Re: Education Ecology Course requirements Re: courses required for graduate ecology programs
I have to admit that the entire biological sciences major would be better considered a college, and the ecology-evolution sequence and the moleucular sequences be considered alternate majors. Ecology and cell are now so divergent that it is difficult to imagine most aspects as more related than ecology is with earth science or genetics is with chemistry! On Sat, August 18, 2007 11:17 pm, Wayne Tyson wrote: > What if ecology was recognized for the fundamental science that it > is, and was taught starting with the nature of life and its > interactions in space and time, and that process was allowed to > proceed naturally? Would not one find that the relevant principles > of physics, chemistry, mathematics, communication, etc. would fall > into place as needed? > > This idea may be, I'll admit, politically naive, but why is it > considered naive by the academic priesthood? > > These three questions are serious ones, and are intended in no way to > be rhetorical. (Well, the "priesthood" crack is, but I couldn't resist.) > > WT > > At 11:18 AM 8/18/2007, yasmin lucero wrote: >>I've long thought that one of the problems with undergraduate Ecology >>programs is that our students spend too much time in other departments. >> We >>don't spend enough time learning why physics, chem, econ, etc. are useful >> in >>ecology. >> >>For starters, I would like to see a year of physics replaced with a year >> of >>"physical ecology" or something similar. I believe the main reason for >> the >>physics course is learn to apply our math skills and to learn mechanics. >> A >>physical ecology course could teach mechanics in the context of >> biomechanics >>problems. But, it would eschew the normal physics emphasis on QED, >> particle >>physics and cosmology in favor of more emphasis on material science, >>acoustics and some basic fluid mechanics. >> >>Cheers, >>Yasmin >> >>On 8/17/07, Sarah Hurteau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > Loren, >> > I am a recent graduate from a masters program that does just that. It >> is >> > officially call "Environmental Sciences and Policy" but the premise is >> > that students who graduate from this program are better suited to >> > address these sorts of issues. A way to bridge the gap in >> communication >> > between scientists and policy makers or community members or land >> > managers. My background is in the natural sciences, but there are >> others >> > in the program who are more focused on social sciences. A fellow grad >> > student searched other universities that had similar programs and >> there >> > were <20, but it seem that this idea is growing. I don't think I will >> > ever make the switch to conducting social science research, but it has >> > been interesting to learn how to view the ecological research from a >> > completely different perspective, which I think will help those of us >> > wanting to work in conservation biology. >> > >> > In this light, I doubt I will need the 3-4 semesters of chemistry or >> > year of physics I had to take as an undergrad. Statistics or >> > experimental design would have been much more useful! You could make >> > those more advanced classes elective, so for those people who are >> > interested in water chemistry, or similar topics, they can follow that >> > course. >> > >> > Sarah >> > >> > LOREN BYRNE wrote: >> > > This question about undergrad requirements for ecology programs >> prompts >> > me to throw out to the community a general question that I have >> pondered for >> > years: >> > > Given the increasingly recognized importance of integrating the >> social >> > sciences into ecology for topics such as ecosystem services, urban >> ecology, >> > etc., is it time to begin shifting our ecology education paradigm >> toward >> > inclusion of "non-traditional" courses as suggested correlative >> courses, if >> > not requirements, in ecology curricula, i.e., courses in sociology, >> > economics and maybe even communications? >> > > Many might argue (legitimately so in my opinion) that such social >> > science courses could be more important and beneficial for >> students who want >> > to go into conservation biology or environmental management fields >> than the >> > standard "full year of chemistry and physics." >> > > >> > > cheers >> > > Loren >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > - Original Message - >> > > From: Jonathan Horton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > > Date: Thursday, August 16, 2007 2:26 pm >> > > Subject: courses required for graduate ecology programs >> > > >> > > >> > >> Colleagues, >> > >> >> > >> We are considering revising our course curriculum for our B.S. >> > >> Biology >> > >> degree with a concentration in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. >> > >> Many >> > >> of us feel that more training in statistics and experimental design >> > >> will >> > >> be beneficial to our graduates seeking professional positions and >> > >> entry >> > >> into research-based graduate programs. Our current requirements >> > >>
Education Ecology Course requirements Re: courses required for graduate ecology programs
What if ecology was recognized for the fundamental science that it is, and was taught starting with the nature of life and its interactions in space and time, and that process was allowed to proceed naturally? Would not one find that the relevant principles of physics, chemistry, mathematics, communication, etc. would fall into place as needed? This idea may be, I'll admit, politically naive, but why is it considered naive by the academic priesthood? These three questions are serious ones, and are intended in no way to be rhetorical. (Well, the "priesthood" crack is, but I couldn't resist.) WT At 11:18 AM 8/18/2007, yasmin lucero wrote: >I've long thought that one of the problems with undergraduate Ecology >programs is that our students spend too much time in other departments. We >don't spend enough time learning why physics, chem, econ, etc. are useful in >ecology. > >For starters, I would like to see a year of physics replaced with a year of >"physical ecology" or something similar. I believe the main reason for the >physics course is learn to apply our math skills and to learn mechanics. A >physical ecology course could teach mechanics in the context of biomechanics >problems. But, it would eschew the normal physics emphasis on QED, particle >physics and cosmology in favor of more emphasis on material science, >acoustics and some basic fluid mechanics. > >Cheers, >Yasmin > >On 8/17/07, Sarah Hurteau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Loren, > > I am a recent graduate from a masters program that does just that. It is > > officially call "Environmental Sciences and Policy" but the premise is > > that students who graduate from this program are better suited to > > address these sorts of issues. A way to bridge the gap in communication > > between scientists and policy makers or community members or land > > managers. My background is in the natural sciences, but there are others > > in the program who are more focused on social sciences. A fellow grad > > student searched other universities that had similar programs and there > > were <20, but it seem that this idea is growing. I don't think I will > > ever make the switch to conducting social science research, but it has > > been interesting to learn how to view the ecological research from a > > completely different perspective, which I think will help those of us > > wanting to work in conservation biology. > > > > In this light, I doubt I will need the 3-4 semesters of chemistry or > > year of physics I had to take as an undergrad. Statistics or > > experimental design would have been much more useful! You could make > > those more advanced classes elective, so for those people who are > > interested in water chemistry, or similar topics, they can follow that > > course. > > > > Sarah > > > > LOREN BYRNE wrote: > > > This question about undergrad requirements for ecology programs prompts > > me to throw out to the community a general question that I have > pondered for > > years: > > > Given the increasingly recognized importance of integrating the social > > sciences into ecology for topics such as ecosystem services, urban ecology, > > etc., is it time to begin shifting our ecology education paradigm toward > > inclusion of "non-traditional" courses as suggested correlative courses, if > > not requirements, in ecology curricula, i.e., courses in sociology, > > economics and maybe even communications? > > > Many might argue (legitimately so in my opinion) that such social > > science courses could be more important and beneficial for > students who want > > to go into conservation biology or environmental management fields than the > > standard "full year of chemistry and physics." > > > > > > cheers > > > Loren > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > From: Jonathan Horton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Date: Thursday, August 16, 2007 2:26 pm > > > Subject: courses required for graduate ecology programs > > > > > > > > >> Colleagues, > > >> > > >> We are considering revising our course curriculum for our B.S. > > >> Biology > > >> degree with a concentration in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. > > >> Many > > >> of us feel that more training in statistics and experimental design > > >> will > > >> be beneficial to our graduates seeking professional positions and > > >> entry > > >> into research-based graduate programs. Our current requirements > > >> are as > > >> follows: > > >> > > >> 1. A core curriculum (16 hours) required of all Biology majors that > > >> includes introductory Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cellular > > >> and > > >> Molecular Biology, Botany and Zoology > > >> 2. Chemistry (Introductory I and II with lab, Organic I and either > > >> Biochemistry with a lab or Organic II with a lab > > >> 3. Two semesters of Physics > > >> 4. Calculus and one semester of introductory statistics > > >> 5. And many upper level biology courses > > >> > > >> With our general education requirements (w
Re: courses required for graduate ecology programs
I've long thought that one of the problems with undergraduate Ecology programs is that our students spend too much time in other departments. We don't spend enough time learning why physics, chem, econ, etc. are useful in ecology. For starters, I would like to see a year of physics replaced with a year of "physical ecology" or something similar. I believe the main reason for the physics course is learn to apply our math skills and to learn mechanics. A physical ecology course could teach mechanics in the context of biomechanics problems. But, it would eschew the normal physics emphasis on QED, particle physics and cosmology in favor of more emphasis on material science, acoustics and some basic fluid mechanics. Cheers, Yasmin On 8/17/07, Sarah Hurteau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Loren, > I am a recent graduate from a masters program that does just that. It is > officially call "Environmental Sciences and Policy" but the premise is > that students who graduate from this program are better suited to > address these sorts of issues. A way to bridge the gap in communication > between scientists and policy makers or community members or land > managers. My background is in the natural sciences, but there are others > in the program who are more focused on social sciences. A fellow grad > student searched other universities that had similar programs and there > were <20, but it seem that this idea is growing. I don't think I will > ever make the switch to conducting social science research, but it has > been interesting to learn how to view the ecological research from a > completely different perspective, which I think will help those of us > wanting to work in conservation biology. > > In this light, I doubt I will need the 3-4 semesters of chemistry or > year of physics I had to take as an undergrad. Statistics or > experimental design would have been much more useful! You could make > those more advanced classes elective, so for those people who are > interested in water chemistry, or similar topics, they can follow that > course. > > Sarah > > LOREN BYRNE wrote: > > This question about undergrad requirements for ecology programs prompts > me to throw out to the community a general question that I have pondered for > years: > > Given the increasingly recognized importance of integrating the social > sciences into ecology for topics such as ecosystem services, urban ecology, > etc., is it time to begin shifting our ecology education paradigm toward > inclusion of "non-traditional" courses as suggested correlative courses, if > not requirements, in ecology curricula, i.e., courses in sociology, > economics and maybe even communications? > > Many might argue (legitimately so in my opinion) that such social > science courses could be more important and beneficial for students who want > to go into conservation biology or environmental management fields than the > standard "full year of chemistry and physics." > > > > cheers > > Loren > > > > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: Jonathan Horton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Thursday, August 16, 2007 2:26 pm > > Subject: courses required for graduate ecology programs > > > > > >> Colleagues, > >> > >> We are considering revising our course curriculum for our B.S. > >> Biology > >> degree with a concentration in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. > >> Many > >> of us feel that more training in statistics and experimental design > >> will > >> be beneficial to our graduates seeking professional positions and > >> entry > >> into research-based graduate programs. Our current requirements > >> are as > >> follows: > >> > >> 1. A core curriculum (16 hours) required of all Biology majors that > >> includes introductory Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cellular > >> and > >> Molecular Biology, Botany and Zoology > >> 2. Chemistry (Introductory I and II with lab, Organic I and either > >> Biochemistry with a lab or Organic II with a lab > >> 3. Two semesters of Physics > >> 4. Calculus and one semester of introductory statistics > >> 5. And many upper level biology courses > >> > >> With our general education requirements (we are a public Liberal > >> Arts > >> College), this makes it a full 4 to 4.5 year schedule for graduation. > >> > >> We are discussing cutting back on the amount of chemistry (through > >> Organic I) and Physics (only 1 semester) and instead having our > >> students > >> take additional courses in Statistics (Linear Regression and Anova) > >> and > >> experimental design and analysis. > >> > >> My questions to the group is this: What are the entrance > >> requirements > >> to ecology graduate programs in terms of course work? Which would > >> better prepare students for a research-based graduate program or > >> professional position, additional chemistry and physics or > >> additional > >> statistical training. > >> > >> We would not want to limit our graduates chances of entering a > >> graduate > >> program by failing to
Re: courses required for graduate ecology programs
My doctoral environmental sciences program had a core encompassing environmental chemistry, environmental policy, environmental economics, and environmental biology. An environmental scientist must have a grasp of atmospheric, water, and soil chemistry. They also must have a grasp of the political and economic tools that can be used to reduce environmental degradation. They also must have an understanding of mathematical principles (physics being a very important one) to operate efficiently in this field. EVS is not conservation biology or visa versa although the fields overlap. In fact, conservation biology is a subcomponent of environmental biology which is a subset of the environmental sciences. All four of these areas are essential to an environmental scientist or they cannot efficiently opperate in a multidisciplinary environment. Many environmental scientists shift to pure ecology and many ecologists work in environmental science. However, both must understand chemistry and physics. Notice I am lumping geology and chemistry together in this email, and clearly geology is important. Many concepts of physics and chemistry are fundamental to the biological sciences, and even moreso to environmental science and ecology. On Fri, August 17, 2007 9:49 am, Sarah Hurteau wrote: > Loren, > I am a recent graduate from a masters program that does just that. It is > officially call "Environmental Sciences and Policy" but the premise is > that students who graduate from this program are better suited to > address these sorts of issues. A way to bridge the gap in communication > between scientists and policy makers or community members or land > managers. My background is in the natural sciences, but there are others > in the program who are more focused on social sciences. A fellow grad > student searched other universities that had similar programs and there > were <20, but it seem that this idea is growing. I don't think I will > ever make the switch to conducting social science research, but it has > been interesting to learn how to view the ecological research from a > completely different perspective, which I think will help those of us > wanting to work in conservation biology. > > In this light, I doubt I will need the 3-4 semesters of chemistry or > year of physics I had to take as an undergrad. Statistics or > experimental design would have been much more useful! You could make > those more advanced classes elective, so for those people who are > interested in water chemistry, or similar topics, they can follow that > course. > > Sarah > > LOREN BYRNE wrote: >> This question about undergrad requirements for ecology programs prompts >> me to throw out to the community a general question that I have pondered >> for years: >> Given the increasingly recognized importance of integrating the social >> sciences into ecology for topics such as ecosystem services, urban >> ecology, etc., is it time to begin shifting our ecology education >> paradigm toward inclusion of "non-traditional" courses as suggested >> correlative courses, if not requirements, in ecology curricula, i.e., >> courses in sociology, economics and maybe even communications? >> Many might argue (legitimately so in my opinion) that such social >> science courses could be more important and beneficial for students who >> want to go into conservation biology or environmental management fields >> than the standard "full year of chemistry and physics." >> >> cheers >> Loren >> >> >> >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: Jonathan Horton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Date: Thursday, August 16, 2007 2:26 pm >> Subject: courses required for graduate ecology programs >> >> >>> Colleagues, >>> >>> We are considering revising our course curriculum for our B.S. >>> Biology >>> degree with a concentration in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. >>> Many >>> of us feel that more training in statistics and experimental design >>> will >>> be beneficial to our graduates seeking professional positions and >>> entry >>> into research-based graduate programs. Our current requirements >>> are as >>> follows: >>> >>> 1. A core curriculum (16 hours) required of all Biology majors that >>> includes introductory Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cellular >>> and >>> Molecular Biology, Botany and Zoology >>> 2. Chemistry (Introductory I and II with lab, Organic I and either >>> Biochemistry with a lab or Organic II with a lab >>> 3. Two semesters of Physics >>> 4. Calculus and one semester of introductory statistics >>> 5. And many upper level biology courses >>> >>> With our general education requirements (we are a public Liberal >>> Arts >>> College), this makes it a full 4 to 4.5 year schedule for graduation. >>> >>> We are discussing cutting back on the amount of chemistry (through >>> Organic I) and Physics (only 1 semester) and instead having our >>> students >>> take additional courses in Statistics (Linear Regression and Anova) >>> and >>> experiment
Re: courses required for graduate ecology programs
Loren, I am a recent graduate from a masters program that does just that. It is officially call "Environmental Sciences and Policy" but the premise is that students who graduate from this program are better suited to address these sorts of issues. A way to bridge the gap in communication between scientists and policy makers or community members or land managers. My background is in the natural sciences, but there are others in the program who are more focused on social sciences. A fellow grad student searched other universities that had similar programs and there were <20, but it seem that this idea is growing. I don't think I will ever make the switch to conducting social science research, but it has been interesting to learn how to view the ecological research from a completely different perspective, which I think will help those of us wanting to work in conservation biology. In this light, I doubt I will need the 3-4 semesters of chemistry or year of physics I had to take as an undergrad. Statistics or experimental design would have been much more useful! You could make those more advanced classes elective, so for those people who are interested in water chemistry, or similar topics, they can follow that course. Sarah LOREN BYRNE wrote: > This question about undergrad requirements for ecology programs prompts me to > throw out to the community a general question that I have pondered for years: > Given the increasingly recognized importance of integrating the social > sciences into ecology for topics such as ecosystem services, urban ecology, > etc., is it time to begin shifting our ecology education paradigm toward > inclusion of "non-traditional" courses as suggested correlative courses, if > not requirements, in ecology curricula, i.e., courses in sociology, economics > and maybe even communications? > Many might argue (legitimately so in my opinion) that such social science > courses could be more important and beneficial for students who want to go > into conservation biology or environmental management fields than the > standard "full year of chemistry and physics." > > cheers > Loren > > > > > > - Original Message - > From: Jonathan Horton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thursday, August 16, 2007 2:26 pm > Subject: courses required for graduate ecology programs > > >> Colleagues, >> >> We are considering revising our course curriculum for our B.S. >> Biology >> degree with a concentration in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. >> Many >> of us feel that more training in statistics and experimental design >> will >> be beneficial to our graduates seeking professional positions and >> entry >> into research-based graduate programs. Our current requirements >> are as >> follows: >> >> 1. A core curriculum (16 hours) required of all Biology majors that >> includes introductory Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cellular >> and >> Molecular Biology, Botany and Zoology >> 2. Chemistry (Introductory I and II with lab, Organic I and either >> Biochemistry with a lab or Organic II with a lab >> 3. Two semesters of Physics >> 4. Calculus and one semester of introductory statistics >> 5. And many upper level biology courses >> >> With our general education requirements (we are a public Liberal >> Arts >> College), this makes it a full 4 to 4.5 year schedule for graduation. >> >> We are discussing cutting back on the amount of chemistry (through >> Organic I) and Physics (only 1 semester) and instead having our >> students >> take additional courses in Statistics (Linear Regression and Anova) >> and >> experimental design and analysis. >> >> My questions to the group is this: What are the entrance >> requirements >> to ecology graduate programs in terms of course work? Which would >> better prepare students for a research-based graduate program or >> professional position, additional chemistry and physics or >> additional >> statistical training. >> >> We would not want to limit our graduates chances of entering a >> graduate >> program by failing to meet entrance requirements in terms of >> supplemental science coursework. Please provide your thoughts. >> >> Feel free to answer off the list. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Jonathan >> >> -- >> * >> Jonathan Horton Ph.D. >> Department of Biology >> One University Heights >> UNC-Asheville CPO#2440 >> Asheville, NC 28804 >> Phone: (828)232-5152 >> Fax: (828)251-6623 >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> * >> >> -- Sarah Hurteau Senior Research Specialist Forest ERA Northern Arizona University PO Box 5694 Flagstaff, AZ 86011 Office: (928) 523-4730 Fax: (928) 523-7423 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.forestera.nau.edu
Re: courses required for graduate ecology programs
Soil Science might be more useful than a true geology class. On Fri, August 17, 2007 12:39 pm, Laurie Anderson wrote: > I think that a geology course is important for ecologists, > particularly those that go on to focus on plants. One possibility is > making a geology course an optional substitute for one of your upper > level biology courses. > > At 02:26 PM 8/16/2007, Jonathan Horton wrote: >>Colleagues, >> >>We are considering revising our course curriculum for our B.S. >>Biology degree with a concentration in Ecology and Evolutionary >>Biology. Many of us feel that more training in statistics and >>experimental design will be beneficial to our graduates seeking >>professional positions and entry into research-based graduate >>programs. Our current requirements are as follows: >> >>1. A core curriculum (16 hours) required of all Biology majors that >>includes introductory Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cellular and >>Molecular Biology, Botany and Zoology >>2. Chemistry (Introductory I and II with lab, Organic I and either >>Biochemistry with a lab or Organic II with a lab >>3. Two semesters of Physics >>4. Calculus and one semester of introductory statistics >>5. And many upper level biology courses >> >>With our general education requirements (we are a public Liberal >>Arts College), this makes it a full 4 to 4.5 year schedule for >> graduation. >> >>We are discussing cutting back on the amount of chemistry (through >>Organic I) and Physics (only 1 semester) and instead having our >>students take additional courses in Statistics (Linear Regression >>and Anova) and experimental design and analysis. >> >>My questions to the group is this: What are the entrance >>requirements to ecology graduate programs in terms of course >>work? Which would better prepare students for a research-based >>graduate program or professional position, additional chemistry and >>physics or additional statistical training. >> >>We would not want to limit our graduates chances of entering a >>graduate program by failing to meet entrance requirements in terms >>of supplemental science coursework. Please provide your thoughts. >>Feel free to answer off the list. >> >>Thanks, >> >>Jonathan >> >>-- >>* >>Jonathan Horton Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>One University Heights >>UNC-Asheville CPO#2440 >>Asheville, NC 28804 >>Phone: (828)232-5152 >>Fax: (828)251-6623 >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>* > > > Dr. Laurie Anderson (Laurel J. Anderson) > Associate Professor > Dept. of Botany/Microbiology > Ohio Wesleyan University > Delaware, OH 43015 > 740-368-3501 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Malcolm L. McCallum Assistant Professor of Biology Editor Herpetological Conservationa and Biology [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: courses required for graduate ecology programs
I agree that interaction between ecosystems and humans can (and probably should) be incorporated into an ecology class. Creating a multidisciplinary course including sociology, political science, etc. is not the purpose of an ecology class. Throwing in a single chapter explaining the difference between environmnental science and ecology might be warranted. Human Ecology is an important area of ecology that is often ignored, outside of a life tables lab. So, we could do a better job of that. Ecology is the partially applied and partially theoretical, but it is a single discpline. Environmental Sciences is much more diverse. Although ecologists work in the environmental sciences, so do geologists, chemists, sociologists, economists, political scientists, and an array of other disciplinarians. An environmental scientist typically specializes in one of these disciplines, but is also trained to work in this multidiscplinary environment. IT is a completely different thing from raw ecology. I have noticed that few introductory environmental texts really address this appropriately. They are usually watered down ecology texts that emphasize conservation and resource use. Environmental Science is a field that sprung out of the Environmental Policy Act (1969) and the need for an Environmental Impact Statement. The majority of an EIS has little to do with biology/ecology. A typical team on an EIS involves chemists, geologists, biologists, engineers, anthropologists, archaeologists, etc. It is interesting to me that modern environmental science is a much different thing than the old 1970's degree program that typically amounted to water treatment, often referred to as a "poor man's chemistry degree." Today, an EVS person is a very specialized scientist who works in a multidisciplinary environment. Ecologists do draw from multiple disciplines, but not to near the same degree. On Fri, August 17, 2007 4:29 am, William Silvert wrote: > While I agree that ecology courses should deal with ecology, I wonder > whether there is enough emphasis on the interaction of ecosystems with > humans. I am not an educator so I do not know what the current teaching > trends are, but I wonder to what extent topics such as the properties of > heavily fished ecosystems are covered in coursework. Do students > understand > the population dynamics of populations where there is high infant > mortality > as opposed to high adult mortality, for example? Effects of habitat > modification, and so on. > > I hope that we do not fall into the same situation that we see in the > split > between anthropology and sociology, where once "civilisation" starts to > affect primitive tribes the anthropologists walk away but the sociologists > are not yet interested, so this critical period receives too little > attention. > > Bill Silvert > > - Original Message - > From: "Malcolm McCallum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 4:53 AM > Subject: Re: courses required for graduate ecology programs > > >>I think not. >> What you are speaking of is more appropriately placed in the >> environmental >> science/studies degree programs rather than ecology. Mixing these two >> programs would do a disservice to both majors. >> >> On Thu, August 16, 2007 9:39 pm, LOREN BYRNE wrote: >>> Given the increasingly recognized importance of integrating the social >>> sciences into ecology for topics such as ecosystem services, urban >>> ecology, etc., is it time to begin shifting our ecology education >>> paradigm >>> toward inclusion of "non-traditional" courses as suggested correlative >>> courses, if not requirements, in ecology curricula, i.e., courses in >>> sociology, economics and maybe even communications? >>> Many might argue (legitimately so in my opinion) that such social >>> science >>> courses could be more important and beneficial for students who want to >>> go >>> into conservation biology or environmental management fields than the >>> standard "full year of chemistry and physics." > Malcolm L. McCallum Assistant Professor of Biology Editor Herpetological Conservationa and Biology [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: courses required for graduate ecology programs
I think that a geology course is important for ecologists, particularly those that go on to focus on plants. One possibility is making a geology course an optional substitute for one of your upper level biology courses. At 02:26 PM 8/16/2007, Jonathan Horton wrote: >Colleagues, > >We are considering revising our course curriculum for our B.S. >Biology degree with a concentration in Ecology and Evolutionary >Biology. Many of us feel that more training in statistics and >experimental design will be beneficial to our graduates seeking >professional positions and entry into research-based graduate >programs. Our current requirements are as follows: > >1. A core curriculum (16 hours) required of all Biology majors that >includes introductory Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cellular and >Molecular Biology, Botany and Zoology >2. Chemistry (Introductory I and II with lab, Organic I and either >Biochemistry with a lab or Organic II with a lab >3. Two semesters of Physics >4. Calculus and one semester of introductory statistics >5. And many upper level biology courses > >With our general education requirements (we are a public Liberal >Arts College), this makes it a full 4 to 4.5 year schedule for graduation. > >We are discussing cutting back on the amount of chemistry (through >Organic I) and Physics (only 1 semester) and instead having our >students take additional courses in Statistics (Linear Regression >and Anova) and experimental design and analysis. > >My questions to the group is this: What are the entrance >requirements to ecology graduate programs in terms of course >work? Which would better prepare students for a research-based >graduate program or professional position, additional chemistry and >physics or additional statistical training. > >We would not want to limit our graduates chances of entering a >graduate program by failing to meet entrance requirements in terms >of supplemental science coursework. Please provide your thoughts. >Feel free to answer off the list. > >Thanks, > >Jonathan > >-- >* >Jonathan Horton Ph.D. >Department of Biology >One University Heights >UNC-Asheville CPO#2440 >Asheville, NC 28804 >Phone: (828)232-5152 >Fax: (828)251-6623 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >* Dr. Laurie Anderson (Laurel J. Anderson) Associate Professor Dept. of Botany/Microbiology Ohio Wesleyan University Delaware, OH 43015 740-368-3501 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: courses required for graduate ecology programs
While I agree that ecology courses should deal with ecology, I wonder whether there is enough emphasis on the interaction of ecosystems with humans. I am not an educator so I do not know what the current teaching trends are, but I wonder to what extent topics such as the properties of heavily fished ecosystems are covered in coursework. Do students understand the population dynamics of populations where there is high infant mortality as opposed to high adult mortality, for example? Effects of habitat modification, and so on. I hope that we do not fall into the same situation that we see in the split between anthropology and sociology, where once "civilisation" starts to affect primitive tribes the anthropologists walk away but the sociologists are not yet interested, so this critical period receives too little attention. Bill Silvert - Original Message - From: "Malcolm McCallum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 4:53 AM Subject: Re: courses required for graduate ecology programs >I think not. > What you are speaking of is more appropriately placed in the environmental > science/studies degree programs rather than ecology. Mixing these two > programs would do a disservice to both majors. > > On Thu, August 16, 2007 9:39 pm, LOREN BYRNE wrote: >> Given the increasingly recognized importance of integrating the social >> sciences into ecology for topics such as ecosystem services, urban >> ecology, etc., is it time to begin shifting our ecology education >> paradigm >> toward inclusion of "non-traditional" courses as suggested correlative >> courses, if not requirements, in ecology curricula, i.e., courses in >> sociology, economics and maybe even communications? >> Many might argue (legitimately so in my opinion) that such social science >> courses could be more important and beneficial for students who want to >> go >> into conservation biology or environmental management fields than the >> standard "full year of chemistry and physics."
Re: courses required for graduate ecology programs
I think not. What you are speaking of is more appropriately placed in the environmental science/studies degree programs rather than ecology. Mixing these two programs would do a disservice to both majors. On Thu, August 16, 2007 9:39 pm, LOREN BYRNE wrote: > This question about undergrad requirements for ecology programs prompts me > to throw out to the community a general question that I have pondered for > years: > Given the increasingly recognized importance of integrating the social > sciences into ecology for topics such as ecosystem services, urban > ecology, etc., is it time to begin shifting our ecology education paradigm > toward inclusion of "non-traditional" courses as suggested correlative > courses, if not requirements, in ecology curricula, i.e., courses in > sociology, economics and maybe even communications? > Many might argue (legitimately so in my opinion) that such social science > courses could be more important and beneficial for students who want to go > into conservation biology or environmental management fields than the > standard "full year of chemistry and physics." > > cheers > Loren > > > > > > - Original Message - > From: Jonathan Horton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thursday, August 16, 2007 2:26 pm > Subject: courses required for graduate ecology programs > >> Colleagues, >> >> We are considering revising our course curriculum for our B.S. >> Biology >> degree with a concentration in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. >> Many >> of us feel that more training in statistics and experimental design >> will >> be beneficial to our graduates seeking professional positions and >> entry >> into research-based graduate programs. Our current requirements >> are as >> follows: >> >> 1. A core curriculum (16 hours) required of all Biology majors that >> includes introductory Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cellular >> and >> Molecular Biology, Botany and Zoology >> 2. Chemistry (Introductory I and II with lab, Organic I and either >> Biochemistry with a lab or Organic II with a lab >> 3. Two semesters of Physics >> 4. Calculus and one semester of introductory statistics >> 5. And many upper level biology courses >> >> With our general education requirements (we are a public Liberal >> Arts >> College), this makes it a full 4 to 4.5 year schedule for graduation. >> >> We are discussing cutting back on the amount of chemistry (through >> Organic I) and Physics (only 1 semester) and instead having our >> students >> take additional courses in Statistics (Linear Regression and Anova) >> and >> experimental design and analysis. >> >> My questions to the group is this: What are the entrance >> requirements >> to ecology graduate programs in terms of course work? Which would >> better prepare students for a research-based graduate program or >> professional position, additional chemistry and physics or >> additional >> statistical training. >> >> We would not want to limit our graduates chances of entering a >> graduate >> program by failing to meet entrance requirements in terms of >> supplemental science coursework. Please provide your thoughts. >> >> Feel free to answer off the list. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Jonathan >> >> -- >> * >> Jonathan Horton Ph.D. >> Department of Biology >> One University Heights >> UNC-Asheville CPO#2440 >> Asheville, NC 28804 >> Phone: (828)232-5152 >> Fax: (828)251-6623 >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> * >> > Malcolm L. McCallum Assistant Professor of Biology Editor Herpetological Conservationa and Biology [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: courses required for graduate ecology programs
This question about undergrad requirements for ecology programs prompts me to throw out to the community a general question that I have pondered for years: Given the increasingly recognized importance of integrating the social sciences into ecology for topics such as ecosystem services, urban ecology, etc., is it time to begin shifting our ecology education paradigm toward inclusion of "non-traditional" courses as suggested correlative courses, if not requirements, in ecology curricula, i.e., courses in sociology, economics and maybe even communications? Many might argue (legitimately so in my opinion) that such social science courses could be more important and beneficial for students who want to go into conservation biology or environmental management fields than the standard "full year of chemistry and physics." cheers Loren - Original Message - From: Jonathan Horton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thursday, August 16, 2007 2:26 pm Subject: courses required for graduate ecology programs > Colleagues, > > We are considering revising our course curriculum for our B.S. > Biology > degree with a concentration in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. > Many > of us feel that more training in statistics and experimental design > will > be beneficial to our graduates seeking professional positions and > entry > into research-based graduate programs. Our current requirements > are as > follows: > > 1. A core curriculum (16 hours) required of all Biology majors that > includes introductory Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cellular > and > Molecular Biology, Botany and Zoology > 2. Chemistry (Introductory I and II with lab, Organic I and either > Biochemistry with a lab or Organic II with a lab > 3. Two semesters of Physics > 4. Calculus and one semester of introductory statistics > 5. And many upper level biology courses > > With our general education requirements (we are a public Liberal > Arts > College), this makes it a full 4 to 4.5 year schedule for graduation. > > We are discussing cutting back on the amount of chemistry (through > Organic I) and Physics (only 1 semester) and instead having our > students > take additional courses in Statistics (Linear Regression and Anova) > and > experimental design and analysis. > > My questions to the group is this: What are the entrance > requirements > to ecology graduate programs in terms of course work? Which would > better prepare students for a research-based graduate program or > professional position, additional chemistry and physics or > additional > statistical training. > > We would not want to limit our graduates chances of entering a > graduate > program by failing to meet entrance requirements in terms of > supplemental science coursework. Please provide your thoughts. > > Feel free to answer off the list. > > Thanks, > > Jonathan > > -- > * > Jonathan Horton Ph.D. > Department of Biology > One University Heights > UNC-Asheville CPO#2440 > Asheville, NC 28804 > Phone: (828)232-5152 > Fax: (828)251-6623 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > * >
