Discovering Ardi — my thoughts.

I liked it.

Overall, I think the Discovery Channel did a good job of capturing the painstaking work that goes into scientific research, in this case spanning more than 15 years from discovery to publication. Some other quick thoughts:

  • This was not hype. If anything, it was pretty modest, given the amount and significance of the work involved. I didn’t see the Darwinius special, but even the previews had me wincing.
  • Mike Rowe is an excellent narrator. I have enjoyed his work when I have watched Deadliest Catch and Dirty Jobs, but I would also like to see (er, hear) him on more specials like this in the future. Mike, if you happen to read this, nicely done.
  • The special did a fine job of emphasizing over and over what needs to be emphasized over and over: we are not descended from chimps, we share a common ancestor with chimps.
  • This isn’t so significant as evidence for the fact of human evolution — we had plenty of that before. This is an important find that illustrates more about the path of human evolution.
  • I am not sure I entirely see why Ardi necessarily shows that the common ancestor was not chimp-like (knuckle-walking and large canine teeth could have been lost after the split), but I will see if this is made more clear in the actual papers. Nonetheless, no one should have assumed the common ancestor must have been very similar to a chimp — that assumption is based on a poor grasp of phylogenetics, basically.
  • The show could probably have been about 1/2 hour shorter. I enjoy seeing reconstructions, and I appreciate that they showed how this is done (I go through this briefly in one of my lectures as well, and I also liken it to forensic reconstruction). However, this did seem to imply a little more than I would have liked that coming up with a digital animation was the culmination of the work rather than an interesting aside.
  • They could have done without the just-so story about pair bonding and carrying food. I guess viewers would prefer some idea, and they did mention that there were many previous hypotheses, but if I had one significant complaint about the special it’s that this part was really speculative and not up to the standard of the rest of the meticulous research depicted otherwise.

Teaching the iGeneration.

Some instructors have lamented the challenges of teaching students who are constantly logged-on, plugged-in, facebooked, etc.

Guess what? I like teaching the iGeneration*. I enjoy using YouTube clips in my lectures, putting together online discussions, and making use of blogs and online resources. I like the fact that they all have laptops (but not if they’re rude enough to play games during class). I appreciate that I can upload my lecture notes as PDF files and they will all be able to bring them to lectures. I have a BlackBerry, an iPod, a netbook, a blog (obviously), a document scanner, and miscellaneous other gadgets. I hate being offline as much as my students do.

I think it really depends on whether you feel that technology is a friend or a foe. If you consider it all just a huge distraction and a competitor for their attention, you’re likely to dislike current technological trends. If, on the other hand, you embrace it, try to keep up with it (or better yet, stay ahead of your students), and use it to connect with the class, then it can be really very exciting.

_____________

* The only thing I don’t like is the excessive use of the word “like” that is common among students… though it did inspire me to create a t-shirt:

How detailed an understanding of evolution do we need?

The folks over at Science and Religion Today were interested in our study on graduate student conceptions of evolution, and asked me to give some thoughts on the question “How detailed an understanding of evolution do we need?” Here is my answer.

If by “we” you mean “scientists,” then it is extremely important that we gain as detailed an understanding of evolutionary mechanisms and the patterns of diversification that they have produced as we can. The question of the origins of biological diversity is a fundamental one, and obtaining as complete an answer as possible is a primary goal of the life sciences. Evolution is to biology what the periodic table is to chemistry: It makes sense of otherwise disconnected pieces of information and provides the framework for further investigation.

If you mean “students enrolled in science programs,” either undergraduates or grad students (as in our study), then I would say that a good working knowledge of evolutionary theory, though not a full understanding of all its nuances, should be a major goal. Again, evolution is the unifying principle of biology, and without grasping how it works, one cannot make sense of the history and current diversity of life on this planet. Most science majors will not go on to become professional evolutionary researchers, but many will become teachers, researchers in industry or government, consultants, doctors, politicians, or any of a wide range of careers in which a working knowledge of evolution is important. As I tell the students in my course when I discuss why they should work hard to understand evolution, if the goal is to have a scientifically literate public, who but the future teachers and other educated citizens can make that happen?

If you mean “members of the public at large,” then I would say that at least a basic understanding of evolution is still important, if not for academic reasons then for pragmatic ones. Evolutionary knowledge informs decisions in medicine, agriculture, resource management, and many other areas. If, as I am sure most biologists feel, an understanding of evolution is important at all levels, then it is important that it be taught—and taught properly—from elementary school to graduate school. A population that recognizes the standing and relevance of evolutionary principles is one that will support this endeavor, whereas one that misunderstands or fears evolutionary biology will seek to undermine science education. There is an inevitable feedback loop in this regard, and effective education is the way to make it a positive one.

How detailed an understanding of evolution do we need? It depends on who “we” are—but “very little” is not the answer in any case.

Special issue of Journal of Effective Teaching.

The Journal of Effective teaching has a special issue on evolution education.

Journal of Effective Teaching

Volume 9, Issue 2, September 2009
Special Issue – Teaching Evolution in the Classroom

Full Issue – PDF

CONTENTS

Letter from the Editor-in-Chief:: Origins …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1-3
Russell L. Herman …………………………………….. HTML, PDF

ARTICLES

The Influence of Religion and High School Biology Courses on Students’ Knowledge of Evolution

When They Enter College ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4-12
Randy Moore, Sehoya Cotner, and Alex Bates ………………………. Abstract, HTML, PDF

Teaching Evolution in the Galápagos ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 13-28
Katherine E. Bruce, Jennifer E. Horan, Patricia H. Kelley, Mark Galizio ……………….. Abstract, HTML, PDF

A College Honors Seminar on Evolution and Intelligent Design: Successes and Challenges ……………………… 29-37
Patricia H. Kelley …………………………………………….. Abstract, HTML, PDF

Clearing the Highest Hurdle: Human-based Case Studies Broaden Students’ Knowledge
of Core Evolutionary Concepts
…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 38-53
Alexander J. Werth ………………………………….. Abstract, HTML, PDF

Evolution in Action, a Case Study Based Advanced Biology Class at Spelman College ………………………….. 54-68
Aditi Pai ……………………………………………………. Abstract, HTML, PDF

Preparing Teachers to Prepare Students for Post-Secondary Science:
Observations From a Workshop About Evolution in the Classroom ………………………………………………….. 69-80
Caitlin M. Schrein, et al. …………………………… Abstract, HTML, PDF

The Do-As-I-Say-Not-As-I-Do-Omics award.

I am the proud recipient of a “Worst New Omics Word Award” from Jonathan Eisen, who blogs at Tree of Life. Usually these go to actual ‘omics words (so far: diseasome, ethomics, and museomics). It seems he thinks “omnigenomics” to describe the study of genome sizes (i.e., all components of the genome) in all organisms (omnis = all) is in the same category. People really should not be adding prefixes to “genomics”, according to Dr. Eisen. Right?…

phylogenomics.blogspot.com

Eisen JA and Fraser CM. Phylogenomics: intersection of evolution and genomics. Science 2003 Jun 13; 300(5626) 1706-7.

Eisen JA. Gastrogenomics1. Nature 2001 Jan 25; 409(6819) 463, 465-6

Eisen JA. Environmental shotgun sequencing: its potential and challenges for studying the hidden world of microbes. PLoS Biol 2007 Mar; 5(3) e82.

“A review I wrote on methods for characterizing uncultured microbes, focusing on the lead in to metagenomics.”


1 Hey, it could have been a lot worse (“colonomics”?).

How well do grad students grasp evolution?

In my recent article on Understanding natural selection in E:EO, I reviewed a large number of studies that examined conceptions of evolution among students from the high school to undergraduate level, as well as among teachers. However, almost nothing seemed to be known about how graduate students in science perceive evolution or how well they understand it. At least, until a student and I did a study at our own university, which is now out in the journal BioScience.

Here’s a press release on it:

Science Students Could Brush Up On Darwin, U of G Study Finds

October 01, 2009 – News Release

Even students pursuing advanced degrees in science could brush up on their knowledge of evolution, according to a new study by University of Guelph researchers.

The finding reveals that there is room for improvement in how evolution is taught from elementary school up, said Ryan Gregory, a professor in Guelph’s Department of Integrative Biology, who conducted the research with former student Cameron Ellis.

The study was published today in BioScience. It’s particularly timely, given that this year is the bicentennial of Charles Darwin’s birth and the 150th anniversary of publication of On the Origin of Species, which underpins understanding of the diversity of Earth’s organisms and their interrelations.

“Misconceptions about natural selection may still exist, even at the most advanced level,” Gregory said.

“We’re looking at a subset of people who have spent at least four years, sometimes even six or seven years, in science and still don’t necessarily have a full working understanding of basic evolutionary principles or scientific terms like ‘theories.’”

Many previous studies have assessed how evolution is understood and accepted by elementary, high school and undergraduate students, as well as by teachers and the general public, Gregory said. But this was the first to focus solely on students seeking graduate science degrees.

The study involved nearly 200 graduate students at a mid-sized Canadian university who were studying biological, physical, agricultural or animal sciences. About half of the students had never taken an evolutionary biology course, which is often not a prerequisite.

The researchers found that the vast majority of the students recognized the importance of evolution as a central part of biology. Overall, they also had a better understanding of evolutionary concepts than most people.

“That was encouraging, especially because it was across several colleges — it wasn’t just the biology students,” Gregory said.

But when the students were asked to apply basic evolutionary principles, only 20 to 30 per cent could do so correctly, and many didn’t even try to answer such questions. Of particular interest to Gregory is the finding that many students seem less than clear about the nature of scientific theories.

“This is telling us that traditional instruction methods, while leading to some basic understanding of evolution, are not producing a strong working knowledge that can be easily applied to real biological phenomena.”

Gregory has studied evolution-related topics for years and recently co-organized a workshop designed to improve how the subject is taught in public schools. He is also associate editor of Evolution: Education and Outreach, a journal written for science teachers, students and scientists. He recently created Evolver Zone, a free online resource for anyone interested in evolutionary biology.

He is also helping bring an evolution-inspired art exhibit to U of G this month. “This View of Life: Evolutionary Art in the Year of Darwin, 2009” highlights diverse artists’ views of Darwin’s ideas and evolution in general. It runs Oct. 9 to 30 in the science complex atrium.

Overall, the students did well on multiple choice questions, and their acceptance of evolution was very high. But it seems we could do a better job at providing students with the capability to actually use evolutionary concepts to explain phenomena.