There have been so many good answers to this very good question, so this feeble response is not limited to Charlene. I've never tried to teach ecology, and I ain't at all sure what I've "learned," but I do know that I've got more questions about the subject than I have answers--more than when I began. Further, my experience is full of mistakes, errors of presumption, pride, and prejudice. And I strongly suspect that the impediments to learning are largely embraced by those three p's. I suspect that there are elements in teaching, especially when it is contaminated by the three p's, themselves run a serious risk of impeding more than advancing learning.
So it's little wonder that those thrust into such a scary test of human limitations--the honest ones anyway--"appreciate more than ever what an extraordinarily difficult thing it is to do well" the more they struggle with it. I admire their courage, not only to take on the quest, but to do so in the purgatory of academia, ensnarled by red tape, bound by bureaucracy, enslaved by statistical oppression. I admire even more those who resist the enslavement of mere tradition in raiments of "intellectual" tyranny, and risk being bounced out of the fold, ostracized, isolated, ridiculed. Have we so enshrined the mere names of Copernicus, da Vinci, and "patron saints" of honest intellectual enquiry who have suffered mightily in that very same tradition that we have become desensitized to what they actually did? That's REAL irony, eh? The best teachers I've had (aside from the organisms and phenomena themselves) are the ones who have challenged me the most. And most of those did so out of the classroom, beyond the bytes. The worst teachers, the kind who could not figure out the crucial distinction between challenging and threatening--the "instructors" who hobbled into the lecture hall propped up (or so they thought, but actually were crippled) by curricula and lesson plans and textbooks. In here somewhere is the elephant that obscures the parade, the Emperor of Authority who rides resplendent in his golden gown, crowned, not be hisher actual achievements but by status conferred rather than won. I weep now as I have wept too long of the tragedy of the uncommoness of challenge and responsibility and the institutionalization of--period. Of course I "exaggerate" as Bagehout would say, by "omission." But I am not arguing a pet point, peeve, or pronouncement--I am merely responding, planarian worm-like, the saline solution dropped on one side of the Petri dish and am squirming accordingly. Demonstrably I have an ego, but it is not at stake here. Further, this is truncated, not because I tire of the subject, but because I know the reader will. And more important, its purpose is to initiate further questing. For example, for such a seemingly endlessly complex subject, where does one begin, where does one end, and what does leave in and leave out? In what sequence shall this knowledge be presented? Your obedient student, WT PS: What ARE the basics? What is THE universal basic? At 07:37 AM 11/18/2007, Charlene D'Avanzo wrote: >This is in response to Andrew's question about 'throwing away' the >textbook in ecology classes. > >In my own ecology class I use an ecology text as an assigned >reference for the very many (over 30) research papers we read. In >nearly every class students present a primary article and I assign >specific, limited numbers of pages in a text. I do that because even >though I ask students to put the assigned paper into the larger >ecological context, it is of course hard for sophomores and juniors >to do that. (Feel free to contact me for the list of papers) So the >textbook is a reference for the papers which are the main focus. > >Your questions about what students in ecology really 'should' know >are vital ones. The ESA education section has been struggling with >this for years and, as you might assume, we do not agree. Here are >some of my ideas: > * Focus on cognitive/thinking skills important in ecology >(and science) and not just on subject matter. A main reason students >present so many papers in my class is because I want students to know >how to read and discuss ecological primary articles - how to identify >the core question, describe and explain data, connect findings to >experimental design, make their own conclusions, etc. The field >component involves writing primary-style papers as well, so there is >a connection there. > * Keep the 'content' small and do it well. Actively involve >your students in their own learning. Very clearly identify what you >want your students to know - and then try to assess along the way >their progress. There are many suggestions on TIEE (tiee.ecoed.net) >in the Teaching Section about how to do ongoing (formative) >evaluation. An example is the minute paper that you give at the end >of class. This is not just 'education-eze'; it's important. > * Connect up with other ecology faculty asking the same >questions. The Education Section of the ESA is very active; come to >our meetings, workshops, and sessions at the annual meeting. There is >also Ecoed net where you can post questions. > >Hope this is helpful. After 30 years teaching, I appreciate more than >ever what an extraordinarily difficult thing it is to do well! >-- >Charlene > >************************************** > >Charlene D'Avanzo >Professor of Ecology & >Director, Center for Learning >Hampshire College > >Phone 413-5595569 >FAX 413-5595448 > >Homepage: http://helios.hampshire.edu/~cdNS/ >TIEE: http://tiee.ecoed.net/ >Course website: http://ns.hampshire.edu/ns207/ >ns/ns207 > >************************************
