Wells Logs and Tests – From acquisition to interpretation

Attitude très variable des élèves : une minorité est sérieuse et attentive. Une majorité ne l’est pas et n’est pas très motivée. Cela se traduit par des notes en demi teinte pour l’examen final Extrait du mail envoyé à l’UFAZ post corrections : With a minimal of listening, participation and work during the course, every student would have been able to obtain a minimum score of 12/20 or higher Only 30 students reached the score of 10 or higher i.e. 59 % and only 19 of them (37%) a score of 12 or higher corresponding to my minimal expectations. There is no significative difference between the 2 groups • For the 27 Students of the Group “Oil & Gas Eng” the average score is 10.9/20 • For the 24 students of the Group “Geo Eng” the average score is 10.2/20 Very simple basic questions as Q3 and Q17 have not been successful due to lack of attention, work, and implication for a great majority of students. Quite the same constat for Q6, Q17, Q18 Some of the Geosciences basics before the course were not clearly acquired and can explain these poor results. The first day (Monday), I was obliged to teach the principles of drilling (methodology, tools, and acquisition/results) and different notions on Thermodynamic, chemistry, parameters of petroleum system. Almost 90 to 95% of the students do not understand the sedimentology, the paleo geographical environment and reconstruction, the global approach of a basin study. By contrast, they have a good to very good knowledge on Organic geochemistry (but not on mineral geochemistry which was a key skill necessary for my course). The prospect generation and maturation are not well understood as well as the mudlogging, operations of geology and even notion of seismic interpretation. The initial easy quiz on the first day was not a success for many of the students. Therefore, I have been obliged the first day to remind or more to really teach the basics of basics that were supposed acquired. Difficultés rencontrées : manque d’autonomie du professeur dans la conduite de l’examen. Ingérence inappropriée du Dpt Education (1 personne notamment) Excellentes conditions pratiques : salles spacieuses bien équipées en son (micro) et bons moyens d’affichage des documents (larges écrans, connexion HDMI parfaite, assistance permanente ou à la demande du personnel IT)