Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
16 July 2020 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Supplied
The teaching project of Drs Matthew Huber and Martin Clark on utilising aerial photography and 3D models increased student engagement in Geology field studies.

The goal of an educator, as seen by Dr Matthew Huber and Dr Martin Clark, is to try and improve the understanding of students. They believe that by combining technological and geological elements within the framework of games, students not only learn but also enjoy the process.

Dr Huber and Dr Clark are from the Department of Geology at the University of the Free State (UFS).

By bringing innovative methods into their teaching processes, they have successfully enhanced student engagement and learning in Geology field studies.

Limited innovation equals limited engagement

As part of the third-year Economic Geology and Exploration Geology courses, students were taken on a field trip to the Vredefort impact structure and an active gold mine. At the Vredefort structure, they were able to view the rock types mined for gold – which are exposed on the surface – to prepare them to identify the rocks when going underground. They also visited an open-pit quarry that was mined for granite dimension stone in the 1950s.  

Fot the visit to the quarry, the students were given ‘traditional’ assignments in advance to make measurements, sketch relevant features, and write down observations. 

“We found that they were not particularly engaged in what they were doing; it was simply an assignment that was separated from any deeper meaning in their minds,” explains Dr Huber.

The status quo of student engagement was about to change. Dr Huber and Dr Clark put their heads together and had a long discussion on how they could improve the exercise. 

Innovative methods equal increase in engagement

“We realised that we could change the focus of the exercise entirely by framing it as a game. When the exercise started, the students were divided into ‘companies’, and then told that they had to pick blocks with particular features to extract from the quarry. They were given parameters concerning how much various aspects of the activity would cost and were then told to make as much money as possible. We did not give them any particular measurements but provided them with all the tools they needed.”

“This had a transformative effect on the students – instead of being bored with the quarry exercise, they were begging for more time to look at the rocks, coming up with innovative solutions on their own,” says Dr Huber.

He believes this is what student engagement means. “Even though we did not assign any particular measurements for the students to do, most of them were diligently making measurements and even arguing with one another about the best way to pick out blocks,” he adds.

To evaluate the students, Dr Clark brought in a technological aspect to the exercise. He made a 3D model of the quarry while the game was in progress, which was used at the end of the task. 

“The students showed us the blocks that they had picked out on the digital 3D model, which we could rapidly evaluate. In addition, they had an opportunity to look at the problem from a different perspective, resulting in ‘last minute’ innovative solutions. The exposure to this type of digital interaction on a traditional geological excursion has increased the ‘cool’ factor for the students and subjected them to new ways of problem-solving – similar to what they can expect later in their careers,” explains Dr Clark.


Innovative methods equal more possibilities

Both Drs Clark and Huber agree that the feedback they received from the students was amazing. “They did not want the assignment to end, and unanimously petitioned us for more time in the quarry, driven by their desire to make the best decisions for their groups. This level of passion from students has never been experienced by either instructor on any other field course,” adds Dr Huber. 

Although games are not a new concept in education, the two academics say they are not aware of any other institution that has attempted to digitally recreate a site for students in real time with this type of game. Drs Clark and Huber also wrote an academic article that is currently in revision for the Journal of Geoscience Education, titled, ‘Using gamification and fourth industrial revolution components to enhance student engagement in traditional field exercises for economic geology students’.

“The other wonderful aspect of this type of exercise is that we now have a digital archive of the site, and we can use that in both student training and our research. In times like now, where it is difficult to travel to the field, this type of model of geological exposures is invaluable,” says Dr Clark. 

They both believe the attitude and philosophy of the educators are very important in terms of student training. Regardless of whether face-to-face or online teaching is offered, there can be a good response to games used in the classroom.

“The more learning scenarios we can expose students to in fun, enjoyable, and innovative ways, the more likely we will spark lifelong passions that they can take with them through their careers. Our goal is not only to create good students but give them the tools to become thought leaders for the next generation of learners,” says Dr Clark.

News Archive

Bloemfontein's quality of tap water compares very favourably with bottled water
2009-08-04

The quality of the drinking water of five suburbs in Bloemfontein is at least as good as or better than bottled water. This is the result of a standard and chemical bacterial analysis done by the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Centre for Environmental Management in collaboration with the Institute for Groundwater Studies (IGS).

Five samples were taken from tap water sources in the suburbs of Universitas, Brandwag, Bain’s Vlei, Langenhoven Park and Bayswater and 15 samples were taken of different brands of still and unflavoured bottled water. The samples were analysed at the laboratory of the IGS, while the interpretation of the analysis was done by the Centre for Environmental Management.

“We wanted to evaluate the difference in quality for human consumption between tap water and that of the different brands of bottled water,” said Prof. Maitland Seaman, Head of the Centre for Environmental Management.

“With the exception of two samples produced by multinational companies at their plants in South Africa, the different brands of bottled water used for the study were produced by South African companies, including a local small-scale Bloemfontein producer,” said Prof. Seaman.

According to the labels, the sources of the water vary from pure spring water, to partial reverse osmosis (as an aid to standardise salt, i.e. mineral, content), to only reverse osmosis (to remove salts). (Reverse osmosis is a process in which water is forced under pressure through a pipe with minute pores through which water passes but no – or very low concentrations of – salts pass.)

According to Prof. Seaman, the analysis revealed some interesting findings, such as:

• It is generally accepted that drinking water should have an acceptable level of salt content, as the body needs salts. Most mineral contents were relatively higher in the tap water samples than the bottled water samples and were very much within the acceptable range of drinkable water quality. One of the bottled samples, however, had a very low mineral content, as the water was produced by reverse osmosis, as stated on the bottle. While reverse osmosis is used by various producers, most producers use it as an aid, not as a single method to remove nearly all the salts. Drinking only such water over a prolonged period may probably have a negative effect on the human physiology.

• The pH values of the tap water samples (8,12–8,40) were found to be slightly higher (slightly alkaline), like in all south-eastern Free State rivers (from where the water is sourced) than the pH of most of the bottled water samples, most of which are sourced and/or treated in other areas. Two brands of bottled water were found to have relatively low pH levels (both 4,5, i.e. acidic) as indicated on their bottles and as confirmed by the IGS analysis. The health implication of this range of pH is not significant.

• The analysis showed differences in the mineral content given on the labels of most of the water bottles compared to that found by IGS analysis. The possibility of seasonal fluctuation in content, depending on various factors, is expected and most of the bottling companies also indicate this on their labels. What was a rather interesting finding was that two pairs of bottled water brands claimed exactly the same mineral content but appeared under different brand names and were also priced differently. In each case, one of the pair was a well-known house brand, and the other obviously the original producer. In one of these paired cases, the house brand stated that the water was spring water, while the other (identical) “original” brand stated that it was spring water treated by reverse osmosis and oxygen-enriched.

• Nitrate (NO3) levels were uniformly low except in one bottled sample, suggesting a low (non-threatening) level of organic pollution in the source water. Otherwise, none of the water showed any sign of pollution.

• The bacterial analysis confirmed the absence of any traces of coliforms or E.coli in any of the samples, as was also indicated by the bottling companies. This is very reassuring. What is not known is how all these waters were sterilised, which could be anything from irradiation to chlorine or ozone treatment.

• The price of the different brands of bottled water, each containing 500 ml of still water, ranged between R3,99 and R8,99, with R5,03 being the average price. A comparison between the least expensive and the most expensive bottles of water indicated no significant difference in quality. In fact, discrepancies were observed in the most expensive bottle in that the amount of Calcium (Ca) claimed to be present in it was found to be significantly different from what the analysis indicated (29,6 mg/l versus 0,92 mg/l). The alkalinity (CaCO3 mg/l) indicated on the bottle was also found to differ considerably (83 mg/l versus 9,4 mg/l). The concentration of Total Dissolved Salts (TDS) was not given on the product.

“The preference for bottled water as compared to Bloemfontein’s tap water from a qualitative perspective as well as the price discrepancy is unjustifiable. The environmental footprint of bottled water is also large. Sourcing, treating, bottling, packaging and transporting, to mention but a few of the steps involved in the processing of bottled water, entail a huge carbon footprint, as well as a large water footprint, because it also requires water for treating and rinsing to process bottled water,” said Prof. Seaman.

Media Release
Lacea Loader
Deputy Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za  
3 August 2009

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept