University Education in Natural Resources - CNR Home - Utah State ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

240 Natural Resources and Environmental Issues Volume VII INCORPORATING SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY INTO STANDARDS FOR PROFESSIONAL FORESTRY EDUCATION V. A. Sample 1 , J. Giltmier 2 , and P. Ringgold 3 1 Executive Director, Pinchot Institute for Conservation, 1616 P Street NW, Washington, DC 20036 2 Senior Associate, Pinchot Institute for Conservation 3 Research Associate, Pinchot Institute for Conservation ABSTRACT: In 1991, the National Association of Professional Forestry Schools and Colleges (NAPFSC) and the Society of American Foresters (SAF) co-hosted a three-day Forest Resources Education Symposium, entitled “Forest Resources Management in the 21st Century: Will Forestry Education Meet the Challenge?” The objectives of the national symposium were to present major forces shaping the country’s management of forest resources, and then to discuss the adequacy of educational criteria in preparing tomorrow’s resource managers to excel under an expanding array of consumer and employer demands. As an outcome, the discussants developed a summary of specific challenges and solutions within five issue areas: The Future of Forestry, Future Educational Needs, Defining Appropriate Curricula, Student Characteristics, and Faculty Characteristics. Many existing problems were identified as a result of that process, as well as potentially useful strategies for corrective action. The purpose of this project is to assess any changes in curriculum content or educational strategies (at both the undergraduate and graduate levels) that have resulted from the 1991 symposium, or in relation to subsequent new issues that have emerged within the forestry profession. Many of these new issues have been identified through processes such as the Pinchot Institute’s 1996 assessment, entitled Evolving Toward Sustainable Forestry: Assessing Change in U.S. Forestry Organizations. This assessment provided an overview of current efforts in each of the major sectors of the profession — forestry education, research, policy, and management — that reflect recent broad-based efforts to articulate public expectations for forests and forestry in the United States. Participants in the 1996 assessment focused not only on the near-term need to change the way some forests are being managed, but the longer-term need to provide the foresters of the future with the skills and expertise to practice sustainable forestry. Among the topics discussed were the changing demand for foresters in the marketplace, the need to incorporate sustainable forestry into curricula at more U.S. forestry schools, the need for continuing education to keep practicing foresters current with the science and techniques of sustainable forestry, and the need for incorporating these considerations in state licensing standards for professional foresters. This project will consist of two major components: (1) establishing what a comprehensive curriculum in sustainable forestry might contain, based upon the changing needs of forestry employers who are broadening their approaches to forest resource management, becoming more responsive to environmental concerns in order to “maintain their social license to practice forestry;” and (2) ascertaining the extent to which professional forestry education programs at universities in the U.S. are providing this comprehensive approach through: (a) (b) (c) a review of current course curricula with school administrators and faculty a survey of recent graduates, aimed at determining the extent to which they feel their institution has prepared them to practice forestry as it is expected of them today a survey of major employers of recent graduates, aimed at determining the extent to which they feel the institutions from which they have recruited or hired foresters have prepared graduates for practicing the kind of forestry that is expected of them. The results of the study will provide valuable information to a number of different entities concerned with forestry education-- forestry school faculty, prospective students, and prospective forestry employers, of course, but also the SAF in its function as the accrediting organization for forestry schools in the U.S., NAPFSC in its function as a forum for forestry school deans to address issues affecting professional forestry education across their respective institutions, and the Seventh American Forest
1998 University Education in Natural Resources 241 Congress Education Committee (a follow-up working group charged with reviewing forestry education in light of the “vision and principles” statements that emerged from the 1996 Forest Congress). These and other organizations will be involved in the conduct of this project, and in the dissemination of the results. The responses are expected to appear first as extension courses or continuing adult education programs targeted to practicing professionals. Through the process of feedback and refinement, forestry educators themselves will get a better understanding of the specific knowledge needed and how it can best be taught. This is expected to facilitate the process by which new knowledge and approaches are incorporated into existing graduate and undergraduate courses, perhaps precipitating the creation of entirely new courses in forestry school curricula and the addition of new faculty with different areas of expertise than have traditionally been found on forestry school faculties. To help with achieving the goals of this project, the Pinchot Institute for Conservation, in cooperation with the Sustainable Forestry Partnership at Oregon State University and Pennsylvania State University, will be hosting a 90-minute panel at the 2nd Biennial Conference on University Education in Natural Resources. The objectives of this panel will be: 1) to present and discuss the findings of the Pinchot Institute’s educational assessment to date; 2) to provide examples of individual university efforts to incorporate new knowledge and approaches into their programs as a way of addressing regional needs and issues; and 3) to engage the audience in a facilitated discussion of the issues surrounding the development of sustainable forestry education programs. The results of this discussion will be incorporated into the Pinchot Institute’s final project document, which will be released in late-1998. USE OF THE DYADIC ALTERNATIVE TO MAKE LEARNING MORE ACTIVE, COLLABORATIVE, AND FUN James M. Savage Associate Professor, Ranger School, SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Wanakena, New York 13695 ABSTRACT: I use the Dyadic Alternative in two sophomore-level courses that I teach at the Ranger School: “Forest Mensuration and Statistics” and “Tree Structure and Growth.” The Dyadic Alternative is an innovative teaching/learning method that involves students working together in cooperative pairs. It was suggested by Licht (1993) and is based on the idea that “two heads are better than one.” In essence, the Dyadic Alternative is a non-traditional, “upside-down”, teaching/ learning model, since formative quizzes on a chapter or unit precede the lecture and/or discussion of that unit. Moreover, students have the opportunity to collaborate on quizzes when using this method. The Dyadic Alternative forces students to take more responsibility for their own learning and encourages cooperation and active learning. The Dyadic Alternative, as used by this author, consists of five steps. In step 1, students form groups of two by selecting partners. Resulting pairs, or “dyads”, agree to remain as a unit for a specified period of time, possibly for the entire semester. For step 2, all students read the assigned chapter or unit in the course textbook for homework. When class meets again, students are quizzed individually on the assigned chapter. After turning in their first quiz, students immediately take the quiz again, but this time with their dyad partner. The higher of the two grades is recorded, completing step 3. In step 4, the instructor discusses the quiz and/or other material that may still be confusing, and/or reinforces key ideas, concepts, and methods. Finally, in step 5, the instructor arranges for summative testing of individuals. The Dyadic Alternative is non-traditional in two important ways. First, students are tested on assigned subject matter before it is presented and/or discussed in class. This motivates students to complete homework assignments, and it forces them to
Page 1 and 2:
University Education in Natural Res
Page 3 and 4:
Acknowledgments This publication re
Page 5 and 6:
INDEX BY SESSION Sunday, March 8, P
Page 7 and 8:
Teaching Methods: Collaborative Lea
Page 9 and 10:
The Upper Midwest Regional Capstone
Page 11 and 12:
INDEX BY AUTHOR if first author, pa
Page 13 and 14:
INTEGRATED NATURAL RESOURCE PLANNIN
Page 15 and 16:
1998 University Education in Natura
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
TEACHING CORE VALUES: SOME QUESTION
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
WRITING AND FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
THE INTERDISCIPLINARY NATURAL RESOU
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
NEW IDEAS FOR TEACHING NATURAL RESO
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
ASSESSING A FORESTRY EDUCATION: THE
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
A GRAPHICAL SURFACE-VEGETATION-ATMO
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT - THE C
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
EDUCATION’S ROLE IN SUSTAINABLE D
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
AN ETHICS PRIMER FOR UNIVERSITY STU
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
THE KENYA MODEL: DEVELOPMENT AND IM
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
STUDENT AUTHORING, EDITING AND ELEC
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
NATURAL RESOURCE EDUCATION: GETTING
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
AUDIO TAPES VS. INTERACTIVE COMPUTE
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202: 1998 University Education in Natura
Page 203 and 204: WRITING ACROSS THE CURRICULUM EFFOR
Page 233 and 234: TEACHING AQUATIC ECOLOGY WITHIN ECO
Page 251: 1998 University Education in Natura
show all

University Education in Natural Resources - CNR Home - Utah State ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?