Benjamin Crosby: Using High Precision Positioning with Static and Kinematic GPS/GNSS in GEOL 4450/5550 Field Geology at Idaho State University
Crosby headshot
![[creative commons]](/images/creativecommons_16.png)
Provenance: Ben Crosby, Idaho State University
Reuse: This item is offered under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ You may reuse this item for non-commercial purposes as long as you provide attribution and offer any derivative works under a similar license.
About this Course
Upper division undergraduate. Mostly geology majors with a few environmental science and geophysics students. Mixture of students from multiple universities.
20
students
2 full days at a field station
Field Geology: GPS Module Syllabus (Microsoft Word 2007 (.docx) 7.9MB Apr23 18)
Five-week summer field camp, applying standard geologic field instruments and geologic concepts to a series of field problems. Prerequisites: GEOL 3314 (Earth Materials II; recommended) or GEOL 4420 (Geochemistry); GEOL 4421 (Structural Geology) and GEOL 4452 (Sedimentation-Stratigraphy).
Course focuses on building broad field skills including field mapping, and the construction of maps, Correlation of Map Units, Description of Map Units and narratives for multiple field sites. Some exercises deal with geotechnology (mobile GIS) while others are traditional geologic critical thinking with paper and pencil alone.
Most module units were tested over a jam-packed, 2-day undergraduate field geology course in central Idaho. Fitting most module units into such a short window is not recommended. The final assessment was a change detection exercise using a leveling line across an active normal fault (the Lost River Fault, home of the Borah Peak earthquake event in 1983). The results were stunning and intriguing for students and professors alike.
Most students, who had never encountered geodetic data with significant change, remarked, "I can't believe what I'm seeing!," as our results started to take shape.
My Experience Teaching with GETSI Materials
Module was tested over two jam-packed days. Most units were utilized, though Unit 2.1: Measuring Topography was not done at all and the summative assessment for Unit 3: Static GPS/GNSS Methods was not completed.
Relationship of GETSI Materials to my Course
Module was implemented over two days, roughly 1.5 weeks into a five week field geology course. Students had only been exposed to traditional geologic mapping techniques so far. Module material was not referenced in the remainder of the course.
Unit 1: GPS/GNSS Fundamentals
- Introductory lecture on GPS/GNSS
- Field measurements for the Accuracy and Precision activity
- Indoor analysis of Accuracy and Precision data; students complete assignment
- Field introduction of Kinematic GNSS/GPS base station
- Unit summative assessment via concept sketch, synthesizing learning from above exercises.
Unit 2: Kinematic GPS/GNSS Methods
- Introductory lecture on kinematic GPS/GNSS
- Field demonstration of base and rover. Description of all equipment involved.
- Students collect data for Unit 2 assessment but do not generate a report or turn anything in.
(Omitted Unit 2.1: Measuring Topography)
Unit 2.2: Change Detection (full day devoted to this)
- Students design and conduct the re-visitation of a leveling line last surveyed in 1985 to detect post-seismic deformation on the Lost River Fault.
- Students analyze data from their field work, generate a series of plots and maps and answer a suite of questions regarding the field area and the significance of their findings.
- This exercise serves as the summative assessment for the two day experience. Questions were incorporated from the module's Assessment page.
Unit 3: Static GPS/GNSS Methods
- Introductory lecture on static GPS/GNSS
- Field Trip to visit a Plate Boundary Observatory (PBO) station. Discuss hardware, data workflow and availability. Discuss regional geology and tectonic setting.
- Working indoors, students completed the time series student exercise focused on permanent stations near Borah Peak.
- Students did not complete a summative assessment for Unit 3.
Assessments
Students enjoyed the concept sketch synthesis of Unit 1 as it was a novel way of expressing their understanding.
Students found the Accuracy and Precision exercise computer-heavy for a field camp exercise and were of varying preparedness to use Excel to do the analysis.
Students enjoyed the concept behind the Unit 3, time series analysis exercise but were confused by some of the language in the handout and the figures. These have since been modified.
The final, summative assessment in Unit 2.2 of detecting change in surface elevations over the last 30 years across the Lost River Fault was both field-intensive and intellectually challenging for the students. Some students would have benefited from more background on the nature of ground deformation before, during and after earthquakes, but all student enjoyed collecting novel data and working to unravel its significance.
Outcomes
My goals to test most units within the module were overly ambitious. Students felt rushed through analysis. Some of the exercises were too computer and indoor-analysis intensive. Regardless, most students responded favorably to the units, some suggesting that they would pursue further experience and training in GNSS because they were so inspired by the course. Student performed very well, given the time limitations.
Show the catalog description of my course
Hide