SciBlogs

a great synopsis of evolution? no, i don’t think so Alison Campbell May 22

No Comments

 The great & wonderful FB (</snark>) this morning delivered me a link to this video, describing it as ‘a great depiction of the process of evolution’.

 To which, having watched it, I can only say, ‘no, I don’t think so’.

Why? Well, apart from the music (repetitive rap-style tracks don’t do a lot for me, but then I am a Grumpy Older Person, lol), the whole thing smacks of the old Scala Naturae – the idea that evolution is a linear process. Which is anything but correct. A lot of the iconography of evolution repeats this misconception, but that doesn’t make it right.

And the video contributes to another misconception: that humans are the pinnacle of the evolutionary process. I mean, that’s pretty much all the second half of the video focuses on.

As it happens, it looks like there are several different versions out there. The one below at least has a better handle on mammal evolution (I mean, it has Dimetrodon!, but it still subscribes to those same misconceptions. 

Which is rather a pity, really.

perhaps the most inspiring graduation address i have ever heard Alison Campbell May 21

No Comments

At the recent graduation ceremony for students from Waikato University’s Faculty of Science & Engineering (& those from its sister Faculty, Computing & Mathematical Sciences), we were privileged to hear an absolutely inspirational address from the recipient of an honorary Doctorate at that ceremony: Dr Gordon Stephenson. And I mean, inspirational! After the event I spoke with Dr Stephenson & asked if he’d be willing to provide the text of his speech, because I believed it deserves the widest possible audience, and he was kind enough to provide me with a copy. (I’ve taken the liberty of adding a hyperlink in a couple of places, for those who may not be familiar with some of the references.)

  

Chancellor Rt Hon Jim Bolger, Vice chancellor Professor Roy Crawford, academia, distinguished guests, students at all levels, my whanau, everyone.

This really is an extraordinary and totally unexpected honour that you have bestowed upon me. I find it very difficult indeed to adequately express what it means to me.   

When my daughter Janet handed me the letter from the University on Christmas day, she says it is the only occasion she has seen me speechless. I was truly gob-smacked ! So I will just say ‘Thank you’.

It is actually somewhat ironic, because in the late 1940’s, as a returned serviceman, I took a BSc (Agric) at Reading University, England, and passed with a ‘C’ grade.

But life was too full as a student, what with sport, starting an agricultural journal, getting married to a beautiful civil engineer  graduate of London University, living on a small boat, and many other activities better left unsaid, such that the ambition to attain a First Class Honours degree went by the wayside.

I did, however, become infected with the stimulating topic of science. Even as a 10 year-old, I pored over nature magazines. I still have some of them.

But I left university puzzled. I had been taught things which just did not make sense, such as the idea that mountain formation was due to shrinkage of the earth’s surface, while the concept of so-called continental drift was anathema. And the explanations of  heredity were far from complete or even believable.

It got me thinking about ‘truth’ and the realisation that truth is only that which is the current knowledge and thought, and that it is constantly being replaced with new ideas. And where do ‘facts’ tie in with ‘truth’?.

We moved to Waikato in 1960, and I have followed with interest the development of this University from paddocks to a landscaped campus. Your reputation has grown, and you can now boast of being a leader among NZ universities in the particular disciplines you have chosen to develop. Congratulations.

Universities have critical roles in society.

Research is a heavy responsibility. It is actually a huge privilege to be paid to research. You are a repository of knowledge, not only in your libraries and theses, but also in the research-based understanding lying in the minds of academia.

Then there are your teaching responsibilities, hence all these wonderful students hopefully fired by your inspirational lectures. I know I was by some unforgettable tutors.

But there is another responsibility, which I often feel is not adequately addressed. This is the role of a university as the public conscience.

It has long perturbed me that the public battlers and advocates for a better society are almost all lay people or NGO’s, whereas those very issues are probably being studied in depth in this institution.

It takes courage to step out beyond the walls of the campus and into the hurly-burly of controversy. There are noble examples at this University, and they will know to whom I refer, but I’ll mention one from Waikato, the late much-loved Dr Charlotte Wallace.

Besides being an assiduous researcher of snails, she was totally fearless in her environmental advocacy, and greatly admired and respected as a result. She virtually started, decades ago, the South Auckland Conservation Association. She made a difference.

We look to the Universities to be the champions, the leaders, for the big issues facing us. You have the knowledge. Please, make sure it is put to good use.  

I turn now to you graduates of all disciplines and interests.

I was born in 1924 (I can see you all doing some rapid mental calculations). In that year, there were only two billion people on earth.

Now, in this one person’s lifetime, that has more than tripled. There are three people alive now for every one alive then. Picture if that were to happen to you all present here in the world of 2013. It would seem impossible.

So believe me when I say that maybe I can personally appreciate the creaks and groans of poor old mother earth, and the pressures and stresses placed upon the populace and natural systems.

There are the issues such as climate change, peak oil, the health of the oceans, extinctions and the loss of biodiversity, the rush to urbanization, rising sea levels, let alone the forecasted inability of farming to feed the projected ten billion people.

We ignore at our peril the intricate web of millions of species whose interactions create our living conditions. We have a lamentable inability to recognise the implications of exponential growth, and the menace of the bell curve. The downside of that curve will turn round and bite.

These matters are all interconnected, and cry out for solutions that are also interconnected. My generation has failed to find those solutions, or, where they are blindingly obvious, failed even more miserably to implement them.

Many of these issues were faced by Maori some 5-600 years ago. Their previously known world of easily harvested fish and birds suddenly faced the impacts of resource depletion. Their reactions paralleled those that arose centuries or millennia before in many parts of the world.

Their first reaction was war, to safeguard their food supplies and other resources. The other reaction, to their great credit, was to impose upon themselves strict rules of harvest, through such mechanisms as rahui. There are lessons there for humans everywhere.

And so I look to you, our next generation, to whom we dodderers bequeath our one-and-only beautiful and magical earth. In some ways, it matters little the topic you studied here.

You have, I trust, been taught by this University to think, because you will need to use those analytical skills that are so necessary in any field of study, for the massive tasks you face ahead. You have to persuade both the wider population and the decision makers, of the root problems we face. There are doubters galore, both for commercial and political reasons or because of reluctance to face facts.

The centuries-old saying is ‘There are none so blind as those who will not see’. You have an absolutely necessary task ahead, which may seem daunting, and you may react by thinking ‘what can little me do’.

However, I say you can make a difference. You will recall the butterfly effect, as expounded by Edward Lorenz, he of the chaos theory. He postulated that the effect of a beat of a butterfly’s wing in the tropics could trigger a hurricane many kilometres away.

I say to you, be that butterfly.

It is a sobering thought that you, we, are each utterly unique, an assembly of atoms never ever seen before. You will each therefore by definition, have abilities that are also unique. To make that ‘difference’ I speak of, you need to develop those abilities, and grow a fire in your belly, a determination to see things through.

Many of our gurus talk of the need to have ambition, but they are usually referring to the ambition to make money. While important, money does not equate satisfaction or contentment. Of its own, neither will it solve the problems you now face.

Nor will you achieve overnight success. It may take years, even decades. You’ll suffer setbacks, but that is in the nature of things, and our world needs stubborn battlers.

You will need to learn the skills of working with, rather than against, and of respecting the right of others to hold opinions that are so divergent from your own that they infuriate you. Anger is no solution. I think Churchill is credited with the saying ‘jaw-jaw is better than war-war’.

Seek friends, make alliances, and above all be positive. So often, even those who you originally felt were opponents, were actually just looking for solutions. Find those solutions.

Many years ago, a truth dawned on me. I had been used to complaining that ‘they’ should ‘do something’. ‘They’ frequently didn’t. I then realised that therefore ‘we’ must do something. Again, ‘we’ sometimes failed, and the clear conclusion was that ‘I’ must get stuck in. If I didn’t, why should someone else ?

Then something magical occurred. My actions suddenly activated the ‘we’, and in some cases, the ‘we’ became a reformed ‘they’. So I say, never be afraid to stick your head above the parapet.

Nor should you be put off by time. May I quote the proposed National Wetland Centre, at Lake Serpentine, south of Ohaupo. It is beginning to take shape, 16 years after planning started. Given maybe two more years, it could be completed.

And another issue took 67 meetings to end up with a solution that was welcomed by all parties. The Waikato Ecological Enhancement Trust was formed. It now puts hundreds of thousands of dollars annually into the wetlands and waters of the Waikato Catchment.

Stick at it !

To date, you have been absorbing, assembling, knowledge. Today, from this moment, your role changes. You have been learners, now, while still seekers, you become teachers. You have been followers, now you must become leaders.

Your collective tasks are frightening in their necessity. I challenge you. Get out there. Don’t be afraid. Be determined. Make sure our planet earth continues to be a place of diversity and beauty we can all truly love and protect. Play your part.

Then, when you reach the age of 80, people will say,’ yes, you made a difference’.

I end with a quote from the inspirational Helen Keller: deaf and blind from early childhood.

I am only one, but still I am one.

 

I cannot do everything, but still I can do something.

I will not refuse to do something I can do.

 

Thank you.

thought-provoking video, pity about the title… Alison Campbell May 20

No Comments

… for I fear the title (not to mention the image below!) of this video by Thunderf00t would put many off if they were not forewarned. A real pity, as the video contains some thought-provoking ideas, eg: the total value of a discovery is the product of data (the utility of an idea) & metadata (can anyone actually find out about it, in the internet age?). So, should scientific publishers become a lot more proactive in using new media to share ideas?

No, seriously – ignore the atrocious cover image & listen to the ideas therein. (I suppose one could argue that the image would get more people to view Thunderf00t’s message than a more mundane title, but would those who came for the cars & women stay for the serious sci-comm message?)

out of the mouths of students Alison Campbell May 19

2 Comments

We’ve been trialling some software for on-line paper/teaching appraisals & I got my results back the other day. The appraisal form included open-ended questions where students could give extended feedback on particular issues that concerned them, & I’ve been going through it all so that I can give feedback in my turn, thus ‘closing the loop’. (This is something that I believe is absolutely essential: students need to know that we value their opinions & that, where appropriate, use them to inform what we do.) I’ve been interested to see that some of the class are definitely thinking outside the ‘box’ that represents my paper, and one comment in particular struck a chord:

One concern with the paper is individuals who were not taught certain aspects of the NCEA Level 3 curriculum. This is a major issue that has resulted from the preference of schools to not teach certain aspects of the course. There NEEDS to be consultation to standardise the NCEA curriculum as well as ensuring that the gap is bridged with communication between teriary education providers and secondary education providers. As I understand it there is significant concern over the changed NCEA Level 3 Biology course, which now does not teach genetics in year 13. I don’t know the answer in the resolution of this issue, however it will greaty impact on future acedemic success as well as future funding when grades drop.

This student has hit the nail squarely on the head. Teachers reading this will be working on the following Achievement Standards with their year 12 students this year (where previously gene expression was handled in year 13): AS91157 Demonstrate understanding of genetic variation and change, and AS91159: Demonstrate understanding of gene expression. (You’ll find the Biology subject matrix here.)

And as my student says, this has the potential to cause real problems unless the university staff concerned have made it their business to be aware of these changes and to consider their impact. For the 2014 cohort of students coming in to introductory biology classes will have quite different prior learning experiences (& not just in genetics) from those we are teaching this year and taught in previous years. We cannot continue as we have done in the past.

aquatic apes & custard elephants Alison Campbell May 14

No Comments

The ‘aquatic ape’ hypothesis (it can’t be described as a theory) has been around for quite a while, & in fact I’ve blogged about it before. So I was sorry to hear that Sir David Attenborough, who’s done so much to promote conservation issues and enhance our understanding of the natural world, appeared to have given the idea some support. He’s certainly taken some flak for this (see here, for example), although at the same time other – ahem! – news outlets have picked up the ball and trotted off down the garden path with it.

Briefly, the aquatic ape hypothesis (I will NOT call it a theory) purports to explain the evolution of a number of aspects of our morphology: our relative hairlessness & the distribution of that hair, bipedalism, the way so many people like fish (I will put my hand up as an exception to this), distribution of body fat, & so on. ** Unfortunately for this particular just-so story, there’s good evidence that all these features did not evolve at the same time. Bipedalism, for example, pre-dates the chimp-human divergence, but the addition of fish to the diet seems to have appeared much later. Nor is there necessarily strong evidence of any links between a particular feature & the life aquatic. For example, while cetaceans are essentially hairless, seals, sealions and their relatives are covered with dense coats of fur.

Anyway, the hypothesis has recently been the focus of some entertaining parodies, among them the ‘space ape’ version (face-to-face copulation would really have been the only option, dontcha know? for otherwise the jetpacks would get in the way) and – as a conclusion to his explanation of why the aquatic ape idea doesn’t stack up – Henry Gee’s thought experiment involving the unlikely combination of elephants and custard.

Enjoy.

** "& so on" includes the sinuses in our skulls (another feature that reinforces our African origins). Apparently they provided a buoyancy aid – yet they’re found in all mammals regardless of habitat.

[EDIT] However, courtesy of one Smut Clyde I find that the aquatic ape proposal has nothing on this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

selling services on-line Alison Campbell May 13

1 Comment

Yesterday’s Sunday Star-Times carried the headline: Chinese cheats rort NZ universities with fakes. The story begins:

An investigation has uncovered a well-organised commercial cheating service for Chinese-speaking students in New Zealand. The long-standing business uses a network of tutors, some outside New Zealand, to write original assignments ordered by Chinese-speaking students attending New Zealand universities, polytechnics and private institutions

and provides a link to an essay bought by the reporting team as part of their investigation.

Frankly, about the only thing that surprised me about the story was the fact that the organisation delivering this ‘service’, and thus helping those using it to cheat, is based in New Zealand. I mean, I’ve just had one of my regular clean-outs of the spam folder. Anything there just gets deleted; there’s so much coming in that I don’t have time to scan it just in case a genuine commenter has been dumped there. But occasionally something at the top of the queue for oblivion catches my eye, and I notice things like this: 

Lately, graduates are overloaded to produce essay writing, they can find custom writing services where they are able to buy critical analysis essays.

If you are desperate, you always have a possibility to purchase high quality essay and all your problems will disappear.

Are willing to be a good student? Therefore, you should realise that good high school students buy paper and if it is fits you, you can do the same!

 And the icing on the cake:

Some people have got a passion of composing academic papers, but, some of them do not know the correct way to complete research papers. Professional Custom UK Essay writing service is developed to help students who cannot write.

Frankly, the standard of English in that lot should put potential buyers off! At least some of the time they make an attempt at ‘buyer beware’ (but don’t you just know that the following would link to one of these ‘good’ sites?):

If you want to escape any troubles while ordering essays at the paper writing services, you ought to be really thorough. Buy essay services only if you have solid evidences that the people you’ll be dealing with are highly educated.

Lols aside, there’s obviously a market for this sort of stuff; it’s worth pondering why students would buy in work, and what options teaching staff have for avoiding/reducing the temptation.

One obvious motivation is the pressure to do well. Students (& often their families) do invest quite a bit of money into their education. This is particularly true for many international students whose families spend a lot to send them here & support them during their studies. (So do taxpayers, via the student loan system, so we – ie taxpayers – do need to know that we’re getting good value there, & that includes the quality of students’ work.) So fear of getting a poor mark, & perhaps having to repeat a paper, could drive the sort of behaviour that our spammers and the Auckland organisation are hoping to generate.

And unfortunately ‘custom essays’ are not going to be picked up by anti-plagiarism software (eg Turnitin) – unless the ghostwriters are stupid enough to just do a copy-&-paste! That’s not to say they can’t still be identified: an obvious clue would be a standard of English that differed significantly from that in other work submitted by a student; the relevance of the actual content would be another.

But there are ways of reducing incentives to be dishonest around assessment. For example, teachers can review their use of ‘high stakes’ assessment items: single essays or reports that are worth a large proportion of the final grade (& so can offer some incentive to cheat in order to gain a higher mark). ‘End-loading’ assessment, so that it’s all due at the end of semester, is not going to help here either. 

Another tool would be to have students generate work in class. Now obviously that won’t work if you want a lengthy report, but what about: getting them to do the relevant research but asking for them to write an abstract, or a summary of their findings, in-class, & having it peer-marked (using your marking scheme) or doing that task yourself? The students still gain practice in useful skills & – hopefully – your workload is somewhat reduced. If students get more involved in the writing process from the start, & are supported in learning the various skills involved, they might be more confident in their own abilities & feel less need to cheat on the assignment. 

Recommended reading**

J.C.Bean (2001) Engaging Ideas: the professor’s guide to integrating writing, critical thinking, and active learning in the classroom. Jossey-Bass (Wiley). ISBN 978-0-787-90203-2

** actually, make that highly recommended!

`~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 And in today’s spam (May 20) – how blatant can you get?

Nowadays you shouldn’t give your best shot in order to come up with quality academic papers since online writing services are willing to provide you with professional assistance. Buy essay example and get out of hard writing assignments.

 

the gastric-brooding frog – not quite back from the dead Alison Campbell May 08

No Comments

I first found out about gastric-brooding frogs (Rheobatrachus silus) when reading Stephen Jay Gould’s essay "Here Goes Nothing" (as published in the 1991 book Bully for Brontosaurus). As he said, these frogs really do live up to their name: the frog

swallows its fertilised eggs, broods tadpoles in its stomach, and gives birth to young frogs through its mouth.

Gould’s tale first introduces another example of the ability of natural selection to shape truly strange behaviour: male Rhinoderma darwini frogs swallow the eggs they’ve fertilised and brood them, not in their stomachs, but in their throat pouches. These are the same pouches that male frogs inflate with air & use in croaking (& whistling, & chirping, depending on species) during courtship, which means that a brooding male is rendered voiceless for the duration. However, it doesn’t stop them feeding normally, something that was first demonstrated way back in 1888 by biologist G.B.Howes (Gould, 1991). I was interested to find out, while researching this post, that the eggs aren’t ingested immediately after fertilisation: they’re laid in damp leaf litter and the male remains close by, but waits until the embryonic tadpoles are wriggling around inside the egg membrane before taking them up in his mouth. (I’m guessing that the behaviour’s triggered by the sight of the wriggling tadpoles.)

As for the gastric-brooding species: Gould provides an engaging description of how this habit was uncovered. Until 1979

[n]atural birth had not yet been observed in Rheobatrachus. All young had either emerged unobserved or been vomited forth as a violent reaction after hatching.

However, scientists finally managed to get a gravid (I hope that’s the right word in these circumstances!) female in an aquarium with their cameras all at the ready:

The mother "partially emerged from the water, shook her head, opened her mouth, and two babies actively struggled out."

It’s no small feat to incubate froglets in this way:

This… female, about two inches long, weighed 11.62 grams after birth. Her twenty-six children weighted 7.66 grams, or 66 percent of her weight without them.

And of course, the incubating female must stop eating and switch off production of gastric juices for the duration!

Sadly, confirmation of this highly unusual method of parental care was rapidly followed by news that the species appeared to be extinct in the wild. Which is why I was so intrigued by my student’s news of its resurrection. However, it seems that reports of that resurrection may have been somewhat exaggerated. A quick search turned up several articles (this one’s a good example) that describe what’s been achieved so far: R.silus tissues that had been in the freezer were thawed, and cell nuclei from those tissues were implanted in enucleate eggs from another, distantly-related, species of frog (an example of somatic cell nuclear transfer). Some of those went on to an early (but unspecified) stage of embryonic development before being frozen in their turn, to await possible reanimation in the future.

In other words, R.silus froglets won’t be hopping around just yet. (And I’m moved to wonder how achievable the aim of the Lazarus project actually is, as it relates to this species. After all, if the gastric brooding part is an essential part of development, where’s the stomach going to come from?)

S.J.Gould (1991) Bully for Brontosaurus. Penguin Books.

see-through creatures Alison Campbell May 08

No Comments

This is a ‘glass frog’ (image from National Geographic):

It’s one of a number of transparent or translucent creatures featured on the National Geographic’s "Weird & Wild" blog. (Actually I take issue with the Monarch butterfly image there, as strictly speaking we’re seeing a transparent pupal case; the butterfly inside is definitely not see-through.)

Glass frogs (Hyalinobatrachium pellucidum) are on the ICUN’s ‘red’ list as an endangered species, with habitat destruction the likely cause. However, if chitrid fungi are introduced to the frog’s limited range  - they’re recorded from only five locations on the Amazonian slopes of the Andes in Ecuador – then the population will likely decline even faster (always supposing this particular pathogen isn’t already there). These delightful little frogs are apparently about the size of a fingernail, & their translucency is due to a lack of pigment in the skin. Not only can you see the air-filled lungs, the red threads that are blood vessels, and the heart with some of the major arterial arches clearly visible – you can also see the animal’s skeleton.

And that reminds me: we were talking in class the other day about gastric-brooding frogs & one of the students said they’d heard that this species had been cloned. An intriguing possibility – I must go off & look into it!

 

tool use – even more widespread than you thought Alison Campbell May 07

No Comments

Yesterday my ‘Facebook science feed’ (ie daily browsing) brought me this stunning image (click the picture for the hyperlink). It’s from the book Thinkers of the Jungle: the Orangutan Report (Shuster, Smits & Ullal, 2008) & shows a young orangutan apparently using a long stick in lieu of a spear, copying local fishermen as they hunted with spears. (It’s been blogged about here by Kambiz Kamrani.)

Which is pretty darned amazing. Tool use, & various tool cultures, are now quite well-documented in our nearest living relatives, the chimpanzees, but this is the first time I’d heard about it in a wild orangutan. Also novel: the concept that another great ape might also sometimes eat vertebrates (again, well-documented in the members of some chimpanzee troops). So I decided to dig a little deeper.

It turns out that orangutans do on occasion eat meat, although reports of this are rare. Back in 1997 Sri Suci Utami & Jan van Hooff reported on a total of seven incidents of carnivory by three different female orangutans in Sumatra. More recently Madelaine Hardus & her colleagues (2012) looked at a few additional instances of this behaviour – which in all recorded cases has female orangutans doing the eating and slow lorises as the prey – and considered whether it might be seasonal and related to the availability of other food sources (they felt that it was). Both research teams characterised the behaviour as opportunistic as there was no evidence of any organised hunting activity: it was more a case of a foraging orangutan happening across a slow loris. And they noted that the data are too few to allow any firm conclusions about either the frequency of this behaviour or whether it might be skewed towards one gender or the other.

Nor was this the first documented example of tool use by these Asian great apes. While it’s apparently well-known in captive animals, Carel van Schaik first documented this behaviour among wild-living orangutans back in 1994, in Sumatra (apparently it’s not been observed in populations from Borneo). The animals he was watching were in relatively high densities and surprisingly tolerant of each other – plenty of opportunity to watch and learn from the activities of others, which may be why tool use hasn’t been seen in the wild in Borneo, where the animals are much more widely dispersed).

van Schaik documented the use of sticks to prise open extremely prickly fruit in order to get at the soft flesh within, but more recently he and a group of co-workers provided evidence that, like their cousins the chimps, orangutans in different areas have developed different cultures (around behaviours broader than simply using tools). Which demonstrates (again) that culture is not something that is solely ‘ours’, and suggests that such behaviour may have been around for a very long time indeed, given the antiquity of the split between the lineages leading to modern orangutans and (eventually) Homo sapiens. As van Schaik and his team concluded:

Hence, great-ape cultures exist, and may have done so for at least 14 million years.

 

M.E.Hardus, A.R.Lameira, A.Zulfa, S.S.Utami Atmoko, H.de Vries & S.A.Wich (2012) Behavioural, Ecological, and Evolutionary Aspects of Meat-Eating by Sumatran Orangutans (Pongo abelli). International Journal of Primatology 33: 287-304. DOI: 10.1007/s10764-011-9574-z

S.S.Utami & J.A.R.A.M.van Hooff (1997) Meat-Eating by Adult Female Sumatran Orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus abelli). American Journal of Primatology 43: 159-165

C.P.van Schaik, M.Ancrenaz, G.Borgen, B.Galdikas, C.D.Knott, I.Singleton, A.Suzuki, S.S.Utami & M.Merrill (2003) Orangutan Cultures and the Evolution of Material Culture. Science 299 (5603): 102-105. DOI: 10.1126/science.1078004

 

science challenges & science education Alison Campbell May 02

No Comments

 The National Science Challenges have been announced – and have already received a lot of attention (including on Sciblogs, with posts by my colleagues Grant, Siouxsie, and John - who also points at where the money’s going). What I’d like to address here is the comment by the Panel that it

was concerned by the lack of significant proposals in educational research

I have to admit that my first response to that was, well d’oh! Because, well, the public discussion was around national science challenges, I suspect that for many (most?) submitters the focus was to come up with a science-based proposal. After all (& please note bulging cheek ensconcing my tongue at this point), isn’t science education something that schools & other seats of learning ‘do’, rather than requiring science research? Hopefully not many scientists really think that way, & it’s great to see the additional Challenge, "Science & New Zealand Society" with its two goals (the first a science goal, while the second is societal):

To ensure the science capacities and literacy of New Zealand society so as to promote engagement between S[cience] & T[echnology] and New Zealand society, in turn enhancing the role played by science in advancing the national interest.

To allow New Zealand society to make best use of its human and technological capacities to address the risks and Challenges ahead. This requires the better use of scientific knowledge in policy formation at all levels of national and local government, in the private sector and in society as a whole.

 

Both are relevant to what follows here.

Let’s look more closely at the question of science literacy/appreciation/education for citizenship. The chair of the Panel, Sir Peter Gluckman, has previously made it clear that we need to do much more in engaging young people with science, to the extent of developing a science curriculum that focuses far more on science literacy than on accumulation of science knowledge. But what constitutes science literacy? This is something I’ve written about previously, & my fellow Scibloggers and I discussed it between ourselves more recently. So I was interested to find a set of nine science literacy ‘themes’ listed and expanded upon in a recent paper (Bartholomew & Osborne, 2004):

scientific methods and critical testing

science & certainty 

diversity of scientific thinking

hypothesis and prediction

historical development of scientific knowledge

creativity

science and questioning

analysis and interpretation of data

cooperation and collaboration in the development of scientific knowledge

And while we might not agree on the relative order of these themes, or the completeness of the list, but they do give us something to go on with. (I’m going to talk about the formal education system for the moment – but I’m perfectly well aware that there’s much more than that to public engagement with science! Let’s just treat this as a starting point for discussion.)

Now, I’d like to think that the current NZ Science curriculum gives a good basis for developing these skills & attributes in all students Right Now, regardless of whether or not they intend to go on to study science at tertiary level. And let’s face it, most won’t, so we surely have to work on engagement with and understanding of what science is about, for all students. in fact, that’s a tension I struggle with myself: a proportion of my first-year biology students are taking the subject purely for interest, & in some cases haven’t studied the subject before. I want them to come away with an appreciation of the wonder and worth of the subject in their lives, as much as I want them to accumulate biological knowledge. It’s a tricky balancing act.

Anyway, while I might like to think that about the curriculum document, in reality I suspect that it doesn’t yet deliver. And that’s something that’s unpacked further by Bartholomew & Osborne, who note that there are a number of factors that affect teachers’ "ability to teach effectively about science". 

One of those factors is the teachers’ own understanding of what science is all about, as opposed to their body of content knowledge. NB Please note, at this point, that this is not a criticism of teachers and the demanding work that they do; it’s a question of whether the training and experiences we offer our teachers prepare them well for this particular aspect of teaching science.

The researchers found that a reasonable proportion of the teachers they worked with were not really confident in their own ability to teach lessons based on the ideas embedded in those themes. This was partly due to uncertainties about their own knowledge, and partly around feeling that they lacked the classroom skills to deliver such a program. Which, of course, raises issues around provision of professional development opportunities (with the associated resourcing). 

Related to that is their own engagement with the subject. OK, if you’re teaching the subject as a specialist science teacher, I’m guessing that you took this role on because you enjoy the subject and want to share that. But if someone’s a primary school teacher with very limited exposure to science during their training, then the story might be very different. 

And so that would be a fruitful area for research, in NZ (and at this point someone is probably going to tell me that they’re Already Doing It): what is the actual level of science literacy – using, for example, those 9 themes listed above – in NZ science teachers at all levels? And how does that translate into classroom practices? And – if the answer is, not as well as we’d like – what do we do about it?

Teachers’ ability to enhance learning about science (as opposed to of science) is also affected by factors outside their classrooms. For example, the pressure is on, at senior school level, to ensure students do as well as possible in national assessment – which, for all the changes associated with NCEA, remains largely content-based. And classroom time is limited, so it’s easy to see how there can be more focus on content & less on the other desirable attributes. As Bartholomew & Osborne comment, 

developing a questioning and sceptical attitude to scientific knowledge claims in students might actually be disadvantageous. 

Perhaps that also needs to change. [Pace, Schol Bio examiners!]

 

H.Bartholomew, & J.Osborne (2004) Teaching students "ideas about science": five dimensions of effective practice. Science Education 88: 655-682 doi: 10.1002/sce.10135

Network-wide options by YD - Freelance Wordpress Developer