{ "schema": 1, "pack_id": "geology-observation-cards", "title": "Look closely. Think geologically.", "audience": "Curious learners, families and educators; approximately ages 12 and up, with discussion support for younger readers.", "instructions": "Choose every statement the evidence supports. Some cards have more than one supported answer. Write an observation in your own words, then compare the reasoning. There is no timer or score.", "lessons": [ { "id": "shape", "number": 1, "title": "Start with shape", "summary": "Describe what is visible before naming a process.", "body": "A shape description is an observation; an explanation of how it formed is an interpretation. A fin is a narrow wall, a window is an opening, and a hoodoo is a standing pillar. Those words organize a view without dating it. A single silhouette can hide depth or overlap.", "practice": "Try a sentence that begins ‘I can see…’ and another that begins ‘One possible explanation is…’. Keep them separate.", "source_ids": [ "G02", "G03" ], "connection": { "href": "geology-hoodoos.html", "label": "Explore the integrated hoodoo guide" } }, { "id": "layers", "number": 2, "title": "Read the layers", "summary": "Order, color and rock identity are different clues.", "body": "The Claron Formation includes informal lower pink and upper white members. These names do not turn every pink or white patch into a mapped unit. Geologists compare material, bedding and geographic relationships. In an upright, undisturbed sedimentary sequence, a lower deposited layer precedes the layer above it; a drawing of that order supplies no duration.", "practice": "Name the visible pattern first. Ask what a geological map or measured section would add.", "source_ids": [ "G04", "G05", "G07" ], "connection": { "href": "rock-layers.html", "label": "Explore the integrated rock-layer exhibit" } }, { "id": "fractures", "number": 3, "title": "Follow the cracks", "summary": "Trace a weakness without inventing its history.", "body": "Cracks help water reach rock interiors. NPS describes joints as boundaries along which fins and narrow passages develop. A fault requires movement along a fracture; a line in an image alone does not establish that movement. Freezing conditions and water can contribute to rock damage, but a thermometer crossing zero is not a count of broken rocks.", "practice": "Describe the crack, then list one observation you would need to test a process explanation.", "source_ids": [ "G02", "G05", "G08" ], "connection": { "href": "weathering-lab.html", "label": "Explore the integrated weathering lab" } }, { "id": "material", "number": 4, "title": "Track the material", "summary": "Distinguish breaking, dissolving and moving.", "body": "Weathering changes or breaks rock; erosion carries material away. Slightly acidic water can dissolve carbonate material, while gravity and runoff can move fragments. These processes can work together. A diagram can isolate one step for discussion without representing a complete physical experiment.", "practice": "Follow one marked piece. Has it changed, moved, or both? Say which evidence supports your choice.", "source_ids": [ "G01", "G02", "G03", "G05" ], "connection": { "href": "weathering-lab.html", "label": "Compare processes in the weathering lab" } }, { "id": "terrain", "number": 5, "title": "Read a terrain profile", "summary": "Work with a small, actual Sunset Point data slice.", "body": "These cards use the center east–west row of the integrated Sunset Point terrain study. Its 129 samples span 512 metres, so adjacent samples are 4 metres apart. Heights are derived from 2018 airborne lidar, filtered and gridded by the earlier study. The profile shows a top surface, not underground layers, a walking route or a current safety assessment.", "practice": "Read both axes. Separate a calculation on the exported data from a new field measurement.", "source_ids": [ "D01", "D02" ], "connection": { "href": "landmarks.html#study-sunset-point", "label": "Open the integrated Sunset Point study" } }, { "id": "models", "number": 6, "title": "Question the model", "summary": "Ask what a dataset can—and cannot—show.", "body": "The Sunset study stores one surface height at each horizontal grid point. That representation cannot describe an overhang’s top and underside at the same location. More samples can improve representation without proving accuracy. Geometry and aerial color can also come from different years. A model is evidence with a method and limits, not a view of everything.", "practice": "Before using a model, find its source, date, spacing, processing choices and missing surfaces.", "source_ids": [ "D01", "D02" ], "connection": { "href": "methods.html#model", "label": "Read the integrated terrain methods" } }, { "id": "time", "number": 7, "title": "Keep time in perspective", "summary": "A sequence is not a clock.", "body": "Sediment deposition, rock formation and the shaping of an isolated pillar are different events. A conceptual fin–window–pillar sequence does not give their dates or require every pillar to follow one path. The Grand Staircase is a regional rock succession across several landscapes; it is not a set of equal time steps. Detecting change requires comparable observations and uncertainty estimates.", "practice": "Replace an unsupported date with a question about what could establish it.", "source_ids": [ "G01", "G03", "G06" ], "connection": { "href": "deep-time.html", "label": "Explore Deep Time at Bryce" } }, { "id": "case", "number": 8, "title": "Build a careful explanation", "summary": "Join a clue, a possible cause and a useful next question.", "body": "A strong explanation keeps its evidence visible. An outward ledge might fit contrasting resistance, but a picture does not measure hardness or mineral content. Compare independent sources and competing interpretations. An unanswered question is a useful result when the available evidence cannot decide it.", "practice": "Use this structure: ‘I observe ___. This could fit ___. To test it, I would need ___.’ Accept more than one defensible observation.", "source_ids": [ "G01", "G07", "D01" ], "connection": { "href": "geology-lab-field.html", "label": "Continue with the integrated field guide" } } ], "cards": [ { "id": "goc-01", "number": 1, "lesson": "shape", "title": "Three silhouettes", "prompt": "Which statements describe visible shapes in this drawing?", "art": "silhouettes", "alt": "Three separate drawings: A is a long narrow rock wall; B is a rock wall with an opening through it; C is an isolated irregular pillar. None has a scale or date.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "B contains an opening.", "supported": true, "reason": "The light opening is enclosed by the drawn rock." }, { "id": "b", "label": "C stands apart as a pillar.", "supported": true, "reason": "Its outline is separated from the other rock shapes." }, { "id": "c", "label": "A is exactly 100 metres tall.", "supported": false, "reason": "There is no scale or measurement." }, { "id": "d", "label": "B will collapse next year.", "supported": false, "reason": "The illustration supplies no stability or timing evidence." } ], "observation": "The middle shape has a hole; the right shape is isolated.", "interpretation": "The sketches illustrate a fin, a window and a hoodoo. They are shape examples, not measured Bryce landmarks.", "alternate": "‘There is rock above the opening’ or ‘A is wider than C in the drawing’ are also defensible visible observations.", "limit": "No real dimensions, dates or future condition can be read from these silhouettes.", "strength": "Direct for features of the drawing; illustrative for landforms.", "source_ids": [ "G02", "G03" ], "evidence_class": "illustrative", "transfer": "What would another viewing angle add?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-01.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-shape" }, { "id": "goc-02", "number": 2, "lesson": "shape", "title": "A wall seen twice", "prompt": "The captions identify two views of the same teaching shape. What follows?", "art": "viewpoints", "alt": "A thin rectangular wall is drawn broadside in view A and end-on in view B. Its length is hidden in B. The caption identifies both as the same schematic wall.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "A single narrow silhouette can hide a longer wall.", "supported": true, "reason": "The second view conceals the dimension visible in the first." }, { "id": "b", "label": "The rock changed between views.", "supported": false, "reason": "Only the viewpoint is changed in the stated example." }, { "id": "c", "label": "The end-on view alone proves an isolated hoodoo.", "supported": false, "reason": "A thin wall can look like a pillar from its end." }, { "id": "d", "label": "A second angle can resolve some shape ambiguity.", "supported": true, "reason": "The broadside view exposes the wall’s length." } ], "observation": "One view shows length; the other mainly shows thickness.", "interpretation": "Apparent outline depends on viewpoint. Multiple views can test whether a narrow outline belongs to a pillar or a wall.", "alternate": "‘View B hides one dimension’ is a useful alternative; no numerical length is required.", "limit": "This is an original perspective exercise, not two photographs of a named landform.", "strength": "Direct for the labeled drawing; no field identification.", "source_ids": [ "G02" ], "evidence_class": "illustrative", "transfer": "Which extra view would help you distinguish a fin from a pillar?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-02.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-shape" }, { "id": "goc-03", "number": 3, "lesson": "shape", "title": "Name versus evidence", "prompt": "NPS discusses Natural Bridge among Bryce’s arches and windows. Which claims are justified?", "art": "window", "alt": "An original sketch of a rock window is captioned ‘Shape example, not a reconstruction of Natural Bridge.’ A small reference label names the NPS Arches page.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "The place name proves a river cut the opening.", "supported": false, "reason": "Names do not establish a formation mechanism." }, { "id": "b", "label": "The NPS account is evidence for its geological description.", "supported": true, "reason": "This is a source-based interpretation, not a conclusion from the sketch alone." }, { "id": "c", "label": "The sketch measures the real opening’s width.", "supported": false, "reason": "It is explicitly an unscaled shape example." }, { "id": "d", "label": "The drawing contains rock over an opening.", "supported": true, "reason": "That is a direct visible observation." } ], "observation": "Rock spans an opening in the drawing.", "interpretation": "NPS treats the named Natural Bridge as an arch/window and notes that process terminology can be imprecise.", "alternate": "You may call the drawn feature an opening or window without claiming its origin.", "limit": "Neither the drawing nor the name supplies a process history or dimensions for the real feature.", "strength": "Direct for the sketch; source-supported for the named place.", "source_ids": [ "G03" ], "evidence_class": "illustrative", "transfer": "Which part of your answer came from looking, and which from reading?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-03.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-shape" }, { "id": "goc-04", "number": 4, "lesson": "layers", "title": "Order without thickness", "prompt": "This simplified Claron column shows the informal white member above the pink member. What does it communicate?", "art": "members", "alt": "A schematic column has an upper block labeled white member and a lower block labeled pink member. A bracket states ‘order only; no thickness scale’. Both blocks have equal drawn height.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "The white member is shown above the pink member.", "supported": true, "reason": "The labels and their vertical order support this." }, { "id": "b", "label": "Both members have equal real thickness.", "supported": false, "reason": "Equal boxes are a layout choice; there is no thickness scale." }, { "id": "c", "label": "Every white patch in Bryce is the white member.", "supported": false, "reason": "A color patch alone does not establish a mapped unit." }, { "id": "d", "label": "The illustration omits local variation.", "supported": true, "reason": "It is an explicitly simplified column, not a local measured section." } ], "observation": "The white-member label sits above the pink-member label.", "interpretation": "This summarizes the informal member order in the NPS wayside, not a complete section at every location.", "alternate": "‘No scale is given’ is a valid evidence observation.", "limit": "Do not infer equal thickness, universal preservation or a contact from color alone.", "strength": "Source-supported order; illustrative geometry.", "source_ids": [ "G04", "G07" ], "evidence_class": "illustrative", "transfer": "What could a measured section add that these boxes cannot?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-04.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-layers" }, { "id": "goc-05", "number": 5, "lesson": "layers", "title": "Color is a clue", "prompt": "The same schematic band is shown in light and shadow. Which statements stay defensible?", "art": "color", "alt": "One continuous band crosses a rock sketch. Its left half is sunlit and pale, and its right half is drawn darker under a labeled shadow. The band boundary stays continuous.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "The band is continuous across the drawn shadow.", "supported": true, "reason": "Its boundaries continue through both lighting conditions." }, { "id": "b", "label": "The darker half must be a different formation.", "supported": false, "reason": "Lighting alone changes the displayed color here." }, { "id": "c", "label": "A geological unit needs more evidence than this color change.", "supported": true, "reason": "Material and bedding relationships would be relevant." }, { "id": "d", "label": "The pale half must be stronger rock.", "supported": false, "reason": "Brightness does not measure strength." } ], "observation": "A continuous band looks darker under the drawn shadow.", "interpretation": "Lighting and material are different explanations for color differences. Unit identification uses more than color.", "alternate": "‘The edge does not shift where the shading changes’ is a useful alternative observation.", "limit": "The diagram is not a mineral analysis or a mapped Claron exposure.", "strength": "Direct for the drawing; insufficient for material identity.", "source_ids": [ "G07" ], "evidence_class": "illustrative", "transfer": "What would you record besides color?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-05.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-layers" }, { "id": "goc-06", "number": 6, "lesson": "layers", "title": "Older is not a number", "prompt": "Assume these three sediment layers are upright, undisturbed and deposited in sequence. What follows?", "art": "superposition", "alt": "Three horizontal layers are labeled C at the top, B in the middle and A at the bottom. A note states the sequence is upright and undisturbed; no ages or thickness units are provided.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "A was deposited before C.", "supported": true, "reason": "Under the stated assumptions, the lower layer came first." }, { "id": "b", "label": "B took exactly one million years to form.", "supported": false, "reason": "No numerical time information is provided." }, { "id": "c", "label": "All three took equally long to form.", "supported": false, "reason": "Drawn thickness does not establish duration." }, { "id": "d", "label": "The conclusion depends on the stated assumptions.", "supported": true, "reason": "Overturning or disturbance would require a different analysis." } ], "observation": "A lies below B, and B below C.", "interpretation": "Superposition gives relative order under the stated conditions. It does not assign numerical ages.", "alternate": "‘C was deposited after B’ is equally valid under the same assumptions.", "limit": "An original generic section, not a dated Bryce stratigraphic column.", "strength": "Logical inference from explicit assumptions; no absolute ages.", "source_ids": [ "G05" ], "evidence_class": "illustrative", "transfer": "What evidence might help place a numerical age on a layer?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-06.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-layers" }, { "id": "goc-07", "number": 7, "lesson": "fractures", "title": "A crack is not enough", "prompt": "A line crosses these drawn layers without a visible offset. Which statements are supported?", "art": "joint", "alt": "Three horizontal bands are crossed by a vertical crack. Corresponding band boundaries meet at the same height on each side. The drawing shows no displacement arrows.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "A crack crosses the layers.", "supported": true, "reason": "The line intersects all three bands." }, { "id": "b", "label": "No layer offset is shown.", "supported": true, "reason": "Corresponding band boundaries align in this view." }, { "id": "c", "label": "An earthquake happened here last week.", "supported": false, "reason": "No event date or field evidence is supplied." }, { "id": "d", "label": "The line alone proves a fault.", "supported": false, "reason": "A fault requires movement; the crack alone does not demonstrate it." } ], "observation": "The band edges align on either side of the crack.", "interpretation": "The drawing is consistent with a fracture without shown displacement. Absence of visible offset in one view does not prove no movement ever occurred.", "alternate": "‘We need another view or a displaced marker to test movement’ is defensible.", "limit": "No real fracture is mapped or dated; out-of-plane movement is not resolved.", "strength": "Direct for alignment in this view; movement history unresolved.", "source_ids": [ "G02", "G05" ], "evidence_class": "illustrative", "transfer": "What would make a fault interpretation stronger?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-07.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-fractures" }, { "id": "goc-08", "number": 8, "lesson": "fractures", "title": "Where could water go?", "prompt": "In this process sketch, which paths are shown as connected to the surface?", "art": "water", "alt": "A rock block has crack A open at its upper surface, with water arrows extending downward. Pocket B is fully enclosed in the drawing and has no shown connection to the surface.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "A has a drawn route from the surface.", "supported": true, "reason": "The opening and arrows join the surface to A." }, { "id": "b", "label": "B definitely has no connection anywhere in three dimensions.", "supported": false, "reason": "The drawing cannot exclude a connection outside this section." }, { "id": "c", "label": "The picture establishes the volume of infiltrating water.", "supported": false, "reason": "No flow measurement or calibrated arrow scale exists." }, { "id": "d", "label": "B has no surface connection shown in this section.", "supported": true, "reason": "That carefully limits the claim to what is visible." } ], "observation": "Only crack A is visibly connected to the top of this section.", "interpretation": "Connected cracks can provide access for water. A two-dimensional drawing cannot settle all three-dimensional pathways.", "alternate": "‘Water access to B is unknown’ is valid; ‘B is always dry’ is not established.", "limit": "Arrows show an illustrative possibility, not measured infiltration or a real cave system.", "strength": "Direct for drawn connectivity; weak for real flow.", "source_ids": [ "G02" ], "evidence_class": "illustrative", "transfer": "How would you express the unknown without filling it in?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-08.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-fractures" }, { "id": "goc-09", "number": 9, "lesson": "fractures", "title": "A cold night is not a counter", "prompt": "The hypothetical record shows air temperature crossing 0 °C, but no rock or moisture measurements. What can you conclude?", "art": "temperature", "alt": "An illustrative air-temperature curve falls below a labeled 0 °C line and rises above it. The chart has no numerical time axis and states ‘rock temperature and moisture not measured’. No fracture is observed.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "The drawn air temperature crosses the freezing reference.", "supported": true, "reason": "The curve crosses the 0 °C line." }, { "id": "b", "label": "Exactly one fracture must have formed.", "supported": false, "reason": "A crossing is not a measurement of rock damage." }, { "id": "c", "label": "Rock moisture and temperature would improve a process explanation.", "supported": true, "reason": "Those address missing conditions relevant to freezing damage." }, { "id": "d", "label": "This is a measured Bryce weather record.", "supported": false, "reason": "The record is labeled hypothetical." } ], "observation": "The curve passes below and above the reference line.", "interpretation": "Water availability and rock thermal conditions matter. Experimental frost-fracture research also includes ice segregation, beyond a simple event counter.", "alternate": "‘There is no observed crack change’ is a valid evidence-limit statement.", "limit": "No climate series, damage count or erosion rate is supplied.", "strength": "Direct for the hypothetical curve; insufficient for fracture count.", "source_ids": [ "G08" ], "evidence_class": "illustrative", "transfer": "What would you measure to test whether the rock actually changed?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-09.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-fractures" }, { "id": "goc-10", "number": 10, "lesson": "material", "title": "Break or carry?", "prompt": "Two panels isolate different actions. Which descriptions fit?", "art": "break-move", "alt": "Panel A shows a rock splitting into two pieces that remain in place. Panel B shows an already loose marked fragment moving downslope along an arrow. These are conceptual panels, not dated photographs.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "A illustrates physical breakdown.", "supported": true, "reason": "The rock separates into pieces without shown transport." }, { "id": "b", "label": "B illustrates transport of a fragment.", "supported": true, "reason": "Its marked starting and ending positions differ." }, { "id": "c", "label": "A supplies a measured erosion rate.", "supported": false, "reason": "There are no real times or measured distances." }, { "id": "d", "label": "Weathering and transport must always happen separately.", "supported": false, "reason": "The panels separate concepts for teaching; processes may interact." } ], "observation": "A piece divides in A; a loose piece changes position in B.", "interpretation": "The panels distinguish physical weathering from material transport.", "alternate": "‘Both could happen in the same landscape’ is a useful process interpretation, not a pictured event history.", "limit": "Drawn arrows do not encode force, distance or elapsed time.", "strength": "Illustrative mechanism distinction; no field measurement.", "source_ids": [ "G01" ], "evidence_class": "illustrative", "transfer": "Could a single rain event involve both kinds of action?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-10.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-material" }, { "id": "goc-11", "number": 11, "lesson": "material", "title": "Material can leave unseen", "prompt": "The sketch labels carbonate entering solution in weakly acidic water. Which statements fit the stated process?", "art": "dissolution", "alt": "A labeled carbonate block is beside a water droplet. Small symbol dots leave its edge into the droplet and are labeled dissolved material; the symbols are not atoms drawn to scale.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "Material can leave without becoming a visible loose pebble.", "supported": true, "reason": "Dissolved material is a different outcome from a transported fragment." }, { "id": "b", "label": "All rock dissolves at the same speed.", "supported": false, "reason": "The drawing specifies neither all materials nor reaction rates." }, { "id": "c", "label": "The dots count real molecules.", "supported": false, "reason": "They are explanatory symbols." }, { "id": "d", "label": "The sketch shows a chemical weathering concept.", "supported": true, "reason": "The stated process is dissolution, not merely movement of a solid piece." } ], "observation": "The labels distinguish a solid block from dissolved material.", "interpretation": "Carbonate dissolution can remove material without a visible pebble leaving the rock.", "alternate": "‘This needs a chemical explanation, not just a shape description’ is defensible.", "limit": "No pH, concentration, reaction speed or measured chemistry is represented.", "strength": "Source-supported process; entirely illustrative symbols.", "source_ids": [ "G05" ], "evidence_class": "illustrative", "transfer": "Why might a before-and-after photograph miss some material loss?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-11.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-material" }, { "id": "goc-12", "number": 12, "lesson": "material", "title": "A pile is a clue", "prompt": "Loose fragments sit below a drawn cliff. What is a careful reading?", "art": "talus", "alt": "Several angular fragments lie beneath a cliff. No falling rock, timestamps, measured movement or stability information are shown.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "Fragments are drawn below the cliff.", "supported": true, "reason": "This describes their visible position." }, { "id": "b", "label": "They all fell this morning.", "supported": false, "reason": "No time evidence is present." }, { "id": "c", "label": "Gravity is a plausible transport explanation to investigate.", "supported": true, "reason": "It is a process hypothesis compatible with the arrangement." }, { "id": "d", "label": "The remaining cliff is proven safe.", "supported": false, "reason": "A static pile does not establish stability." } ], "observation": "Loose pieces are lower than the drawn cliff face.", "interpretation": "Gravity is one plausible contributor; the arrangement alone does not identify each fragment’s source or travel history.", "alternate": "‘The pieces could have accumulated in multiple events’ is possible but not demonstrated.", "limit": "This is not a rockfall forecast or an access recommendation.", "strength": "Direct for position; tentative for process and unknown for timing.", "source_ids": [ "G03" ], "evidence_class": "illustrative", "transfer": "What information would separate one event from many?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-12.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-material" }, { "id": "goc-13", "number": 13, "lesson": "terrain", "title": "Read the drop", "prompt": "Use the labeled endpoints of the derived Sunset profile. Which statements follow?", "art": "profile-drop", "alt": "A west-to-east terrain profile spans 512 m. The west endpoint is labeled 2,441 m and the east endpoint 2,293 m NAVD88, rounded to whole metres. Horizontal and vertical scales are equal.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "The west endpoint is higher in this derived profile.", "supported": true, "reason": "2,441 m exceeds 2,293 m." }, { "id": "b", "label": "The rounded endpoint difference is about 148 m.", "supported": true, "reason": "2,441 minus 2,293 equals 148; the retained unrounded difference is 147.62 m." }, { "id": "c", "label": "This is a measured 148 m rockfall.", "supported": false, "reason": "These are two places in one dataset, not the same place before and after." }, { "id": "d", "label": "The line is a surveyed walking route.", "supported": false, "reason": "It is an east–west row through an upper-envelope terrain model." } ], "observation": "The west endpoint is visibly and numerically higher.", "interpretation": "The difference is a calculation on an existing data derivative, not a new field measurement or change detection.", "alternate": "‘The east end is about 148 m lower’ is equivalent; ‘the whole line is downhill’ is not true of every segment.", "limit": "2018 source, 4 m exported spacing; an upper surface with filtering/interpolation limits.", "strength": "Derived numerical evidence; source accuracy not established by export precision.", "source_ids": [ "D01", "D02" ], "evidence_class": "derived", "transfer": "Why is an elevation difference different from an erosion measurement?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-13.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-terrain" }, { "id": "goc-14", "number": 14, "lesson": "terrain", "title": "Compare equal spans", "prompt": "A and B each span 128 m horizontally. Compare their endpoint drops in the same derived profile.", "art": "profile-spans", "alt": "On the Sunset center profile, span A from 0 to 128 m drops from about 2,441 to 2,425 m. Span B from 128 to 256 m drops from about 2,425 to 2,341 m. Both horizontal spans are 128 m.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "B has the larger endpoint drop.", "supported": true, "reason": "B drops about 84 m; A drops about 16 m." }, { "id": "b", "label": "B has the greater average downward grade between its endpoints.", "supported": true, "reason": "With equal horizontal distances, the larger drop gives the larger mean grade magnitude." }, { "id": "c", "label": "Every small segment within B is steeper than every segment within A.", "supported": false, "reason": "Endpoint comparisons do not describe every local segment." }, { "id": "d", "label": "B is therefore safe to descend.", "supported": false, "reason": "A profile comparison is not a route or safety assessment." } ], "observation": "Equal horizontal spans contain unequal endpoint drops.", "interpretation": "The derived endpoint grades are about 12.4% downward for A and 65.5% for B. These are profile calculations, not measured trail grades.", "alternate": "‘B drops roughly five times as much over the same horizontal span’ is an acceptable approximate comparison.", "limit": "Local slope, accessible tread and stability cannot be inferred from this two-endpoint comparison.", "strength": "Derived arithmetic; no route qualification.", "source_ids": [ "D01" ], "evidence_class": "derived", "transfer": "What changes if the spans have different horizontal lengths?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-14.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-terrain" }, { "id": "goc-15", "number": 15, "lesson": "terrain", "title": "Below the line", "prompt": "Only the top line comes from terrain data. What can the empty space beneath it tell us?", "art": "profile-empty", "alt": "The derived Sunset surface profile is drawn over an unfilled region labeled ‘subsurface not sampled by this profile’. Two proposed underground layer boundaries appear as question marks, not lines.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "The profile identifies underground layer contacts.", "supported": false, "reason": "The dataset supplies surface heights, not buried contacts." }, { "id": "b", "label": "The blank region communicates missing information.", "supported": true, "reason": "It is deliberately left uninterpreted." }, { "id": "c", "label": "A geological map or measured section could add relevant evidence.", "supported": true, "reason": "Those sources can address material and stratigraphic relationships." }, { "id": "d", "label": "The blank region means the ground is hollow.", "supported": false, "reason": "An absence of drawn data is not a physical void." } ], "observation": "A surface line is present; subsurface boundaries are not.", "interpretation": "Topography and stratigraphy answer different questions. The section does not justify invented underground bands.", "alternate": "‘No rock type is identified by the surface height alone’ is valid.", "limit": "The area beneath the profile is unknown in this representation, not an inferred cavity.", "strength": "Derived surface; no subsurface evidence.", "source_ids": [ "D01", "G07" ], "evidence_class": "derived", "transfer": "What source would you seek before drawing a contact?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-15.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-terrain" }, { "id": "goc-16", "number": 16, "lesson": "models", "title": "One height cannot hold an arch", "prompt": "An upper-envelope grid stores only the top height at each horizontal position. Which claim follows?", "art": "upper-envelope", "alt": "An illustrative arch is shown with downward sampling lines ending on its roof. At one horizontal location the roof and the underside have different heights; a grid column stores only the top value.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "A top-only grid can fully describe both roof and underside at the same position.", "supported": false, "reason": "That requires more than one surface height at that horizontal location." }, { "id": "b", "label": "A filled model opening proves the real opening is filled.", "supported": false, "reason": "The representation may be unable to preserve the opening." }, { "id": "c", "label": "The model’s missing underside is an evidence limitation.", "supported": true, "reason": "The representation and observation geometry limit what is recoverable." }, { "id": "d", "label": "Another source is needed to establish hidden geometry.", "supported": true, "reason": "Multi-angle evidence could address surfaces unavailable in the top-only grid." } ], "observation": "The schematic grid retains the top sample and omits the underside.", "interpretation": "The integrated study’s upper-envelope method cannot recover a complete arch or ground-level scan.", "alternate": "‘More triangles alone cannot provide an unseen underside’ is a valid inference.", "limit": "Generic diagram only; no replacement model of Thor’s Hammer or Natural Bridge is made.", "strength": "Direct representation limit, supported by the source method.", "source_ids": [ "D01" ], "evidence_class": "illustrative", "transfer": "What evidence would you request before filling a hidden surface?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-16.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-models" }, { "id": "goc-17", "number": 17, "lesson": "models", "title": "Spacing is not accuracy", "prompt": "The exported profile contains 129 nodes across 512 m. Which statements are justified?", "art": "sampling", "alt": "A number line marks nodes 0, 1, 2 and 128. Adjacent early nodes are 4 m apart, and the total first-to-last span is 512 m. Interior nodes are omitted from the drawing with an ellipsis.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "There are 128 intervals between 129 nodes.", "supported": true, "reason": "Intervals lie between neighboring nodes, so there is one fewer interval than nodes." }, { "id": "b", "label": "The sample spacing is 4 m.", "supported": true, "reason": "512 divided by 128 equals 4." }, { "id": "c", "label": "Every height is accurate to 4 m.", "supported": false, "reason": "Sampling distance does not establish elevation accuracy." }, { "id": "d", "label": "Adding interpolated nodes creates new measured detail.", "supported": false, "reason": "Interpolation adds estimates between existing samples." } ], "observation": "The endpoints enclose 128 equal intervals.", "interpretation": "Spacing describes the exported representation. Centimetre encoding and a dense grid do not certify source accuracy.", "alternate": "‘129 is a node count, not an interval count’ is a useful distinction.", "limit": "The number line depicts exported sample geometry, not individual laser footprints.", "strength": "Derived metadata and arithmetic; accuracy remains separate.", "source_ids": [ "D01" ], "evidence_class": "derived", "transfer": "Which metadata would you read to learn about actual accuracy?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-17.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-models" }, { "id": "goc-18", "number": 18, "lesson": "models", "title": "Two dates, one model", "prompt": "The integrated Sunset study lists 2018 geometry and 2024 aerial color. Which statements follow?", "art": "dates", "alt": "Two labeled records feed a model box: USGS airborne lidar, 2018 project interval; USDA NAIP aerial color, July 23, 2024. A label states this card reuses metadata only, not the imagery.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "The inputs were acquired in different years.", "supported": true, "reason": "2018 and 2024 are distinct acquisition dates." }, { "id": "b", "label": "The combined model is a live view.", "supported": false, "reason": "Both sources are dated records." }, { "id": "c", "label": "Every colored detail is a measured three-dimensional surface.", "supported": false, "reason": "Image color and geometry are different inputs." }, { "id": "d", "label": "The dates should stay with the model’s interpretation.", "supported": true, "reason": "They help users assess temporal mismatch and limits." } ], "observation": "The two source records have different dates and roles.", "interpretation": "A composite can combine evidence from different times. It does not establish what changed between those times.", "alternate": "‘The geometry is older than the color imagery’ is defensible; an exact six-year interval is not established by year labels alone.", "limit": "Metadata exercise; no aerial photograph is copied and no present condition is claimed.", "strength": "Direct inherited metadata; no change detection.", "source_ids": [ "D01" ], "evidence_class": "reference", "transfer": "Why should a model keep separate geometry and imagery dates?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-18.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-models" }, { "id": "goc-19", "number": 19, "lesson": "time", "title": "Two different ages", "prompt": "The diagram separates sediment becoming rock from a pillar becoming isolated. What can it establish?", "art": "two-ages", "alt": "A conceptual sequence shows sediment layers, a solid rock block, then an isolated pillar. Arrows indicate order but are not scaled to time and carry no dates.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "Rock formation and pillar isolation are different events.", "supported": true, "reason": "The conceptual sequence separates them." }, { "id": "b", "label": "The pillar’s current shape is as old as its sediment.", "supported": false, "reason": "Sediment history and later shaping are different questions." }, { "id": "c", "label": "The arrows supply exact durations.", "supported": false, "reason": "They show order only." }, { "id": "d", "label": "An age for the rock alone would not date pillar isolation.", "supported": true, "reason": "A second event needs its own dating evidence." } ], "observation": "The material exists before the isolated shape in the drawing.", "interpretation": "The age of a rock is not automatically the age of the landform made from it.", "alternate": "‘The shape developed after the material in this model’ is acceptable without adding a date.", "limit": "This is a teaching sequence, not a dated reconstruction of one Bryce hoodoo.", "strength": "Source-informed relative sequence; no numerical chronology.", "source_ids": [ "G01" ], "evidence_class": "illustrative", "transfer": "Which event does the phrase ‘How old is it?’ actually refer to?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-19.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-time" }, { "id": "goc-20", "number": 20, "lesson": "time", "title": "A sequence is not a forecast", "prompt": "The labeled conceptual panels show a fin, a window and a remaining pillar. Which claims fit?", "art": "sequence", "alt": "Three equal-sized panels show a fin, a window and a remaining pillar, joined by arrows. The caption says ‘one possible sequence; no duration scale’. No present-day landmark is identified.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "The panels illustrate a possible progression of forms.", "supported": true, "reason": "That is the explicitly stated role of the diagram." }, { "id": "b", "label": "Each panel lasts the same number of years.", "supported": false, "reason": "Equal panel sizes do not encode equal durations." }, { "id": "c", "label": "Every hoodoo must pass through exactly these shapes.", "supported": false, "reason": "The simplified sequence is not universal." }, { "id": "d", "label": "The last panel predicts a named landmark’s failure date.", "supported": false, "reason": "No named landmark or timing evidence is present." } ], "observation": "The opening appears in the middle panel; the final shape is separate.", "interpretation": "The NPS description supports this broad process story, while the original panels omit alternate histories and timing.", "alternate": "‘A connection is lost between the second and third sketch’ describes a visible diagram change.", "limit": "No duration, inevitability or collapse prediction is supplied.", "strength": "Illustrative process sequence; no forecast.", "source_ids": [ "G03" ], "evidence_class": "illustrative", "transfer": "How would you label this figure to avoid implying a countdown?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-20.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-time" }, { "id": "goc-21", "number": 21, "lesson": "time", "title": "One profile, no rate", "prompt": "You have one derived terrain profile from the 2018 source. What would support a defensible change estimate?", "art": "repeat", "alt": "The 2018 profile is shown once. A second panel is empty and labeled ‘comparable later survey needed’. A ruler and uncertainty symbol indicate registration and measurement quality must be checked.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "Divide its relief by the number of years since 2018.", "supported": false, "reason": "Spatial relief is not a measured change over time." }, { "id": "b", "label": "Obtain a comparable later survey and align the observations.", "supported": true, "reason": "A change estimate needs comparable positions and acquisition records." }, { "id": "c", "label": "Account for uncertainty and differences in processing.", "supported": true, "reason": "Apparent changes may arise from measurement or method differences." }, { "id": "d", "label": "Assume every difference is erosion.", "supported": false, "reason": "Registration, vegetation and other differences need evaluation." } ], "observation": "Only one dated surface is available on the card.", "interpretation": "A single snapshot cannot provide an erosion rate. A comparison would still need uncertainty analysis and process interpretation.", "alternate": "‘No change rate can be calculated from this card’ is a complete valid conclusion.", "limit": "No second survey, erosion value or new acquisition is supplied.", "strength": "Derived baseline; insufficient evidence for temporal change.", "source_ids": [ "D01" ], "evidence_class": "derived", "transfer": "What would make two surveys meaningfully comparable?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-21.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-time" }, { "id": "goc-22", "number": 22, "lesson": "case", "title": "A ledge has several stories", "prompt": "A layer juts out farther than its neighbors in this sketch. Which statements keep evidence and explanation separate?", "art": "ledge", "alt": "An original pillar sketch has one broad ledge between narrower intervals. A dashed pointer marks the outward edge. No samples, hardness tests or mineral labels are present.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "One interval projects outward in the drawing.", "supported": true, "reason": "This describes the visible shape." }, { "id": "b", "label": "Contrasting resistance is one possible explanation to test.", "supported": true, "reason": "It is compatible with differential weathering, without identifying the exact material." }, { "id": "c", "label": "The sketch proves that interval is dolomite.", "supported": false, "reason": "Mineral identity requires evidence beyond outline." }, { "id": "d", "label": "The ledge will never erode.", "supported": false, "reason": "Relative resistance is not immunity or a forecast." } ], "observation": "A wide ledge separates narrower parts of the outline.", "interpretation": "Differing resistance can contribute to ledges and recesses; the drawing does not identify a rock type or cause uniquely.", "alternate": "‘The change could also reflect fracture geometry’ is a reasonable alternative hypothesis, not a confirmed finding.", "limit": "Illustrative shape, no sampled bed or strength measurement.", "strength": "Direct shape observation; tentative process interpretation.", "source_ids": [ "G01", "G07" ], "evidence_class": "illustrative", "transfer": "What would help distinguish material differences from fracture effects?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-22.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-case" }, { "id": "goc-23", "number": 23, "lesson": "case", "title": "Match the question to the source", "prompt": "You want to investigate rock-unit boundaries, surface relief and exact collapse timing. Which matches are defensible?", "art": "sources", "alt": "Three source cards are labeled geological map/section, dated surface profile, and single sketch. Three question labels ask about units, relief and exact future collapse timing.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "A geological map or section can inform rock-unit relationships.", "supported": true, "reason": "It addresses geological identification and spatial relationships, within its scale and limits." }, { "id": "b", "label": "A derived elevation profile can inform surface relief.", "supported": true, "reason": "Its numerical surface heights address that question." }, { "id": "c", "label": "A single sketch establishes an exact collapse date.", "supported": false, "reason": "The sketch has no predictive physical or temporal evidence." }, { "id": "d", "label": "Every source answers every geological question equally well.", "supported": false, "reason": "A source’s method and scope constrain the questions it can address." } ], "observation": "The source cards contain different types of information.", "interpretation": "Choose evidence that addresses the question. A precise-looking graphic does not automatically supply the missing information.", "alternate": "‘None of these sources alone establishes exact collapse timing’ is a valid conclusion.", "limit": "A geological map also has scale and uncertainty limits; it is not a guarantee of any specific contact at any zoom level.", "strength": "Source-method reasoning; no new geological or stability finding.", "source_ids": [ "G07", "D01" ], "evidence_class": "illustrative", "transfer": "Which source would you choose for a question about a hidden underside?", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-23.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-case" }, { "id": "goc-24", "number": 24, "lesson": "case", "title": "Write the careful caption", "prompt": "Choose the captions that fit this derived Sunset profile without adding unsupported claims.", "art": "caption", "alt": "The same dated Sunset center profile is shown with 4 m sample spacing, west and east endpoints, and a label ‘derived upper surface; no subsurface or change data’. Three empty notebook lines invite a caption.", "options": [ { "id": "a", "label": "‘A derived 2018-source profile has a higher west endpoint than east endpoint.’", "supported": true, "reason": "It preserves source class, date scope and the visible comparison." }, { "id": "b", "label": "‘The cliff lost 148 m since 2018.’", "supported": false, "reason": "It turns spatial relief into an unmeasured time change." }, { "id": "c", "label": "‘This profile does not resolve buried layers or hidden undersides.’", "supported": true, "reason": "It states an actual method limit." }, { "id": "d", "label": "‘These lines measure the real rock layers.’", "supported": false, "reason": "The figure shows topography rather than stratigraphy." } ], "observation": "A west-to-east surface line is paired with a dated source and sampling note.", "interpretation": "A careful caption combines the observation, evidence class and an honest limit. Several wordings can do this well.", "alternate": "‘The east endpoint is lower in this model; this is not a current survey’ is also defensible.", "limit": "Your own wording is not automatically graded; discuss whether each clause is supported.", "strength": "Derived surface comparison; explicit limits on interpretation.", "source_ids": [ "D01", "D02" ], "evidence_class": "derived", "transfer": "Write a different caption that includes one observation and one limit.", "illustration": "illustrations/goc-24.svg", "lesson_href": "guide.html#goc-lesson-case" } ] }