There are two main geologic targets: 1) regional geophysics: the Valles Caldera structure and magmatic and hydrothermal systems, 2) near surface: The fens hydrologic features and controlling structures. Each geologic target will include 2 or more geophysical methods to form a team of 5-8 people. Each geophysical method will have a group of 3-5 people. For the final presentation each team will provide an introduction of the geologic target and what scientific problems are trying to be solved with geophysics, and a summary of findings. The topics covered in the introduction and summary should be evenly split between team members. In between the introduction and the summary each group will provide an introduction to the geophysical method including the underlying physics of the geophysical method, the physical property measured, and any other specifics for the method, and a summary of findings from the group. Again split this evenly between group members. Between the group introduction and summary each person will present on their specific topic of the method.
Overarching Program Goal: Use geophysics to address a scientific research question or applied geoscience problem of value to society, while operating as effective, professional members of a scientific team.
SAGE 2026 Research Questions:¶
Volcanic/tectonic interaction between the Valles Caldera and the Rio Grande Rift
What is the style and geometry of faulting within the Caldera?
Magmatic and hydrothermal system beneath the Valles Caldera
Where is, and what is the shape of, the magma reservoir, magma conduits, and hydrothermal conduits beneath the caldera?
Near-surface geomorphic and hydrologic processes within the Valles
Why do the fens exist and what is the structure of the rock/sediment interface underneath them?
Structure and evolution of intra-caldera basins
Where is, and what is the geometry of, the boundary between the Valles and Toledo calderas?
General Presentation Structure¶
Team provides an introduction (5 min)
Group provides an introduction (5 min)
Each group member presents on their topic (10-12 min)
Group provides a summary (5 min)
Repeat for other groups in the team
Team provides a summary (5 min)
Team Presentation¶
Purpose: You will collaboratively work as a team to develop a joint interpretation of the study area using geophysics. As a team you will provide background information on the study area, geophysical methods, physical properties measured, survey design, and research questions to be answered. You will provide a summary of the team’s findings, how the findings impact stakeholders, and future recommendations. Each team will have team leads that are responsible for organizing the presentation and delegating specific topics to individuals. That said, everyone in the team has responsibility for the final product. The introduction and summary parts of the presentation should be evenly split between group members such that each person has a role.
Knowledge and Skills: You will practice working as a team, synthesizing various pieces of information into a comprehensive interpretation linking geophysical anomalies with geology through rock properties, and presenting in a research setting.
Task:
Introduction: provide an overview of the project goals for the science targets (5 min)
Overview of methods used, each group will be more specific.
2. Overview of project goals specific to the method → Explain why the geophysical method(s) used is appropriate for solving the geological question under investigation.Summary: provide a summary of overall findings as they pertain to the geological research question (5 min):
Tie back to geology and rock properties
Highlight implications of the current work (societal impacts/so what?)
Suggest future work (recommendations, things to change)
Criteria for evaluation:
See the Team/Group Rubric
Group Presentation¶
Purpose: You will collaboratively work as a group to develop an interpretation of the study area using a single geophysical method. As a group you will provide background information on the study area, geophysical methods, physical properties measured, survey design, and research questions to be answered. You will provide a summary of the group’s findings, how the findings impact stakeholders, and future recommendations. The group will have a group leader that is responsible for organizing the presentation and delegating specific topics to individuals. The introduction and summary should be evenly split between group members such that each person has a role.
Knowledge and Skills: You will practice working in groups, synthesizing various pieces of information into a comprehensive interpretation linking the results from your specific geophysical method with geology through rock properties, and presenting in a research setting.
Task:
Introduction: provide an overview of the project goals for the method (5-10 min)
Overview of method → physical background, physical property measured, how to do field measurements, survey design)
2. Overview of project goals specific to the method → Explain why the geophysical method used is appropriate for solving the geological question under investigation.Summary: provide a summary of overall findings (5 min):
Tie back to geology and rock properties
Highlight implications of the current work (societal impacts/so what?)
Suggest future work (recommendations, things to change)
Criteria for evaluation:
See the Team/Group Rubric
Individual Presentation¶
Purpose: You will individually choose a topic to focus on from your chosen geophysical method. You will describe the topic in detail, the workflow, and the results.
Knowledge and Skills: You will practice focused research on a specific topic. Practice individual presentation skills.
Task:
Focus on one topic of a single method (e.g. gravity 2D modeling of a fault system)
Presentation (10-12 min):
Describe your topic
What part of the workflow your topic is in (e.g. processing, modeling, interpretation, etc.)
Why is your topic important
The physical property measured
Describe the physics/methods/workflow for your topic
Describe your interpretation and how it relates back to geology
Summarize your findings and suggest future work/how to make the topic better
Criteria for evaluation:
See the Individual Rubric
Final Presentation – Team/Group Rubric¶
| Dimension | Needs Improvement | Satisfactory | Exceptional |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Overall Organization | Generally understandable but some disorganization or uncertainty is evident One or more classic scientific section is missing or lacking enough detail to support the presentation | Talk is understandable and flows well All classic scientific section content is included: introduction, methods, results, interpretations and conclusions | Scientific topics are complete and presented in a logical order All classic scientific section content is included with high quality supporting details: introduction, methods, results, interpretations and conclusions |
| 2. Project Research Questions | Research question/s is given but components were confusing or incomplete Project importance omitted or poorly stated | Research question/s and project components are easily understandable Project importance at least partially articulated | Research question/s and project components are easily understandable and presented in a compelling and contextualized manner Project importance clearly stated |
| 3. Method | Research methods are mentioned Explanation of why the geophysical method(s) used are appropriate is not presented | Research methods are described Explanation of why the geophysical method(s) used are appropriate, but maybe not fully articulated | Research methods are described Clear explanation of why the geophysical method(s) used are appropriate for solving the geological question under investigation |
| 4. Survey Design | Rationale behind the geophysical survey design is less clear or maybe omitted | Rationale behind the geophysical survey design is included, but not very detailed | Rationale behind the geophysical survey design is clearly communicated |
| 5. Hypotheses | Interpretations are not clearly separated from observations Hypotheses don’t include some data, results or physical properties, or presented data and results are not used in the interpretations. Hypotheses explain geophysical observations, but some possibilities may be missed, or some hypotheses may not be possible given geologic constraint | Interpretations are separated from observations Hypotheses are solidly based in data, results and physical properties Reasonable hypotheses explain geophysical observations, but some possibilities may be missed | Potential interpretations are clearly separated from observations Hypotheses effectively synthesize all data, results and physical properties. Reasonable hypotheses explain geophysical observations and a defendable concluding interpretation |
| 6. Conclusions | Conclusions of the project are not well stated or tied back to geology and/or the research question/s Uncertainties relevant to the synthesis are inadequately or not described. Some team members’ individual work is not tied into the conclusions. | Conclusions of the project are stated and at least partially tied back to the driving geological question Uncertainties relevant to the synthesis are described at a basic level. All team members’ individual work is included in the synthesis. | Various geophysical and geologic data of the target area are synthesized into a comprehensive geologic interpretation Uncertainties relevant to the synthesis are clearly described. All team members’ individual work is included in the synthesis. |
| 7. Implications | Implications of the current work are not included and/or many important aspects are unclear or missing or inaccurate | Implications of the current work are included, but but one or more important implications are not as well explained | Presentation highlights one or more implications of the current work (e.g. recommendations, future work, societal implications) |
| 8. Professionalism- Overall Slide quality | Slide composition and/or figures, photos and text sometimes hinders understandability Figures, photos and text are not legible or the slide composition is unbalanced (e.g. too much text or too many images on one slide) | Slide composition is understandable and figures, photos and text help the audience understand the presentation | Figures, photos and text are clear, explained, and easy to view Quality approaches professional standards, such as in a publication or conference presentation |
| 9. Collaboration | Uneven contributions from team members | Contributions from team members are fairly even All team members show ownership of the material | It is evident that everyone on the team had a role in the project Contributions from team members is even and shows clear “ownership” of the material by all |
Final Presentation – Individual Rubric¶
| Dimension | Needs Improvement | Satisfactory | Exceptional |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Method | Research methods are mentioned but lack detail Explanation of why the geophysical method(s) used are appropriate is not presented | Research methods are described Explanation of why the geophysical method(s) used are appropriate, but maybe not fully articulated | Research methods are described Clear explanation of why the geophysical method(s) used are appropriate for solving the geological question under investigation |
| 2. Data | Research results are presented but some aspects unclear Presentation leaves out some important results in favor of a deeper dive on others | Research results are presented with adequate detail Data presentation might lean heavily on one aspect, but all results are included | Enough details of the data are described for the audience to understand results and nuances, including uncertainties Presentation of data details is not overly detailed in one aspect at the expense of others |
| 3. Physical Properties | Lithologies explain geophysical images, but physical properties are not mentioned or some lithologies may not explain the data well | Lithologies explain geophysical images, but may not be clearly tied to the physical properties observed | Reasonable lithologies are assigned to explain geophysical images and resulting physical properties |
| 4. Interpretational Uncertainty | Interpretational uncertainties are not or are incompletely mentioned | Interpretational uncertainties are described | Interpretational uncertainties are clearly described, including how rock property uncertainty plays into the interpretation |
| 5. Professionalism- Overall Slide quality | Slide composition and/or figures, photos and text sometimes hinders understandability Figures, photos and text are not legible or the slide composition is unbalanced (e.g. too much text or too many images on one slide) | Slide composition is understandable and figures, photos and text help the audience understand the presentation | Figures, photos and text are clear, explained, and easy to view Quality approaches professional standards, such as in a publication or conference presentation |
| 6. Professionalism- Individual Delivery Style | Expresses the results and interpretations in a way that is sometimes confusing The section of the presentation the individual is presenting is missing some aspects | Expresses the results and interpretations in an understandable manner The section of the presentation the individual is presenting is complete | Expresses the results and interpretations with clarity while speaking The section of the presentation the individual is presenting are completely explained Quality approaches professional standards, as for a conference presentation |
| 7. Contribution to the Group Project | The individual’s role in the project and/or presentation is a bit unclear or the person did notable more or less than other members | The individual had a role in the project and presentation | The individual had a clear role in the project and presentation but did not dominate over the contributions of others |