|
Back to the Huckabay Main Page
Huckabay
Fellowship Announcement
Huckabay
Fellowship Application
Huckabay FAQ Page
Guidelines for Huckabay Mentors
Fellows and Mentors
Examples of Successful Proposals
Preparing Future Faculty |
|
|
2002-2003 Huckabay Teaching Fellowship
Application
Submitted
by
Fellow: J. Alan Clark
Department of Zoology
University of Washington
Mentors:
P. Dee Boersma
Department of Zoology
University of Washington
Gregory A. Hicks
School of Law
University of Washington
Clare Ryan
College of Forest Resources
University of Washington
Proposed Course:
The Law and Policy of Wildlife Conservation
Instructional Problem
Conservation biology is a new discipline, developed
mostly in the past 15 years. While many universities now house courses or
even entire departments in conservation biology, these programs are still
relatively young. Recently, a dialog in the conservation community began in
which criticism of academic curriculum has been strong. The primary criticism
is that, like traditional biology and wildlife programs, these new programs in
conservation biology do not adequately prepare students for success in the
non-academic world (e.g., Noss 1997, Clark 2001).
A major weakness in efforts to conserve wildlife lies in “the kind of
knowledge, problem-solving approaches, and outlook that professionals bring to
this difficult and important work” (Clark et al. 1994). As Schaller (1992)
noted, “conservation problems are social and economic, not scientific, yet
biologists have traditionally been expected to solve them.”
Reed Noss (1997), former
President of the Society of Conservation Biology and former editor of the
journal Conservation Biology, noted: “with few exceptions, universities
fail to train graduate students for problem-solving outside academia.”
Noss (1997) offered several suggestions for
improving university curriculum to better prepare students for future
challenges in conservation biology. Foremost among his suggestions is for
universities to develop rigorous interdisciplinary programs and courses that
include encouraging student familiarity with applicable state and federal
environmental laws and policies. In addition, Noss
(1997) suggested that universities require coursework sufficient for students
to understand the philosophical underpinnings, value dimensions, and
historical context of science. Both Noss (1997)
and Clark (2001) suggested that an interdisciplinary approach should provide
the foundation for improving university curriculum on wildlife conservation.
Addressing the Problem
My Mentors and I hope to develop a course that draws on
an interdisciplinary approach to understanding how law, policy, and science
intersect and interact in relation to real-life wildlife conservation
problems. Although our concept for the course is still early in development,
the first part of the course would provide essential background material.
First, I hope to develop materials that provide a solid foundation for what
“the law” is: drawing on resources from philosophy, history, and early case
law. Second, I would like develop/organize materials that would provide a
basic understanding of the policy process. Some of this material could be
presented in a more traditional lecture format, but we hope to develop an
approach to this information that provides more direct engagement for the
students, such as working in small groups.
Clark (2001) and Burnner
(1997a and 1997b) recently suggested that wildlife conservation education
could be significantly improved through the use of (1) case studies and (2)
interactions with decision makers, interest groups, and people affected by
conservation problems. My Mentors and I firmly believe that case studies can
provide a valuable educational tool for students needing to understand how
science, law, and policy interact in our efforts to conserve wildlife. We
hope to develop at least one case study to highlight these interactions and
impacts. Other case studies may already be available. For example, in 1994,
I authored a chapter on the U.S. Endangered Species Act (Clark 1994) for a
book that used numerous case studies to highlight the problems encountered by
biologists in conservation of endangered species. Furthermore, we hope to
locate and contact several guest speakers that could also provide students
with exposure to real-life wildlife conservation problems and approaches.
As part of the course, we anticipate having the students
break into small groups with each group undertaking an analysis of one
wildlife law/policy. We would provide students with several suggested
laws/policies, but we would allow them to analyze others as they choose. My
goal is to present one such law/policy as an example. As we presently
envision the curriculum, the end product would be a group presentation of
these analyses to the larger class. Our hope is that this small group project
would provide an opportunity for an integrative application of the background
material presented earlier in the course.
With input from my Mentors and the Center for
Instructional Development and Research, I anticipate undertaking substantial
research into developing the methods and materials for this course. This
research would likely include:
- Pedagogic methodology
- What is “the law”?
- What is the “policy process”?
- A history of wildlife law and policy
- A case study on the interaction of law, policy, and
science in wildlife conservation
- Possible wildlife laws/policies appropriate for small
group analysis
- Development of a model/example of such laws/policies
Project Assessment
My Mentors will provide regular feedback throughout the
curriculum development phase. Should the course be selected for listing by
one or more departments/programs, my Mentors have also agreed to attend class
and provide feedback throughout the quarter. I will invite additional
evaluators to visit the class and to provide us with feedback on both
curriculum and pedagogy. Evaluation of student assignments, both written and
oral, should provide key insights into course effectiveness. In addition to
evaluation of student work and regular Mentor and visitor feedback, the
students will be given two opportunities to complete written evaluations of
the course. Finally, I will keep a journal during the course to document my
teaching experience and to reflect on means of improving the
curriculum/methodology.
References
Brunner,
R.D. 1997a. Raising standards: a prototyping strategy for undergraduate
education. Policy Sciences 30:167.
Brunner,
R.D. 1997b. Teaching the policy sciences: reflections on a graduate
seminar. Policy Sciences 30:217.
Clark,
J.A. 1994. The Endangered Species Act: its history, provisions, and
effectiveness. Pp. 19-43 in Endangered Species Recovery: Finding the
Lessons, Improving the Process (Clark, T.W., R.P. Reading, and A.L. Clarke,
Eds.). Washington (DC): Island Press.
Clark,
T.W. 2001. Developing policy-oriented curricula for conservation biology:
Professional and leadership education in the public interest. Conservation
Biology 15:31.
Noss, R.F. 1997. The failure of universities to
produce conservation biologists. Conservation Biology 11:1267.
Schaller,
G.B. 1992. Field of dreams. Wildlife Conservation (September/October):44.
| Return to the Top |
|
