[obol] attitude adjustment: losing is fun! photo quizzes as learning tools

[Greg Gillson]

The American Birding Association has a monthly photo quiz:
http://www.americanbirding.org/photoquiz/

I have learned a lot about observing birds and paying attention to all the 
field marks. Did I learn on the birds I got right? No, the photo quizzes 
that taught me the most were the ones I got wrong! Attitude change 
time--losing is fun!

In the latest set of quizzes at ABA I was doing good. I got Quiz 55 right 
(Northern Fulmar from the rear), the gull in Quiz 56 took some work (Little 
Gull in flight with head hidden), Quiz 57 didn't fool me (rump of Pine 
Grosbeak). Then I lost my string on Quiz 58. The puzzler? A bird I see 
regularly. That's right, I misidentified a chickadee! I got hung up on the 
extensive pale edges of the greater coverts and buffy underparts (only on 
Black-capped Chickadees, right?) and dismissed the hint of white eyebrow 
stripes. Little did I know that there are forms of Mountain Chickadees that 
can be colored as the quiz bird. I know now. I would never have learned that 
by observing birds in life--I "know" chickadees and wouldn't pay them enough 
attention in the field where more interesting birds would grab my attention. 
I learned something wonderful! Hurray! I hope I'm stumped and can't figure 
out Quiz 60! (Unfortunately, I find Quiz 59 easy. Nothing to learn. No 
benefit.) I love being wrong on photo quizzes!

I agree that going out and looking at birds is a great way to learn bird 
identification. That's if you can get a good look--and if you are right. You 
can only identify the birds that you see. In a book or online you can 
actually learn to identify birds that aren't around at the moment or in your 
home region. No, they aren't all cute and fuzzy and 3-dimensional. They have 
been 2-dimensional since well before Peterson first put his silhouette end 
plate "quizzes" in his field guides in 1934. Actually, my kids had books 
with little fuzzy pop-ups.... maybe there is a marketing idea for a new 
field guide for a certain select subset of birders.... but I digress.

Photo quizzes allow you to look at very similar species that you might pass 
up otherwise. How many Swamp Sparrows get passed up as Lincoln's or Song 
Sparrows because the observer doesn't recognize them? A photo quiz allows 
you to study, research, read, ponder, and critically examine a single bird 
at your leisure. Would you recognize a female Blue-winged Teal? A Willow 
Warbler? A Chimney Swift? Lesser Nighthawk? Greater Frigatebird? They are 
all possible in Oregon. But even common birds get misidentified 
(Pacific-slope Flycatcher now being reported from Colstin Rd on the Siskiyou 
summit--[Hutton's Vireo?]). The photo quiz I set up a few months ago 
revealed that Oregon birders (at least the ones that responded) confused 
pretty straight forward immature California Gulls as Ring-billed Gulls (and 
may explain the erroneous high count of Ring-billed Gulls that are really 
Mew Gulls on the Forest Grove CBC year after year). And the photo quiz on my 
site now (http://thebirdguide.com/quiz/quiz.htm) has far more respondents 
that are wrong (this means you, I know you think you got it right, but that 
dark group of feathers on the wing is not what you think they are). All 
these people who are wrong should be very ecstatic because they are going to 
learn something when the explanation comes out. It's a much anticipated and 
wonderful surprise!

Photo quizzes that are done well also let you follow the critical thinking 
of another that leads to the identification. This is perhaps more important 
than just giving the identification. What do you look at first? What's most 
important? What clinching, new field mark will they reveal? Tell me! The 
person who sent me the photo I'm using now (you know, the one that you 
fortuitously got wrong) did not identify it for me. So I approach its ID 
from a fresh perspective; I don't have a preconceived idea because of 
knowing what it is in advance.

The mental challenge of finding and identifying birds--a treasure hunt and 
solving puzzles--is more of an appeal to me than any "oh, beautiful" nature 
experience. I might or might not have such a moment, but I wouldn't admit it 
on OBOL, that's not why I watch birds.

Greg Gillson
greg at thebirdguide.com

-----
Famous American Naturalist Charles B. Cory (Cory's Shearwater namesake), 
incoming president of the American Ornitholigists' Union, was asked in 1902 
to speak at the newly formed Audubon Society. He declined. "I do not protect 
birds. I kill them." -- Of a Feather: A Brief History of American Birding. 
Scott Weidensaul. 2007.
-----