Subject: ECOLOG-L Digest - 20 May 2003 to 21 May 2003 (#2003-133)
There are 17 messages totalling 991 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Teaching writing in an ecological context (9)
2. CALL FOR ABSTRACTS - 14TH CENTRAL HARDWOOD FOREST RESEARCH CONFERENCE
3. Peer Review - Improving Scientific Writing
4. Permanent markers for vegetation plots
5. Peer evaluation of writing
6. Teaching Writing in an Ecological Context
7. Teaching Writing - E-prime
8. postdoc ad: plant water transport, Duke U.
9. Special Session Fall AGU - Snow and Ecosystems
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 23:03:43 -0500
From: Brian Rehill <irceboy@ENTOMOLOGY.WISC.EDU>
Subject: Teaching writing in an ecological context
All:
I second Ross Thompson's suggestion regarding student peer review. I
is
now used extensively in English departments, and can be applied effectively
to teach writing skills as well as content. Some proponents suggest student
groups of 3-6, to encourage more discussion.
This technique can work especially well with lab reports as well as library
research papers, and provides a means for students to learn to provide
constructive criticism in a civil manner.
Brian Rehill
==========================
Brian Rehill
Postdoctoral Research Associate
Department of Entomology
University of Wisconsin
1630 Linden Drive
Madison, WI 53706
Phone: 608-262-4319
==========================
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 09:29:57 -0400
From: "P. Charles Goebel" <goebel.11@OSU.EDU>
Subject: CALL FOR ABSTRACTS - 14TH CENTRAL HARDWOOD FOREST RESEARCH CONFERE
CE
<html>
<font size=4><b>14TH CENTRAL HARDWOOD FOREST RESEARCH
CONFERENCE<br><br>
</font>CALL FOR ABSTRACTS - DUE JUNE 13, 2003<br><br>
Location<br>
</b>The 14th Central Hardwood Forest Conference will be held at Ohio
State University's Shisler Conference Center, on the Wooster campus of
the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center. Wooster is
approximately 80 miles northeast of Columbus and about 60 miles south of
Cleveland. Known as the "Gateway to Amish Country," region is
home to the world's largest population of Amish people. Nearby natural
areas included Mohican State Park and State Forest, Killbuck Marsh State
Wildlife Area, Johnson Woods State Nature Preserve, and the 85-acre
Secrest Arboretum on the OARDC campus.<br><br>
<b>Objective<br>
</b>The objective of the conference is to bring together forest manage
s
and scientists to discuss research and issues concerning the ecology and
management of forests in the Central Hardwood Region.<br><br>
<b>Subject Areas<br>
</b>Speakers will include researchers and managers from both public an
private sectors. Oral presentations and posters in areas applicable to
Central Hardwood Forest management will be presented. Concurrent sessions
will included the following subjects:
<ul>
<li>Silviculture and Silvicultural Systems
<li>Forest Ecology
<li>Stand Dynamics
<li>Forest Ecosystem Restoration
<li>Tree Physiology and Genetics
<li>Soils, Hydrology and Nutrient Cycling
<li>Forest Health and Protection
<li>Forest Biometrics and Modeling
<li>Harvesting and Utilization
<li>Forests and Wildlife Management
<li>Human Dimensions of Forest Management
</ul>Field tours of local forest ecosystems and forest industries,
including several Amish sawmills, will be available on Friday, March 19.
See the conference web site for more information.<br><br>
<b>Proceedings<br>
</b>The proceedings will be published as a USDA Forest Service General
Technical Report from the Northeastern Research Station.. The proceedings
will be available at the meeting on a CD and will contain refereed papers
from authors giving oral presentations and abstracts from authors
presenting posters.<br><br>
<b>Time Schedule For Presenters<br><br>
</b><i>Paper Submission: </i>Authors must adhere to follow
ng deadlines.
<ul>
<li>Title and abstracts due: <font color="#FF0000"><b>June
13,
2003</b></font>
<li>Notification of acceptance: June 20, 2003
<li>Manuscript due: Sept.19, 2003
<li>Reviews to authors: Dec. 15, 2003
<li>Final manuscripts due: Feb 13, 2004
</ul><i>Poster-Abstract Submission: </i>Participants prese
ting a poster
may provide an abstract up to two pages in length for inclusion in the
proceedings. Authors of abstracts must adhere to the following deadlines:
<ul>
<li>Title and abstracts due: <font color="#FF0000"><b>June
13,
2003</b></font>
<li>Notification of acceptance: June 20, 2003
<li>Final abstracts due: Feb. 13, 2004
</ul><i>Submitting an Abstract: </i>Abstracts must be subm
tted
electronically through the conference Web site. To submit an abstract
visit the conference web site at
<a href="http://www.oardc.ohio-state.edu/chfc2004/" eudora="autourl"><
font color="#0000FF"><u>http://www.oardc.ohio-state.edu/chfc2004/<
/a></u></font>.<br><br>
<b>Questions?<br>
</b>Please feel free to contact us if you have questions or desire mor
information about the conference.<br><br>
Dr. David M. Hix<br>
School of Natural Resources<br>
The Ohio State University<br>
2021 Coffey Rd.<br>
Columbus, Ohio 43210 <br>
Phone: (614) 292-1394<br>
Fax: (614) 292-7432<br>
Email: <font color="#0000FF">hix.6@osu.edu</font> <br><
r>
Dr. P. Charles Goebel <br>
School of Natural Resources<br>
The Ohio State University<br>
1680 Madison Ave.<br>
Wooster, Ohio 44691<br>
Phone: (330) 263-3789<br>
Fax: (330) 263-3658<br>
Email: <font color="#0000FF">goebel.11@osu.edu</font> <br><
br>
Dr. Daniel A. Yaussy<br>
Northeastern Research Station<br>
USDA Forest Service<br>
359 Main Road<br>
Delaware, Ohio 43015<br>
Phone: (740) 368-0093<br>
Fax: (740) 368-0152<br>
Email: <font color="#0000FF">dyaussy@fs.fed.us</font> <br><
br>
Dr. Robert P. Long<br>
Northeastern Research Station<br>
USDA Forest Service<br>
359 Main Road<br>
Delaware, Ohio 43015<br>
Phone: (740) 368-0050<br>
Fax: (740) 368-0152<br>
<table border=0>
<tr><td width=156>Email:
<font color="#0000FF">rlong@fs.fed.us</font><u></td><
/tr>
</u><tr><td width=156></td></tr>
</table>
<u><br><br>
</u><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----<br>
P. Charles Goebel, Ph.D.<br>
Forest Ecosystem Restoration & Ecology<br>
School of Natural Resources<br>
OARDC<br>
The Ohio State University<br>
1680 Madison Avenue<br>
Wooster, OH 44691-4096<br><br>
Phone: 330.263.3789<br>
Fax: 330.263.3658<br>
E-mail: goebel.11@osu.edu<br>
Web:
<a href="http://snr.osu.edu/research/goebel/web/index.htm" eudora="autour
">http://snr.osu.edu/research/goebel/web/index.htm</a><br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----</html>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 09:50:24 -0500
From: Burks_Romi <BURKSR@RHODES.EDU>
Subject: Peer Review - Improving Scientific Writing
For those interested in incorporating more writing into their courses,
there is a very good article about the process of peer review recently
published in BioScience. We recently used the process quite
successfully in an undergraduate ecology course.
=20
Title: Peer Review in the Classroom=20
Author(s): Jianguo Liu ; Dawn Thorndike Pysarchik ; William W. Taylor =20
Source: BioScience Volume: 52 Number: 9 Page: 824 -- 829 =20
Publisher: American Institute of Biological Sciences =20
Reference Links: 19 =20
=20
Hope it is of interest,
Romi Burks
=20
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Romi L. Burks
Faculty Fellow, Rhodes College
=20
http://kesler.biology.rhodes.edu/burks/burks.html
<http://kesler.biology.rhodes.edu/burks/burks.html>
<http://www.biology.rhodes.edu/burks/burks.html>
<http://www.biology.rhodes.edu/burks.html>=20
=20
2000 North Parkway
Memphis, TN 38112-1690
Phone: 901-843-3558
FAX: 901-843-3565
=20
E-mail: burksr@rhodes.edu <mailto:burksr@rhodes.edu>=20
=20
"The mediocre teacher tells. The good teacher explains. The superior
teacher demonstrates. The great teacher inspires." W. A. Ward, English
novelist
Learning without thought is labor lost; thought without learning is
perilous. -- Confucius
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
=20
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 10:44:59 -0500
From: "D. Liane Cochran-Stafira" <cochran@SXU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Teaching writing in an ecological context
Hi all,
Here's a question that has come up regarding student grading. It's the
issue of privacy. Some of my colleagues have expressed concern over
liability if a student objects to having other students read or grade their
work. Has anyone had any experience with this?
BTW - This has been a really helpful thread. Thanks George for bringing it
up! I am on our University Writing Council, and I'll be bringing some of
these ideas to the rest of the council members for our fall discussions.
One other question comes to mind. Are any of you that are involved in
writing intensive courses receiving additional compensation in terms of
overload pay or a reduction in teaching load because of all the paper
grading. It's a issue we are trying to iron out right now because our
English department does get a reduced load for the freshman writing
classes, and we want to be fair to those teaching writing intensive classes
in other departments.
Cheers,
Liane
At 11:03 PM 5/20/03 -0500, you wrote:
>All:
> I second Ross Thompson's suggestion regarding student peer revie
.
It is
>now used extensively in English departments, and can be applied effectiv
ly
>to teach writing skills as well as content. Some proponents suggest stud
nt
>groups of 3-6, to encourage more discussion.
>
>This technique can work especially well with lab reports as well as libr
ry
>research papers, and provides a means for students to learn to provide
>constructive criticism in a civil manner.
>
>Brian Rehill
>
>
>==========================
>Brian Rehill
>Postdoctoral Research Associate
>Department of Entomology
>University of Wisconsin
>1630 Linden Drive
>Madison, WI 53706
>Phone: 608-262-4319
>==========================
>
>
***************************
Liane Cochran-Stafira, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Biology
Saint Xavier University
3700 West 103rd Street
Chicago, Illinois 60655
phone: 773-298-3514
fax: 773-779-3536
email: cochran@sxu.edu
http://www.sxu.edu/science/faculty_staff/cochran_stafira/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 12:24:06 -0300
From: robh-send <robh@FCA.UNESP.BR>
Subject: Re: Teaching writing in an ecological context
All;
We've used the University of Washington's (Seattle) student peer review
system for several years now to teach Environmental Science and Soil Science
to >2000 students per year. All of my courses have writing (individual or
group) and/or peer review requirements.
In particular, as the introductory course in Environmental Science grew from
a dozen or so to as many as 1000 students per quarter, we had to drop the
field trip component, and considered dropping the writing component.
Adding an on-line student peer review process has been very helpful, since
providing constructive criticism on writing is a great aid in learning to
write. Getting the students to publish their written material on-line to
allow the peer review system to be used has been much easier than we thought
it would be. Incoming students at the University of Washington tend to be
very computer-savvy.
We find that the quality of student writing improves dramatically after
students posting their first drafts respond to the peer review. We read and
grade only the final product. This saves us quite a lot of time and
eyestrain. Grading the peer review is essential.
The web system organizes all of the writing. With the proper password, I can
read any student's material (writing and peer reviews) from previous classes
from any computer. An additional advantage is that we can scan the online
material and peer reviews for plagiarism, at least for material plagiarized
from the internet.
The UW system can be seen at:
http://catalyst.washington.edu/
catalyst@u.washington.edu
Sincerely yours, Atenciosamente,
I am currently in Brazil, Agora eu estou no Brasil,
Rob Harrison, Professor Rob Harrison, Professor visitante
Soil & Environmental Sciences Ciências do Solo e Ambientais
Ecosystem Sciences Division Dep. de Recursos Naturais
College of Forest Resources Faculdade de Ciências Agronômicas
Box 352100, University of Washington Fazenda Experimental do Lageado
Seattle WA 98195-2100 Caixa Postal 237, CEP 18603-970
Botucatu - SP - BRAZIL
----------------------------------- ----------------------------------
robh@u.washington.edu Email robh@u.washington.edu Email
http://soilslab.cfr.washington.edu/ http://fca.unesp.br
----------------------------------- ----------------------------------
Phone 206-685-7463
Fax 206-685-3091
Do not reply to this message by hitting the "reply" feature of your browser
Por favor use meu email; please send email to me at:
robh@u.washington.edu
> From: Brian Rehill <irceboy@ENTOMOLOGY.WISC.EDU>
> Reply-To: Brian Rehill <irceboy@ENTOMOLOGY.WISC.EDU>
> Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 23:03:43 -0500
> To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
> Subject: Teaching writing in an ecological context
>
> All:
> I second Ross Thompson's suggestion regarding student peer review
It is
> now used extensively in English departments, and can be applied effecti
ely
> to teach writing skills as well as content. Some proponents suggest stu
ent
> groups of 3-6, to encourage more discussion.
>
> This technique can work especially well with lab reports as well as lib
ary
> research papers, and provides a means for students to learn to provide
> constructive criticism in a civil manner.
>
> Brian Rehill
>
>
> ==========================
> Brian Rehill
> Postdoctoral Research Associate
> Department of Entomology
> University of Wisconsin
> 1630 Linden Drive
> Madison, WI 53706
> Phone: 608-262-4319
> ==========================
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 11:17:33 -0400
From: "Collada, Angela E. - Contractor" <colladaa@GORDON.ARMY.MIL>
Subject: Permanent markers for vegetation plots
We are establishing a vegetation monitoring program on an Army installation
which supports low-impact training, forestry, hunting, and a variety of
other activities. The purpose of the program is to understand the impact of
management activities on longleaf pine restoration. The protocol calls for
installing permanent markers at each corner of a rectangular plot, plus
painting witness trees to aid in relocating the plot without GPS technology.
There are two concerns: 1) that witness trees draw attention to the
location of the plots and therefore influence the intensity of management
and 2) that permanent markers (12-inch hollow conduit) might be removed.
The conduit has typically been left 2-4 cm. aboveground; markers that are
inserted flush to the ground have been very time-consuming to relocate with
the added concern of the impact of relocation efforts on the vegetation
(moving litter around, disturbing plants, etc.). The first point of every
plot has been globally positioned, but relocating points with GPS will only
get us to within 20 ft. of the marker.
I would be interested in:
1. Suggestions for permanent plot markers that are as unobtrusive as
possible yet are relatively easy to relocate, and
2. Options for general relocation markers (in lieu of painting witness
trees).
Thank you for any input.
Angela Collada
The Nature Conservancy
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 12:30:35 -0500
From: Dave McNeely <dlmcneely@LUNET.EDU>
Subject: Re: Teaching writing in an ecological context
In a case that came out of the Oklahoma public schools (from a community
just north of Tulsa, maybe the town of Skiatook, but my memory is weak) that
went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court several years ago, the ruling was
that (at that level at least) what was private was the grade of record, not
the grade on individual daily papers. The case specifically involved
student grading of papers, where students exchanged quiz papers and graded
them in class.
I don't know if I agree with the ruling philosophically, and I have a hard
time with student grading for exactly the reasons cited by those who brought
suit against the school in the above case. Some students have a tough time
sharing their own successes and failures with their peers to the point that
it hampers their learning. We all know that team work, including responding
appropriately to both positive and negative criticism, is an important part
of life and of learning, though.
All the above said, I have used peer evaluation as a part of the learning
process. For example, I have had students evaluate each other's
contributions in group projects, and used the peer evaluation as a very
small part of the project grade. But I was somewhat uncomfortable with it,
as were some of the students. Some students suggested that the peer
evaluation was valuable, but that it should not be incorporated into the
grade.
Dave McNeely
----- Original Message -----
From: "D. Liane Cochran-Stafira" <cochran@SXU.EDU>
To: <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 10:44 AM
Subject: Re: Teaching writing in an ecological context
> Hi all,
> Here's a question that has come up regarding student grading. It's the
> issue of privacy. Some of my colleagues have expressed concern over
> liability if a student objects to having other students read or grade
their
> work. Has anyone had any experience with this?
>
> BTW - This has been a really helpful thread. Thanks George for bringin
it
> up! I am on our University Writing Council, and I'll be bringing some
f
> these ideas to the rest of the council members for our fall discussions
> One other question comes to mind. Are any of you that are involved in
> writing intensive courses receiving additional compensation in terms of
> overload pay or a reduction in teaching load because of all the paper
> grading. It's a issue we are trying to iron out right now because our
> English department does get a reduced load for the freshman writing
> classes, and we want to be fair to those teaching writing intensive
classes
> in other departments.
>
> Cheers,
> Liane
>
>
> At 11:03 PM 5/20/03 -0500, you wrote:
> >All:
> > I second Ross Thompson's suggestion regarding student peer
review.
> It is
> >now used extensively in English departments, and can be applied
effectively
> >to teach writing skills as well as content. Some proponents suggest
student
> >groups of 3-6, to encourage more discussion.
> >
> >This technique can work especially well with lab reports as well as
library
> >research papers, and provides a means for students to learn to prov
de
> >constructive criticism in a civil manner.
> >
> >Brian Rehill
> >
> >
> >==========================
> >Brian Rehill
> >Postdoctoral Research Associate
> >Department of Entomology
> >University of Wisconsin
> >1630 Linden Drive
> >Madison, WI 53706
> >Phone: 608-262-4319
> >==========================
> >
> >
>
> ***************************
> Liane Cochran-Stafira, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor
> Department of Biology
> Saint Xavier University
> 3700 West 103rd Street
> Chicago, Illinois 60655
>
> phone: 773-298-3514
> fax: 773-779-3536
> email: cochran@sxu.edu
> http://www.sxu.edu/science/faculty_staff/cochran_stafira/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 10:40:28 -0700
From: "Baker, Tim" <Tim-Baker@REDWOODS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Teaching writing in an ecological context
This is a timely topic -I'm grading writing projects now- and I'm heartened
at the wide discussion on it. When I developed a writing-intensive course
for a wildlife course at Penn State, I found a number of valuable ideas
scattered out there. The 3 top ideas I stole were:
- discussing writing as a process rather than an end product
(outlines -> drafts -> reviews -> rewrites)
- writing to learn (using the writing mechanism as a way to
organize and process ideas)
- peer-reviews (using single- or double-blind techniques)
Rather than focus exclusively on the preciseness of the mechanics, I've been
trying to get my students to look at writing more as a critical thinking
exercise with organization and analysis of ideas being the most important
aspects. This isn't because the mechanics of writing aren't important, but
rather because I'm not an English professor and that isn't really my job. I
do edit 1-2 pages of each rough draft and then tell students to apply the
concepts in the edits to the rest of the paper. I also emphasize that edits
are really just a different opinion on how to communicate; not a mandatory
rule they have to follow. This is vital with peer-reviews where the edits
offered by other students may be misguided or confusing.
Miscellaneous observations from the last 7 years of doing this:
- students who read more (about anything) tend to do a better job
writing
- many lower division students are woefully under prepared for
either reading or writing critically
- peer-reviews vary so widely in quality that they cannot be relied
on as the sole mechanism for revising rough drafts
- peer-reviews work best at getting students to re-evaluate their
own works (the competitive/collaborative benefit)
Peace,
Tim
TR Baker, PhD
Head - Forestry and Natural Resource Program
College of the Redwoods
7351 Tompkins Hill Rd
Eureka, CA 95501
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 13:21:31 -0500
From: Jerome Joseph Howard <JJHoward@UNO.EDU>
Subject: Peer evaluation of writing
David McNeely raises a good point - peer evaluations must be used carefully.
The case in Oklahoma refers to students grading quizzes with set answers, n
t to peers "grading" term papers or writing assignments that may require mor
reflective evaluation. I have used peer evaluation of writing very success
ully, but only to evaluate and improve first drafts, which are then handed b
ck for revision prior to being graded by me. Peer evaluations are never par
of the final grade. I assign papers to reviewers in a double blind, so tha
only I know the identities of each party.
One of the goals of my class is to learn to read critically, so I sometimes
rade the peer reviews themselves. It is quite easy to show students the dif
erence between superficial picking at grammar and spelling and truly insight
ul evaluation of a paper's goals, ideas, and arguments. Managing all this t
kes a whole lot more time than just assigning a paper in the beginning of th
term and handing back the bloody results at the end, but I've found it to b
worth it.
Jerry
---
Jerome J. Howard
Associate Professor
Department of Biological Sciences
University of New Orleans
New Orleans, LA 70148
jjhoward@uno.edu
Voice: (504) 280-5441
Fax: (504) 280-6121
"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm
just the one to do it."
-- A congressional candidate in Texas
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 14:02:54 -0400
From: "David M. Lawrence" <dave@FUZZO.COM>
Subject: Re: Teaching writing in an ecological context
My background is in both science and journalism. I do have privacy concerns
over grading others' tests, posting grades and things like that.
-- BUT --
When it comes to writing, peer critiques are essential (even if you don't
agree with the criticism, it is good to hear). Let's face it, if you're
afraid to "communicate" your results with others, you don't belong in
science, nor do you belong in any other field that requires communication.
Learning how to come to terms with others' critique of your work should be a
part of the educational experience.
I will also say that it is the instructor's responsibility to manage the
environment in which these critiques are made. Satire is welcome, abuse is
not.
Dave
------------------------------------------------------
David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786
7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787
Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave@fuzzo.com
USA | http: http://fuzzo.com
------------------------------------------------------
"We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo
"No trespassing
4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan
-----Original Message-----
From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news
[mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of Dave McNeely
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 1:31 PM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Re: Teaching writing in an ecological context
In a case that came out of the Oklahoma public schools (from a community
just north of Tulsa, maybe the town of Skiatook, but my memory is weak) that
went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court several years ago, the ruling was
that (at that level at least) what was private was the grade of record, not
the grade on individual daily papers. The case specifically involved
student grading of papers, where students exchanged quiz papers and graded
them in class.
I don't know if I agree with the ruling philosophically, and I have a hard
time with student grading for exactly the reasons cited by those who brought
suit against the school in the above case. Some students have a tough time
sharing their own successes and failures with their peers to the point that
it hampers their learning. We all know that team work, including responding
appropriately to both positive and negative criticism, is an important part
of life and of learning, though.
All the above said, I have used peer evaluation as a part of the learning
process. For example, I have had students evaluate each other's
contributions in group projects, and used the peer evaluation as a very
small part of the project grade. But I was somewhat uncomfortable with it,
as were some of the students. Some students suggested that the peer
evaluation was valuable, but that it should not be incorporated into the
grade.
Dave McNeely
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 10:53:23 -0700
From: welden <welden@SOU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Teaching Writing in an Ecological Context
In response to Liane's question:
I have used two approaches to dealing with the issue of confidentiality. One
is to have students identify themselves on papers by a code number or other
pseudonym. You probably can't use their social security numbers or student
ID numbers for legal reasons, but you can assign them random numbers or have
them come up with their own. The other approach is to have students sign a
waiver of confidentiality. You can make this very limited - applying for
example only to papers written for this class and promising to reveal only
to other students in the class. Of course, you have to be prepared for
students who decline to waive confidentiality, and have a way to deal with
their papers.
I'd like to reinforce something another respondent said about peer reviews.
You have to take them seriously, perhaps to the point of grading them.
Students often give each other very little useful feedback (Good Job -
smiley face) unless you actually teach them how to do a peer review. It
takes time and effort on the instructor's part and you have to plan for
that. Think carefully ahead of time about what you want peer reviewers to
look for and comment on, and then check to make sure they're doing it. But,
as others have pointed out, this can be time well spent because it really
can improve student writing and critical thinking skills.
Charles
****************************************************************************
Hi all,
Here's a question that has come up regarding student grading. It's the
issue of privacy. Some of my colleagues have expressed concern over
liability if a student objects to having other students read or grade their
work. Has anyone had any experience with this?
BTW - This has been a really helpful thread. Thanks George for bringing it
up! I am on our University Writing Council, and I'll be bringing some of
these ideas to the rest of the council members for our fall discussions.
One other question comes to mind. Are any of you that are involved in
writing intensive courses receiving additional compensation in terms of
overload pay or a reduction in teaching load because of all the paper
grading. It's a issue we are trying to iron out right now because our
English department does get a reduced load for the freshman writing
classes, and we want to be fair to those teaching writing intensive classes
in other departments.
Cheers,
Liane
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 12:55:47 -0600
From: Jill Podolsky <jpodolsky@EHA-INC.COM>
Subject: Re: Teaching writing in an ecological context
As a former student who has reviewed the work of other students, and who has
been the subject of peer review, I have encountered two points that Tim
Baker brings to light. The first is where he states that lower division
students are "woefully under prepared for reading or writing critically."
This leads to his other point that peer reviews vary in quality.
Are there any systems in place where there is more than one peer reviewer
assigned the same paper? I think this benefits the critical thinking aspect
of writing because it provides the writer with a variety of perspectives on
the same body of work. The writer then has to analyze and revise or
reconstruct the topic and its language to make the paper more robust for a
general or specific audience rather than just one person. This also enables
the writer to determine whether or not a sentence or paragraph produced the
meaning she/he was hoping to convey to his/her audience.
Jill
Jill S. Podolsky, M.Sc.
Environmental Health Associates, Inc. (EHA)
P.O. Box 26164
Albuquerque, NM 87125
Email: jpodolsky@eha-inc.com
Phone: Dial 711 for TDD Relay,
then ask for (720) 898-1061
http://www.eha-inc.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 14:29:36 -0500
From: Jerome Joseph Howard <JJHoward@UNO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Teaching writing in an ecological context
Jill Podolsky has asked about multiple peer reviewers for student papers. I
ve assigned two reviewers to each paper in the past, which means that everyo
e in the class has to write two reviews. This gives the authors the opportu
ity to see that some comments are particular to one reviewer (haven't we all
had that experience?) while others are consistent and indicate a real proble
in expressing an idea (haven't we all had that experience as well!). It al
o gives reviewers a valuable perspective on writing quality. However, manag
ng multiple, doubleblind reviews can quickly absorb all your time, particula
ly if you try to grade the peer reviews. In a class focused on writing it i
well worth the effort, but in a large enrollment general ecology class the
ffort required will at some point exceed the time and energy the instructor
as available. However, students need this type of exercise early and often
f they are really to learn to write well.
Jerry
---
Jerome J. Howard
Associate Professor
Department of Biological Sciences
University of New Orleans
New Orleans, LA 70148
jjhoward@uno.edu
Voice: (504) 280-5441
Fax: (504) 280-6121
"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm
just the one to do it."
-- A congressional candidate in Texas
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 15:12:28 -0500
From: Jason West <westx062@TC.UMN.EDU>
Subject: Re: Teaching writing in an ecological context
Ecologgers might be interested in an article in Nature this week about scien
e writing/jargon/etc. Some of the things that people teach their introductor
students might need to be brought to the attention of more advanced student
as well (including those with PhD's):
Knight, J. "Scientific literacy: Clear as mud" Nature 423(6938) pg. 376
Jason
Jerome Joseph Howard wrote:
> Jill Podolsky has asked about multiple peer reviewers for student paper
. I've assigned two reviewers to each paper in the past, which means that e
eryone in the class has to write two reviews. This gives the authors the op
ortunity to see that some comments are particular to one reviewer (haven't w
all had that experience?) while others are consistent and indicate a real p
oblem in expressing an idea (haven't we all had that experience as well!).
t also gives reviewers a valuable perspective on writing quality. However,
anaging multiple, doubleblind reviews can quickly absorb all your time, part
cularly if you try to grade the peer reviews. In a class focused on writing
it is well worth the effort, but in a large enrollment general ecology class
the effort required will at some point exceed the time and energy the instru
tor has available. However, students need this type of exercise early and o
ten if they are really to learn to write well.
>
> Jerry
> ---
> Jerome J. Howard
> Associate Professor
> Department of Biological Sciences
> University of New Orleans
> New Orleans, LA 70148
> jjhoward@uno.edu
> Voice: (504) 280-5441
> Fax: (504) 280-6121
>
> "That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, an
I'm just the one to do it."
>
> -- A congressional candidate in Texas
--
______________________________________________
Jason B. West
Postdoctoral Associate
Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior
University of Minnesota
St. Paul, MN 55108
Phone: (612) 625-7271
Fax: (612) 624-6777
______________________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 16:49:04 -0400
From: David Inouye <inouye@umd.edu>
Subject: Teaching Writing - E-prime
Fellow Ecologers,
On the topic of using writing as a teaching tool, allow me to tell you
about another technique that I have found useful (at least in some
contexts). Some years ago my wife Amy, who used to work as a technical
writer, told me about E-prime and suggested I use it in my plant ecology
course. E-prime consists of the English language stripped of all forms of
the verb "to be." Writing in E-prime has several benefits: it precludes the
passive voice with all its ambiguity and excess verbiage; it encourages use
of action verbs rather than state verbs, resulting in livelier prose; and
above all, it forces the writer to consider alternative ways of expressing
her or his ideas. Considering alternatives often leads to finding better
ones, of course. Most insidiously, E-prime breaks old habits, allowing the
writer to develop new and better ones.
Does it work? It has worked well for me in my upper-division plant ecolog
course. I see clear and dramatic improvement in the students' writing in one
quarter, and I get consistently favorable (although often sardonic) comments
on E-prime in student evaluations. It has not worked well in my freshman
University Colloquium course. I think the difference relates to the maturity
of the students and their readiness to learn the lessons E-prime can teach.
But whatever the reason, E-prime seems to frustrate freshmen and actually
leads to worse writing.
Whenever I tell people about E-prime, someone always claims you can't do
it, at least at any length. But you can. I wrote this message in E-prime and
I have published peer-reviewed papers written in E-prime. In fact, an editor
once commented (favorably) on the clarity and forcefulness of my writing
without noticing the lack of the forbidden verb.
Charles
welden@sou.edu
Editorial note from list moderator:
Here's a web site that has some interesting information about E-prime:
http://www.generalsemantics.org/Education/WEPrime.htm
You can find others by searching with Google, etc.
David Inouye
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 17:18:47 -0400
From: Will Cook <cwcook@DUKE.EDU>
Subject: postdoc ad: plant water transport, Duke U.
Postdoctoral position, Biology Department and Nicholas School of the Environ
ent at Duke
University:
We seek a biologist with experience in water relations and/or molecular ecol
gy to study the
controls of water transport in plants. The successful applicant can contrib
te to funded (NSF,
USDA, and Mellon Foundation) projects examining water transport in both labo
atory and field
settings, including a unique cave system for integrating root and shoot func
ioning in situ.
Phylogenetically based studies of water transport characteristics and microa
ray approaches
are already underway in the lab. Candidates with experience using stable is
topes are also
welcome, and would have access to Duke's new stable isotope laboratory
(http://www.biology.duke.edu/jackson/devil/).
Applicants should send a CV, statement of research interests, and three lett
rs of
recommendation to: Rob Jackson, Department of Biology, Phytotron Building, B
x 90340,
Duke University, Durham, NC 27708-0340. Applications received by July 1st,
003 will be
assured consideration. For more information on research in our lab see
http://www.biology.duke.edu/jackson . Duke University is an equal opportunit
employer.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 19:32:41 -0400
From: Paul Brooks <brooks@HWR.ARIZONA.EDU>
Subject: Special Session Fall AGU - Snow and Ecosystems
Mathew Sturm and I would like to invite interested parties to submit
abstracts to the following session being held at the Fall Meeting of the
American Geophysical Union, December 8-12, 2003 in San Francisco, CA USA
Snow Cover and Biogeochemical Cycling: Seasonal snow covers approximately
1/3 of the land surface of Earth during some part of each year, but until
recently this period was considered biologically unimportant. A wealth of
recent findings have shown that many critical biological and biogeochemical
processes continue through the winter, having a large impact on annual
fluxes of nutrients and carbon, and influencing a wide range of biological
and biogeochemical processes both during the winter and in the following
growing season. The impact goes both ways, with plants and animals affecting
the accumulation, distribution, and melt of the snow. The nature of the
impact changes with the season, producing quite different interactions in
autumn vs. spring, and these impacts are manifest at many different scales.
While interactive processes tend to be local in nature, the outcome of these
snow-biota interactions at landscape and regional scales can affect whole
ecosystems and the climate. The purpose of this session is to bring together
researchers working on the interactions between the winter environment,
particularly snow, and biological processes at scales ranging from
individual organisms to regional biogeochemical fluxes.
Conveners: Matthew Sturm, USA-CRREL-Alaska, P.O. Box 35170, Ft. Wainwright,
AK 99703-0170, Tel: 907-353-5183; FAX: 907-353-5142; E-mail:
msturm@crrel.usace.army.mil
Paul Brooks, Hydrology and Water Resources, 1133 E. North Campus Dr,
University of Arizona, Tucson Arizona 85721. Tel: 520-331-0088; Fax:
520-621-1422: E-mail: brooks@hwr.arizona.edu
------------------------------
Subject: ECOLOG-L Digest - 21 May 2003 to 22 May 2003 (#2003-134)
There are 10 messages totalling 519 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. News: Bio-remediating Salty Soils
2. Measuring aspen stress in the Lake Tahoe Basin
3. Statistical differences and report "discussion"
4. Introduction to National Sea Grant Library's services
5. seeking continuing student for paid frog restoration position at Sequoi
&
Kings Canyon NP
6. Alternative to EXCEL stats
7. teaching with writing--another suggestion (2)
8. writing in ecology
9. Teaching Writing in an Ecological Context
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 23:06:55 -0700
From: Ashwani Vasishth <vasishth@USC.EDU>
Subject: News: Bio-remediating Salty Soils
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 21:39:47 +0200
From: Ferdinand Engelbeen <ferdinand.engelbeen@pandora.be>
To: Infoterra@cedar.at
Subject: INFOTERRA: Indian scientists produce salt from vegetable
For the original article, see the India Times:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=467
0577
"NEW DELHI: Researchers at the Central Salt and Marine Chemicals Research
Institute at Bhavnagar in Gujarat have produced salt from a vegetable plant.
"This is the first time salt has been produced from a vegetable source and
we have filed an international patent," Pushpito Ghosh, director of CSMCRI,
an institute under the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research told
PTI. The salt currently used for cooking worldwide is derived from seawater.
Named "saloni", it contains several important nutrients not normally found
in sea salt and is therefore promising as a health salt, Ghosh said.
Samples have been sent to some companies overseas to assess its commercial
potential and "the preliminary feedback is encouraging", he said.
"Our interest in salicorni cultivation was mainly to reclaim salty soil,"
said JB Pandya, coordinator of the project. India has around eight to 10
million hectares of salt-affected soils of which Gujarat's share is nearly
25 per cent.
Seeds from the plant contain 25-35 per cent edible oil, and the institute
already has a process to extract the oil. "Now, our finding that the plant
can also be a source of nutritive salt has made large scale saline soil
cultivation an attractive proposition from the point of eco-restoration and
making money from wasteland," Ghosh said."
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
envecolnews-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to:
envecolnews-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Or, for more options, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/envecolnews/
For questions or suggestions, contact:
vasishth@usc.edu
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 08:40:45 -0700
From: Steve Ellsworth <sellsworth@SIERRANEVADA.EDU>
Subject: Measuring aspen stress in the Lake Tahoe Basin
I'm developing a field course activity dealing with the decline of aspen =
stands in the Lake Tahoe Basin. The decline is partly associated with =
fire suppression and competitive displacement by conifers. I'm looking =
for a relatively simple way to determine whether aspen stands are =
stressed. Determining the age of stems is not a possibility. One idea =
is to look at height distribution of stems in a stand, the idea being =
that stressed stands may send up fewer new shoots. Another idea is to =
use the height/DBH ratio in a stand. Might stressed stems have a smaller =
DBH relative to height?=20
=20
Does anyone have other ideas for other quick and simple ways to measure =
stress in an aspen stand?
=20
- Steve Ellsworth, Sierra Nevada College (Lake Tahoe, NV)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 11:39:51 -0400
From: Scott Altmann <saltmann@USGS.GOV>
Subject: Statistical differences and report "discussion"
We conducted a "bioblitz" survey of five different wetland sites on
Maryland's Eastern Shore. For wildlife we trapped amphibians, reptiles,
and small and medium sized mammals and surveyed birds. For vegetation we
looked at cover >1m and cover < 1m, and also measured (DBH) and identi
ied
all woody vegetation in 25m x 25m plots.
Using standard ANOVA tests, we found significant differences in abundance
among sites for some of the taxon but not all. We did not run statistical
tests to determine significant differences in abundance of the taxon
between individual sites. My question is: in our report, should there be an
emphasis in the discussion section on the taxon for which we found
significant differences among sites or should all taxon be discussed
equally?
Thanks in advance for any insight into this.
Scott Altmann
Biological Researcher
Patuxent Wildlife Research Center
11410 American Holly Drive
Laurel, Maryland USA 20708-4015
TEL: (301) 497-5640
FAX: (301) 497-5624
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 10:24:11 -0400
From: "Diane E. McGannon" <demcgannon@GSO.URI.EDU>
Subject: Introduction to National Sea Grant Library's services
We would like to introduce you to the National Sea Grant Library (NSGL),
which serves as the archive and lending library for the National Sea Grant
College Program. Our web site http://nsgl.gso.uri.edu will further provide
a description of our services.
The collection is comprised of over 32,000 books, journal reprints,
conference proceedings, advisory and technical reports, handbooks, maps and
other types of information not readily available from traditional
sources. You can access this wealth of information through our
web-searchable database, where you'll find many of our documents available
as full-text PDF documents. Documents not available online can be borrowed
directly from our library.
The NSGL website also provides a list of recent Sea Grant acquisitions, in
addition to direct links to the 30 Sea Grant programs across the country.
If you'd like additional information, please feel free to contact us at:
National Sea Grant Library
Pell Library Building
University of Rhode Island
Narragansett Bay Campus
Narragansett, RI 02882-1197
USA
(401) 874-6114
(401) 874-6160 (fax)
e-mail: nsgl@gso.uri.edu
http://nsgl.gso.uri.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 13:08:31 -0400
From: Danny Boiano <danny_boiano@NPS.GOV>
Subject: seeking continuing student for paid frog restoration position at
Sequoia & Kings Canyon NP
I manage the mountain yellow-legged frog restoration project at Sequoia and
Kings Canyon NP, and one paid summer student position recently became
available. We are seeking a current student, that qualifies as a GS-5
biological science technician and will also be a student in the fall or
spring, for a backcountry position that involves removing introduced trout
from lakes and streams and conducting amphibian surveys. The GS-5 wage rate
is $12.31/hr and the work dates are from 6/16-9/18.
Please read the advertisement below, and contact me ASAP if interested in
the position.
**************************************************************
Danny Boiano, Aquatic Ecologist
National Park Service, Sequoia & Kings Canyon National Parks
47050 Generals Highway, Three Rivers, CA 93271
phone: (559) 565-4273 fax: (559) 565-3730
email: danny_boiano@nps.gov
**************************************************************
STUDENT ASSISTANT NEEDED
SEQUOIA AND KINGS CANYON NATIONAL PARKS
MOUNTAIN YELLOW-LEGGED FROG RESTORATION PROJECT
The National Park Service is seeking one continuing student who qualifies
as a GS-5 biological science technician to implement an amphibian
restoration project in backcountry lakes of Sequoia and Kings Canyon
National Parks (SEKI), California. The GS-5 wage rate is $12.31/hr. Work
dates are from 6/16-9/18.
GS-5 Biological Science Technician (Aquatic)
Position Description: Incumbent will work as part of a two-person crew
restoring a population of mountain yellow-legged frogs (Rana muscosa) in
Upper LeConte Canyon, a wilderness location in the backcountry of Kings
Canyon NP at 10,500 feet in elevation. About 65% of the position involves
removing introduced trout from three lakes and their tributaries in the
basin using gill nets and backpack electrofishers. About 30% of the
position involves conducting shoreline visual encounter surveys for
amphibians at all aquatic sites near the restoration sites. About 5% of the
position involves surveying headwater seeps for Mt. Lyell salamanders
(Hydromantes platycephalus). The field site is 17 miles from the trailhead.
The pay period work schedule is an 8-hour day, 10 days in a row, with four
days off in a row in the backcountry (the crew will be given work time to
hike out to the frontcountry for two of these weekends). The season will
last for 5 pay periods. The incumbent will spend most of the season in
wilderness, and will sleep in a backpacking tent and cook in a mosquito
tent with a propane stove.
Duty Station: Backcountry
Requirements: Background in aquatic biology, backpacking experience, and
ability to:
a. hike with a backpack for long distances (up to 17 miles per day) on
trail and cross-country terrain at high elevation (up to 12,000 feet);
b. identify High Sierra fish & amphibian species, distinguish between their
life stages, and estimate numbers of individuals detected by species and
life stage;
c. use gill nets (deployed by float tube) and backpack electrofishers to
eradicate introduced fish in lakes and streams;
d. work well with other people on a small crew in an intimate setting for
more than two months.
Incumbent must supply own food, clothing, boots, water bottles &
dinnerware. SEKI will supply backpack, sleeping bag & pad, tent, cooking
stove & pots, fuel, filter, and restoration equipment.
If interested, please call Danny Boiano, SEKI Aquatic Ecologist, at
559.565.4273. Also, E-mail a transcript, resume, and three past
supervisors/references to: danny_boiano@nps.gov
Include all experience related to herpetology, aquatic ecology, fisheries
and related fields.
Describe backpacking skills and experience, including lengths and
elevations of longest trips.
Please send applications ASAP!
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 14:22:37 -0300
From: VOLTOLINI <jcvoltol@UOL.COM.BR>
Subject: Alternative to EXCEL stats
Another idea !!!
STATSDIRECT is a very easy package and you can open Excel files, work on
them and save them as Excel files!
The software is cheap and user friend enough for first year Biology students
!
http://www.statsdirect.com/
GOOD LUCK !!!
VOLTOLINI
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Prof. J. C. VOLTOLINI
Grupo de Estudos em Ecologia de Mamiferos (ECOMAM)
Universidade de Taubate, Departamento de Biologia
Praca Marcelino Monteiro 63, Bom Conselho.
Taubate, SP. CEP 12030-010. BRASIL.
Tel: 0XX12 - 2254165 (Lab. Zool.) ou 2254277 (Depto. Biol.)
E-Mail: jcvoltol@uol.com.br
http://www.ecomam.hpg.ig.com.br
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Tutto di noi è un angelo con un'ala e
possiamo volare soltanto se ci abbracciamo"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Sears" <msears@MAMA.INDSTATE.EDU>
To: <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2003 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: Alternative to EXCEL stats
> As many have mentioned R/S-plus is a great package for statistical
analyses
> (simple or complex) and for the graphical display of data. One drawback
is
> that there is a steep (but highly rewarding) learning curve to take ful
> advantage of these packages.
>
> Two packages that standout for their ease of use for stats are Statisti
a
> (www.statsoft.com) and JMP. Both are menu driven, accept many data form
ts
> (Excel, text, dbf, etc, etc), and produce reliable results. The drawbac
to
> these packages is that they produce poor graphs. Good graphs can be ma
e
> using these programs, but it's not worth the headache.
>
> For most plots, I use SigmaPlot (www.spss.com). It is versitile and ver
easy
> to use including edits. The plots are publication quality.
>
> To get away from Excel altogether, the OpenOffice.com office suite is a
great
> package that offeres a spreadsheet, word processor, presentation softwa
e,
> equation editor, etc. It doesn't have all of the bells and whistles of
> Microsoft's product that most of us don't use/need anyway, and it is fr
e.
It
> also recognizes and correctly opens most Microsoft
> documnets/spreadsheets/ppts. (For those that feel software is best if
> purchased, Sun Microsystems will sell you the same program for about $8
).
>
>
> Mike Sears
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 10:57:41 -0700
From: "Donald B. Zobel" <zobeld@SCIENCE.OREGONSTATE.EDU>
Subject: teaching with writing--another suggestion
Group,
This topic has been very interesting and useful, I think, to those who try
to use/teach writing in class. I do not recall, however, seeing reference
one point that struck me during a few years of teaching a writing intensive
course in plant ecology to upper division undergraduates.
I spent time on the process of producing a professional research article
(after the data are in hand). I was surprised at the students' interest in
the topic. Some things that they seemed not to know that were worth
presenting:
-scientist do not get paid for publishing articles
-often scientists have to pay to get articles published, and how much it
costs
-the specificity and variety of formatting requirements by different
journals
-the multiple cycles of review and rewriting, before submission and after,
the agony I felt doing some of the deletions along with my usual long-term
conclusion that required revision was for the best
-the responsibilities of the reviewer and the author during the review
process
-the proofreading process and its importance, with some examples of things I
and others have missed
-the reprint distribution process (or now the file distribution process, as
discussed here recently)
Don Zobel
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 14:15:41 -0500
From: "D. Liane Cochran-Stafira" <cochran@SXU.EDU>
Subject: writing in ecology
Forgot the subject line
Hi all,
I was exploring the Great Lakes sections of the Sea Grant site, and found
this. It might be useful for those involved in teaching writing to ecology
students.
http://www.seagrant.umn.edu/seiche/apr.99/art11.html
Liane
>More than ever before, today's high school students must
be
> prepared for a complex world where science play
a role in every
> sphere. Those who can understand and write
science-based
> stories for the general public will continue to
be in demand by
> newspapers, magazines, and media organizations.
Exploring
> Science Writing: An Environmental Focus gives
students and
> teachers an exciting place to start.
>
> This 74-page reader, published jointly by the
Michigan and
> Illinois-Indiana Sea Grant programs, introduces
students to
> crucial issues facing the Great Lakes and ocean
.
The
> spiral-bound reader was developed in
collaboration with more
> than 100 teachers. It features easy-to-teach
writing principles,
> teaching notes, and teacher-developed activitie
to enhance
> high-school language arts, science, and
interdisciplinary
> curriculums.
>
> Minnesota Sea Grant is offering single copies o
Exploring
> Science Writing at a reduced price of $6 ($5 fo
10 or more).
>
> This publication can be requested through our
purchasable
> on-line ordering form, or you can call us at
218.726.6191 to
> place an order.
***************************
Liane Cochran-Stafira, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Biology
Saint Xavier University
3700 West 103rd Street
Chicago, Illinois 60655
phone: 773-298-3514
fax: 773-779-3536
email: cochran@sxu.edu
http://www.sxu.edu/science/faculty_staff/cochran_stafira/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 15:35:16 -0400
From: Rich Zobel <rzobel@AFSRC.ARS.USDA.GOV>
Subject: Re: Teaching Writing in an Ecological Context
In reply to Don Zobel's comment:
I observed very similar responses during my 20 years at Cornell.
But in the USDA-ARS we are paid based on #'s of publications. That
is, we are penalized if we publish too little and get bonuses and
grade increases if we publish more than one or two papers a year, on
average. Unlike the tenure requirements at Universities, these
publication requirements are career long and, for some of us with
long term research programs, are inhibitory to good science.
Rich Zobel
(and then the East met the West, and lo, they agreed)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 14:27:40 -0500
From: "D. Liane Cochran-Stafira" <cochran@SXU.EDU>
Subject: Re: teaching with writing--another suggestion
Don,
I recently experienced the same thing. A student asked why we publish
papers. It sounded like she thought the popular press and other media
outlets were the main avenues for broadcasting important information. I
was taken aback by her questions. I always include "peer reviewed
publishing/communicating the results" as the final step of my scientific
method lecture. I'll certainly focus more attention on this aspect in the
future.
Liane
At 10:57 AM 5/22/03 -0700, you wrote:
>Group,
>
>This topic has been very interesting and useful, I think, to those who t
y
>to use/teach writing in class. I do not recall, however, seeing referen
e
>one point that struck me during a few years of teaching a writing intens
ve
>course in plant ecology to upper division undergraduates.
>
>I spent time on the process of producing a professional research article
>(after the data are in hand). I was surprised at the students' interest
in
>the topic. Some things that they seemed not to know that were worth
>presenting:
>-scientist do not get paid for publishing articles
>-often scientists have to pay to get articles published, and how much it
>costs
>-the specificity and variety of formatting requirements by different
>journals
>-the multiple cycles of review and rewriting, before submission and afte
,
>the agony I felt doing some of the deletions along with my usual long-te
m
>conclusion that required revision was for the best
>-the responsibilities of the reviewer and the author during the review
>process
>-the proofreading process and its importance, with some examples of thin
s I
>and others have missed
>-the reprint distribution process (or now the file distribution process,
as
>discussed here recently)
>
>Don Zobel
>
>
***************************
Liane Cochran-Stafira, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Biology
Saint Xavier University
3700 West 103rd Street
Chicago, Illinois 60655
phone: 773-298-3514
fax: 773-779-3536
email: cochran@sxu.edu
http://www.sxu.edu/science/faculty_staff/cochran_stafira/
------------------------------
End of ECOLOG-L Digest - 21 May 2003 to 22 May 2003 (#2003-134)
***************************************************************
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ
Thanks to discussion with TVR, I have decided to put a link to back files of the discussion group. This months back files.
The link to complete archives is available elsewhere.
This text was originally an e-mail. It was converted using a program
RUPANTAR- a simple e-mail-to-html converter.
(c)Kolatkar Milind. kmilind@ces.iisc.ernet.in