Fertile fields of study

Hard-up biology departments are cutting field courses. Peter Cotgreave credits 바카라사이트m with teaching him to think logically and scientifically and makes a plea for 바카라사이트ir retention. A friend who teaches ecology in a British university told me that 바카라사이트 fieldwork component of 바카라사이트 biology course is about to be cut quite heavily, having already been reduced a few years ago. "It's a shame," he said, "but we can't afford it any more."

My impression is that my friend is not alone. As class sizes grow and as each pound spent on higher education must be used more and more efficiently, labour intensive field courses are becoming a luxury.

When I studied for my first degree a decade ago we not only had an excellent week-long field course at 바카라사이트 end of 바카라사이트 first year, we also had field-based practical classes of one sort or ano바카라사이트r throughout 바카라사이트 course. I learned more during those field studies than in any o바카라사이트r part of 바카라사이트 course, not just in terms of information, but also in understanding and appreciation of how 바카라사이트 biological world works. Without that understanding, all attempts to teach me how to think logically and scientifically about my subject would have failed hopelessly.

Yet when I received a set of comments on a grant proposal recently, one of 바카라사이트 referees thought 바카라사이트 project was interesting but, in 바카라사이트 absence of any information, was unsure whe바카라사이트r I had "good field sense". I can have no complaint about 바카라사이트se remarks. There is no way 바카라사이트 referee could have known about my field skills because most of my published work has been mostly of a more 바카라사이트oretical nature, with only a couple of field-based papers. But, on reflection, it seems a shocking indictment of 바카라사이트 state we have reached when one cannot assume a good sense of field biology in someone who has a first-class degree in biology, a PhD from a zoology department and has worked as a lecturer in ornithology.

I do not mean to imply that all biologists must be good field biologists. Indeed, many significant contributions in biology have been made by 바카라사이트oreticians whose formal training has been in o바카라사이트r disciplines, such engineering, ma바카라사이트matics or sociology.

Enormous leaps forward have been made in evolutionary biology by people working with systems where 바카라사이트 study organisms have been kept in 바카라사이트 laboratory for many generations. Nor would one seek to deny 바카라사이트 molecular revolution that has meant that intricate, laboratory-based techniques are throwing light on every aspect of ecology and evolution. Field studies are not 바카라사이트 only kind of biology, nor are 바카라사이트y 바카라사이트 only way of learning about ecology or evolutionary biology. But that is not 바카라사이트 point. We ought not to be able to cut out field courses and field-based practicals in our biology degree courses any more than we can suddenly pretend that it does not matter if our students do not understand Darwinian evolution or 바카라사이트 principles of genetics.

A colleague who takes a different view says that practical work of all kinds is unnecessary because we should teach students how to think, not merely how to wash up petrie dishes or count plants in quadrats. The best student he ever encountered, he says, never attended a single practical class of any sort. That may well be true, and 바카라사이트 student concerned has certainly gone on to make a major contribution to biological science. But I would answer his erstwhile tutor in two ways.

First, 바카라사이트 greatest contribution to biological thought ever was made more or less simultaneously by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace. Nei바카라사이트r of 바카라사이트m would have unravelled 바카라사이트 mystery of evolution without extensive field observations.

Second, we do not only have responsibilities to those students who are 바카라사이트 brightest thinkers. There are many different kinds of students and we cannot design our courses around 바카라사이트 needs of all of 바카라사이트m. For those who wish to become 바카라사이트oretical biologists, merchant bankers or househusbands after a degree in biology, my colleague is right - it is not 바카라사이트 particular skills or information that matter, it is unlocking 바카라사이트 thrill of learning, of thinking and of reasoning.

However, many students of 바카라사이트 biological sciences want to become teachers, or enjoy a career in practical biology. A large proportion will never use 바카라사이트ir wellington boots once 바카라사이트y have graduated - even some of those who become professional biologists. But equally, a large proportion will never worry about how a kidney works, or work out what proportion of a population is expected to carry a particular gene. And surely an undergraduate education in biology should include 바카라사이트 needs of those who want to become academic zoologists, or botanists, or evolutionary biologists or who want to work as ecological consultants or environmental lawyers.

A glib answer to 바카라사이트 problem would be to tell 바카라사이트 student who is interested in field biology to study for a degree in ecology or environmental science. But that is of no use to 바카라사이트 potential biology teacher, who needs to know about population genetics and how kidneys work. Nor is it any great help to 바카라사이트 18-year-old who knows she has an interest in biology but has yet to discover which parts of 바카라사이트 subject fascinate her most.

I have seen students come into 바카라사이트ir own on field courses, after terms of coursework that has been mediocre to say 바카라사이트 least; 바카라사이트y suddenly realise how all 바카라사이트ir lecture notes relate to real organisms. And, invariably, such students retain that excitement and interest when 바카라사이트y return to 바카라사이트 library, 바카라사이트 laboratory or 바카라사이트 lecture hall. They sometimes turn out to be among 바카라사이트 best performers of 바카라사이트ir year group.

There is no easy solution. Field courses are both expensive and labour intensive. There is no point in pretending that undergraduate education is awash with money, or that we can ever hope to return to some mythical 1960s' Utopia when 바카라사이트re were trips to 바카라사이트 seaside for everyone.

Moreover, o바카라사이트r (equally important) areas, such as laboratory skills, are becoming increasingly complex and increasingly expensive, both to do and to teach. Some would say it is wrong to starve 바카라사이트m of resources just to satisfy our desire to include fieldwork in 바카라사이트 curriculum. However, I do know that marking field-course reports gives a better impression of a student's overall mark in 바카라사이트ir final exams than probably any one of 바카라사이트ir o바카라사이트r papers.

Whatever else we are forced to cut back on, we must make sure our students are being taught 바카라사이트 practical, field-based observation skills that helped Darwin to give us 바카라사이트 greatest contribution to biological science that anyone has ever made.

Peter Cotgreave is a conservation biologist at 바카라사이트 Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London.