Malcolm, this might be controversial, but I would say the program needs to be large enough (have enough faculty and students) that diversity of thoughts and breadth of training (for faculty) are sufficient. I know some advocate small programs for personal attention, especially for undergraduates. However, I have known programs where there simply were not enough faculty members to properly cover the subjects taught, and people without sufficient training and knowledge in a discipline taught it.
I would also consider the research opportunity for undergraduates (a given for graduates, but in some programs, undergraduate access to research is limited). Bottom line is, the reputational vetting that programs get mostly works, AND what's good for one student may not be good for another. One always has to keep in mind that students may be limited in their ability to choose a program due to family or other constraints, and they must then make do with the program they can access (such as a regional school because they can't move away). That doesn't mean that they can't get an excellent education in such circumstances, even if the program is less than the best. One should not overlook these regional school programs as potentially excellent either. Some of them are. David ---- malcolm McCallum <malcolm.mccal...@herpconbio.org> wrote: > I didn't really have anything specific in mind regarding what you > listed. In fact, though most general bio programs are divided up in > tracts of the programs you listed. I guess I wasn't really looking at > specialized programs when I posed the question but graduate or > undergraduate, generalized or specialized should not really matter all > that much. > > I hear all of the time people say "That school has a good program" or > "that school's program is weak." > But really, what makes it good vs weak? > > I felt it basically boiled down to the following, but wanted to see if > others had different or refined views: > > 1) Coursework is sufficiently rigorous for students to move on into > good jobs or postgraduate study. > 2) students leaving the program succeed in later pursuits. > 3) faculty are trained in the subjects they teach > 4) courses have sufficient facilities and resources to be effective > 5) courses from other disciplines (chemistry/physics/math, &c) provide > suffienct depth for biologists. > > This is just off the top of my head and pretty open-ended. > > Malcolm > > > On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 6:57 PM, <mcnee...@cox.net> wrote: > > Malcolm, are you talking about an academic, degree offering biology > > program? Ph.D. level, Masters level, undergraduate? Objective of the > > program -- is it to train folks in an applied discipline like wildlife > > biology, or is it a basic biology program? Do you include botany programs, > > zoology programs, or just programs labeled "biology?" > > > > More later, David McNeely > > > > ---- malcolm McCallum <malcolm.mccal...@herpconbio.org> wrote: > >> Hi, > >> My brother asked this question: > >> > >> What standards would you use to evaluate whether a biology program is > >> viable, good, excellent in educational quality? > >> > >> IT got me thinking? What do you think? > >> > >> -- > >> Malcolm L. McCallum > >> Managing Editor, > >> Herpetological Conservation and Biology > >> "Peer pressure is designed to contain anyone with a sense of drive" - > >> Allan Nation > >> > >> 1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea" W.S. Gilbert > >> 1990's: Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss, > >> and pollution. > >> 2000: Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction > >> MAY help restore populations. > >> 2022: Soylent Green is People! > >> > >> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any > >> attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may > >> contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized > >> review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not > >> the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and > >> destroy all copies of the original message. > > > > -- > > David McNeely > > > > > > -- > Malcolm L. McCallum > Managing Editor, > Herpetological Conservation and Biology > "Peer pressure is designed to contain anyone with a sense of drive" - > Allan Nation > > 1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea" W.S. Gilbert > 1990's: Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss, > and pollution. > 2000: Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction > MAY help restore populations. > 2022: Soylent Green is People! > > Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any > attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may > contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized > review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not > the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and > destroy all copies of the original message. -- David McNeely
