An updated version of the list of state development teams is also being distributed to all state coordinators and development team members.  Any corrections should be reported to Norma Adams at Clemson.

A total of 33 people, representing all eight participating states, attended the July 1998 SE MAPS Summer Conference at Clemson University (July 7-10).  A Tuesday night reception allowed early arrivals the opportunity to look through some of the draft products that Burgess Howell had printed for us.  The anaglyph (3-D) topo maps ordered by Tennessee generated particular interest among the participants and guests.

On Wednesday morning, Project Director John Wagner brought attendees up to date on the progress of the SE MAPS project since last year.  The South Carolina team then presented some draft materials to be used in the South Carolina study areas and led participants through a sample activity for each of their three sites.  Each state was given the same opportunity to present similar progress reports and highlight sample activities for their study areas Wednesday or Thursday.

Participants were very pleased with all of the regional products except the AVHRR image.  Several participants were sure that something better must exist.  Mike Clark of Tennessee suggested using the digital shaded relief map (USGS Map I-2206) and John Wilson of Mississippi thought he could obtain a better Landsat image.  No final decision has been reached yet.

On Tuesday evening, each state team met separately with Burgess Howell to discuss the final layout, scale, and geographic coverage of their cartographic products.  On Friday, Assessment Coordinator Phil Astwood led a series of discussions to determine the objectives of the pilot testing and identify how to set up reasonable mechanisms and timetables for accomplishing them.  NSF representative C.Q. Brown addressed the group before the conference adjourned.

- The RATIONALE should be written as a series of bullets followed by brief short paragraphs which match the identified themes.  It should answer the question, "Why was this study area chosen for inclusion in SE MAPS as opposed to other potential areas?"
 
- The PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES should be presented as a matrix if possible, relating to national standards.  Otherwise, a series of bullets would do.  Bullets should be thematically related.
 
- The ASSESSMENT RUBRICS should be presented as a matrix if possible (we will post a South Carolina example on the SE MAPS web site once the format is finalized).  Teams will receive more information on this format later.
 
- The NEWSPAPER ARTICLE should relate to some event of interest in or near the study area which  links to one or more activities.  For conformity, we ask you to stick to newspapers as opposed to magazine articles.  Stories must be edited, if necessary, to fit on one page. It was suggested that a small index map (showing exact location of the event) be inserted at the end of the article.
 
- The STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION should be limited to 5 pages of thematically based narrative information plus a reasonable number of diagrams (sketches or maps), plus from 1-3 ‘original source’  site-based stories or other language arts selections.
 
- The DIAGRAMS must be black & white line drawings or sketches which are photocopiable.  You can submit these on disk or we can scan in hard copies.  Please include only those diagrams which are absolutely necessary for students to complete the activities.
 
- The LANGUAGE ARTS SELECTIONS may range from short stories to poetry to diary entries to songs and ballads to excerpts from historical documents.  Length of items can vary considerably, but should be held to a maximum of one page if possible.
 
- The ACTIVITIES should each relate to a stated theme.  Each activity should address one theme only.  Every study area should have from 2-4 activities.  Each activity should begin with a ‘power thinking’ question, list needed materials, and provide an ‘icon’ legend.  There should be from 5-15 performance task questions and from 2-5 enrichment questions written for each activity.
 
- The POWER THINKING EXERCISE should be an open ended question that introduces students to the cartographic products by encouraging them to examine patterns and collect information from maps and photos.  This exercise should constitute the ‘exploration phase’ of the Learning Cycle.  Length can vary considerably, but the exercise should be do-able in one standard class period.
 
- The MATERIALS LIST should list all cartographic products and other materials needed to do any task (including the Power Thinking Exercise) included under this activity.  If rulers or protractors are used, be sure to list these implements as well.
 
- The ICON assignments should mirror the example in the Columbia Study Area in South Carolina which is posted on the web site.
 
- The PERFORMANCE TASKS should actively engage students with the cartographic products.  These questions should be hands-on in nature and should lead students to a better understanding of the theme of the activity.  Length will vary, but no single task should last longer than the standard class period of 50 minutes.
 
- The ENRICHMENT tasks will ask students to use resources and references beyond the scope of the SE MAPS materials.  They should still relate to the theme of the activity.
 
- The BACKGROUND INFORMATION for each chapter will be written at Clemson.  If anyone on a state development team is interested in helping write these segments, please let us know.  This task is not a state responsibility, but we would welcome help.
 
- The PLACES TO VISIT list should include a manageable number of important sites of interest keyed to particular landform regions.  For example, Tennessee should provide a list of such sites in the Valley & Ridge even though none of Tennessee’s three study areas specifically deal with the Valley & Ridge province.  We have never discussed the optimal number of listings, but probably 5-10 sites per region per state is reasonable.  These must be places students can visit.
 
- The REFERENCES & RESOURCES section should include recommended books, magazines, videos, web sites, and any other data source that the state team thinks would be helpful to students.

We are still looking for someone to head up the Birmingham development team.  We have some pretty clear ideas as to what we want, but need some local assistance in order to identify specific cartographic products that can be used here.

Greg Cox has the Lookout Mt. study area well in hand and has most of the narrative material ready for pilot testing.  We don’t have final word on the status of some map and image products called for in the outline.
 

FLORIDA

The Woodville Karst Plain study area is virtually complete; a draft narrative has already been submitted on disk to the Clemson office.

For South Florida and the Florida Peninsula, there are still some local sketches and photos which must be delivered to Burgess Howell.

Pilot schools have been identified in Central, North, (and probably) South Florida.  Three teachers are definitely willing to participate and others may take part if needed.  A proposal for funding the Florida In-service training was submitted to the Clemson SE MAPS office.  TheGulf Archeological Research Institute (GARI) is interested in leading it
 

GEORGIA

Tom Hanley has finalized the selection of materials for Pine Mountain.  These will include some historical air photos documenting the shift from truck farming to pine forests from the 1930’s to the 1950’s.  He has also included a portion of an unpublished geologic map of the area.

Images for the Atlanta area are likewise firmed up.  Nancy Huebner and Pam Gore will select the exact images to be used in the Soapstone Ridge and Stone Mountain insets.  Three teachers from the Atlanta area attended the July conference as future pilot testing partners.
 

LOUISIANA

Pam Borne has pursued the idea of generating a LA MAPS statewide project and has received funding from the Louisiana Sea Grant College Program to start the process.

Two teachers have been identified to pilot the materials in New Orleans and Shreveport.  Several other teachers may be able to participate as well.
 

MISSISSIPPI

NORTH CAROLINA

SOUTH CAROLINA

Three schools have been selected to pilot the materials in South Carolina.  The lead teachers for these schools attended the July conference at Clemson.
 

TENNESSEE

Five teachers have been identified to pilot test materials, and several back-ups exist if needed.  Mike Clark will make contact with principals at the beginning of the Fall term.

 SUMMER, 1998:

• acquire working copies of all cartographic products for development team
• State Coordinator selects pilot schools for testing SE MAPS materials
• State Coordinator makes final assignments to writing teams at state level
• Phil Astwood (consultant) refines assessment mechanism for pilot testing in coming year

• State Coordinator schedules first pilot testing of all state units for either Fall or Spring.
• state development teams continue writing according to state schedule.
• printing and laminating of first draft of cartographic products
• chapter background information and regional sections completed at Clemson
• presentation of SE MAPS concept at Regional NSTA Meeting in Birmingham, AL
• limited pilot testing and teacher training workshops occur in some states

• limited pilot testing and teacher training workshops occur in all states
• printing and laminating of all remaining SE MAPS cartographic products
• final drafts of all written materials produced by state development teams turned in
• presentation of progress report to SE Section meeting of Geological Society of America
• correlation of all activities to state and national standards