I share the contempt for "soft" in the sense of sham (for which all
too many courses, degrees, and institutions qualify), but ecology (we
should not be forced to qualify the term, for example, as not
referring to "the" ecology, whatever that is, or saving beer cans and
mulching xmas trees) should be taught in the primary grades as a
required subject, and in (ugh!) "junior" high school, high school,
and at least the first year of any university course of
study. BECAUSE, simply, that ecology is connected to everything
else, and its expansion to its ultimate potential, for those who
really want it, requires readin', writin', 'n 'rithmetic, and just
about any subject one can name ("even" music, art history, real
basket-weaving and other "sub" disciplines).
Since study of anything necessarily involves discipline, that should
come first. It is the job of teachers to expose the young to the
passion of learning, to set an example, and speak, not with
conviction but in terms of excitement about The Quest! Universities,
mentors, and others who would be teachers should simply reject those
who, with or without the "benefit" of a "secondary" education, who
lack the motivation to work hard, but accept them back when they
change their minds. But if teachers at the primary and secondary
levels are permitted to set the example of passion for all learning,
any lack of enthusiasm on the part of those entering university
(check the etymology) there will be little need to leave any person
(short of those damaged souls with real limited abilities who should
get extra care) behind.
"We," society, any culture, should shy from inculcating, but embrace,
with all our being, the idea of universal and lifetime learning
(univers-ity) for all who really want it, just for the thrill of
it! To do otherwise is to fail humankind and all life. To abandon
the Quest is not just fanning the flames of our collective suicide,
but the survival of the life forms for which we have inherited
responsibility.
There is nothing "soft" about that task, but neither is it
"hard." It is simply a responsibility--and a privilege and a joy.
Pardon my soapbox--I try hard to avoid this, but something about this
email pushed me over the edge.
WT
At 04:36 AM 11/20/2007, James J. Roper wrote:
>In many schools, environmental science is "soft" ecology and the
>environment. I actually attended a graduate level seminar course called
>"the philosophy of ecology" - only to discover I was the only student in th=
>e
>class who knew what the definition of ecology was - the rest thought of it
>as either "environmental sciences" or "tree hugging 101". My suggestion wa=
>s
>that the students need a lower level course that reinforces their knowledge
>to get them to a level for a real ecology course.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Jim
>
>On Nov 19, 2007 6:24 PM, Kelly Stettner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote=
>:
>
> > "So, if the students do not have that background, then I think you are
> > wasting your time teaching "ecology" and what you should be teaching is
> > "environmental studies." That could easily be geared to unprepared
> > undergrads, and could fill in some of those voids that you mentioned your
> > students have.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Jim"
> >
> >
> > Yikes! As a self-teaching student with Vermont College myself, I am
> > cringing at the thought of an "unprepared undergrad" attempting to grasp
> > environmental studies WITHOUT a solid understanding of multi-disciplinary
> > ecology. I am finding that too many of my fellow students are single-min=
>ded
> > and wholly without any concept of basic scientific principles or methods.
> > They are feeling with their emotions instead of thinking with their brai=
>ns.
> > That, in my opinion, sets the stage for disaster -- truly caring people =
>out
> > there attempting to "fix" nature's "problems" with "solutions" that cause
> > worse problems than before. All in the name of The Environment...and no
> > science in sight. No geology, climate history, basic chemistry or physic=
>s
> > or thermodynamics.
> >
> > In other words, as a student, I do not consider myself a responsible
> > scientists unless and until I realize that each question I answer leads t=
>o
> > more questions.
> >
> > Respectfully,
> > Kelly Stettner, Director
> > Black River Action Team
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> > Black River Action Team (BRAT)
> > 45 Coolidge Road
> > Springfield, VT 05156
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > http://www.blackriveractionteam.org
> >
> > ~Making ripples on the Black River since 2000! ~
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Be a better pen pal. Text or chat with friends inside Yahoo! Mail. See
> > how.
> >
>
>
>
>--=20
>James J. Roper, Ph.D.
>
>Ecologia e Din=E2micas Populacionais
>de Vertebrados Terrestres
>
>Caixa Postal 19034
>81531-990 Curitiba, Paran=E1, Brasil
>
>E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Telefone: 55 41 33857249
>Mobile: 55 41 99870543
>
>http://www.bio.ufpr.br/ecologia/ Ecologia e Conserva=E7=E3o na UFPR
>
>http://jjroper.googlespages.com Personal Pages
