicators like pH and DO have a direct effect. Indicators like
nitrates and phosphates are indirect indicators. Turbidity can affect fish gills
directly but also has an indirect effect by lowering DO.]
™ We’ve seen a lot of what’s going on in Taiga. What do we know? Now, what
do we know we don’t know? [Students have asked why the DO level is still OK
for fish by the Mulu, where there is evidence of eutrophication, but bad by the
loggers, where there is evidence of erosion. Why is this if both supposedly lower
DO? Well, we don’t know what happens in other seasons or at other times of the
day. We only took one measurement at a time of day when photosynthesis would
be producing DO in the water (also at a time of day when suspended sediment
would be busy warming the water). We also don’t know what the DO is like
upstream of Taiga, at either branch of the river. The DO by the Mulu may still
represent a big reduction.]
A longer discussion could go along those lines, maybe filling in the map/data
chart sheet in the Field Notebook on an overhead based on what the students say.
[This depends on the level of interest in having the students solve it as a mystery, with
less prompting.]
Activity 6: Taiga Mission 3
•
Due to political and financial pressure, Ranger Bartle reluctantly has to choose
one culprit to regulate. Students choose between the loggers, the farmers, and
9
Water Quality: Investigating our Waterways
•
the fishing company and briefly justify their choice. After talking to Salik, the
students go to the time machine by the cave and travel two years into the future
to see what has happened as a result. Depending on their choice, they see one
of three futures. They explore these futures (water quality data can optionally be
collected) and write about what went wrong (Quest 3). After submitting Quest 3,
students go into the cave and work on Lan’s Mission, in which they briefly help
Lan to solve two somewhat-related problems on Atlantis.
The three alternatives:
o Blame the loggers: Logging company leaves, but the shoreline is not
replanted and erosion continues. The farmers had been renting land to
the loggers, and step up farming to offset lost revenue. The
eutrophication problem worsens, fish are doing even worse, and the
fishing company is about to relocate. The park, in turn, is on the brink of
having to close, with no income from tourism or commerce.
o Blame the farmers: The farming is scaled back to a garden.
Eutrophication is no longer a problem, but the farmers rent out more of
their land to the loggers, so erosion worsens and turbidity increases, with
the fishing company again on the verge of relocating, and the park about
to close.
o Blame the fishing company: The park rents out more of its land to
loggers, and so is not in danger of closing, but the fish are still almost
gone. The fishing company leaves, and the tourists are disappointed. The
farmers are unaffected.
Class Discussion Prompts During Mission 3
™ Some of you helped Ranger Bartle to make a decision today about who was
causing the fish problem. What did you choose? … Why? … Did you get to
use the Time Machine Yet? What did you see when you got there?
Activity 7: Taiga Mission 4
•
•
Ranger Bartle asks students for a more nuanced solution to aid him in making an
urgent decision, his last chance to save the park. They give him their solution
and travel twelve years into the future to see the result. They explore this future
and write about what happened and which of their suggestions Ranger Bartle
followed (Quest 4).
Students who finish early can optionally complete two quests by helping other
students in Taiga as Junior Rangers and writing about the experience.
Class Discussion Prompts During Mission 4
™ Now that you’ve seen the way the park works, what do you think you’ll
recommend to Ranger Bartle?
™ Some of you got to use the time machine again today. Who had a chance to
look around in the future? How far in the future? Did Ranger Bartle follow
any of your suggestions?
10
Water Quality: Investigating our Waterways
Other Taiga Implementation Examples
Recently we assisted with the first implementation of the latest version of Taiga. We
worked with two teachers who had very different styles, and each used techniques they
preferred to make Taiga work best for them. In these implementations we were
somewhat restricted by our research design for a motivation study, so more a much
wider variety of approaches is certainly possible.
Some of Their Strategies:
™ Short class discussion after each computer session (and possibly before
as well) to provide focus for the day’s activities and goals. Students are not
all in the same place at the same time, so this discussion was an opportunity to
remind students what they were learning and when certain tasks should definitely
be completed. At the end of most sessions, discussion was directed at getting
them to provide their own opinions about what was going on based on the
evidence they’d seen so far. This worked well because while few students
noticed all the evidence provided, they could draw each other’s attention to the
evidence that stood out for them. Everyone ended up with a bigger picture. *see
Discussion Prompts below
™ If possible/necessary, a longer class discussion with presentation of the
science concepts central to Quest 2. The teacher who did this waited until
students had some initial exposure to the concepts, then had them explain each
concept back to her in a discussion. She used a map (which is now in the student
field notebook) and filled it in with the water quality indicators over the course of
the discussion. Students wrote information that was new to them in their field
notebooks during this discussion, and referred to what they had already written
while answering questions. This again gave everyone a chance to be on the
same page with all of the information before spending a lot of time on revisions of
Quest 2.
™ Enhancing focus through immersion in the plot. One teacher was very
interested in maintaining the atmosphere of the game, to the point of not
conspicuously grading their Quests. She gave feedback in the persona of Ranger
Bartle or Lan. The student field notebooks were not treated like an assignment
but like an organized way of taking any necessary notes. Her students also
printed out screenshots and text from the game when they wanted to add
something extra to the notebook. Students were not given specific deadlines
(and we used our data from that implementation to develop a timeline which is
now included with the teacher handbook).
™ Enhancing focus through timeline and reminders of educational goals. The
other teacher preferred to retain more of the traditional classroom motivational
context. Students were graded on field notes and participation in general. They
used the field notebook as an outline for what they were supposed to do next
(which occasionally led to confusion, as it is not designed to be a complete
alternative to the goals prompted by the game). The teacher set deadlines for
completion of certain areas of the game, beyond which students were penalized
for late work.
™ Feedback. Both teachers decided which assignments they wanted to spend the
most feedback and revision time on, within the limitation that students must have
their answers accepted in order to move forward in the scenario. They varied
their feedback on Quests to address specific problems with student answers. We
11
Water Quality: Investigating our Waterways
provide a feedback rubric for initial scoring and feedback on Quest 2, but further
revisions rely on feedback the teacher wants to provide.
™ Teacher presence in the game and in the classroom. Both teachers spent
part of the time students were in the space responding to student Quest
submissions to provide quick turnaround. One teacher circulated around all the
desks answering questions in person. The other also logged in to the game and
stayed in Taiga during each session so he could be available to answer
questions, or point things out to students (and to monitor chat).
™ Extension of in-game incentives into the classroom. One teacher created a
trading post where students could spend ‘Cols’ (in-game currency that can be
earned by completing Quests anywhere in QA and/or traded between students)
on real-world things. Items offered in the trading post included little items like
pencils and erasers, and special activities. The other teacher didn’t do anything
extra with Cols, although students sometimes traded them anyway if they had
begun doing other QA activities on the side.
Other Possibilities
™ Have students practice using online resources. The students have a
Q-Pack, an online location where game objects are stored. If they are
used to checking their Q-Pack, they can quickly review maps, data, and
screenshots of important areas that they pick up throughout the game.
Students who don’t make use of this may have more trouble managing
the information in the game. A quick overview of the Q-Pack and of Quest
submission/revision might help things to go smoothly.
™ Be aware that students must get all the way through conversations
with characters in order to move forward. Although it is possible if a
network is momentarily slow for the Quest Atlantis server not to register
that a student has visited a dialogue page, often if a student is told in the
game to talk to a character they’ve already visited, it is because they did
not finish every page of the conversation.
12