2016 AGU Town Hall Future of Tectonics Closed caption for ...€¦ · objectives, timeline & status of a community effort to draft a report on future directions in tectonics. The

Future Direc*ons in Tectonics NSF-‐supported community-‐wide effort to: •  Iden*fy scien*fic grand challenges and opportuni1es •  Ar*culate our needs •  Develop a vision for our community •  Final goal: report on Future Direc*ons in Tectonics •  Now is a good *me; last effort was 15 years ago

•  The welcome and introduc*on to AGU Town Hall, Dec 15, 2016, was presented by YveNe Kuiper (a co-‐PI on NSF grant funding this community effort)

•  Such reports have benefiNed other successful communi*es; the *me is right for us to assess how our relevance, opportuni*es and needs have changed in the nearly 15 years since the last report on tectonics.

This annotated presenta*on is followed by a 3-‐page handout from AGU Town Hall 2016.

Process •  Organizing commiNee: Laurel Goodwin, YveNe Kuiper, Basil Tikoff

•  Workshop commiNee: Rick Allmendinger, Marin Clark, Eric Cowgill, Becky Dorsey, Kevin Mahan, Jim Spo*la

•  Wri*ng commiNee: led by Kate Hun*ngton and Keith Klepeis

•  Workshop (May 20-‐22, 2016): >90 par*cipants •  Community: town halls, online input and feedback •  A large community effort is underway. The effort has been adver*sed broadly for

over a year. Many people represen*ng diverse perspec*ves have goNen involved. •  The org commiNee got funding from NSF and worked with the workshop and

wri*ng commiNees to plan and facilitate the workshop. The wri*ng commiNee has goNen extensive feedback on documents and dracs from the other commiNees, workshop par*cipants, and feedback and contribu*ons from community members.

Thank you

•  NSF Tectonics: David Fountain, Steve Harlan •  Everything-‐not-‐already-‐men*oned: Randy Williams

•  The NSF-‐EAR Tectonics program officers encouraged this community effort and provided funding (NSF-‐EAR-‐1542001). Randy Williams (U Wisconsin Madison) has provided extensive logis*cal and technical support.

The AGU town hall goals are:To share with you the process and explain the objectives, timeline & status of a community effort to draft a report on future directions in tectonics.

The take-home messages are:1)  The process including May 2016 workshop

and information gathering from the community is working.

2)  A draft is in progress.3)  Your input is needed

•  The presenta*on and audience group ac*vi*es for the rest of the Town Hall were presented by Kate Hun*ngton (on behalf of Kate Hun*ngton and Keith Klepeis, wri*ng commiNee co-‐chairs)

Image: legjoints.com

The locy goals of the wriNen report are:

to build

community, ar*culate our vision, enhance our

impact, like many other

successful communi*es

The goals also include:

To explain examples of our science to many poten*al audiences To galvanize our community & build our iden*ty To serve as a plahorm to aNract resources that can benefit the community as a whole (and avoid being prescrip*ve) Image: legjoints.com

The process:

We made every effort to build in transparency

& avoid personal agendas

Image: domvetlabs.worpress.com

•  The process is designed to avoid having any one person or group hold the reins. •  The people who obtained a workshop grant from NSF to produce the report are

not the same people who are wri*ng the report. •  There are mul*ple commiNees of volunteers and groups of people selected to

represent the diverse perspec*ves of our community. •  We adver*sed broadly and solicited widely to aNract broad par*cipa*on from the

Tectonics community.

Image: Boris Karloff

Image: Wikipedia

The process:

avoid Franken-‐ Document

•  The process has been designed with the end product in mind. We want to avoid making a frankendocument composed of individual posi*on papers on different topics all s*tched together.

•  Rather we want to clearly ar*culate a vision with one voice that provides context and organizes the broad perspec*ves of our community into unifying themes.

The process:

wri*ng co-‐chairs

asked to join early on

Image: DreamWorks

Keith KlepeisU Vermont

Kate HuntingtonU Washington

•  The wri*ng commiNee is composed of two people with different backgrounds to reflect the breadth of our community.

•  They are responsible for shepherding the process and ensuring a coherent product comes out at the end.

•  Their job is to solicit, discill, and help ar*culate the community’s ideas rather than their own.

Goals (1)  iden*fy scien*fic grand challenges & opportuni1es where

we are poised to make progress, that illustrate the kind of work we do

(2)  iden*fy the resources, technologies, partnerships, and infrastructure our community needs to make scien*fic progress

(3)  develop a vision to build and strengthen our community, to maximize the educa*onal and societal benefits of our work and to communicate and enhance our impact

The main goal of the May 2016 workshop was to obtain content from a diverse cross sec1on of our community &

to help build that community

•  We (the wri*ng commiNee) spent several months planning the workshop with the organizing commiNee and the workshop commiNee.

•  This included reading examples of dozens of completed reports to get an idea of what we might want for content.

•  The commiNees adver*sed the workshop, members of the community applied, and a large (>90) and diverse group of people agreed to par*cipate.

•  These three commiNees then worked out when and how to ask key ques*ons to get the content needed.

Examples of the kinds of ques6ons we asked are presented on the next slide.

(1) How should we define tectonics? (2) What do we contribute to both basic research and applied

research that is societally relevant? (3) What does the best science look like in our field, and how

does it happen? (4) What are the most exci*ng opportuni*es for cumng edge

science over the next decade? (5) What are the barriers to achieving our scien*fic goals and

ways to overcome them? (6) What are pathways to building a stronger community and to

enhancing the broader impacts of our science? (7) If you could observe/measure anything, what would it be and

why? Where on Earth? With what magical instruments? (8) What else should we discuss or obtain feedback on now and

over the coming months?

May 2016 Workshop to get content & build community

Image: NBC The Office

Collect data in many formats: papers/pop-‐ups, breakouts

Made sure all voices were heard (Facilitators)

We used facilitators to make sure everyone’s voice was heard and to aid in consensus-‐building. We collected data in many formats (e.g., breakout session summaries, online solicita*ons, idea papers, madlibs, think/ pair/ share ac*vi*es, plenary discussions etc.) to see what emerged. We built in syntheses at each stage, revisited key ques*ons in different ways (e.g., group ac*vi*es) to increase signal to noise in the data and build consensus.

Increased signal-‐to-‐noise ra*o: breakout Synthesizers Image: Devo Moog

Image: NBC The Office

Repor*ng back: synthesis presenta*ons & discussion

Image: *racon-‐6v.de

Syntheses of the syntheses, individual syntheses

The process & workshop worked:

There was enthusiasm about the workshopand the outcomes among the participants,

Most felt that their voices were heard,And clear themes emerged…

Image: andrew-‐davidson.uk

… and lots of data

Idea papers“Madlib” individual synthesesScribe reports from breakoutsPowerPoint synthesis reportsSyntheses from plenariesOnline commentsGroup brainstorm sessions

From before, during, after workshop

Image: andrew-‐davidson.uk

… and lots of data

Idea papers“Madlib” individual synthesesScribe reports from breakoutsPowerPoint synthesis reportsSyntheses from plenariesOnline commentsGroup brainstorm sessions

From before, during, after workshop

From many perspectives

e.g., Active tectonicsGeochronologyGeophysicsLow & Hi-T Geochem.Erosion/tectonicsMetamorphic/structureShallow/structureStructure/MechanicsP-magGeomorphologyGeodynamicsGeodesy/tectonicsField/Lab/ModelingGrad/undergrad institutionRange of career stagesUnderrepresented groups

By the GSA Town Hall update, we had:

Developed a draE report framework

Checked the data

Got feedback (vemng included

skype, emails, online comments…)

Systema*cally analyzed the data (Part 1)

Dis*lled & organized ideas from workshop

By the GSA Town Hall update, we had:


Checked the data



thumbs up from commiFee*, share, survey

Repeated 4x…finally

Systema*cally analyzed the data (Part 1)


* The organiza*on, language, and examples used to illustrate the approach are evolving, but the vision outlined in the 9/2016 document accurately reflect the main themes from the workshop.

By the GSA Town Hall update, we had:Systema*cally analyzed

the data (Part 1)



Checked the data



thumbs up from commiFee*, share, survey

Repeated 4x…finally

Report structure & direc1on (full doc of 9/2016 drac is online) Structure: exec summary (1-‐3 pages), intro to tectonics (5 pages) Part 1: Science opportuni*es, takes the form of grand challenges

The litmus test for the 5 themes was: they must be rich, mul*faceted, by nature mul*disciplinary; they must jump out of the data showing broad community interest; they must resonate broadly with the overarching “tectonics” theme; and we must be poised to make breakthroughs now (this last one was crucial to help us hone our list). (50 pages total)

These challenge themes provide examples of the kind of work we do. They are not exclusive or comprehensive.


Themes; rich, mul*faceted, by nature mul*disciplinary Jump out of the data, resonate broadly, “tectonics” Poised to make breakthrough now (50 pages total) •  Intellectual merit (and some example ques*ons) •  Why poised for breakthrough now •  4-‐5 Example sidebars/ boxes/ vigneNes •  Images to support the main messages & examples •  Requirements to make progress


Themes; rich, mul*faceted, by nature mul*disciplinary Jump out of the data, resonate broadly, “tectonics” Poised to make breakthrough now (50 pages total)

Part 2: Sustaining a healthy future for tectonics

i.e., resources needed to advance the science, building and maintaining a strong tectonics community, training workforce of the future – including diversity, quan*ta*ve skills, communica*ng to society (20 pages total).


Themes; rich, mul*faceted, by nature mul*disciplinary Jump out of the data, resonate broadly, “tectonics” Poised to make breakthrough now (50 pages total) 9/2016 draD is online (overall structure + Part 1 framework)

Thank you to all who contributed ideas at GSA, responded to the online survey &

sent comments

Since then, we have (see today’s handout page 2):

•  Started analysis of data to develop Part 2 framework •  Revised Part 1 framework based on feedback (GSA & online) •  Started to tap teams of experts to help with Part 1

Excerpt from Handout page 2: We have completed the first systema*c review of your feedback, and we will be revisi*ng the data again in the months ahead. As expected, the comments touch on a wide range of topics (and in some cases directly contradict each other!). Fortunately, the major cri*cisms and ideas that resonate broadly across the community are emerging clearly and star*ng to shape revisions of the report framework. We have begun to tap teams of experts to help with framing and wri*ng parts of the report. We are working in parallel on all of the grand challenge topics, and have made substan*al progress on the topics from the drac framework that were most developed and that received the strongest support from the feedback we received. Names of poten*al wri*ng contributors for the various sec*ons have arisen organically through the workshop, GSA Town Hall, survey/feedback and other community ac*vi*es. In most cases, poten*al wri*ng contributors were recommended independently by several people in their respec*ve fields. In other cases, a key concept was highlighted by many people in the community as being important, and someone’s wri*ng (e.g., an “idea paper” submiNed prior to the May 2016 workshop, see hNps://sghuturedirec*ons.wordpress.com/idea-‐paper/ for more informa*on; other wriNen product from the workshop, online surveys or GSA Town Hall ac*vity responses; or recent publica*on) ar*culated that concept par*cularly clearly, making that author an obvious person to tap.

The Part 1 framework is evolving. 1 & 2. Deforma*on, from Earth’s surface to the upper mantle, over the earthquake cycle, from geologic *me to human *me. -‐ What controls the spectrum of fault zone behavior through 1me, from the Earth’s surface to the upper mantle? -‐ How does rheology vary throughout the lithosphere?

To give you a sense of how the themes are evolving: Themes 1 & 2 (themes from the 9/2016 Drac Framework that was shared with the community and online; fault zone behavior and rheology) both center on deforma*on; wri*ng groups are working on developing the examples for these themes, and we as the wri*ng co-‐chairs will revise, merge or change the order of these themes as needed to crac a cohesive final document that is faithful to the main consensus ideas that emerged from the workshop and community survey data.

1 & 2. Deforma*on, from Earth’s surface to the upper mantle, over the earthquake cycle, from geologic *me to human *me. -‐ What controls the spectrum of fault zone behavior through 1me, from the Earth’s surface to the upper mantle? -‐ How does rheology vary throughout the lithosphere? 3. What are the dynamic interac1ons among Earth-‐surface

processes, landscape development, and tectonics? This list provides examples of the type of vigneNes that might be used to illustrate key aspects of this theme : •  Tes*ng geodynamic and tectonic models using the geologic record of surface uplic and subsidence •  Localized interac*ons among climate, erosion and tectonics •  The missing link – understanding rock damage and erodibility •  Dynamic coupling of tectonic/topographic stress, damage/deforma*on, chemical weathering and physical erosion


processes, landscape development, and tectonics? 4. How have tectonic processes shaped the co-‐development of

the solid Earth, biosphere and atmosphere? Some of the concepts that are being used to frame this theme include the following: -‐ Tectonic processes link Earth systems, key role in developing and maintaining the habitability of our planet -‐ To understand processes, need to integrate structure and dynamics of the mantle and crust to develop quan*ta*ve, global tectonic model of Earth that spans both oceans and con*nents over billions of years.


processes, landscape development, and tectonics? 4. How have tectonic processes shaped the co-‐development of

the solid Earth, biosphere and atmosphere? 5. How can interac*ons between tectonic processes and society

help advance scien1fic knowledge and help us determine how best to sustain an increasingly urbanized planet?

Please be pa*ent with us as we work through this massive organiza*onal effort!

•  Your input is needed at this Town Hall (in 1 minute: get ready) •  Addi*onal experts to review each of the sub-‐sec*ons •  Everyone’s help to vet the framework for Part 2 of the report

and Review the en*re report.

So far we have asked >20 poten*al wri*ng contributors to work together and with us on some aspect of Part 1 of the report. Another ~10-‐12 wri*ng contributors we have not yet contacted will be needed to help flesh out the rest of Part 1, and many more will be needed to contribute to wri*ng other sec*ons.

Your input is needed (today’s handout page 3): What are the opportuni1es for our community to increase and/or beFer communicate the quan1ta1ve rigor of our research?

The next slides introduce the individual & group brainstorming ac*vi*es that made up the rest of the Town Hall, following ques*ons from the audience.

Your input is needed (today’s handout page 3): What are the opportuni1es for our community to increase and/or beFer communicate the quan1ta1ve rigor of our research? à  across the many disciplines that make up our community, or à  as we communicate to other audiences New ways of integra*ng observa*ons and models? Standardizing data repor*ng for the kind of work you do, or the publica*ons you rely on from others? How to communicate data and uncertain*es to students?

Your input is needed (today’s handout page 3): What are the opportuni1es for our community to increase and/or beFer communicate the quan1ta1ve rigor of our research? à  across the many disciplines that make up our community, or à  as we communicate to other audiences New ways of integra*ng observa*ons and models? Standardizing data repor*ng for the kind of work you do, or the publica*ons you rely on from others? How to communicate data and uncertain*es to students? What are the opportuni1es for our community to increase the development of quan1ta1ve skills in our educa1onal efforts, workforce development, and outreach efforts? Does a “rocks for jocks” stereotype affect your curriculum? What quan*ta*ve skills do students need to succeed at higher levels?

Your input is needed (today’s handout page 3): What are the opportuni1es for our community to increase and/or beFer communicate the quan1ta1ve rigor of our research? à  across the many disciplines that make up our community, or à  as we communicate to other audiences New ways of integra*ng observa*ons and models? Standardizing data repor*ng for the kind of work you do, or the publica*ons you rely on from others? How to communicate data and uncertain*es to students? What are the opportuni1es for our community to increase the development of quan1ta1ve skills in our educa1onal efforts, workforce development, and outreach efforts? Does a “rocks for jocks” stereotype affect your curriculum? What quan*ta*ve skills do students need to succeed at higher levels? ACTIVITY (see handout): 1.  Respond to one or more ques*ons, discuss with neighbor(s), write notes 2.  Submit responses online, hand in, and/or photograph & email to [email protected]!

Future Direc1ons in Tectonics Thanks for being part of this effort to advocate for our community!

•  Visit online hNps://sghuturedirec*ons.wordpress.com •  Join Listserv email join-‐st-‐[email protected] •  Respond to today’s ques1ons *nyurl.com/AGUsurvey, [email protected]

Next steps

•  Complete Part 2 framework (needs, community, educa*on, broader impacts) •  Complete draE of Part 1 with help from experts •  Solicit community input, con1nue veeng and review

Report target date May, 2017

NSF-‐EAR-‐1542001

AGU 2016 Town Hall handout – 1

Report on the "Future Directions in Tectonics" Workshop The University of Wisconsin – Madison, May 20-22, 2016

Synopsis This NSF-sponsored workshop assembled ~90 Earth scientists to discuss a broad range of topics, including: (1) identifying grand challenges and opportunities for significant advances in the field of Tectonics; (2) defining and prioritizing the resources, technologies, partnerships, and infrastructure our community needs to make scientific progress; and (3) developing a vision to build and strengthen our community, including finding new ways to maximize the educational and societal benefits of our work and to communicate and enhance our impact. The overarching goal of the workshop was to begin a community-wide conversation on these issues that will continue in public forums throughout the year. The results will be captured in a report that communicates the goals, needs, and relevance of Tectonics research to funding agencies, other scientists, and non-specialist audiences. The Process The Workshop Organizing Committee (Basil Tikoff and Laurel Goodwin, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Yvette Kuiper, Colorado School of Mines) obtained the funding (NSF-EAR-1542001), designated the Writing Committee chairs (Kate Huntington, University of Washington; Keith Klepeis, University of Vermont) and handled logistics in Madison. The Workshop Planning Committee, composed of volunteers and individuals recruited to represent the diversity of the Tectonics community (Rick Allmendinger, Cornell University; Marin Clark, University of Michigan; Eric Cowgill, University of California-Davis; Becky Dorsey, University of Oregon; Kevin Mahan, University of Colorado; Jim Spotila, Virginia Tech) managed participant application and selection, and worked with the Writing Chairs and Organizing Committee to design and lead the workshop. Workshop participants represented a broad range of disciplines, institutions, backgrounds and career stages; a full list of participants is available on the workshop website (link provided below). The workshop was structured around five breakout sessions, which led to very exciting, animated discussions and numerous ideas to move our community forward. Short papers (also posted on the website) solicited from each participant and presented as brief pop-ups at the start of the workshop also helped shape the discussions. Themes that emerged from the discussions are forming the basis for the Tectonics report. Getting Involved

Broad input from the community is critical to the success of this endeavor, from defining our vision for the report to realizing that vision in the decades to come. Major themes and ideas that emerged from workshop discussions have been synthesized and the report is starting to take shape—please join our listserv for regular updates and for opportunities to contribute your ideas. You are invited to:

1) subscribe to the workshop listserv: email '[email protected]' 2) visit our website: https://sgtfuturedirections.wordpress.com 3) Leave a comment: (visit our website for the link).

The target date for the report is May, 2017. We encourage you to be part of this opportunity to advocate for our community!

Acknowledgments

We thank the NSF for sponsoring the workshop and David Fountain and Stephen Harlan for their insights. We thank the Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison for hosting the event and Randy Williams for excellent support.


AGU Town Hall Update For those of you who are new to this effort, thank you for coming! Thank you also to everyone who checked out the website and draft report framework, sent comments, participated in the GSA Town Hall activities, and responded to our surveys about the draft report framework. We have completed the first systematic review of your feedback, and we will be revisiting the data again in the months ahead. As expected, the comments touch on a wide range of topics (and in some cases directly contradict each other!). Fortunately, the major criticisms and ideas that resonate broadly across the community are emerging clearly and starting to shape revisions of the report framework. We have begun to tap teams of experts to help with framing and writing parts of the report. We are working in parallel on all of the grand challenge topics, and have made substantial progress on the topics from the draft framework that were most developed and that received the strongest support from the feedback we received. Names of potential writing contributors for the various sections have arisen organically through the workshop, GSA Town Hall, survey/feedback and other community activities. In most cases, potential writing contributors were recommended independently by several people in their respective fields. In other cases, a key concept was highlighted by many people in the community as being important, and someone’s writing (e.g., an “idea paper” submitted prior to the May 2016 workshop, see https://sgtfuturedirections.wordpress.com/idea-paper/ for more information; other written product from the workshop, online surveys or GSA Town Hall activity responses; or recent publication) articulated that concept particularly clearly, making that author an obvious person to tap. So far we have asked >20 potential writing contributors to work together and with us on some aspect of Part 1 of the report. We have begun discussions and writing with some and await responses from others. We aim to complete initial drafts of some grand challenge sections by the end of December. Another ~10-12 writing contributors we have not yet contacted will be needed to help flesh out the rest of Part 1, and many more will be needed to contribute to writing other sections. Please be patient with us as we work through this massive organizational effort! Your input is needed at this Town Hall and accompanying online survey (http://tinyurl.com/AGUsurvey). We will need additional experts to review each of the sub-sections. And everyone’s help is needed to vet the framework for Part 2 of the report (Winter 2017) and Review the entire report. Thanks again for being part of this effort to advocate for our community. Kate Huntington (U of Washington) and Keith Klepeis (U of Vermont), Writing committee co-chairs


Please respond to one or more of the following questions. • We suggest you take a moment to jot down your ideas, then discuss in pairs or small groups and

record your notes in the spaces below. • You can complete your responses later and submit online: http://tinyurl.com/AGUsurvey

and/or turn in page 3 only of this handout at the end of this Town Hall meeting. • If you wish, take photo of this page with your phone, keep it or email it to [email protected].

Question #1: What are the opportunities to increase and/or better communicate the quantitative rigor of our scientific research? Specifically:

a. across the many disciplines that make up our community? (e.g., Do we need new ways of organizing observations, archiving them and incorporating them into models? What statistics should be reported in the kinds of datasets you publish, or in the datasets you rely on from others? What are the strategies for communicating uncertainties to other geoscientists?) b. as we communicate to other audiences? (e.g., What are the strategies for communicating data and uncertainties to your students? To your institution administrator? To the public?)

Question #2: What are the opportunities for our community to increase the development of quantitative skills in our educational efforts, workforce development, and outreach efforts?

(e.g., Does the “rocks for jocks” stereotype affect participation, learning goals or outcomes in your undergraduate curriculum? What quantitative skills do high school students need to succeed at higher levels? What quantitative skills do graduate students need to succeed in their future careers? What are the opportunities to develop or engage the quantitative skills of non-scientists?)

Name (optional): ____________________________________

Documents

2016 AGU Town Hall Future of Tectonics Closed caption for ...€¦ · objectives, timeline & status of a community effort to draft a report on future directions in tectonics. The