Project Grade 10 Art & Music

Kessling County Aquifer Cross-Section: A Two-Ink Illustration Project

Grade 10 teams design a two-ink aquifer cross-section for a fictional county well guide, choosing a vertical exaggeration, layer patterns, an inset, and captions.

Objectives

  1. Students will choose a vertical scale for an aquifer cross-section that fits a fixed frame and keeps the thinnest layer legible, and will state the resulting vertical exaggeration on the figure.
  2. Students will design a pattern and tint system in black and one blue that keeps four layers and the water-filled zones distinct in a black-and-white copy.
  3. Students will draw an inset at a larger scale, with its own scale bar and locator mark, to show features too small for the main section.
  4. Students will write captions that explain how groundwater fills pore spaces and how water from a septic drain field can reach a shallow well.

Vocabulary

Aquifer
An aquifer is an underground layer of rock, sand, or gravel that holds water in the tiny spaces between its grains. Wells reach down into aquifers to bring water up to the surface.
Water table
The water table is the underground level below which the ground is completely soaked with water. Dig a hole deeper than the water table and it will start filling with water.
Confining layer
A confining layer is a layer of tightly packed clay or solid rock that water cannot easily pass through. It acts like a lid or a floor for the water stored underground.

Also: cross-section, pore space, vertical exaggeration, inset, tint

Teacher overview

Geologic cross-sections are a common way for geologists, hydrogeologists, and public health agencies to show where well water comes from, and the drawing works only when its designer makes deliberate choices about scale, pattern, and emphasis. Over five sessions, teams design the centerfold illustration for a well-owner guide published by the fictional Kessling County Health Department: a cross-section along a 12,000-foot line from Maddox Ridge to the Tulley River, printed in black and one blue. Teams choose a vertical exaggeration that fits a fixed frame, build a pattern and tint system that survives a black-and-white photocopy, draw an inset for features too small to show at section scale, and write three short captions. Each team turns in the finished centerfold on tabloid paper, a one-page design memo, and a three-minute presentation to a county review panel played by classmates.

A common misconception, held by many adults as well as students, is that groundwater sits in underground lakes or flows in underground rivers. In sand, gravel, and most sandstone, the water fills the small pore spaces between grains, and the water table is the top of the zone where those pores are full. A cross-section that paints an aquifer as a flat band of solid blue reinforces the underground-lake picture, so the brief requires teams to show water as a blue tint running through the grain pattern, and the rubric rewards teams that can explain why. A second misconception comes from the drawing itself, because readers tend to take the slopes in an exaggerated section at face value. In Session 2, have teams set their layout beside the true-scale strip from Session 1, and ask each memo to explain why the ground in the drawing looks much steeper than the gentle walk from the ridge to the river.

Rubric

Criterion Emerging Developing Proficient Advanced
Scale, exaggeration, and origin No vertical scale is stated, or the section does not fit the frame. A vertical scale is stated, yet it breaks the frame rule or the clay rule, or the exaggeration is missing or miscomputed. The vertical scale falls between 1 inch = 60 feet and 1 inch = 80 feet, the exaggeration is computed correctly and printed on the figure, and the vertical origin is labeled. All of Proficient, and the memo explains how the chosen exaggeration changes the apparent slope of the ground and why the team accepted that tradeoff.
Two-ink pattern and tint system Layers are told apart only by color, or inks other than black and one blue appear. Two inks are used, yet two or more layers merge in the gray copy, or an aquifer is filled with flat blue. Every layer has a pattern and tint that stays distinct in the gray copy, and water appears as tint running through the grain pattern. All of Proficient, and the swatch notes show at least one revision made because of the photocopy test, with the reason stated.
Hierarchy and legibility Labels are missing or unreadable, and every line is the same weight. Most features are labeled, yet some labels sit on patterns without a knockout or leader line, or the water table does not stand out. All required features are labeled at the minimum size, line weights rank the ground surface and water table above the layer boundaries, and the legend matches the drawing. All of Proficient, and the peer reviewer found every required feature within 60 seconds.
Inset detail There is no inset, or the drain field and farmhouse well are crowded into the main section without comment. An inset is present, yet it lacks its own scale bar or locator mark, or it exceeds the 4-by-3-inch limit. The inset fits the size limit, shows the well screen, the water table, and the drain field at the inset's stated scale, and carries a locator mark on the main section. All of Proficient, and the inset states its own vertical exaggeration, and the team can explain why it differs from the main section.
Captions and accuracy Captions are missing, or they describe groundwater as an underground lake or river. Captions cover the three topics, yet one runs over 40 words or contains a factual error. Three captions of 40 words or fewer accurately explain pore-space water, the role of the clay, and the path from the drain field to the farmhouse well. All of Proficient, and each caption directs the reader to a specific labeled part of the drawing.
Memo and panel presentation The memo or the presentation is missing. The memo states the scale choices but omits the photocopy results, or the presentation covers appearance only. The memo is complete, and the presentation names one choice made for the reader at the cost of true scale and gives its reason. All of Proficient, and the team answers a panel question about a tradeoff without abandoning a stated constraint.

Reference values for the scale criterion: the section spans 640 minus 370, or 270 feet, and the frame leaves 6 minus 1.5, or 4.5 inches, for it, so the vertical scale can be no smaller than 270 divided by 4.5, which is 60 feet per inch. The clay rule allows no more than 20 divided by 0.25, which is 80 feet per inch. Against the fixed horizontal scale of 1,000 feet per inch, the allowed exaggeration therefore runs from 1,000 divided by 80, or 12.5 times, to 1,000 divided by 60, or about 16.7 times.

Differentiation

Support

Break the scale work in Session 2 into two separate questions: how many feet the fictional section spans from top to bottom, and how many inches of the frame are left for it once the space above ground is reserved. Teams that have both numbers can usually find the frame limit themselves, and the clay limit then follows the same pattern. The Session 1 strip is also worth checking before teams move on, because at true scale the whole section is only about a quarter inch tall and the clay layer is about as thin as an inked line, which is the reason exaggeration is needed at all. Provide tabloid sheets with the 12-by-6-inch frame and a light half-inch grid already printed, and offer a starter set of six black patterns (fine dots, open circles, short dashes, long dashes, a brick pattern, and diagonal hatching) for teams to choose from rather than invent. For the inset, one workable choice is 1 inch = 50 feet across and 1 inch = 25 feet down, which is an exaggeration of 2 times and fits the 150-foot spacing and the 50-foot well inside the size limit.

Extension

Give advanced teams one more line for the fictional data sheet: water in the newer house's well rises to 30 feet below the ground, which is 40 feet above the top of the sandstone, because water in a confined aquifer is under pressure. Teams show that water level inside the deep well without implying that the clay layer around it holds open water, and they add a fourth caption of 40 words or fewer, as an exception to the three-caption limit, explaining the difference between the water table and the level in the deep well. A team that finishes early can also draw a second version of the section at the other end of the allowed scale range and write a short note to the county recommending one of the two, with reasons drawn from the well-owner test.

ELL supports

Pre-teach cross-section, aquifer, water table, confining layer, pore space, vertical exaggeration, inset, and tint using a jar of wet sand next to a labeled sketch, so students see that the water sits between the grains. Provide a bilingual glossary card for those terms and for legend, scale bar, and knockout. Offer caption frames such as "The farmhouse well gets its water from ___ because ___" and "The clay layer ___, so the deep well ___." Allow the design memo and the presentation to use the annotated swatch card and short phrases in place of continuous prose.

Extensions

Add a small key map in one corner of the centerfold, drawn from above, that shows where line A-A' runs across the fictional county between the ridge, the field, and the river. Teams that want a professional comparison can look at a published cross-section from a state geological survey, find its vertical exaggeration statement and its pattern conventions, and write one change they would make if that drawing were going into a guide for well owners. A class with access to drawing software can rebuild the section on separate layers for each ink and test the result with a grayscale preview before printing.