Education in Conservation Biology: Translating Education into Practice

Organized by the Education Committee for the Society for Conservation Biology
Society for Conservation Biology 2003 annual meeting, Duluth, Minnesota
Wednesday, 2 July 2003, 9:30 AM

View content in PDF format

View content in Word format

Introduction
Participants
Presentation 1: The Perfect Conservation Practitioner
Presentation 2: Considerations from an Academic Perspective
Small group discussions
K-12 education
Undergraduate education
Graduate education
Continuing education (Group 1)
Continuing education (Group 2)
Presentation 3: Concluding Remarks: common issues and questions

Introduction

This interactive symposium was offered at the 2003 annual meeting of the SCB in order to allow participants to explore issues associated with what educators should be doing to better prepare our students to be conservation practitioners. For the purposes of this discussion, “practitioner” was defined as someone who is professionally engaged in carrying out the work of conservation outside of academia. We realize that conservation work is also conducted by volunteers and by academicians, but we specifically wanted to focus on the professional, non-academic careers.

The symposium was divided into three parts. First, we listened to two brief presentations, one from the perspective of a practitioner with experience in hiring the kinds of practitioners we are talking about (Rob Sutter, The Nature Conservancy) and one from the perspective of an academician with experience in training the kinds of students that go into practitioner careers (Jim Dietz, University of Maryland).

Second, the participants in this interactive symposium broke up into small discussion groups organized around four different educational contexts: K-12 education, undergraduate education, graduate education, and continuing education. Each group considered the same set of four primary questions: What specific strategies do we use to help educate our students as practitioners? What levels do we need to reach with our students and what are our general goals? What barriers do we face in implementing such strategies? How can these barriers be overcome? The purpose of the discussions was to allow each participant the opportunity to share experiences and perspectives on the issues as they specifically related to their own educational context.

Third, each discussion group offered a brief summary of their discussions to the larger group, followed by concluding remarks by someone who specifically visited each discussion group to learn about commonalities and differences among issues and approaches (Nora Bynum, American Museum of Natural History).

Presented below are the summaries of each of the three presentations and the notes from each of the five discussion groups. As you read these comments, we invite you to add to the discussion by posting your own observations and suggestions. Thus, this document will become a growing archive of experience about how conservation biologists can best translate education into practice.

Questions about this document, the symposium, or the Education Committee of the Society for Conservation Biology can be sent to Steve Trombulak (trombulak@middlebury.edu).

Participants

Presentation 1: Rob Sutter, Senior Conservation Ecologist, SE Division of The Nature Conservancy

Title: The Perfect Conservation Practitioner

1. Have a combination of skills as a biologist (e.g., E.O. Wilson), politician (e.g., Jimmy Carter), and enlightened being (e.g., Buddha).

2. Know biodiversity

Go deep into one species group
Know what biodiversity is and how it is distributed, both in terms of natural and human-dominated landscapes

3. Know systems ecology

Go deep into the ecological processes of any system (e.g., fire ecology)
Understand interconnectedness and complexity

4. Know how to do science

Get involved with a field-based research study that will teach you hypothesis testing, sampling design, data collection and management, statistical analysis, data interpretation, and review of the literature.

5. Gain experiential training

Internships
Assistantships
Study/work at a biological field station

6. Learn how to work collaboratively

Teamwork
Facilitation
Understand and respect other perspectives
Communication, both oral and written

7. Go beyond mere lecture-based education

Team-based exercises
Field experience

8. Learn to have a heart

Patience
Learn to love the questions as much as the answers
Don’t have high salary expectations

Presenter 2: Jim Dietz* and David Inouye, Department of Biology and Graduate Program in Sustainable Development and Conservation Biology, University of Maryland, College Park

Title: Translating education into practice: Considerations from an academic perspective

1. We’re not experts in conservation curriculum design

We’ve created only two courses, one at the graduate and one at the undergraduate level

Helped design and implement a graduate program

Seat of the pants—before there were lots of examples and books

2. Student evaluations and other measures suggest that these courses and this grad program are doing what we had hoped they would do

Highly specific to our experience and context

Ask yourself: how is my situation similar or different? What should I adopt or do differently?

3. Ours is a nonthesis MSc-level graduate program (CONS)

~45 students

Created in 1990 as a result of Pew Charitable Trust initiative

University of Maryland, College Park is located on the beltway a few miles north of Washington, D.C., with lots of government and NGO conservation organizations and development banks nearby

About 110 CONS graduates: ~70% have jobs as practitioners; 15% go on to Ph.D.s; 10% teaching.

I was hired in 1988 to help develop the CONS curriculum and design an undergraduate and a graduate course in conservation biology

4. In assessing one’s curriculum (sensu latu) from the perspective of how well it does in training students to become conservation practitioners, it’s useful to ask the kinds of questions you would ask ourselves in preparation for an external review.

A. WHAT WE THINK WE DO AND WHY

What is our (faculty) vision of why we think we are training our students?
Clearly we want our graduates to go on to become leaders in conservation, but in what capacity?

Do we envision them getting tenure-track jobs in top research universities and publishing articles on metapopulation dynamics? Or populating the ranks of NGO's or managing conservation programs for development banks? Or working on endangered species for state or federal agencies? Or do we want to make sure that future doctors, business men/women and farmers know enough about conservation to “make a difference” in their own spheres of influence? Or all of these?

In sum, do we want to train students to be researchers, program managers, or community activists?

Is our vision flexible? Does it track advances in the field?

B. THE TRAINING RESOURCES WE HAVE

Are our university/college, faculty and geographic resources compatible with our vision? What are the strengths of our institution? Its weaknesses?

Are we taking advantage of training opportunities in our region/state?

What is the job market for conservation biologists and conservationists in our area?

What faculty expertise do we have within our program in the practice of conservation? For example, is anyone associated with our program a former employee of a conservation organization or agency? Are any of our faculty currently employed as practitioners?

Does anyone on our team have a research collaboration with practitioners? Does anyone do consulting work with a conservation organization or agency? Do any of our faculty have relevant international experience?

C. OUR STUDENTS

Who are our students? What background do they come to us with? What are their interests and experience in conservation? How competitive are they nationally? What skills and experiences do they hope to get from of our program? How are we assessing their interests?

What are their anticipated career paths? Do these result from the specific range of options we expose them to in their studies, or from the particular set of expectations they have in selecting our institution?

What do our students typically go on to do? Again, do we have good data on this?

D. WHAT IS OUR CURRICULUM AND WHAT CONSERVATION-RELATED OPPORTUNITIES DO WE PROVIDE FOR OUR STUDENTS?

What courses do we teach now? Are we using lower-level courses to hook undergrads on conservation, and is that part of the goal of our graduate program?

Providing useful training for graduate students? Do our courses and other offerings provide skills our graduates need? What other conservation opportunities do we provide for our students? Internships? Work in labs doing conservation research? Lecture series and seminars?

E. HOW CAN WE IMPROVE AT ACHIEVING OUR VISION?

What opportunities do we have for adding practical experience into our curriculum, either through existing courses, the development of new courses, or the development of extracurricular opportunities/requirements?

To what extent can we add practical experience through internships and/or service-learning practica?

What are the logistical or institutional barriers to adding practical experience to our curriculum and how might these barriers be reduced? Money? Additional faculty or staff?

How can we attract students with superior academic backgrounds?

Are there other faculty at our institution who have talents in conservation and might be interested in helping with our program? What can we do to attract these folks?

Are there other programs we can interact with, through mechanisms such as dual degrees?

What connections and relationships does our program have historically with non-academic conservation practitioners? Can that be continued/expanded?

What can we learn from comparable institutions? How can we acquire that information?

What kinds of feedback do we solicit from our students about their experience in our program? E.g., use an exit survey or contact alumni a year after graduation.

What alumni resources do we have that can improve opportunities for students? Do we have alumni from our program who are practitioners who can provide feedback on what we did to prepare them as practitioners?

Can they also help us build connections with their organizations or agencies?

Can any of our alums provide us with, or lead us to major funding for our program?

Small group discussions

K-12 Education

· Debates

o Involving school’s conservation club to debate with other schools on conservation issues
o Interschool and intraschool competition
o Presentation to the wider community

· Songs/Drumming Competition

o Interschool and intraschool competition
o Presentation to the wider community

· Provide them with local connections

o NGO's and government agencies working with local protected areas to develop local level EE materials
o Working with local community and local students

· Games

o Effective for reinforcement of concepts – instead of just teaching more new concepts

· Hands on approach

o To reverse information overload
o Many kids have seen tons of animals on TV, but never touched one

· Teaching how to assimilate information

o How to identify systems, species, etc.

· Provide them with tools

o For them to conduct their own exploration

· Use of monitoring forms

o To help kids to familiarize themselves with their own environment
o Get them to inspect their environment and report their observations to the wider group

B. What levels do we need to reach with our students and what are our general goals?

· We believe we should reach more of a breath level with K-12 students. Our general goal is to transfer concepts and information but also to have more fun throughout the process.

C. What barriers do we face in implementing such strategies? How can these barriers be overcome?

· Too many NGO's, too many people with a lot of knowledge but not enough passion and feelings for conservation (in China). Need to transfer more passion and feelings toward nature to students of all levels

· In rural schools (in Kenya and Uganda) – headmasters are worried about developing academic excellence. Schools are not interested in learning through the arts and through fun and games. A possible solution – to have exchanges between urban and rural schools – maybe with students monitoring a common resource, either by visiting or through the Internet.

· Several places with too much access/ or too little access to education resources

o Need to reach out to all communities
o Need to consult local communities on what is the best way of doing education locally
o Need to reach out to the different audiences and minorities

Undergraduate Education

A. What specific strategies do we use to help educate our students as practitioners?

· Integrate GIS into the curriculum with modules and courses.

· Advisors should work with students to get them into the relevant student clubs and organizations (e.g., Wildlife Club).

· Bring faculty research and conservation efforts to the students both in courses and internships.

· Develop field camps for technical skills (15-20 students per class): field studies like deer population estimates, invasive plant surveys, fore management.

· Mix environmental studies “idealists” with natural resource “practical/hunter”-types

· Help students develop facilitation/mediation skills.

· Help student learn systems thinking (e.g., through the use of STELLA exercises).

B. What levels do we need to reach with our students and what are our goals?

Breadth vs. depth

· Most people feel that the priority at the undergraduate level is for breadth.

· Use theme-based approached to present material (e.g., sustainable development).

· Help them develop their skills as well-rounded naturalists.

· Give them the tools necessary to access depth later on.

Preparation for further training vs. pursuit of practitioner careers

· Both are important: tools and internships for employment as well as preparation for graduate school.

C. What barriers do we face in implementing our teaching strategies?
· The job market is quite minimal for practitioners with only an undergraduate degree, so it is not always clear what we should be training them to do.

D. How do we overcome the barriers to implementing our teaching strategies?

· We need to make them aware that with only an undergraduate degree the odds are that they will primarily get seasonal or short-term work.

Graduate Education

A. What special strategies do we use to help educate our students as practitioners?

· Start off a course in conservation biology with an overview of the entire discipline, so that students understand the overall structure of conservation biology before they get into the specific details.

· Develop a system of classes/courses that build through to a capstone course

· Use environmental problems that are directly relevant to the country or the specific region where the students are located. This gives the students experiences in real-life issues and it makes the learning process seem more relevant and engaging, which helps focus students.

· Use case-study examples to give students some experience of real-life examples. Then apply the results/lessons learned from the case study to other species/ecosystem/area management problems that are immediately relevant to the students (i.e., dealing with local issues, or issues that are contemporary news items).

· Incorporate problem-solving skills so that students can apply this to their work when they are employed

· Allow students to select the problems that interest them; this will ensure that they are motivated to study the problems in depth

· Give students electives that allow the students to focus on chosen subjects and become specialized and proficient in them

· Take students out into the field to get hands-on field experience

· Invite practitioners into classes to discuss some of the practicalities of conservation biology. This gives students a more direct insight into conservation practice

· Have students work in teams, to give them teamwork experience

· Have students present work in debates and discussion groups, to give them experience of communication skills. Have the students present conclusions from the debates and discussion groups; this gives them training in the process effective decision-making based on immediate synthesis of available information (i.e., they listen to a debate, and use the information to construct a well-supported and well-argued decision of conservation policy)

· Also have students produce final reports of the assignments/field projects, so that they develop effective written communication skills (i.e., an ability to synthesize and communicate information clearly in reports)
· develop a program of graduate seminars, to allow students to work on their communication skills

· Develop professional networks (e.g., list serves etc.) of current students and former, graduated students who are working as practitioners. The former students can provide information on contemporary projects that could be incorporated into classes, and can give advice to students on what kind of experience/skills they should be developing in order to fit into the changing job markets.

B. What levels do we need to reach with our students and what are our goals?

Breadth vs. depth

· Start broad initially; give the students an initial overview of the subject so that they have all the baseline information they need for subsequent, more focused and detailed studies …..

· However, be mindful that conservation biology is an extremely broad, multidisciplinary field. We should not expect to be able to teach it all.

· Graduate students usually have a good, general understanding of conservation biology, and they are very focused. So they are usually looking for course materials that have depth of content more than breadth (i.e., more focused and specific in details, rather than broader, general courses with less specific information)

· Design course that can use general information but can apply it at greater depth and/or for different ecosystems. For example, take general case-study information and apply the results and conclusions to more detailed or applied analytical exercises in other settings.

Preparation for further training vs. pursuit of practitioner careers

· Graduate students usually seem to be very self-motivated and are looking to be practitioners. They usually don’t require any additional encouragement beyond their own self-motivation.

· However, it can be very useful to create a community of graduate students and employed former graduate students, so that they can discuss job opportunities and possible avenues for career development. This is a very effective way in which students can help each other prepare for careers.

C. What barriers do we face in implementing our teaching strategies?

· Money is the main problem. There is not enough money to do the things we need to do.

· There may be relatively few people who are trained to teach the wide variety of disciplines that are covered within the field of conservation biology.

· In some cases, the people teaching the projects and case histories used in conservation biology courses are not directly involved in the projects or case histories themselves, so they cannot teach the projects/case histories in optimum detail

· The name ‘conservation biology’ can appear too specific to biology. Faculty from other departments may consider this to be a sub-branch of biology, rather than a more interdisciplinary field, so they will overlook the possibility of contributing to the course by teaching their own subjects (e.g., environmental law and policy, environmental economics)

· The reward system in academia is geared to conducting/publishing research rather than teaching. This provides very little incentive to devote large amounts of time to curriculum development and teaching activities

D. How do we overcome the barriers to implementing our teaching strategies?

· One way to overcome problem (b) above is to use faculty from a variety of departments; those faculty can give classes in their field of specialization (economics, law etc.), focusing on the application of their subject to conservation biology

· Problem (c) can be overcome by involving conservation practitioners in teaching courses. They can teach classes and case studies that use examples from their own work; they can then discuss the examples extensively and in detail, and so make the experience more instructive and meaningful to the students

· Problem (d) can be overcome by giving more descriptive names to courses; e.g., ‘Sustainable development and conservation biology’

· Problem (e) can be partly overcome by publishing the results of teaching oriented work in conservation journals, such as Conservation Biology, BioScience

Continuing Education (Group 1)

Introduction

Our group was concerned with building an affinity for conservation within the larger public, rather than specifically with the training of practitioners. This made it hard for us to answer the questions head on. As an alternative, this is a summary of the conversation.
Christina holds courses aimed at education professional adults.
She would start these courses by deliberately challenging the participant’s existing beliefs. These beliefs were ‘media driven’ and often ‘doom laden’. An initial challenge would often be to tell people that the battle was far from lost.

These courses aim to give students a deeper understanding in one area in the hope that it would bring awareness of some of the complexities involved, instilling a sense of wonder and a desire to learn more.

Students completed fieldwork assignments with the aim of fostering an understanding of the issues and processes involved. The fieldwork was aimed at skills acquisition, rather being intended to generate useful data.
Doug has a non-biology background and now studies invasive species.
Doug felt that it was important that teaching was learner-, rather than teacher-oriented.
Students are actively engaged in discussion about their objectives so that they can be better fulfilled by a course.

It is important that courses encourage learning rather than just packing information into people.
Teri had taken part in an online course
The course relied on an extensive online discussion between other students and the teacher. This helped to establish a ‘peer’ community that encouraged mutual development and made it easier to fulfil objectives.
Discussion
Our discussion would have taken hours to us have answered the questions properly.
It was felt that the conservation community could feel threatening to those outside of it acting as a barrier to interest.

We saw two ways to overcome these barriers, either by ensuring that the message reflects the existing concerns of the target audience, or where necessary to use legislation to supply a need require an understanding.

It is also important that any course has a proper assessment regime, with assessments continuing long after the course if possible. Any course should evolve to reflect the outcomes of these assessments.
We felt that there could be more training to help conservationists communicate with the greater public. It could even become part of a course assessment.

Continuing Education (Group 2)

The group had a mixed background with some working in developing countries and others in developed and educational activities ranged from working with communities and protected area guards to the general public.

A. What specific strategies do we use to help educate our students as practitioners?

· Active learning, problem solving approach based on or directly using real situations
· Interaction between specialists and teachers/educators to create curriculum
· Connect with something students know or can immediately relate to and then expand to the bigger issues
· Field-based or “real life” approaches, for example in Papua New Guinea, local landowners were shown first hand the potential impacts of different land use strategies
· Learning during the course of solving actual conservation problems

B. What levels do we need to reach with our students and what are our general goals?

· Design courses where the information is immediately applicable (essential for courses with adults)
· Need to know audience’s skills and abilities as well as their needs to design effective course that will capture their attention, particularly important with adults where time is limited

C. What barriers do we face in implementing such strategies?

· Lack of interest
· Lack of motivation
· Dealing with student bias as well as preconceptions which are often media-based
· High turnover (train someone and then they disappear)
· Low empathy
· Lack of time
· Disempowerment, don’t feel they will have an impact
· Limited attention span
· Maintaining interest

D. How can these barriers be overcome?

· Focused training with good audience needs assessment in advance
· Numerous programs, people can enter at different levels and offer repeat training opportunities
· Increase interdisciplinary training
· Influence societal values on a broad scale, new ethic/value system use the media as a tool

Presentation 3: Nora Bynum, Center for Biodiversity and Conservation, American Museum of Natural History

Title: Concluding Remarks: Common issues and questions

1) There was general agreement that there is a need for both specific content/knowledge areas, and certain process skills and attitudes (communication, problem solving, heart). Question remains, however, when to get what, and what depth?
2) In terms of depth vs. breadth, most symposium participants indicated that undergraduate education can most effectively provide exposure or breadth. So the question remains where to get the depth? This will be obtained during a Ph.D. program relevant to Conservation Biology, but probably not in most professional-preparation 2 year Master’s Programs, which often focus on integration of interdisciplinary information and process skills. One partial solution may be on emphasis of independent research/practical internship components at both the undergraduate and Master’s level.
3) All of the break out groups at all levels from K-12 to adult learners emphasized the use of active approaches and hands-on learning, using examples and cases that had local relevance and global significance.
4) Evaluation and adaptive management of programs are crucial at all levels.
5) Is there a disconnect between academics and practitioners? Description of Master’s level programs that we heard about does not indicate so. However, is there more of a disconnect at the undergraduate level, and is this a problem? If it is a problem, how can it be addressed?
6) The multitude and variety of skills and knowledge needed to produce the “perfect practitioner mean that we should encourage students not to depend on a single program to meet all of their needs- no “one stop shopping”.
7) Different educational levels can serve complementary functions with regards to education in conservation biology. K-12 and undergraduate training can “hook” students, undergraduate training can further give them breadth/depth, graduate training can give them depth/breadth and the ability to integrate, while adult education can keep students adding to their knowledge base throughout their life.
Different educational levels can serve complementary functions with regards to education in conservation biology. K-12 and undergraduate training can “hook” students, undergraduate training can further give them breadth/depth, graduate training can give them depth/breadth and the ability to integrate, while adult education can keep students adding to their knowledge base throughout their life.