EESC GU4230

We learned about strain, fractures, faulting, and folding. We also learned how to use a Brunton compass on the field to measure fractures.

advanced structural geology, including field work techniques.

I learned about some of the high level concepts in structural geology, in particular, faulting, folding, rifting, rheology, deformation styles, basin formation and inversion, and some field work basics. I also learned some of the jargon in structural geology, and a bit about how to plot common data types (stike/dip, trend plunge on steronets, rose diagrams etc.). I did not learn much about the details of these topics.

In a crustal deformation course, I learned about tectonic forces, stress and strain, faulting, folding, and plate movements. I developed skills in geological mapping, structural analysis, and interpreting seismic data for understanding Earth's tectonic processes

This class really should be 4 credits--the research paper assignments and field trips exceed the normal workload expectations of 3-credit grad/undergrad course. I really wouldn't take this course unless you think it would directly apply to your current/future research interests. But if you are an aspiring geologist, it is definitely an interesting and comprehensive introduction to the field.

I would recommend this to someone very interested in learning structural geology. since this class is the only structural geology course currently offered, it covers a lot of content very quickly and is aimed at graduate students with basic existing structural geology knowledge.

I think the course can be improved in two main ways: 1) Providing feedback to students throughout the semester. We received no feedback from the professor all semester. Some general comments about the overall quality of everyone's midterms were given during the last lecture, but this was not student specific. I really would have appreciated some feedback especially from a Professor who clearly has a lot of wisdom to provide. 2) Consistent and well planned lectures. I would have really appreciated more concise and well-planned lectures. Most were rambling, disorganized and did not follow the slides. Sometimes it seemed like the Professor was unsure what was in the slides or where the lecture was even going. To be clear, I think all of the content of the lectures was great! The professor has endless valuable knowledge and is very motivated to communicate it, but I think the delivery was not well executed. For example, often the first 30-40 minutes of the class were spent an a tangent about something from last class or a rambling on general statements about structural geology. I think connecting the content to actual slides and sticking to the slides (2-3 minutes a slide) would really help the Professor create a story or narrative that students can follow much more easily.