Czech participation in the IESO 2024 International Earth Science Olympiad in China

From August 7 to 17, 2024, the 2024 International Earth Sciences Olympiad (IESO) was held in the Chinese capital, Beijing. The Czech Republic was represented by the four most successful participants of the central round of the Geological Olympiad (webpage available only in Czech language), which is organised by Masaryk University, and two mentors from the Department of Geological Sciences at Masaryk University’s Faculty of Science (SCI MUNI). Kateřina Kozáková (Jírovcova 8 Grammar School, České Budějovice), Alex Strnad (Jan Kepler Grammar School, Prague), Josef Šedivý (Krkonoše’s Grammar School and Vrchlabí Secondary Vocational School) and Antonín Pech (Pierre de Coubertin Grammar School, Tábor) competed for the students. The team was led by the main mentor, doc. Rostislav Melichar, and Dr. Kateřina Zachovalová, as second mentor, both from SCI MUNI. The Czech team competed in all three main categories and brought home two silver and four bronze medals. The contestants have just returned, so we took the opportunity to interview them while their impressions were still fresh.

How did the IESO International Earth Science Olympiad go? What were the individual competition categories like?

Pepa: We arrived in Beijing by plane from Vienna. The organisers picked us up at the airport and buses took us to the accommodation at the boarding high school. For the first few days we had a cultural program where we got to know the local culture. Since some of the preparations were delayed, the competition schedule had to be changed, so we started with what we were supposed to end with.

Tonda: There were two types of competition; individual tests, where everyone performed on their own, and two team competitions, ESP and ITFI, each of which was on a slightly different topic. The ESP (Earth Science Project) competition focused on global issues, sustainability and life around us, while the ITFI (International Team Field Investigation) competition was more focused on researching specific locations, which differed for each team. I liked the organisation, even though nobody seemed to know anything at first - it depended on who asked who what.

Alex: Well, for the first five days and nights, I was completely disabled by a viral infection, so I was “appreciating the beauty” of the infectious diseases department of one of the hospitals in Beijing. But the organisers of the competition took good care of me the whole time there. They were always close to me in case I needed something translated from or to Chinese, or to buy medicine. Unfortunately, however, I had to miss the individual tests that took place during that time.

You said that you competed in individual tests. How did it go, and what were the test questions focused on?

Tonda: The entire individual competition focused on three themes, each with a different range of questions. The first two parts were theoretical tests. The first test concerned greenhouse gases and their effects throughout the Earth’s history, from the Cryogenian period, when the entire Earth was frozen, to events that are much more recent. There were also questions about other planets, how the greenhouse effect has affected them, and how it probably looked there in the past. The second test was more focused on astrophysics and required quite a lot of calculations, such as when calculating orbits for the moons of Mars. The third part was more practical and focused on geology. In our case, our test site consisted of sedimentary rocks, and we had questions related to determining the different layers, the different thicknesses of layers, their relative age and other associated events. We also went to look at a dump, where our task was to reveal that it was an anthropogenic creation and not a naturally occurring deposit.

Katka: Well, there wasn’t much mineralogy there. It was mostly general geology, and then also physical geography, but there was also some astrophysics.

Pepa: The questions focused on astrophysics were the most difficult for me because we were given relatively little data in the assignment. During the calculations, I came to realise that I needed some data that I just didn’t know off the top of my head, for example density, specific capacities, etc. The easiest questions were those focused on geology. Some were harder, some easier, but in general the geology questions were easier for me. I would say that, in terms of geology, the Geological Olympiad prepared me very well; but this competition also included other specialisations, such as oceanography and climatology.

Both theoretical tests were completed on a computer, one in the morning and the other in the afternoon. They showed us their system the day before and, while it worked pretty well, it wasn’t without some minor issues. For us, it was a normal electronic test where one chose the correct answer, very similar to the tests in our Geology Olympiad. If only one answer was correct, it was explicitly written, otherwise there could be more than one correct answer. The official computer version of the test was in English, and the answers were entered there. However, we also had a printed version with a translation into Czech prepared for us by our mentors as an aid.

I thought the system worked pretty well; we were able to see all the things we hadn’t answered yet. The course was very similar to that of the Geological Olympiad, but I think the Geological Olympiad is even better as there we could see how much time we had left. That didn’t quite work here. Also, it didn’t just end when the time ran out, like it does in the Geological Olympiad. The organisers even cancelled one part due to non-functionality.

The day after the theoretical tests, we had a practical test in the field, where we filled in answers on paper, though once again we chose from pre-written answers.

Now let's get back to those team competitions. Teamwork is quite rare in such competitive events. How did it go?

Tonda: We were divided into international teams of five to six people, each chosen to represent a different culture. Each team had six local computers at their disposal, on which scientific posters were to be produced as part of the ESP competition.

What topics did you include on the posters?

Katka: We were given one rather broad topic, and we could then basically choose what we wanted to do based on what interested us. This was a bit of a problem in our team because one of our team members tried to push their favourite thing at all costs. In the end, however, we somehow came to a team agreement. Actually, it was all about choosing something original and doing it well.

Pepa: At the beginning, one topic was assigned to everyone – “habitability of the planet”­ – and then each team chose a specialisation. Our team chose a partly biochemical topic, namely “Why water is important to life and whether it can be replaced”.

Tonda: We had a rather general topic, we chose “Water as an indicator of global temperature change”.

How did the ESP competition proceed?

Tonda: After choosing a topic, we searched for information. It was also possible to consult in specially assigned rooms, which we used quite a lot. The rooms were initially used by us competitors, so that we could find out the opinions and ideas of other team members, and later by our mentors as well, who evaluated our posters and presentations.

Katka: We could search for whatever we wanted on the Internet but, unfortunately, most of the sites I am used to accessing did not work in China, so it was often of no use to us.

Tonda: The dimensions of the posters were accurately entered into our assigned computers, and we gradually entered individual text boxes, images and links onto our poster. Finally, they printed the poster for us, and three days later we presented it at the “poster session”.

In the second ITFI team competition, you had to do field research. What did you research?

Katka: The goal was to work as a team, but it didn’t always work out. We had questions to try to answer, and these differed depending on the topic we were assigned. But the main thing was the subsequent creation and presentation of our results.

Alex: A total of 136 participants, from all over the world, competed, so there were 22 teams of roughly six people. We got on our assigned bus early in the morning and this transported us to three different locations in a river floodplain with the remains of a village that had been swept away by a big flood the year before. We were supposed to measure the large stone blocks that had been transported there by the flood using various tapes and measuring devices and based on this, we were supposed to determine the intensity of the flood. It was terribly hot, the stones were terribly hot, and there was no shade at all, so we all “enjoyed” the two hours there. Nevertheless, our whole team worked well together, and I think we tried hard enough.

Tonda: We had the same task as Alex’s group. We were given three tape measures and a “play” assignment - so we “played”. We collected a lot of samples, which we then determined throughout the day. Finally, we tried to trace the original stone sizes to individual small samples using our messy records.

Fortunately, our group worked quite well. The team split into smaller groups that were each given smaller tasks that were simpler than the whole research question. Although our presentation did not end up in a medal position, I think it served its purpose. We enjoyed the whole program; we found out that China can be very diverse and very different from our home situation in terms of geology and geomorphology.

Pepa: Our teamwork during the ITFI was good at the beginning but bad at the end. At the beginning, we were tasked with measuring levels of dissolved substances, pH and other water parameters at several sites, as well as determining pollution levels or some other parameter. Our research went well but the subsequent demonstration did not go as we expected; unfortunately, especially at the beginning, it was very chaotic.

How did you prepare for your presentation? Did you practice it beforehand?

Katka: We rehearsed the presentation a couple of times, but otherwise we agreed that everyone would try to prepare their part separately as we didn't have much time. We all worked on the presentation itself at the same time, so it was a bit chaotic at times, but our team worked quite well. We fine-tuned what we were going to say quite quickly.

English was difficult for me. It seemed to me that the others could speak English better, so it wasn’t such a big problem for them. Otherwise, everything was fine. In the beginning, we found resources on the Internet, though this was a bit of a problem in China. Luckily, one person on our team had Internet access working so he sent us a bunch of articles and we split them up to read. We turned them into something like a handout, then we started doing a team presentation.

And how did you use your data?

Katka: We did that continuously. We mainly read as much as possible about our topic and then processed our data from the field accordingly. We took samples of the sedimentary rock that was the subject of our research. Our goal was to create a theory of ​​how the rock had formed and how it related to climate change in the past. We only had a limited amount of time to determine the composition of the samples. Luckily, our our team had fewer samples, so we managed to measure them all in time. Well, it didn’t help us much as we found that the composition of all the rocks was exactly the same, but at least we could use that data in the presentation.

And then we discovered other things, often using creative methods. For example, we got a magnet from somewhere and tried to see if there were any magnetic minerals, which the other groups didn’t think of. This was an example of our creative approach. We couldn’t have completed the test any other way as we had limited options - I think it was just what was expected of us.

Katka, you won two medals. What were they for?

Katka: The bronze medal was for an individual competition, where not only knowledge was tested but also some skills. Of course, it was also a lot to do with whether the questions matched the interests of the participants. I would recommend future participants read about the broad topics of earth sciences because, you might just stumble upon something you know well in the competition, but not necessarily. Basically, you can’t tell in advance what will be there.

The silver medal was for the ITFI. Our team did pretty well, but I think it can be a bit of a lottery as it depends on how the organisers put the team together. So, it was certainly not won purely on my merit; rather, it is an appreciation of the creativity and good communication of the whole team.

Alex: I would still like to go back to that preparation. I think that the most important thing was not just the factual preparation but the psychological preparation; we not only had to be prepared to speak in English, but also in a completely new environment, with completely new participants. Most were “in the same shoes” and experiencing this for the first time. I think that communication was the most important thing in both the ESP and ITFI team competitions. We received the individual theory tests in two versions, in English (original) and translated. Although the translation was not always perfect due to the time pressure, having a Czech language version helped a lot. When preparing for the ESP and ITFI tests, you didn’t get anything translated and you couldn’t even translate it yourself - Google Translate doesn’t work in China. So, it was all about mutual communication - I think that was very important for all the teams, and for many of the decisions made.

And what was the accompanying programme like? According to the plans, you were supposed to attend ceremonies and cultural events.

Tonda: I quite enjoyed it. The cultural events were probably arranged by a travel agency, so, before visiting any facility, our guides warned us not to buy anything. Many of the places we visited were quite commercial, which was evident when we visited a pearl jewellery store, where 150 students walked past shelves of jewellery and excited saleswomen ran around trying to sell some of the products. It was similar in a store we visited selling luxury teas. Otherwise, the cultural programme was really nice, from the visit to the Sun Palace, through the local university and library with professional interpretation in English, to tea tasting.

Pepa: We also saw the Olympic Park and the Great Wall of China, including the part known as “Mutianyu”. And for the sake of interest, the competitive part of the Olympiad also began and ended with ceremonies that included various cultural performances. The farewell party, where the national teams gave a performance and where we exchanged small gifts, was also spectacular. We are really grateful to TIC Brno for the nice things we were able to give as gifts.

Alex: For the ceremonies, the Czech team wore a ‘uniform’ consisting of grey jeans and a short-sleeved white shirt with the Czech Republic printed on it, prepared for us by ČGS. I liked it very much. We also had hats, and we could decide whether to wear a grey one or black one. Some teams took their ceremonial attire even more seriously than we did. For example, the Norwegian team wore their beautiful national costumes, which I personally liked a lot. On the other hand, some teams decided not to wear any kind of uniform. For example, the teams from New Zealand and the USA came to the ceremony all wearing different T-shirts and shorts, which I thought was not very appropriate.

Katka: I also liked the part after the opening ceremony, when we had a guided tour of Peking University, which was very nice. But of course, it was terribly hot. I was surprised that there were lots of trees at the university, so the area appeared really green. There were also some traditional Chinese buildings and together it all looked very aesthetic. I actually expected that there would be some more modern buildings. Before we went to the IESO, I had looked up what it would be like on the Internet, and I was quite surprised that it all looked so nice and that there were so many examples of Chinese culture. They also had a nice library at the University.

What was better in China than in the Czech Republic?

Tonda: Alongside the local biodiversity, I liked their climate, which is significantly warmer than ours, though with summer monsoons and summer rain. Nevertheless, it is still warm, so you don’t mind being outdoors even in the rain.

The local environment was really varied and there was great subsoil geodiversity, which contributes to the high local biodiversity. For example, the steep hills and sedimentary rocks encourage the formation of scree slopes, which are an ideal environment for supporting small arthropod diversity. In addition, everything is supported by higher temperatures and humidity. I found the local fauna and flora, which is quite different from ours, really interesting.

Alex: I think the infrastructure works well in China. Any construction or reconstruction there is done well and quickly, though I think this is partly due to the political system there. What did I like the most? I liked the food the most! One shouldn’t be immediately intimidated by the stories of what is eaten in China and what is considered a delicacy. When you know how to choose, you can eat really well. But otherwise, China surprised me in that some things were exactly the same as in Europe - alongside the obvious fundamental differences, of course.

Katka: I had heard that Asians in general are very hardworking, and now after visiting China I can confirm that. I think it’s because there are so many of them, so they have to try to ‘make it’ somehow. Otherwise, of course, the food there was great. They eat a lot of vegetables and there, and as I don’t really like meat, it was ideal for me. You can eat well in China, even without meat.

Pepa: I would say that, in general, Chinese cuisine is better than Czech cuisine.

How has participating in the Geology Olympiad and the IESO benefited you, and has it helped you develop at all?

Alex: Overall, I liked that the Geology Olympiad brought us together, especially the national round. We met many people with similar interests, and I think, in many cases, such meetings resulted in very good friendships and camaraderie, and I really liked that.

The biggest benefit from the IESO for me was that it changed my perceptions of both China and my own country, the Czech Republic. I think a lot of Czechs who are presently dissatisfied or constantly complaining about our government or other people who live here should experience a trip like this to China. Their perceptions would change a lot when they are forced to “judge others by themselves”; I know my opinions changed quite a bit.

Tonda: For me, the main personal benefit was realising that one has nothing to fear, whether it’s communication in a language you don’t fully understand (which in my case was English) or communicating with other contestants or other people who speak a language I understand even less than English! For me, it all meant a wide range of experiences, from having a great time with friends to, let’s say, some rough-and-tumble out in the world.

Pepa: Yes, my main benefit was realising that there is nothing to be afraid of. In fact, even with poor communication, everything was resolved somehow, and we always came to an agreement. Even when we talked to someone who didn’t know English at all, hands, feet and facial expressions always helped. IESO gave me many new experiences, both in science and in international cooperation. I would recommend participation in the Geological Olympiad and IESO to everyone who is interested in geology and the natural sciences in general.

---

Participation of the Czech team at IESO 2024 in Beijing was supported by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, the Department of Geological Sciences of the Faculty of Science at Masaryk University Brno, and the Czech Geological Service in Prague. The participants thank the Tourist Information Centre of the city of Brno for providing gifts for the other contestants.