Preliminary: Rocks and Minerals

[kjhsscioly]

I find that it is easier to make my long pages organized in the same order as the list, because that is the order I learn them in, which makes it easier to find. However, if I make a fast ID guide, i like to organize small pictures on a few (3 or 4) pages and group them by shape or color, or like a dichotomous key.

[anatomy]

Yes i agree,
That is what i did with fossils,
its much easier to organize them according to the given list, so you can refer back to the list if you dont know where something is.

[gneissisnice]

Yes i agree,
That is what i did with fossils,
its much easier to organize them according to the given list, so you can refer back to the list if you dont know where something is.

The list is in alphabetical order (separating the groups by mineral, igneous rock, sedimentary rock, and metamorphic rock).

[IdahoSciGuy]

This is exactly what I did while studying, and ill be honest, I really only had one partner that ever studied the material. One thing that I didn't do was make and memorize a custom dichotomous key, because I thought it was an overall waste of time, and couldn't be used quickly if needed. In hindsight, that probably would have been a really good idea. I would try to make a dichotomous key even if you don't bring it too the competition, because in order to make one, you can explore each one of the minerals/rocks, look at their differences, and learn to separate similar looking minerals by minute differences.

[gneissisnice]

This is exactly what I did while studying, and ill be honest, I really only had one partner that ever studied the material. One thing that I didn't do was make and memorize a custom dichotomous key, because I thought it was an overall waste of time, and couldn't be used quickly if needed. In hindsight, that probably would have been a really good idea. I would try to make a dichotomous key even if you don't bring it too the competition, because in order to make one, you can explore each one of the minerals/rocks, look at their differences, and learn to separate similar looking minerals by minute differences.

I wouldn't recommend a dichotomous key, you only have 1:30 to 2 minutes per station and a dichotomous key just takes too long.

Maybe I'm just super awesome, but it honestly doesn't take too long to be able to ID every mineral on sight. There are a couple pairs of minerals that are very similar (olivine and epidote, chalcopyrite and bornite, barite and celestite, etc.), but you should be able to at least narrow it down to that pair and then work out the minor details later, a dichotomous key is unnecessary. You don't really have time to go "let's see...luster...metallic...no it's a gray streak, not black...hmm cubic..." etc., you need to be able to glimpse at it and say "galena" (hypothetical example, of course).

[IdahoSciGuy]

This is exactly what I did while studying, and ill be honest, I really only had one partner that ever studied the material. One thing that I didn't do was make and memorize a custom dichotomous key, because I thought it was an overall waste of time, and couldn't be used quickly if needed. In hindsight, that probably would have been a really good idea. I would try to make a dichotomous key even if you don't bring it too the competition, because in order to make one, you can explore each one of the minerals/rocks, look at their differences, and learn to separate similar looking minerals by minute differences.

I wouldn't recommend a dichotomous key, you only have 1:30 to 2 minutes per station and a dichotomous key just takes too long.

Maybe I'm just super awesome, but it honestly doesn't take too long to be able to ID every mineral on sight. There are a couple pairs of minerals that are very similar (olivine and epidote, chalcopyrite and bornite, barite and celestite, etc.), but you should be able to at least narrow it down to that pair and then work out the minor details later, a dichotomous key is unnecessary. You don't really have time to go "let's see...luster...metallic...no it's a gray streak, not black...hmm cubic..." etc., you need to be able to glimpse at it and say "galena" (hypothetical example, of course).

Well, yes, But i mean to make one to study from, not bring to the competition to use. My logic is that by making one, you can learn to memorize things in ways other than staring at note sheets or cards. Also, by studying from a dichotomous key, you can memorize those subtle differences. It's kind of a linear memorization thingy that I was thinking. By all means, it is a waste of time to have AT the competition, but it certainly isnt a bad idea to use it as study material.

[anatomy]

Again, why would you work harder, for something that you can easily do.
I think the best method for ID is too look at a mineral and try to find unique characteristics.
Why create a dichotomous key, when one is not needed?
i agree with gneissisnice, you should just look at the individual characteristics too help you identify the mineral/rock.

[IdahoSciGuy]

Again, why would you work harder, for something that you can easily do.
I think the best method for ID is too look at a mineral and try to find unique characteristics.
Why create a dichotomous key, when one is not needed?
i agree with gneissisnice, you should just look at the individual characteristics too help you identify the mineral/rock.

Because not everyone can easily "do" that right as they start studying for an event, anatomy. Creating a Dichotomous key is only a burden if you make it one. Personally, I feel I could have placed much higher had I learned from a dichotomous key to start with, rather then take each mineral and "find unique characteristics", and solely rely on that form of learning. I tried doing that, and it failed me. Multiple times. I had to think out of the box, and find a way to learn it. This was my result. This isn't about using that process of elimination during the test, this is a suggestion to help maximizing retention. I couldn't just look at a rock or mineral when I started out, I had to analyze everything, then it just came naturally to me. This process is an option for people who have a hard time with memorization, or are very linear in thinking. It would be good to start out with this now, in summer, and work towards instant recognition in time for the competition. Hence why i'm even bringing this up. It's what I did to profit(and from where I come from, placing above 40 at nats is indeed a profit).

[gneissisnice]

Again, why would you work harder, for something that you can easily do.
I think the best method for ID is too look at a mineral and try to find unique characteristics.
Why create a dichotomous key, when one is not needed?
i agree with gneissisnice, you should just look at the individual characteristics too help you identify the mineral/rock.

Because not everyone can easily "do" that right as they start studying for an event, anatomy. Creating a Dichotomous key is only a burden if you make it one. Personally, I feel I could have placed much higher had I learned from a dichotomous key to start with, rather then take each mineral and "find unique characteristics", and solely rely on that form of learning. I tried doing that, and it failed me. Multiple times. I had to think out of the box, and find a way to learn it. This was my result. This isn't about using that process of elimination during the test, this is a suggestion to help maximizing retention. I couldn't just look at a rock or mineral when I started out, I had to analyze everything, then it just came naturally to me. This process is an option for people who have a hard time with memorization, or are very linear in thinking. It would be good to start out with this now, in summer, and work towards instant recognition in time for the competition. Hence why i'm even bringing this up. It's what I did to profit(and from where I come from, placing above 40 at nats is indeed a profit).

Different people learn in different ways. A dichotomous key could work very well for learning the samples (I thought you meant to bring it to the competition, which isn't a good idea). I personally didn't need that, since I just happened to be very very good at learning the distinguishing characteristics of all the minerals, but that doesn't mean that works for everyone. Some people use flash cards, some people make keys, some people read tons of stuff, and some people look at every sample they can get their hands on, one way isn't better than another for everyone. My way worked quite well for me; 3rd place at Nationals when I was in 9th grade (sadly, that was the only year I did Rocks and Minerals at Nats because we didn't make it to Nats in 10th and 11th), but that doesn't mean it's the only way. Do what works best for you.

[Cheesy Pie]

In fossils I studied a previous test. It worked out well.