[ECOLOG-L] Volunteer field assistants wanted, small mammal study in South Africa

[David Inouye]

Volunteers needed as field assistants for the project:

Evolution and Socio-Ecology of small Mammals in 
the Succulent Karoo of South Africa


From May 2010 onwards
Opportunity: This is a great opportunity for 
anybody who wants to get more experience in field 
work relating to evolution, ecology and behavior 
before starting an MsC or PhD project.


Project: We study the evolutionary and ecological 
reasons of group living, paternal care, communal 
nesting and social flexibility in the striped 
mouse. As this species is diurnal and the habitat 
is open, direct behavioral observations in the field are possible.


What kind of people are needed? 
Biology/zoology/veterinary students are preferred 
as candidates. Applicants must have an interest 
in working in the field and with animals. Hard 
working conditions will await applicants, as the 
study species gets up with sunrise (between 5 and 
6 o` clock), and stops its activity with dusk (19 
o` clock). Work during nights might also be 
necessary. Work in the field will be done for 5 
days a week. Applicants must be able to manage 
extreme temperatures (below 0 at night in winter, 
sometimes over 40°C during summer days). 
Applicants must both be prepared to live for long 
periods in the loneliness of the field and to be part of a small group.


Work of field assistants: Trapping, marking and 
radio-tracking of striped mice; direct behavioral 
observations in the field. Volunteers are also 
expected to help with maintenance of the research 
station (water pump, solar power, etc.)


Confirmation letter: Students get a letter of 
confirmation about their work and can prepare a 
report of their own small project to get credit 
points from their university for their bachelor or masters studies.


Costs: Students have to arrange their transport 
to the field site themselves. Per month, an 
amount of Rand 1000 (around 100 Euro) must be 
paid for accommodation at the research station. 
For students with their own undergraduate 
project, a fee of Rand 1250 (approx. 120 Euro) 
per month applies. Students must buy their own 
food etc in Springbok (costs of about R 2000 or 
200 Euro/month). Including extras, you should 
expect costs of about 300 - 400 Euros per month. 
Students get an invitation letter which they can 
use to apply for funding in their home country 
(eg. DAAD in Germany, SANW in Switzerland).


Place: The field site is in the Goegap Nature 
Reserve near Springbok in the North-West of South 
Africa. The vegetation consists of Succulent 
Karoo, which has been recognized as one of 25 
hotspots of biodiversity. It is a desert to 
semi-desert with rain mainly in winter (June to September).


When and how long: At the moment we are looking 
for volunteers to start in May 2010 and 
especially for the period June to December 2010. 
Volunteers are expected to stay at least 2 
months, but longer periods of up to 6months are preferred.


How to apply? Send a short motivation letter 
stating why and for which period you are 
interested and your CV via email to 
carsten.schra...@ieu.uzh.ch.


More information under www.stripedmouse.com

Contact via e-mail: 
carsten.schra...@zool.uzh.ch


Dr. Carsten Schradin
Research Assistant, Department of Animal Behavior,
University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.
Tel: +41 - (0)44 635 5486

Honorary Researcher at the School of Animal, Plant and Environmental Sciences,
University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa.

Re: [ECOLOG-L] decline in education, comment on active learning

[Jane Shevtsov]

One problem with many active learning methods is that they constrain
when and how the student is to learn the material. In a traditional
situation, I can attend lecture/lab, read the textbook, study with
friends, study alone, decide our book sucks and use another one, look
up material online, try problems, etc. It doesn't matter what methods
I use or don't use. The only thing that matters is the result. In
particular, I've had several math professors who graded homework to
give students an incentive to do it, while also providing a way to get
an A without turning in homework -- and gave fair warning that this
was very unlikely to happen!  On the other hand, active learning tends
to be method-dependent. You're graded on the intermediate steps of
learning, not just the outcome. If the methods a particular professor
decides to use don't work well for me or if I already have a good
grasp of the material, I still have to put in the time.

Furthermore, if the professor decides that everybody needs to read the
book before coming to class and gives a daily quiz to enforce the
policy, the student has just lost some of the freedom to decide when
to study. Maybe I find it helpful to have a lecture overview of the
material before reading the more detailed book. Maybe I just have a
big biochemistry exam and need to focus on that for a few days. Thus,
many active learning methods have a paradoxical effect. By drawing
attention to the process of learning as opposed to the outcome, they
make the student more dependent on the professor for structuring their
learning experience.

Despite all of the above, I am not opposed to all active learning
methods. In particular, I had a physiology professor in undergrad who
would interrupt himself during lecture and start evaluating an idea
he'd  thought of or asking a question and trying to reason out the
answer, thus modeling the process for us. This, plus the fact that he
told the class on day one that he expected us to make mistakes and
that these were just part of learning, really got people to ask
questions and speak up in class -- and imposed no extra constraints. I
myself, as a TA, have inflicted a journal assignment on ecosystem
ecology students in which they were asked to wrestle with class
material, ask questions and draw connections with their daily
experiences or other classes. (This journal was only a small part of
their grade and I gave substantive feedback, in the form of letters to
each student.) And some things can only be learned through first-hand
experience. I just wish the enthusiasm for active learning methods was
tempered by an awareness of the constraints and dependence they can
impose on students.

Jane Shevtsov

On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 1:28 AM, Sarah Berke  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I want to briefly respond to David Lawrence's comment from several days ago,
> about evaluation scores declining when he switched to active learning.  This
> comment probably hit home for anyone who has tried active learning:
>
>> >>> I watched my evaluation scores decline when I switched to "active
>> >>> learning."  ...It was also unreasonable for me to expect them to ask
> questions
>> >>> relevant to the material we discussed in class.  I had students
>> >>> complain they didn't learn anything from me
>
> For anyone who has ever been in this boat, you are not alone--this is a
> common phenomenon when introducing active learning methods to a student body
> that is accustomed to traditional lecture-based methods.  Based on my own
> experiences, and those of various colleagues, I would guess that most
> instructors got similar comments when they first switched over from
> lecturing.  I am fairly new to active learning myself, but I've talked with
> colleagues who have been doing it for years, and everyone says that it
> really does get better (particularly if many faculty in the department all
> start using it).  I think comments like "I didn't learn anything" stem from
> problems with metacognition.  How do you know when you've learned
> something?  Memorizing 30 vocabulary words is a concrete achievement, you
> can point and say "There, I learned these words".  But interpreting data, or
> designing an experiment, or predicting the outcome of a perturbation to a
> system are all rather amorphous--there's no one thing to point to and say
> "I've learned this".  That can throw students for a loop.  Furthermore, the
> level of energy and preparation required to participate in a
> learner-centered classroom can push students out of their comfort zones,
> particularly if they are accustomed to the ease of showing up and taking
> notes through a lecture.  I am not trying to dismiss your student's
> comments, I'm just pointing out that some negative comments might have more
> to do with feeling uncomfortable in a new situation than with learning
> science per se.
>
> Happily, none of these issues are insurmountable.  The trick is to help
> students be aware of their own progress, and to bring 

Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education- student's perspective

[William Silvert]

I think that Derek's "older gentleman" friend may have an idealistic view of 
why students went to college back in the remote 60's. When I entered college 
in 1954 (a good one, an Ivy League university) there was a reception for the 
scholarship students at which I met the Dean of Admissions. He immediately 
recognised me, to my great surprise. When I expressed shock that he could 
recognise me from a single photograph in a university with thousands of 
applicants he laughed and replied that I was especially memorable because of 
my reply to the question, "Why do you wnt to go to Brown University?". My 
answer, which I thought straightforward but which was apparently unusual, 
was "To get an education." I hardly believe that it became more common ten 
years later.


Bill Silvert
Brown '58

- Original Message - 
From: "Derek Pursell" 

To: 
Sent: sábado, 23 de Janeiro de 2010 6:20
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education- 
student's perspective



A good friend of mine, an older gentleman who has worked as president for an 
environmental NGO in the northeast for years, put it to me in a particularly 
striking way. He said, and I am paraphrasing, "In terms of education, the 
reality in America is that a lot of people are going to college who 
shouldn't." When I asked him to expound on his point, he said, "Ideally, 
especially when I was going to university in the 60's, it was viewed as a 
way of getting an education and expanding your mind and interests. The fact 
it could lead to meaningful and satisfying work was an afterthought. The 
point was education. Today, it feels like many students, and others have 
said this too, are going for certification. Instead of education being the 
end, it is the means to something else, such as a job position. It isn't 
like I am saying that people should not try to educate themselves; what I am 
saying is that the trend towards mass production of education (which very
obviously has led to some real shortcomings in quality) has damaged the 
overall education of many students, and that some people who are students 
shouldn't be; standards have dropped for entry to many universities, and it 
shows." After hearing his thoughts, I thought about all the students I had 
met as a student whom were there because their parents told them to go and 
gave them the money to do so. Many of them didn't want to be there; they 
only knew that college was expected of them and they wouldn't resist being 
pushed into it, considering how many students these days treat college as an 
extension of high school. I realize that the opinions expressed here seem 
harsh and the evidence only anecdotal, but these are my personal 
observations. In the same breath, my former advising professor told me a 
story of a student years ago who came into his office angry. He asked the 
student why he was upset and he said he didn't want to be there. My 
professor
pressed him and asked why, and he said it was because his old man was 
making him go to college. My professor informed him that he was an adult and 
didn't have to go to college if he didn't want to. The frustrated young man 
looked at him, nodded, thanked him, said goodbye, and as my former advisor 
professor testified, he never saw him again. It appears as if at least some 
people figure out on their own that college isn't for them, hm?
- Derek E. Pursell 

Re: [ECOLOG-L] decline in education, comment on active learning

[Sarah Berke]

Hi,

I want to briefly respond to David Lawrence's comment from several days ago,
about evaluation scores declining when he switched to active learning.  This
comment probably hit home for anyone who has tried active learning:

> >>> I watched my evaluation scores decline when I switched to "active
> >>> learning."  ...It was also unreasonable for me to expect them to ask
questions
> >>> relevant to the material we discussed in class.  I had students
> >>> complain they didn't learn anything from me

For anyone who has ever been in this boat, you are not alone--this is a
common phenomenon when introducing active learning methods to a student body
that is accustomed to traditional lecture-based methods.  Based on my own
experiences, and those of various colleagues, I would guess that most
instructors got similar comments when they first switched over from
lecturing.  I am fairly new to active learning myself, but I've talked with
colleagues who have been doing it for years, and everyone says that it
really does get better (particularly if many faculty in the department all
start using it).  I think comments like "I didn't learn anything" stem from
problems with metacognition.  How do you know when you've learned
something?  Memorizing 30 vocabulary words is a concrete achievement, you
can point and say "There, I learned these words".  But interpreting data, or
designing an experiment, or predicting the outcome of a perturbation to a
system are all rather amorphous--there's no one thing to point to and say
"I've learned this".  That can throw students for a loop.  Furthermore, the
level of energy and preparation required to participate in a
learner-centered classroom can push students out of their comfort zones,
particularly if they are accustomed to the ease of showing up and taking
notes through a lecture.  I am not trying to dismiss your student's
comments, I'm just pointing out that some negative comments might have more
to do with feeling uncomfortable in a new situation than with learning
science per se.

Happily, none of these issues are insurmountable.  The trick is to help
students be aware of their own progress, and to bring them on board with the
goals of a learner-centered classroom.  That is easier said than done, and
it might take several years of trying before you land on the best way to
accomplish that for your particular student body (but then, most new classes
take several years before you're happy with them, right?).

Most importantly, none of these issues mean that your students were actually
not learning.  You know what your students accomplished based on their
exams, papers, and class participation.  You probably know that they
actually learned a lot, far more than they may have realized at the time.

If you are convinced that active learning is better for students (and there
are good data to support that), then keep on truckin'.  And pat yourself on
the back--changing the way you teach is a challenge, and your willingness to
try says more about you as an instructor than any given crop of
evaluations.  Finally, if you have any colleagues who are also trying active
learning, get together regularly and compare notes.  It will help a lot.

Best wishes,
Sarah
_
Sarah K Berke
Postdoctoral Researcher
Department of the Geophysical Sciences
University of Chicago
5734 S. Ellis Ave
Chicago, IL 60637

Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education- student's perspective

[Derek Pursell]

A good friend of mine, an older gentleman who has worked as president for an 
environmental NGO in the northeast for years, put it to me in a particularly 
striking way. He said, and I am paraphrasing, "In terms of education, the 
reality in America is that a lot of people are going to college who shouldn't." 
When I asked him to expound on his point, he said, "Ideally, especially when I 
was going to university in the 60's, it was viewed as a way of getting an 
education and expanding your mind and interests. The fact it could lead to 
meaningful and satisfying work was an afterthought. The point was education. 
Today, it feels like many students, and others have said this too, are going 
for certification. Instead of education being the end, it is the means to 
something else, such as a job position. It isn't like I am saying that people 
should not try to educate themselves; what I am saying is that the trend 
towards mass production of education (which very
 obviously has led to some real shortcomings in quality) has damaged the 
overall education of many students, and that some people who are students 
shouldn't be; standards have dropped for entry to many universities, and it 
shows." After hearing his thoughts, I thought about all the students I had met 
as a student whom were there because their parents told them to go and gave 
them the money to do so. Many of them didn't want to be there; they only knew 
that college was expected of them and they wouldn't resist being pushed into 
it, considering how many students these days treat college as an extension of 
high school. I realize that the opinions expressed here seem harsh and the 
evidence only anecdotal, but these are my personal observations. In the same 
breath, my former advising professor told me a story of a student years ago who 
came into his office angry. He asked the student why he was upset and he said 
he didn't want to be there. My professor
 pressed him and asked why, and he said it was because his old man was making 
him go to college. My professor informed him that he was an adult and didn't 
have to go to college if he didn't want to. The frustrated young man looked at 
him, nodded, thanked him, said goodbye, and as my former advisor professor 
testified, he never saw him again. It appears as if at least some people figure 
out on their own that college isn't for them, hm?
- Derek E. Pursell

--- On Fri, 1/22/10, Wayne Tyson  wrote:

From: Wayne Tyson 
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education- student's 
perspective
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Date: Friday, January 22, 2010, 9:14 PM

Honorable Forum on Ecology and Education:

This is one of the best "threads" I've read on Ecolog. There have been so many 
good points made from such a varied assemblage of participants that "what we 
have here," is a high potential for actually communicating on a very important 
subject. Because it is important, comment can be touchy, but the quality of the 
responses has shown that most everybody has straddled the line between 
frankness and abusiveness pretty well. I, at least, think I've learned a lot. 
There are some aspects of this issue that have not been discussed, and I will 
offer some in the hopes I can learn whether or not there is sympathy, 
hostility, or neutrality out there.

In the USA, we have a strong tradition of the concept of a "free" education. 
There is also a strong tradition that comes from pioneering, hard work, and an 
instinctive contempt for elitism and an embracing of the concept of a classless 
society. There is also a tradition born out of a strong sense of inferiority in 
the realm of "letters." There can be little question that there is some truth 
and some exaggeration in all of these factors.

It seems that higher education in the USA has developed more strongly and 
increasingly along the lines of specialization and preparation of marketable 
skills than a truly liberal education. There is an undercurrent that seems to 
imply that specialists needn't or shouldn't waste their time on "irrelevant" 
matters like literature and arts--"humanities" and other "soft" subjects. 
Increasingly, there seems to be more division than integration, as well as a 
growing trend, ironically, toward "hybrid" curricula that attempts a middle 
ground between "hard" and "soft," resulting in an "education" that is neither 
fish nor fowl--but which provides a watered-down dose of "science" and 
"humanities" and degrees that satisfy the need for numerical expansion of 
universities at the expense of the kind of intensive devotion to intellectual 
development that, for example, was the strong meat upon which Darwin and other 
"Caesars" of the intellect doth fed (Latin and other
 languages, literature, mathematics, etc.). It involved a tradition, not of 
grinding though or even running the gauntlet, but one in which the goal was a 
fully integrated and competent and honest individual. This example, was, of 
cour