I guess I am pretty much a polar opposite attitudewise to the views expressed in this post. Human beings are not disk drives. The purpose of education is to learn how to do things, and to understand things. Recall does not equal learning. It really doesn't matter that much if you spell words like rarefaction wrong every once in a while. It does matter, however, if you do or do not know why we use rarefaction, even though it doesn't really matter if you can do the calculations from memory, or just plug the data into a computer. The value (from education) is knowing when to use rarefaction, which obviously requires an understanding of why you might want to rarefy the odd sample from time to time...regardless of how well you spell the word!
Again, JMHO, but lecture based ecology courses aren't of much use. In my specialty, Plant Ecology, we survey local forests for diversity. We did look more at ground cover and other issues, but that degrades to a taxonomic excercise far too quickly, so now we just look at trees. I really like the Alwyn Gentry method of surveying forests. Ten 50 X 2 meter transects and look at several localities. Gives students a chance to get to know the local forests and collect and analyze field data. Fisher's alpha is a pretty good parameter and it is easy enough to calculate so that just about anyone can calculate it by hand if necessary, but many students program their calculators (IMHO it is also better than most if not all others because, IMHO, it reveals the underlying pattern of diversity better; may have more or fewer rarer species from time to time, but overall, the log model is a good "average"...and we discuss this issue in class). I have presented this to high school teachers, who can use it in their schoolyard, local parks, or even along a city street, and about half a dozen teachers, at least, have used it. So we spend all our time collecting and analyzing data. We look at methods of analysis, but not to memorize them and regurgitate them once or twice and then perform a hippocampal flush, but to see if they help us with our data. At the end of the day, students seem to understand the nature of biological diversity a lot better, have a lot better appreciation of local forests and have some real understanding of what real ecologists actually do....if the fool notion of becoming an ecologist even wanders across their mind! Rob Hamilton "So easy it seemed once found, which yet unfound most would have thought impossible" John Milton ________________________________________ Robert G. Hamilton Department of Biological Sciences Mississippi College P.O. Box 4045 200 South Capitol Street Clinton, MS 39058 Phone: (601) 925-3872 FAX (601) 925-3978 >>> Malcolm McCallum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 9/24/2007 4:45 PM >>> Most highschool teachers have multiple courses under their belt in anatomy, physiology and general organismal biology. They have a well rounded education in biology with only a single course in ecology. When they teach biology they have that broad background to draw off of. If they teach ecology they have virtually no background to draw off of. Its is atune to having a person with one math class teach algebra. And, we already have enough of that going on in the schools today. I know of one person who teaches math and science and doesn't have but a few courses. If the coursework and degrees don't matter, then why even have them? Ecology is not an introductory course! I do not think it is wise unless the teacher has special education in the discipline, and then, I still see no point in watering down the highschool curriculum with more advanced courses, when the basics are barely fulfilled. If the teachers aren't covering the material in general biology because they are unable to finish the book, its time to raise the standards and make them finish the book. The text "Modern Biology" if they are still using it, simply isn't that difficult to complete. Place some expectations on the students beyond tying their shoelaces. Expect them to read something outside of class. IF students were expectations in reading, writing, and even math were implemented in the general biology course, maybe the class would make it to the end of the book! Why? because the students who don't care would not take the class and slow it up. On Mon, September 24, 2007 3:13 pm, Larry T. Spencer wrote: > Here's my two cents. Personally, I would rather have students come > away from high school with a positive feeling for science and I think > that they might be achieved more readily by teaching ecology and > evolution than teaching the Krebs cycle and cell metabolism (not to > denigrate those topics). I think it might be easier for a student to > see the idea of hypothesis and hypothesis testing in ecology than in > the normal science course. The fact that ecology can also be taught > from a quantitative viewpoint could also mesh well with the math the > student is taking in other hs classes and perhaps math teacher and > biology teacher could work together such as they often do at the middle > school level. > > In any case, the fact that the teacher lacks a Ph.D. is not really > germane to the teaching of ecology or any science at the hs level. If > that were true the teacher would need a Ph.D. to teach the Krebs cycle > and other topics. > > Larry > > > -- > Larry T. Spencer, Professor Emeritus of Biology > Plymouth State University > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. > Malcolm L. McCallum Assistant Professor of Biology Editor Herpetological Conservation and Biology http://www.herpconbio.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
