 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
INTRODUCTION (continued)
Geology, as taught at that time, had the strong legacy of field geologic mapping,
created and fostered by a cadre of geologic greats who came West and were awestruck
by the direct association of landform and tectonic and sedimentologic processes,
mostly unmasked by vegetation in the arid and semi-arid climates stretching from
the Mexican border to Canada. Hence the ethos of West Coast geological teaching was
one of field geologic mapping and enough office and lab work to sort out the details,
create the resultant geologic maps, and to create explanations for the geologic
landforms, as supported by sophisticated studies in petrology, petrography,
sedimentology, paleontology and geologic structural analysis. The impacts of plate
tectonic theory were just breaking out for examination and most laboratory work was
done in a painstaking fashion, with hand specimens for reference.
Initiation into the ranks of West coast geologists was demanding. Far more
casualties piled up in the small classes than did successful graduates take degrees
from these schools. Most of us will not forget the introduction to the first of
four field courses; the professor advised us to introduce ourselves to our neighbors,
right and left, to the admonition that one of those persons would not be around at
the end of the semester. No idle threat! The few women who were in our ranks in
Geology 102A had to be stalwart. There were no surviving women enrolled in Geology
102B, the summer field class, or who graduated in the class of 1961. There ought to
have been, but that was not the way of the time. In simple numbers, the Summer
Field Class of 1960 represented about 60 entering Geology freshman and about twelve
final graduates. At the same time, UCLA’s emphasis on student enrollment strongly
favored graduate students, and so, the “undergrubs” were outnumbered about
three-to-one by graduate students. Most of the graduate students were not veterans
of the withering UCLA undergrub experience. In fact, the authors recall the
frustration of having to deal with a single-standard grading system in which UCLA
undergrads had to compete for grades on an even basis with the graduate students,
most of whom did not share the uniqueness of the undergrub experience.
DE RIGOUR
Summer Field 1960 was the second year of coastal range mapping as the turn accorded
to Professor Clarence Hall, whose master work was published in the
Volume 78, p 559-582 of the Bulletin of The Geological Society of America in 1967,
with map-acknowledged participation of the each class member. Preparation for the
summer course came by way of Geology 102A, the child’s play of ten acres of complex
Miocene-aged structure, long ago obliterated by residential subdivision developers
at Bouquet Canyon, and by Geology 102B, a frightening jump to structurally complex
sedimentary rocks at Tick Canyon, near Castaic and Vasquez Rocks. During the summer
field course (Geology 121A and 121B) in the Nipomo Quadrangle of San Luis Obispo
County, teams were selected and paired on two three-week stages, one under the
direction of Professor Hall and the other under the direction of Professor Christie.
Each student came to know best his other three partners for the two interim periods.
Mapping was performed on photoenlarged USGS topographic quadrangles. At the end of
six weeks, the group returned to.
|
|
[Previous Page] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [Next Page]
|
|
