The University of Waikato - Te Whare Wānanga o Waikato
Faculty of Science and Engineering - Te Mātauranga Pūtaiao me te Pūkaha
Waikato Home Waikato Home > Science & Engineering > BioBlog
Staff + Student Login

September 2011 Archives

I joined up to Facebook a few months ago - it was a good way to keep in touch with friends, plus it's made 'talking' with various NZIBO colleagues easier in the sense that we can have group chats. But it's also been a bit of an eye-opener in that it's turned out to be another way of exposing just how gullible people can be...

For instance, this morning the following popped up via a friend's page (names will not be used, to protect the unwary):


(All caps, heheh, never a good sign...)

The question that immediately sprang to mind was, say what?? What 'news', when? Why on earth would simply changing the colour of your icon make you exempt from a charge? I seriously doubt that the FB programmers would let that one slip! Plus, it seems a strange way to make money, if you're going to have a loophole that let's people opt out so easily :-)

So no, I didn't pass it on. But I did go to to see what they had to say about this particular hoax. Turns out it's been around (in various forms) for a few years now. The last time it popped up, it was associated with a page that supposedly collected signatures for a petition against the 'charges'. Trouble was, clicking on links within the page had some users getting some particularly graphic Naughty Pictures on their computers, along with attempts to install malicious spyware.

So do think first, before passing these things on!

| | Comments (0)

Rather to my surprise (I wrote the original post quite a while ago), I've had a response from the subject of that post: 'Scientists Anonymous'. This group was drawn to my attention by a friend who's a secondary school biology teacher, concerned that Scientists Anonymous had done a mass e-mailout to NZ teachers to promote an intelligent design article.

At the time I asked

who, exactly, are these 'Scientists Anonymous' who are behind the e-mail to schools, and why aren't they prepared to put their names to the document?

Well, I'm left none the wiser by their response:

Anonymity of this informal group is upheld in the interest of those still active in the profession, but may be reviewed in future.

Why? In NZ, having a particular religious worldview is not grounds for losing one's job (nor is it in the US -the thesis of "Expelled" notwithstanding ). However, presenting oneself as a brave maverick scientist, ignored by the mainstream, is one of the warning signs that we may be dealing with pseudoscience. So wouldn't it be better to front up, identify themselves, and present their evidence? (Their solid, peer-reviewed evidence, not articles on the Institute for Creation Research website.) After all, as E.O.Wilson has said,

If someone could actually prove scientifically that there is such a thing as a supernatural force, it would be one of the greatest discoveries in the history of science. So the notion that somehow scientists are resisting it is ludicrous.


| | Comments (0)

Technology in its various manifestations looms ever larger in our lives - & that includes education. For example, many schools require their students to have laptops or - more recently - ipads. I've wondered previously whether this is done for a particular pedagogical reason, or whether it's more a case of  "the technology's there - let's use it!" 

All this does rather assume that students are fairly tech-savvy: something along the lines of "they've grown up with all this stuff, so of course they'll know how to use it." Yes?

Well, no. this was recently brought home to me as I went through the responses to a survey a couple of colleagues & I carried out recently, looking at student use of the lecture-capture technology Panopto. One of our questions asked how they viewed recorded lectures, & as prompts offered 'computer' and 'i-pod/mp3 player'. (I put this one in because that's often how I view them.)

Most of the students chose 'computer'. Very few chose 'i-pod'. And some commented plaintively that they would have used i-pods if they'd known that option was available. Now, there's a link on the Panopto page for my class that gives the option of downloading recordings in mp3 (sound only) or mp4 format (lecture + pictures). I'd made the mistake of assuming that because a relative technological illiterate like me (hey, it doesn't take much tech knowledge to blog!) knew what to do, my students would to.

So next semester, "show them how to access recordings" is high on the list of Things To Do on the first day of class :-)

Seriously, though, I think it's important that teachers realise that students may not actually be all that familiar with some of the learning technologies that we expect them to make use of.

| | Comments (0)

I've just finished writing & delivering a new set of lectures; next week we're moving back into what is - for me anyway! - more familiar territory. At the same time I've been reading Therese Huston's book Teaching what you don't know. Huston's examples are drawn from the US tertiary system, and as you begin reading it quickly becomes apparent that 'teaching what you don't know' is a common occurrence for teachers in that sector. (And I really do mean, 'what you don't know': a science lecturer teaching a general writing course, for example. At least I'm still teaching biology!)

| | Comments (2)

I've written quite a bit, from time to time, on the value of doing more than simply lecturing to students. More than a few research projects have shown the value of group work, including problem-solving and discussions, for enhancing students' learning and understanding in a subject. I was reminded again of this today.

Over the last few weeks I've been busy writing and delivering lectures in the area of molecular genetics, a subject that I've never taught before at this level. (I'm also reading Teaching what you don't know by Therese Huston (2009), which has been both slightly alarming and pliantly encouraging.) I always make sure there are plenty of opportunities for questions & discussion in my classes, but now I'm just about teetering on the edge of making at least some classes a combination of discussion & small-group work, no formal lecture at all. I've been thinking about this for a while & the class I had this morning simply reinforced my thoughts on the issue.

Yesterday's lecture was about various molecular biology techniques used in biotechnology, & it elicited quite a lot of questions at the time. At the beginning of this morning's tutorial class, one of the adult students commented that much of what had gone on had pretty much whizzed by above her head; could I give a simple summary, she asked. The rest all nodded; yes, please! After a minute's thought I pulled together what I thought were the key ideas - and then the discussion really took off. What were gene libraries? How did you access them & 'read' their 'volumes' (usually bacterial cells engineered to contain another species' DNA)? What about cloning - could we/should we clone humans? No? Then what about other mammals? Bacteria? Where do we draw the line, & why? What are some of the ecological & evolutionary implications of developing transgenic crops or farm animals? What are the ethics associated with all this - not just the biological & technical prox & cons, but the social and ethical issues? It was an incredibly wide-ranging & stimulating discussion and I think most of us were sorry when our time came to an end.

As we left the room, one of the students said, "do you know, I have learned so much today! That discussion helped me make sense of yesterday's information & I think I've got a much better understanding & appreciation of the issues involved." So, next time I teach this - or another topic with such potential for getting everyone involved in discussion, or a topic that I know will be challenging and where working on problems in groups will be helpful - well, I think I may just throw tradition to the winds :-)

| | Comments (0)

This comes at an opportune time for those of you teaching the Human Evolution content - and for those looking around for some follow-up reading :-) The Howard Hughes Medical Institute has a whole lot of free biology education resources available on line, and this upcoming webcast looks to be wonderful stuff: Bones, Stones, & Genes: the origin of modern humans. It's completely free; you just need to register for it. You can bet I'll be doing my best to be there!

And hat-tip to PZ, who as usual finds out about these things first :-)

2010 banner ad

| | Comments (0)

That's the attention-grabbing title for a post on Number 8 Network.

The answer: maybe, and maybe not. That was the experience of Peter & Vicki Hyde, who live in the Christchurch suburb of Redcliffs & were interviewed by the N8N team. They've got some valuable lessons to share, which will well reward time spent reading the article.

| | Comments (0)

August 2013

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Recent Comments

  • Alison Campbell: a cat may look at a cephalopod! read more
  • herr doktor bimler: Poaching on PZ's territory! read more
  • Stephen: Snap or is that Schnapps! I'm reading The Drunken Botanist read more
  • Alison Campbell: Perhaps you should be promoting 'liquid oxygen' enemas for maximum read more
  • herr doktor bimler: Sorry, that was supposed to be a comment on the read more
  • herr doktor bimler: I see a potential market here in selling Charles Atlas read more
  • herr doktor bimler: drinking a couple of spoonfuls of 'liquid oxygen' isn't going read more
  • herr doktor bimler: Speaking of fermentation: read more
  • Alison Campbell: an army of post-docs looking for that place to settle read more
  • herr doktor bimler: Tunicates are inevitably compared to senior academics, because they reabsorb read more