Summer Homework 2: Science Communication

Research the ways in which scientists can communicate with other scientists and with the general public. What are the advantages and disadvantages of each method? What are the benefits and drawbacks of the existing peer-review method for academic publications? How do you feel peer-review could be improved?

Several methods of communication exist for scientists to educate others about their research. They range from the formal (journal articles), to semi-formal (conferences), to informal (newspapers, television shows, outreach programmes).

Journal articles and edited books
In general, when scientists wish to communicate their research formally to other scientists in the field, they need to subject their work to peer-review, where other scientists in the field read the work, try to replicate the results and give (hopefully) formative feedback that will improve the quality of the research. Scientific journals are considered the best way of achieving that. Scientists are assessed, especially if they work in universities, on the length and prestige of their publication record. With a few exceptions, it seems the shorter the journal title, the more prestigious it is, e.g. Science, Nature, Cell. The advantages are, no doubt, the prestige, the rubber-stamp of authority from the peer-review process, and the knowledge that the important researchers in your field will see your work. The disadvantages are the length of time it takes from submission to publication (18 months is not unusual), and the cost of accessing the articles for people who do not have an institutional subscription to the journal.

Conferences
When scientists have work in progress, a conference can be a good place to present this, prior to publication. Abstracts (short summaries) are submitted, and subjected to a mild form of peer-review (i.e. the committee decides whether the abstract sucks or not). They are then published in a conference volume. The conference takes place, and the scientists present their work either as a talk, usually between 10-20 minutes long, or as a poster in a 2-3 hour poster session.


The advantages of this are the ability to talk to scientists in related fields, get ideas, swap knowledge of specimens/techniques, and to showcase one's own talents. It's an opportunity to collaborate with others. The disadvantages are the cost of travel and accommodation, and difficulties with getting time out of teaching or other commitments. Often, the conference organisers will have a press conference, which can raise a problem of a specimen being reported in the press that has not been officially named or published in a journal. This can be awkward for all involved.

Press releases to newspapers
If a piece of work is considered worthy, then the institution or journal may write a press release. This is sent to journalists in advance of the release of the article, so they are able to research and write their own piece. Sometimes this can result in an unfortunate game of Chinese Whispers - the press release doesn't quite get the science correct, and the news report doesn't quite interpret the press release correctly, and a scientist may find, say, that they've been quoted as saying that there are only 500 dinosaur species left to be discovered (!). However, this is probably the most common means of getting information to the general public, through the popular press. And there have been some really interesting cases that have arisen from press releases and press conferences.

Blogging and outreach
With some of the issues related to press releases, many scientists have decided to cut out the middle men (the press officers and journalists) and communicate directly with the public. Science blogging is becoming more and more popular, with big organisations such as Scientific American, Wired and Discover Magazine getting in on the action. The advantages are that the scientists get to tell the public exactly what they want to say, and the public get to ask the scientists questions directly. However, the disadvantages are that, while there are many journalists that slip up on the science, there are many scientists that really don't have the communication skills to make their science sound interesting. Plus, any old nutjob can set up a blog...

Where next?
Peer-review is a pretty decent method, all told. It gives credibility to the research and shows that other scientists have deemed the methods to be accurate and the data to be genuine. Publication in a scientific journal is a chartermark of sorts. However, it is not foolproof - there have been examples where peer-review has not caught academic fraud. I'd like to see double-blind peer-review as standard - the authors don't know who the reviewers are, and the reviewers don't know who the authors are, until publication. There is evidence that this improves the representation of female first authors, so presumably removing inherent sexism and prejudice that female authors can't do science...

Journal articles are also prohibitively expensive - it can be $35 to access a short communication in a journal, rendering much research inaccessible to people who are not at a wealthy university with an institutional subscription. However, there are moves towards open access for all government-funded research (surely only fair?), and there are pretty high-impact open access journals such as PLoS, who are giving the big academic publishers a run for their money. I would like to see more online free publication of scientific journal articles, each with the means to comment on them and debate the implications of the results or conclusions. That would be awesome.

858 words

Summer Homework 1: My Life In Science

Introduce yourself (to the extent that you are willing to be identified). Write about your earliest memories of science. How have these influenced you to study the sciences? Do you wish to continue to study sciences at university? If so, what made you choose this subject? If not, what has captured your mind more than science?

I am Julia Anderson, biology lecturer. I used to be Julia Heathcote, palaeontologist.

I was fortunate, growing up, to have parents who were pretty progressive in terms of gender stereotypes. I had as many trucks as dolls, a Fisher Price tool kit and doctor's kit. I pretty much lived in dungarees as a baby and toddler.


I was already perfecting That Look, though I think my hair looks better now.
Dad had cause to visit London at weekends, and would often stop off at the Natural History Museum when it was free for the last half hour or so. And he bought me a plastic dinosaur. It was a dark maroon injection-moulded Tyrannosaurus. This was swiftly followed by a beige Triceratops, yellow Iguanodon and green Megalosaurus. I was hooked.

From then on it was all about the science, and even more so, it was about the dinosaurs. My junior school teacher was impressed that, at the age of nine, I could spell the word "palaeontologist". My dad was convinced I was going to be his "Ellie", and that I would be a great scientist. There was a whole-family outing to see "Jurassic Park" when it came out in the cinema. On our first and only holiday as a family to the USA we went round an obscene number of museums. They endured afternoons fossil-hunting on beaches in Scotland and Dorset while on holiday.

I was academically excellent, so I won a scholarship to Nottingham High School for Girls for the sixth form. It was the only way I could do four A-levels (how times have changed!). I applied to, and was offered a place at Gonville & Caius College, the same Cambridge college my father had attended. I got the three A grades I needed, and spent a moderately miserable four years at university, before doing a Masters and being offered a PhD place in the US. That didn't work out so well, and I returned to the UK. I spent five years drifting from admin job to admin job, before taking a leap of faith and figuring I may as well become a teacher.

I was fascinated by the unknown, the other worlds that had existed on the Earth, completely unrecognisable. Dinosaurs and other large, mostly extinct taxa, have captured the minds of people in this way for centuries. I was particularly enamoured of sauropods, the ones with the long necks and tails. The evolution of gigantic forms was fascinating. Nothing like them has existed since. What was it about the Earth's environment that enabled this size increase? I remember a common put-down from my PhD supervisor being "You're not curing cancer". No, but sometimes knowledge for knowledge's sake makes human beings better people. Sometimes understanding the past can help us avoid disastrous conditions in the future. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

But in the end it wasn't for me. I tried to combine teaching with a reboot of my PhD part-time, but couldn't combine the two successfully. In the end, my students won. I have never regretted this decision. I get to work with clever, funny, curious, irreverent, kind youngsters every day. I get to help them see what a wonderful and awesome universe we live in. I get to raise their aspirations and create the scientists of the next decade.

I will never lose my curiosity and enthusiasm for science. I love to read up on new discoveries and breakthroughs, and I love to share that with my students. I will never be Dr Julia Heathcote, but as Mrs Julia Anderson I get to be Miss, Jules, Mum (!) and Prof - all genuinely things I've been called by students. And one day, maybe, a student who has been inspired to study life sciences at university by me and my teaching, whether it's an A-level, BTEC or HND student, might cure cancer.

638 words

Making Science "A Girl Thing"

This all broke yesterday, when I was rather busy trying not to cry as I said goodbye to my A2 class. An A2 class that, by and large, are off to study sciences at university, and who do not in any way identify with the teenagers portrayed in the video below. When I did get a chance to catch up with the catastrofuck on Twitter, this is what hit me:


This is one of the worst ways of getting girls interested in STEM careers that I've seen in some time. Certainly since the pink geek glasses and microscopes. The video quite rightly attracted the scorn of a number of scientists and teachers. A number of criticisms were made, summarised below.

1. That sort of clothing would be a health & safety disaster in the majority of laboratories, despite what CSI suggests.
   
2. There is a hell of a lot more to science than knowing what goes in makeup.
   
3. They still can't resist a man in a white coat looking down a microscope.
   
4. It's promoting short skirts and makeup to pre-teen girls.
   
5. The "i" in "science" is a lipstick, FFS. I'd almost have been tempted to download some of the free posters for the lab, but for the lipstick.
   
6. The website is full of stereotypes and "avatars" of science - inaccurate Rutherford models of atoms, flasks and beakers of random coloured liquids, and some mathematical equations that I don't think make any sense.
   
7. It detracts from the actual message of the campaign.
   
8. It's fucking patronising.

The unfortunate thing is that the profiles the EU project is promoting are really interesting. Paul and I were saying that all that was really needed as a teaser, was each scientist introducing herself with a few caption slides in between. And ditch the lipstick.

The people behind the campaign did remove the teaser video, realising that it was detrimental to the message they were trying to convey, but I fear the damage is done. For one thing, even if the aim of the teaser (cynically) was to get people talking on the basis there's no such thing as bad publicity, the teenagers just weren't present for the conversation. We were all adults on Twitter, bitching, swearing or contributing to the hilarious #scienceboything hashtag. Some adults reported back what their children thought of the video, but that was it.

Sophia Collins, who developed the I'm A Scientist concept, had some more constructive things to say. I'm A Scientist has been without a doubt one of the most effective means at my disposal of getting all my students, male and female, interested in science as a career. Seeing a range of different faces doing interesting things in science is powerful. And they don't all have to have perfect manicures, glamorous wardrobes and crippling high heels. A day or two earlier, @teachingofsci linked to an abstract for a paper entitled "My Fair Physicist? Feminine Math and Science Role Models Demotivate Young Girls". I'd love to see a copy of the whole paper, but I'm most struck by this line in the abstract:

"Study 2 suggested that feminine STEM role models' combination of femininity and success seemed particularly unattainable to STEM-disidentified girls."

So for all that, the EU campaign could end up having the opposite effect, as teenage girls feel even more pressure to conform to a certain formula even within the STEM field. We're also facing a deeper look at the "macho culture" in the sciences, since it is turning women off to science.

Could we not just stand to improve the range of scientists that children learn about at school? Maybe not cutting the Researchers in Residence scheme would have been a good idea. And maybe employers could put in decent equality policies to silence sexist jokes, harassment, assault and discrimination against wormen.

Until then, I will stand at the front of my lab, refusing to be manicured, made up and tottering around on high heels, and I will be the role model my female (and indeed male) students need - unapologetically enthusiastic about science, full of high expectations for them, and their biggest cheerleader.

A Coincidence

When two or more palaeontologists are in the same room, it is inevitable that one will suggest going for an alcoholic beverage of some description. So when real cider-lover Dave Hone stopped by for a chat and to inspect the gecko, I suggested we hit the Red Lion, home to real ales, real cider, the European pork scratchings mountain, and Eddie the cross-dressing dog. And, it would appear, pterosaurs:


It's a model of the Pterodactylus gargoyle on the front of the Natural History Museum, part of an exhibit by a local artist, Mac, who had died earlier that year. Shown, of course, with Dave for scale.

There was another Pterodactylus closer to the bar, but it was wearing a pink feather boa and wasn't so exciting (or maybe we'd just had too many pints by that point). Still, something of a fortunate coincidence to be able to take a pterosaur palaeontologist to a pub with a few pterosaur models kicking around.

The Truth About Fieldwork Data Collection

Skidding in late like one of my students handing in homework, here's my submission for the Accretionary Wedge #38, with the hope that since Anne's deadline was "before you go to bed" and that there may be some bloggers in Alaska who are still up, and that crucially Anne may still be asleep for another hour or so, I can sneak in my post.

The theme is "Back to school", and I've been back at school for three weeks (many more if you include enrolment and induction). I am teaching my favourite A-level topic - "The Natural Environment and Species Survival" (and crucially have succeeded in palming off all the immunology and infection stuff on my colleague), involving a lot of evolution, climatology and ecological principles. The students covered a bit of biodiversity and conservation last year but this builds on it.


The A2 class of 2011 on fieldwork - all now off to university, and since this photo now appears in the prospectus I feel okay about posting it online...
For me, one of the most important things I can teach my students is how to do fieldwork. I appreciate that few of my students will ever go into a field-based science (although I am delighted to report that the student I dispatched to do Palaeobiology & Evolution at Portsmouth is having a fantastic time), but it is a superb skill. For the past two years the A2s haven't had a choice - their coursework component has been field-based. This year I may be giving the students an option to do lab-based work instead, but I will still strongly encourage them to still choose a fieldwork project.

It is difficult for the students to think of an original project. Lab-based projects, if unoriginal, give predictable results, and students are perhaps simply repeating the same experiment over and over again through the years. I know I looked at Elodea, photosynthesis and light intensity for my A-level practical - yawn. What I like about fieldwork is its unpredictability. Over the short period of time we have in the field, students essentially choose an area and study biotic and abiotic factors - proximity to hedges or streams, pH of soil, amount of sunlight received, soil moisture, number of species. Despite using a small private nature reserve, and having done this two years running, I have yet to see two projects with the same results - they always choose a different transect, or have a different idea about how frequently to take measurements.

And that is the the crux of it all. I had a student before the summer who, on a short practical quadrat-chucking exercise on campus complained, "This is crap, there's hardly anything here and it makes no sense". Essentially I said to him:

"But don't you see? There is hardly anything here. And you're measuring exactly what is there - you have no expectations of what the answer should be, so all you are doing is pure data collection. Collecting data without an idea of what the results should be is as close as you'll get to eliminating your own bias in ecological fieldwork. Also, do you realise that you are the first person to ever collect this data? No one has ever measured that species, on that transect before."

I saw the realisation dawn on him - this is what science is actually about. Doing an experiment and collecting data without having any idea what the result will be. I dislike the hypothesis-driven way of doing science. It can end up putting the cart before the horse. I'd rather approach a scientific investigation with "I wonder what happens if I do X" than "I think if I do X then Y will happen". There are, of course, times when either is appropriate, but when students are taking their first tentative steps towards doing "real" science, with no teachers' notes and "right answers", the prospect of Y not happening can be disheartening.

So I would encourage my colleagues to be more honest about data collection in science, and to give the students the chance to investigate questions you don't know the answer to (admittedly, easier once dealing with undergrads). Real science rarely gives you a nice straight line graph or results you can use to prove or disprove your hypothesis. Real science is anomalous, full of errors (all ready to be minimised by the prospective scientists as they hone their technique) and deliciously exciting.

Watching Dinosaurs

I've been indulging my not-so-inner dino-nerd over the past few weeks. Firstly, I was able to do something I last did eighteen - EIGHTEEN!! - years ago, and see "Jurassic Park" again at the cinema, courtesy of Cineworld's re-release. Paul and I went on Saturday. I'm delighted (and a little bit embarrassed) to say I still welled up when they first saw the Brachiosaurus. And the kitchen scene is one of the few scenes that, no matter how many times I see it, makes my palms sweat:


Despite its age (and some pretty dodgy science), it is still one of those magical movies that I can watch over and over again.

In contrast, the BBC's "Planet Dinosaur" is not so great. Having seen "Jurassic Park" at the age of 13, and "Walking With Dinosaurs" at 19, my formative years were shaped by some truly superb CGI animation, not to mention the robotics. So I hold all dinosaur television up to those rather high standards. "Planet Dinosaur" falls quite short of these.

There is a great deal of merit in the use of infographics, a cut away to a Greg Paul-esque skeleton (did they get permission or will we endure another long rant on the Dinosaur Mailing List?) and reference to fossil evidence for many of the statements being made. I am particularly delighted to see, via the trailer, that John Hurt is able to pronounce Diplodocus properly (DIP-lo-DOE-cus as opposed to di-PLOD-o-cus).


But there is much to be annoyed about. In the first episode, Spinosaurus was dribbling the basketball rather than holding it - the orientation of the wrists such that the "palms" face each other is pretty established anatomy now, and really should not have slipped by. The Ouranosaurus looked so rubbery that it was almost as if the entire budget had been blown on the carnivores, and the landscape seemed more appropriate to the example footage from a computer game advert - we were truly spoilt by WWD's use of real footage from modern areas. I shall step aside on much of the science though, in favour of Dave Hone's more detailed discussion of the first two episodes.

For me, I'm looking at the BBC as a prospective teaching resource. I was able to use some of the superb Channel 4 show "Inside Nature's Giants" for my AS Biology class, and it's nice to be able to do that with other documentaries. Sadly, "Planet Dinosaur" only has merit for me as an example of what is wrong with the reconstruction. While they are undoubtedly limited by budget and specimens available, the first episode has something like four apex predators (Carcharodontosaurus, Spinosaurus, Rugops and Sarcosuchus) and a single herbivore (Ouranosaurus). GCSE students would know that is an unsustainable ecosystem with too many predators and not enough prey. At A2 the students should know that one could not have two species occupying the same niche (with the exception of Sarcosuchus the others are pretty much in the same terrestrial top carnivore niche) without competitive exclusion or resource partitioning. There is no suggestion of this presented, though I am sure there will be a loyal reader who can tell me whether this is the sort of thing that is being thought about with such assemblages (I'm ridiculously out of touch with the literature).

Some will no doubt say I am over-thinking this. It is after all a popular science show. However, the BBC has, within its public service remit, an obligation to educate and inform. And a documentary, even based mainly on CGI animation, should educate and inform. I am unable to use it except as an example of a failure to do both, and I don't think that's what the BBC intended with the series. I am, even nearly two decades later, very forgiving of Jurassic Park - it was never meant to teach its audience about dinosaurs, but was to entertain, delight and terrify in equal measure.

The BBC, however, gets no such leniency from this particular dino-nerd teacher...

Drawings Of Scientists

I am teaching, for the second year running, the BTEC Level 3 unit "Perceptions of Science". We kick off with what a scientific theory is, and I beat them soundly over the head with Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn. We had an interesting chat at the start of the lesson about the CERN neutrinos and what it was that scientists were trying to achieve by releasing the story and data prior to publication (and whether this was going to follow Popper's or Kuhn's ideas about how science works).

Now we've moved on to science and the media, and I'll be showing them various clips and programmes, including Brian Cox's 2010 Huw Wheldon lecture and "Mad and Bad: 60 Years of Science on TV". But I thought I'd start off with the good old Fermilab Drawings of Scientists game.


I got the students into groups to do this, and was delighted with the results. Now, I have had conversations with some rather smug, sanctimonious types (the sort who don't really like talking to anyone who isn't either a scientist or important), who think that there is no merit in this whatsoever. Still, I persevered. And the students noticed that their scientist drawings all contained:

• Glasses/goggles
  
• Wild hair
  
• Beards
  
• Labcoats
  
• Test tubes or other "typical" lab kit

And that's all rather expected. They are, in some ways, choosing avatars of scientists - representatives of entities recognisable as scientists. Whether that is the fault of the old Frankenstein movies, or dodgy Open University shows from the 1970s is perhaps up for debate. We were able to discuss the clothes that scientists actually wear, and that labcoats are really only appropriate for a very small number of scientific disciplines (I like showing them photos of palaeontologists wearing labcoats, overalls, hiking boots, jeans and t-shirts, and even medical scrubs for aspects of their work).

What they didn't pick up on was that all the scientists they had drawn were male. And the girls in the group were in full indignant feminist rant mode, when I also pointed out to them that, for such a diverse group of students, they'd all rather stuck with white scientists. They were horrified. One student asked for his group's poster back so he could shade the skin. I was pleased with the reaction - I simply noted for them that it seemed a shame that, for all that they were achieving in the college, they still had an idea of scientists as not necessarily being people like them.

I think they'll have mulled over this tonight. And while students still have this reaction, then I still see merit in the exercise, whatever certain scientists think.

A Late-Night Thought

As I wait for my husband to finish his nightcap cup of coffee, a thought popped into my head.

About this time of year in 2003, I was a PhD student in St Louis, MO. About six weeks on from irreparably ruining my chances of progressing by making the rookie error of defending myself from assaults by my supervisor, he was doing his best to break us all. One wonders who told him that grad school was meant to be like boot camp complete with drill sergeant shouting 24-7.

In one particular dissection of my many failings, he told me that I didn't have what it took to become an assistant professor like him and that I wasn't up to tenure track. I remember saying that I didn't want to become a professor - that I had no desire to teach and that having seen how miserable he and his wife were as assistant professors I felt a career of research in a museum was the best option.

I am so thankful that it was a knee-jerk defensive remark on my part. Sometimes I wonder what would have happened if I'd gone into teaching after my MRes and avoided the six really shitty years between August 2003 and August 2009. But I know I will never have a manager as awful as my PhD supervisor. I got some great university lecturing experience out of it. I may not have been such a strong candidate without that, showing up for my interview with no teaching qualification and very little time teaching under-18s.

I'm suffering a little existential crisis at the moment, especially in reference to the A-Level classes. I've taught A2 for two years and AS for a year. I know this stuff. I've passed my PGCE. I got a Grade 1 at my last observation. But lately I'm coming into the staffroom after one of these sessions and sitting there dazed, wondering if I can still do it. I've got some really bright students, genuinely destined for medical/vet school, and the weight of their expectations feels heavy on my shoulders.

But if I can't hack it, then I will prove that bastard right. And I can't have that.

Microteaches #5: Back In The Jug Agane

I'm determined to bash something out for the blog before teaching starts tomorrow. I couldn't think of anything suitably moving. I felt envious of The Learning Spy's department - his colleagues seemed a lot keener to embrace new technologies and to genuinely improve learning. Whereas I'm the only one in mine who knows what a QR code is. That's going to be an uphill struggle. I want to use them to put links to websites, facts and trivia, exam tips and videos around the labs for students to seek out. As an incentive I might even put the answers to the first AS Biology test up there.


For all the newness and shininess of a brand new building and lab, there are still snags. The skylight in the forensics lab is amazing and it's so bright and clean-looking in there. However, it's impossible to see the IWB. So I'm crippled in there, forced to resort to regular whiteboard and pens until they figure out how to put a horizontal blind across.

But I'm still really looking forward to teaching again. I met the new AS groups last week, and can't wait to get to know them properly. Each year I have relied on the ease and joy of teaching the A2 class to cancel out any bad bits. I've not seen many of the incoming A2 class yet, and as it's a class fed in from the two AS classes last year, there are still some students I've never taught before. They've got some big shoes to fill, as the classes of 2010 and 2011 were brilliant. They'll probably manage it.

This year I am less prepared than I have ever been for classes in terms of formal paperwork. Of my five hours' teaching tomorrow, two hours are going to be nothing more than getting to know the groups and handing out the assignment sheets. I have a practical to do with one group of students after that, then there are still some induction activities going on. Broadband conked out today for a bit, so I haven't done as much work as I wanted to. The good news is, lesson plans are overrated, and I can demonstrate that I have planned my lessons (the lab technicians looked at my requests for this week like I'd just given them each £500).

So the Year 1 forensic science students will be learning about the scientific method and the nature of science. There are some awesome ideas about it, many of which focus on evolution, so we can talk about what a theory really is. The Year 2 applied science students will be hacking away at a kidney later in the week, but they will be nervous about having a unit on plant sciences to study later in the year. Maybe they'll take a bit of notice if I give them some of the important questions that plant science may be able to answer. They might also get put off animal sciences when we do the physiology of the nervous system and muscle contraction, which I intend to demonstrate thus:


The AS students will be asked to help with @teachingofsci's exit questionnaire, to which I have assigned a shorter URL of bit.ly/physicsQ, as they'll never remember the full URL. We had a lot of students take physics this year - enough for two groups at long last - so we might not have so many non-physicists, but it's worth a go.

I'm looking for CPD. I'm going to see if I can extract some money to go to the ASE 2012 conference (hey, they'd have paid for me to go to Las Vegas for SVP, so they'd better pay for me to go to Liverpool!). I'm going to try to be more involved in the two blog carnivals I love most: Scientiae and the Accretionary Wedge. This is of course if the management lay off the Trial By Ordeal daily meeting regime of the past fortnight. I'll be taking Tom Bennett's School Bullshit Bingo card into the next meeting with me. The phrase "sharing best practice" is like fingernails down a blackboard. I have no problem with the action it signifies, but the phrase sucks.

See you in October, I guess...

Microteaches #4: Already Bored

I've been off for ten days now, and the weather has rewarded my year's hard work with rain - all my grand plans for reading in the garden, going out on day trips and doing a lot of catching rays are on hold until Britain remembers that it's fucking summer and is supposed to be warm. The weather picked up nicely on Friday, when I picked up Chris from Highly Allochthonous from the airport and took him for beer and sausages - I think we went through a full reminiscence of every lecturer we'd had in Cambridge Earth Sciences.

There's a new site called Instagrok, which markets itself as a search engine for educational materials. I'm quite taken by the idea of having the more commercial sites discounted from my searches, so I'll be trying it out over the holiday.

Clearing some of my starred feed items, my husband shared this little gem courtesy of The Onion:


I like the satires about fundamentalism and creationism that involve the other students objecting. Sometimes it feels like it's only the teachers complaining about anti-evolution sentiments in the biology classroom, but it's worth remembering that there are a lot of students who want to learn the science, as Doonesbury demonstrates:


On the subject of inspiring students overcoming the odds to study, the Mary Sue ran a feature on Sada Mire, the only active Somali archaeologist in the world. One of my Somali students is really keen on anthropology, and somehow I have got to get her to meet Dr Mire as soon as possible.

I'm on a bit of a women-in-science binge, to prepare for my additional role next year as the chair of our Women In Science committee, and may well have more to say about this, but I noted this press release reported on Labspaces. We have a long way to go, ladies!

I'll be using this XKCD cartoon in my classes when we have to look at correlation and causation:


And I'll finish off with something that will make the former students who read my blog snigger like they're still at school (bonus points guys if you download and read the paper!): "Immune Activation Reduces Sperm Quality in the Great Tit". Don't say I don't give you interesting articles to read!

Just A Little Sorrowed Talk

The day I left school to sit my GCSE exams, I remember the last song I heard on the radio before leaving the house. It was "Ordinary World" by Duran Duran, which had come out three years earlier, and I remembered these lines above anything else:

Here beside the news of holy war and holy need
Ours is just a little sorrowed talk
My grandmother shut me up when I whined in a pithier manner: "Worse things happen at sea", which is a really good way of putting a girl off cruises for life. And there are some monumentally appalling things happening in the world, things that I cannot even bear to watch on the evening news anymore. I teach students who have been through so much: refugees and asylum seekers, torture victims with PTSD, whose life stories have made me weep. I get it. And yet, awful things still happen to the rest of us, which is something that Richard Dawkins doesn't seem to get.

For women all over the world, life is lived with a little hint of fear. This is summed up nicely in a post from a couple of years ago, entitled "Schrödinger's Rapist" - in summary: men, until we open the box, you exist in two states - someone who will rape us and someone who will not rape us. The vast majority of you are, thankfully, the latter, and you are wonderful. We don't particularly want to open the box and find out you're the former. Certainly not on a deserted tube carriage, or working late at night at the office, or in an elevator on our way to our hotel room. The odds of you being "someone who will rape us" become much greater in our minds if you do not take no for an answer.

For those of you late to all this, and wondering why I'm rabbiting on, read the "Open letter to Professor Dawkins from victims of sexual assault", posted at Almost Diamonds. Because looking at the "relative awfulness", so to speak, of an uncomfortable come-on in an elevator versus female genital mutilation is flawed at best, downright insulting to victims everywhere.

I signed the letter. This is why. I don't feel as able to write eloquently about it all anymore, so it's just as well all the gory details are permanently online. I spoke about it to a couple of students who had been through a similar experience, and who wanted support and reassurance - it was comfort to know someone else who "got it", but my heart aches for those girls, and all the others whose stories I've read in the comment list at Almost Diamonds.

I wish we didn't have these scars.

A Bit Of Maternal Pride

I've had a very busy and stressful fortnight (today I noticed I now have a full-on streak of grey hair at the front, which although not caused by the stress seemed an apt visual accompaniment...). Another member of staff and I joined up to organise our college's participation in National Science and Engineering Week. We had trips up the wazoo - to a "Chemistry In Action" event, to a criminology workshop, to the Science Museum and to the Natural History Museum.

I would like to apologise firstly to the staff in the Sexual Nature exhibit for the large drawing of a penis left on the comment board. I shall encourage them to draw it more anatomically correct next time...


My BTEC students have been taking part in I'm A Scientist: Get Me Out Of Here!, in the Space Zone. If any of you think that the vocational students are unable to deal with complex theoretical ideas, then check out my lad "waveicle" and some of the questions he's asking - every time I see a new question from him I get a swell of pride.

Great friend of mine Dave Hone very kindly agreed to come and give a talk on feathered dinosaurs, which was attended by about 50 or so students ranging from pre-GCSE up to A2. All I was able to offer him in return was one of the chef's more "experimental" recipes in the staff canteen, but there'll be a nice big pint of cider with his name on it down the Town Wharf come the summer. And he did say the students were better behaved than some of his undergrads, which is always nice to hear (even if I did have to give a couple of girls the hairdryer treatment later for being physically incapable of not speaking for more than ten seconds)...

And finally, the AS science students, admittedly with some degree of inertia, undertook some Science Busking activities, which drew absolutely massive crowds. The nice thing about objects with a lot of inertia is that, while it is really difficult to get them moving, once they're moving they really go! These guys were no exception. Since my video footage is up on the officially sanctioned YouTube channel, I can at last show you the little darlings in action:


You'll see me hamming it up pretending to be all nervous that the water balloon was going to burst, and the absolute highlight of the entire video is when the boys levitate the Principal from 2:30 or so onwards. So I'm incredibly proud of my students - they've risen to a lot of challenges in the past week and shown that they're growing and developing into very insightful, communicative scientists. I wonder if any of them will get a Nobel Prize?

(Of course this now means that I've told you where it is I work, so a) please don't come and stalk me, and b) if you look back at any of my blog posts and find I've done something stupid like call a manager a nobber, please let me know.)

MYRSFO: Scottish Qualifications

I assume that, if I had studied in Scotland and was training to teach Scottish qualifications, I would find these far less bewildering than they actually are. Fortunately, I happen to be married to a Scotsman who has been very helpful with translating for me. Rather than specifications, the list of criteria is referred to as the arrangements on the SQA website.

Standard Grade
There are general and credit levels within this (broadly equivalent to foundation and higher tiers in GCSEs), but for the sake of getting the information down, I've combined the two.

• State that competition occurs when organisms have a need for the same resources
  
• Describe some effects of competition
  
• State that a species is a group of interbreeding organisms whose offspring are fertile
  
• State that variation can occur within a species
  
• Give examples of continuous and discontinuous variation
  
• Explain what is meant by continuous and discontinuous variation

Now, what has shocked me is that at Standard Grade, there is absolutely no mention of evolution or natural selection. There is brief mention, in topic 3b, that "Pupils should be aware that selection favours those individuals that leave most surviving offspring. This sub-topic provides opportunities for pupils to investigate ways in which animals achieve this through sexual reproduction". But that is really not good at all. Paul has suggested that evolution might be covered earlier in the curriculum, during general science, but that's not really an excuse.

The Intermediate 1 and 2 qualifications listed are, I understand, more vocational in nature, and as such because I've excluded BTEC and applied science courses for the rest of the UK, I'll exclude them here too. There are some aspects of evolution included in Intermediate 2, which serves to reassure that the Powers That Be do not think that evolutionary biology is only useful to those destined for university.

Higher
Highers are equivalent to A-Levels (give or take), and are taken over one year, as far as I am aware.

• Natural selection:
  - The survival of those organisms best suited to their environment
  - The concept of the species
  - The importance of isolating mechanisms as barriers to gene exchange leading to evolution of new species
  - Adaptive radiation
  - The high-speed evolution of organisms such as antibiotic resistant bacteria and the melanic peppered moth
  - The conservation of species through wildlife reserves, captive breeding and cell banks. The maintenance of genetic diversity

There are some small bits about succession as well, but the majority of the relevant bits are covered in the module on variation and adaptation.

Advanced Higher
Back in the Jurassic period, these were Sixth Year Studies, and students took them in their final year, usually with another couple of Highers for good measure. Since neither Paul nor I really know what these are all about now, so more recent Scottish school leavers feel free to comment. Not all schools would have offered all the SYS subjects, so it is possible that this is still the case.

• Analysing the genomes of other species. Comparison of the human genome with other species reveals remarkable similarities
  
• Biotic interactions:
  - Distinction between biotic and abiotic components of ecosystem; density-dependent and densityindependent factors. Interspecific and intraspecific interactions
  
• Predation:
  - Predator/prey population cycles. The role of predators in maintaining diversity in ecosystems by reducing the population density of prey species allowing weaker competitors to survive
  - Defences against predation; camouflage (crypsis and disruptive coloration); warning (aposematic) coloration. Batesian and Mullerian mimicry
  
• Competition:
  - Exploitation competition and interference competition. The concept of fundamental niche as a set of resources a species is capable of using. Realised niche as the set of resources actually used due to competition. Resource partitioning. The competitive exclusion principle
  
• Symbiosis:
  - Parasitism
  - Commensalism
  - Mutualism
  
• The costs, benefits and consequences of interactions
  
• Changes in complexity of ecosystems
  - Autogenic succession (primary and secondary succession). The increase in complexity of ecosystems from pioneer through to climax communities. Facilitation of change in early stages. Increase in complexity shown by increase in: diversity of species, variety of habitats and niches, complexity of food webs. Changes in stability and productivity through succession
  - Reference to effects of external factors in allogenic succession and relatively short-term nature of degradative (heterotrophic) successions
  
• Evolution of behaviour:
  - Natural selection of behaviour patterns
  - Single gene effect on behaviour
  
• Feeding behaviour:
  - Predation strategies
  - Foraging behaviour
  - Defence strategies
  
• Sexual behaviour:
  - Male and female investment
  - Courtship and display

Those readers in Scottish universities, this is an absolute gift - almost all aspects of palaeontological research can be related to the specification for Advanced Higher, so knock yourselves out there. I wish that the A-Level specifications had half of this detail, as in my humble opinion this is way more fun and interesting than considering the ethics of performance-enhancing substances.

MYRSFO: A2 Biology

By A2, the students should be able to deal with some quite high-level research, and read some straightforward scientific papers. They have probably carried out some ecological fieldwork, so are used to the particular issues raised by sample size, data collection, and trying to do science in horizontal rain (why there isn't more uptake for earth science degrees, I do not know).

AQA
Unit BIOL4

• Succession from pioneer species to climax community
  
• At each stage in succession, certain species may be recognised which change the environment so that it becomes more suitable for other species
  
• The changes in the abiotic environment result in a less hostile environment and changing diversity
  
• Species exist as one or more populations
  
• The concepts of gene pool and allele frequency
  
• The Hardy-Weinberg principle. The conditions under which the principle applies
  
• Differential reproductive success and its effect on the allele frequency within a gene pool
  
• Directional and stabilising selection

CCEA
Unit A2.1
Students should be able to:

• Understand how populations grow
  
• Distinguish between r- and K-selected species
  
• Understand the ways in which populations may interact

Unit A2.2

Students should be able to:

• Understand the concept of the gene pool
  
• Understand the Hardy-Weinberg equation and apply it to calculate allele and genotype frequencies in an outbreeding population
  
• Understand selection and its contribution to the maintenance of polymorphic populations and evolutionary change in populations
  
• Understand the concept of species and the process of speciation

Edexcel
Unit 4
Students will be assessed on their ability to:

• Describe the concept of succession to a climax community
  
• Describe how evolution (a change in the allele frequency) can come about through gene mutation and natural selection
  
• Explain how reproductive isolation can lead to speciation
  
• Describe the role of the scientific community in validating new evidence (including molecular biology, eg DNA, proteomics) supporting the accepted scientific theory of evolution (scientific journals, the peer review process, scientific conferences)
  
• Describe how DNA profiling is used for identification and determining genetic relationships between organisms (plants and animals)

OCR
Unit F215
Candidates should be able to:

• explain why variation is essential in selection
  
• use the Hardy–Weinberg principle to calculate allele frequencies in populations
  
• explain, with examples, how environmental factors can act as stabilising or evolutionary forces of natural selection
  
• explain how genetic drift can cause large changes in small populations
  
• explain the role of isolating mechanisms in the evolution of new species, with reference to ecological (geographic), seasonal (temporal) and reproductive mechanisms
  
• explain the significance of the various concepts of the species, with reference to the biological species concept and the phylogenetic (cladistic/evolutionary) species concept
  
• explain, with examples, the terms interspecific and intraspecific competition

WJEC/CBAC
Unit BY5

• Genetic and environmental factors produce variation between individuals
  
• Variation may be continuous and discontinuous; heritable and nonheritable. Inter and intra-specific competition for breeding success and survival
  
• Selective agencies (e.g. supply of food, breeding sites, climate). The gene pool and genetic drift
  
• Selection can change the frequency of alleles in a population
  
• Isolation and speciation
  
• Separation of populations by geographical, behavioural, morphological seasonal and other isolation mechanisms. Hybrid sterility
  
• Darwin's theory of evolution that existing species have arisen through modification of ancestral species by natural selection
  
• Principles of succession as illustrated by the change from bare rock to woodland
  
• Use of terms primary and secondary succession, pioneers, sere and climax community

A2 Biology is much more concerned with ecology, speciation and reproductive isolation. Some new examples of evidence for speciation, co-evolution of parasites, or even a tame scientist with a collection of cichlid fish, will go down very well indeed.

MYRSFO: AS Biology

After the somewhat vague and bewildering GCSE specifications, we settle down a little with the post-compulsory qualifications. A-Level is divided into two: AS and A2. It seems natural to stick with this division here, and to go with AS Biology first.

AQA
Unit BIOL 2

• Candidates should be able to analyse and interpret data relating to interspecific and intraspecific variation
  
• Candidates should appreciate the tentative nature of any conclusions that can be drawn relating to the causes of variation
  
• The principles and importance of taxonomy
  
• Classification systems consist of a hierarchy in which groups are contained within larger composite groups and there is no overlap
  
• The phylogenetic groups are based on patterns of evolutionary history
  
• A species may be defined in terms of observable similarities and the ability to produce fertile offspring
  
• One hierarchy comprises Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, Species
  
• Candidates should be able to appreciate the difficulties of defining species and the tentative nature of classifying organisms as distinct species
  
• Courtship behaviour as a necessary precursor to successful mating. The role of courtship in species recognition
  
• An index of diversity describes the relationship between the number of species and the number of individuals in a community

CCEA
Unit AS.2
Students should be able to:

• Understand that organisms are adapted to their environment
  
• Understand that ecological factors have an influence on the distribution of organisms
  
• Understand the role of selection in maintaining the adaptiveness of populations of organisms in their environment
  
• Understand that biodiversity involves variation among living organisms at all levels of biological organisation
  
• Measure species diversity and appreciate that genetic diversity can be measured
  
• Understand the principle of taxonomy
  
• Understand the concept of the species
  
• Understand the other taxa within which species can be grouped
  
• Understand phylogenetic taxonomy as a means of classifying sets of species according to ancestral relationships
  
• Appreciate the five kingdom system of classification

Edexcel
Unit 2
Students will be assessed on their ability to:

• Explain the terms biodiversity and endemism and describe how biodiversity can be measured within a habitat using species richness and within a species using genetic diversity, e.g. variety of alleles in a gene pool
  
• Describe the concept of niche and discuss examples of adaptation of organisms to their environment (behavioural, physiological and anatomical)
  
• Describe how natural selection can lead to adaptation and evolution
  
• Discuss the process and importance of critical evaluation of new data by the scientific community, which leads to new taxonomic groupings (i.e. three domains based on molecular phylogeny)
  
• Discuss and evaluate the methods used by zoos and seedbanks in the conservation of endangered species and their genetic diversity (e.g. scientific research, captive breeding programmes, reintroduction programmes and education)

OCR
Unit F212
Candidates should be able to:

• define the terms species, habitat and biodiversity
  
• explain how biodiversity may be considered at different levels; habitat, species and genetic
  
• define the terms classification, phylogeny and taxonomy
  
• explain the relationship between classification and phylogeny
  
• outline the binomial system of nomenclature and the use of scientific (Latin) names for species
  
• discuss the fact that classification systems were based originally on observable features but more recent approaches draw on a wider range of evidence to clarify relationships between organisms, including molecular evidence
  
• define the term variation
  
• discuss the fact that variation occurs within as well as between species
  
• describe the differences between continuous and discontinuous variation, using examples of a range of characteristics found in plants, animals and microorganisms
  
• explain both genetic and environmental causes of variation
  
• outline the behavioural, physiological and anatomical (structural) adaptations of organisms to their environments
  
• explain the consequences of the four observations made by Darwin in proposing his theory of natural selection
  
• define the term speciation
  
• discuss the evidence supporting the theory of evolution, with reference to fossil, DNA and molecular evidence
  
• outline how variation, adaptation and selection are major components of evolution
  
• discuss why the evolution of pesticide resistance in insects and drug resistance in microorganisms has implications for humans

WJEC/CBAC
Unit BY2
All organisms are related through their evolutionary history:

• Biodiversity is the number of different organisms on the planet. Biodiversity varies spatially and over time
  
• Biodiversity has been generated through natural selection and adaptation over millions of years. Adaptive radiation e.g. Darwin’s finches on the Galapagos
  
• Organisms are classified into groups based on their evolutionary relationships. Classification places organisms into discrete and hierarchical groups with other closely related species. The need for classification and its tentative nature. Characteristic features of Kingdoms: Prokaryotae, Protoctista, Plantae, Fungi, Animalia
  
• Animal biodiversity is classified into over 20 major phyla and several minor ones with each phylum containing organisms based on a basic blueprint. Basic features of: Annelids, Arthropods, Chordates. Arthropods are subdivided into four groups (details not required). Some phyla contain many more species than others
  
• Physical features and biochemical methods can be used to assess the relatedness of organisms. DNA ‘genetic fingerprinting’ and enzyme studies show relatedness without the problem of morphological convergence
  
• All organisms are named according to the Binomial system. The species concept

At AS, OCR seems to be the most comprehensive (although many of the exam boards make up for it at A2). AS is mostly concerned with biodiversity and natural selection - more complex ideas of speciation are to be left until A2. Some boards mention phylogenies (morphological and molecular) at this stage, but you'll find others wait to A2. I particularly like WJEC's statement for the module, that "all organisms are related through their evolutionary history".

MYRSFO: GCSE Biology

Here are the relevant parts of the GCSE specifications for evolutionary palaeobiology. GCSE Chemistry contains some aspects of climate change, and GCSE Physics has some astrobiology and the evolution of our atmosphere, but this'd be a humongous post if I included all that.

AQA
Unit B1
Candidates should use their skills, knowledge and understanding of how science works:

• to suggest how organisms are adapted to the conditions in which they live
  
• to suggest the factors for which organisms are competing in a given habitat
  
• to suggest reasons for the distribution of animals or plants in a particular habitat
  
• to suggest reasons why scientists cannot be certain about how life began on Earth
  
• to interpret evidence relating to evolutionary theory
  
• to suggest reasons why Darwin’s theory of natural selection was only gradually accepted
  
• to identify the differences between Darwin’s theory of evolution and conflicting theories [Yes, this does mean they have to look at Lamarckism...]
  
• to suggest reasons for the different theories

There really isn't much more about evolution. I'm not a fan of AQA, either at GCSE or at A-Level. The GCSE course does not really deal in depth with anything (although GCSE Chemistry has a pleasing amount of geology in it), and the A-Level exams are an exercise in obfuscation (you may remember some outcry about the infamous "shrews" paper of January 2010.

CCEA
Pupils should:

• learn that living organisms are adapted to survive in the environment, for example, adaptations to life on land, and in water
  
• understand how variation and selection may lead to evolution or extinction, including:
  - natural selection as variation within phenotypes and competition for resources leading to differential survival
  - the implications of natural selection for the concept of evolution as a continuing process

Of all the boards, this has the least evolutionary content. The role of the fossil record as evidence for evolution is not on the Northern Ireland Programme of Study, whereas it is for England and Wales. This is disappointing, but not surprising. The students are, however, expected to be able to identify and classify a large number of plants, animals and fungi, so with any luck they should have good taxonomical knowledge.

Edexcel
Unit B1
Students will be assessed on their ability to:

• describe how organisms in an ecosystem compete with each other for resources
  
• explain population data in terms of predator-prey interdependence and intra-species competition
  
• demonstrate an understanding of how computer models can be used to study populations, and show an awareness of the advantages and disadvantages of these models compared with real data
  
• demonstrate an understanding of the principles of natural selection, to include:
  - how individuals within a species can have characteristics that promote more successful reproduction (survival of the fittest)
  - how, over generations, the effects of natural selection result in changes within species and the formation of new species from genetic variants or mutants that are better adapted to their environment
  - how species that are less well-adapted to a changing environment can become extinct
  
• explain how fossils provide evidence for evolution
  
• discuss why Charles Darwin experienced difficulty in getting his theory of evolution through natural selection accepted by the scientific community in the 19th century
  
• explain the principles of classifying organisms and the difficulties encountered in attempting to do so, as illustrated by the five kingdoms, the use of phylum, class, order, family, genus, species and the main characteristics of the five vertebrate groups

Unit B2
Students will be assessed on their ability to:

• explore the principles of interdependence, adaptation, competition and predation and explain how these factors influence the distribution and population sizes of organisms in a given terrestrial or aquatic environment
  
• interpret data on environmental change
  
• describe the special nature of some extreme environments, notably deep sea volcanic vents, the Antarctic and high altitudes

Unit B3
At the end of this unit students will be able to describe and explain the following statements and carry out the tasks indicated:

• vertebrate herbivores may feed in large groups or herds, and they may do so for protection in numbers. This is a successful evolutionary strategy, even though some members of the herd may be killed
  
• some animals, in particular birds and mammals, have developed special behaviours for the rearing of young, since they display parental care
  
• parental care is a successful evolutionary strategy; although it involves risk to the parents, it can increase the chances of survival of the parental genes

I like the final section that deals with behaviour and ethology, but it does rather skirt over evolution - it's something that can be covered in a double period if the teacher feels like it.

OCR
Module B3

• recall that the many different species of living things on Earth (and many species that are now extinct) evolved from very simple living things
  
• recall that life on Earth began about 3500 million years ago
  
• understand that evidence for evolution is provided by fossils and from analysis of similarities and differences in DNA of organisms
  
• recall that the first living things developed from molecules that could copy
  themselves
  
• understand that these molecules were produced by the conditions on Earth at that time, or may have come from elsewhere
  
• recall that evolution happens due to natural selection
  
• understand the process of natural selection in terms of variation, competition, increased chance of survival and reproduction, and increased number of individuals displaying certain characteristics in later generations
  
• understand that variation is caused by both environment and genes, but only genetic variation can be passed on
  
• explain the difference between natural selection and selective breeding
  
• interpret data on changes in a species in terms of natural selection
  
• recall that changes can occur in genes (mutations)
  
• understand that mutated genes in sex cells can be passed on to offspring and may occasionally produce new characteristics
  
• understand that the combined effect of mutations, environmental changes and natural selection can produce new species
  
• understand that if the conditions on Earth had, at any stage, been different from what they actually were, evolution by natural selection could have produced different results
  
• when provided with information about alternative views on the origin of life on Earth, or the evolutionary process:
  - can identify statements which are data and statements which are (all or part of) an explanation
  - can recognise data or observations that are accounted for by, (or conflict with), an explanation
  - can identify imagination and creativity in the development of an explanation
  - can justify accepting or rejecting a proposed explanation on the grounds that it accounts for observations; and/or provides an explanation that links things previously thought to be unrelated;
  -can identify a scientific question for which there is not yet an agreed answer and suggest a reason why
  - can suggest plausible reasons why scientists involved in a scientific event or issue disagree(d)
  - can suggest reasons for scientists’ reluctance to give up an accepted explanation when new data appear to conflict with it
  
• recall that the evolution of a larger brain gave some early humans a better chance of survival
  
• understand human evolution in terms of a common ancestor, divergence of hominid species, extinction of all but one of these species
  
• when provided with additional information about human evolution, can draw valid conclusions about the implications of given data for a given theory, for example:
  - recognises that an observation that agrees with a prediction (derived from an explanation) increases confidence in the explanation but does not prove it is correct
  - recognises that an observation that disagrees with a prediction (derived from an explanation) indicates that either the observation or the prediction is wrong, and that this may decrease our confidence in the explanation
  
• understand that a rapid change in the environment may cause a species to become extinct, for example, if:
  - the environmental conditions change
  - a new species that is a competitor, predator or disease organism of that species is introduced
  - another organism in its food web becomes extinct
  - understand that species have become extinct (or are in danger of becoming extinct) and that this is likely to be due to human activity;
  
• recall two examples of modern extinctions caused by direct human activity, and two caused by indirect human activity

The real issue I have with OCR is that they are still pussyfooting around the issue that evolution may not be true. I'd like to see the chemists having to hedge their teaching about collision theory on the grounds that, while there is a lot of evidence, this does not prove that collision theory is true and that there may be an alternative explanation that allows people to continue worshipping their invisible sky fairy without questioning their belief that Homo sapiens is different in some way...

WJEC/CBAC
Biology 1
Candidates should:

• know that organisms that have similar features and characteristics can be classified together in a logical way. Understand the need for a scientific system for identification and scientific as opposed to 'common' names.
  
• use local first and/or second hand data/ICT simulation to compare the variety of organisms which live in particular habitats, and investigate how the organisms in an area are affected by other organisms
  
• explore information about the morphological adaptations shown by organisms which enable them to survive in their environment
  
• understand that new genes result from changes, mutations, in existing genes and that mutations occur naturally at random. Mutations may be beneficial or harmful and are increased by exposure to radiation and some toxic chemicals
  
• variation is the basis of evolution
  
• examine evidence and interpret data about how organisms and species have changed over time. Suggest reasons why species may become extinct
  
• consider how individuals with characteristics adapted to their environment are more likely to survive and breed successfully. Consider the uses and limitations of modelling to illustrate the effect of camouflage colouring in prey and predator relationships
  
• know that the genes which have enabled these better adapted individuals to survive are then passed on to the next generation. This is natural selection
  
• consider the process of data collection, creative interpretation and deduction that lead Charles Darwin to propose the theory of evolution. Discuss the controversy surrounding the acceptance of the theory. Discuss evidence that evolution is ongoing such as data on Warfarin resistance in rats

This isn't too bad, but Edexcel and OCR still show more evolution discussion. So some examination boards are rather detailed when discussing evolution, extinction and adaptations. Speciation is, however, skirted around at best and actively ignored at worst. It's worth remembering when pitching outreach to these students, that only the CCEA require their students to know the major phyla and groups within the vertebrates, and I doubt even my current A2 students would know what a bryophyte was if I smacked them about the head with one. New species are not going to be very exciting for this age group (unless it's a big toothy dinosaur), but any discovery that demonstrates adaptation, new observations of behaviour, or perhaps transitional forms/two new gaps in the fossil record, might be worth pitching to a GCSE group.

Making Your Research Suitable For Outreach

Last Tuesday I was able to catch up with good friend Dave Hone of the Archosaur Musings blog. He mentioned that grant application forms are more frequently asking (nay, demanding?) applicants to demonstrate how they will engage in outreach relating to the specific research project for which they are applying for funding, something he later posted about on his blog.

Dave said it was no simple task, given the complexity and perhaps obscurity of [insert name of Dave's project here]. Nonsense! said I. And I grabbed a copy of the A2 Biology textbook for my exam board and shoved the pages about evolution, speciation and adaptation in his face. What came out of that discussion was that a) very few researchers have a scoobies what criteria are examined in high school qualifications, b) knowing this would certainly make grant applications a little easier, and c) it would be awesome if a fantastic, selfless and damn sexy lecturer-blogger could put together the details. They weren't available, so I said I'd do it.

Of course, this will be of absolutely zero interest to any researchers outside of the UK, and for now this will be simply those assessment criteria relevant to evolution, ecology and palaeontology. If there are sufficient requests from readers for other fields (e.g. biochemistry, physiology, inverts etc) then make them known.

There are three English examining boards: Edexcel, OCR and AQA. Additionally, there is one Welsh board, WJEC/CBAC and a Northern Irish board, CCEA. All five of these offer GCSEs, sat at age 16, and A-Levels, sat at age 18. There are other qualifications, such as baccalaureates and BTECs, but they are not as common, nor, have I found, is there as much opportunity for the discussion of evolution and palaeontology. There is also a Scottish examining board, SQA, of which the most common qualifications are Standard Grades and Highers. I'll try to tackle SQA as well, with the caveat that I am not as familiar with these examinations as I am with GCSE and A-Level.

Rather than looking at each board individually, I intend to divide as follows:

• GCSEs
  
• Advanced Supplementary (AS) Level
  
• Advanced (A2) Level
  
• Scottish qualifications

When I've finished each, I'll update the links.

Farewell To Another Professor

Today I received my copy of GeoCam, the alumni magazine for the Dept of Earth Sciences at the University of Cambridge. And my heart sank when I read that on 16th September of this year Professor Tjeerd Van Andel died. He was one of my lecturers for the module on climatology I studied in my third year at Cambridge, and taught the first year sedimentology course.

He told us about the North Atlantic Conveyor, about ocean currents and thermohaline circulation. We learned about CCDs and ACDs, and I got to take out my frustrations on a LOT of foraminifera. But most memorable was the lecture he gave at the end of Lent term in our first year. It was a slide show of his work aboard Alvin, the deep-sea submersible. Professor Van Andel was the first person to ever see the weird and wonderful animals living around the deep-sea hydrothermal vents.

Hydrothermal vents are on the GCSE biology specification, in the context of adaptations to extreme environments. It has been, and is still, a delight to pass on some of what I learned from Professor Van Andel to a generation of eager (in theory) science students. And I am so proud to be able to tell them that I was taught by the first person to see the tube worms, crabs and snails that make their homes there.

It is an irony that, on the day I learn of this great man's death it is also announced that Alvin is to receive an upgrade for the next 50-odd years of research.

There is an obituary from the University of Cambridge, and a longer one from Standford University, along with some delightful memories of his earlier years.

In geological terms, 87 years was no time at all.

Leigh Van Valen 1935-2010

I read this morning (via John Hawks) that Leigh Van Valen, who came up with the Red Queen's Hypothesis (a concept I have just taught my Level 2 Applied Science students) among many other valuable contributions to evolutionary biology, has died.

Leigh was a long-time reader of the old blog The Ethical Palaeontologist, and he subscribed by e-mail. Often I would receive an e-mail from him with his thoughts. He defended me on Paleonet without ever having met me (although to this day I do not know who the original poster was). When I was skeletonising the pigeons he sent me his co-authored paper on "Terrestrial Isopods for Preparing Delicate Vertebrate Skeletons". He even sent me the lyrics to his song "Sauropod Lek", where the chorus goes:

Sperm are cheap and so the males act sexy;
They twirl their tails till they get apoplexy,
And we can choose the one whose tail’s most flexi.

I have the female version - if anyone has his male version I'll swap you!

He made a tremendous contribution to the field of palaeontology and evolutionary biology, and my students will hear all about his legacy as and when we cover speciation. He also made a difference in my life personally, and while I did thank him many times for his support, I don't think my e-mails can do justice to the gratitude I feel towards him.

I will miss him.

A Great Cock-Up On Great Cockup

It's time for the Accretionary Wedge, and for this month Lockwood has asked for our important geological experiences:

It may (or may not) be something that led you to the discipline [...], or a class, or a work experience, or a field experience. It might have been a puzzle or problem solved, or job landed, a degree completed. Perhaps it was something else entirely. It could have been an awful, disastrous experience from which you learned an important lesson.

I'm going to go with the latter, and this is perhaps a big one for me to admit to - it's quite embarrassing, and I just hope my fellow geoscientists can still look me in the eye afterwards.


In July 2000, I carried out my geological mapping project. I mapped an area of the Uldale Fells, the very north of the Lake District. Standing on Brae Fell, I could see the Solway Firth and over into Dumfries and Galloway. I could see wind farms. When atop Great Calva looking south, I could see right down an old fault line stretching beyond Thirlmere. It was beautiful in a wild way that we don't often see in the UK. I shared the entire Uldale Fells with three classmates: I mapped the westernmost section, with Theo, Heather and Dave mapping successively further east.


We spent four days making reconnaissance trips around the area in groups, and then began our individual mapping. I was dropped off just to the west of Great Cockup (yes, it does exist, and yes, I still think this is hilarious), and was due to meet the others at the end of the day southeast of Knott, at a parking area next to a swimming spot in the River Caldew.

About an hour before our rendezvous point, I was on the saddle between Knott and Great Calva, with Hause Gill and Wiley Gill either side of me. I had intended to go down Wiley Gill, meet up with the track along the Caldew, and stroll back to the car. To this day, I have no idea why I did this, as I was perfectly capable of reading a compass.

I went the wrong way.

I went towards Great Calva, looking for the path on the left hand side of the gill, but never found it. I was about halfway down what was Little Calva before I realised my mistake. I fished around for my mobile to ring the others. But it wasn't there. Somewhere in the scrub I had lost my phone, having kept it in my pocket for easy access down the fells. I went back to look for it, and probably wasted more time than was necessary. I realised I was going to be late.


In retrospect, the sensible thing to do would have been to find the Caldew track again and hoof it back to the car Scouts pace. But I was absolutely desperate to get a message to someone. Then I spotted the youth hostel. The warden was in, but his mobile phone had very little reception. After wandering around outside for a while, we eventually managed to get my grandmother on the phone and ask her to phone my mother (I forget why I couldn't get hold of her immediately) and for Mum to phone one of the others. Note to all field geologists - even if you have mobile reception and are in a relatively safe area, write down your contacts' mobile phone numbers just in case.

Then I had to start the route back anyway. I was mentally exhausted, gutted at the loss of my mobile phone (it had a really cool Xpress-On cover and a light-up aerial - this was, after all, the year 2000), and feeling like an absolute pillock. About halfway along the track, I spied Theo walking towards me. When he caught up with me and we started walking back, he waved his fluorescent yellow CAS strap in the air as a signal, and that was when I realised just how worried my classmates had been.


It is not my finest hour. I cannot believe what a stupid mistake I made. I have always prided myself on my map-reading and compass-using skills, so I don't understand what was with my loss of judgment and idiocy. I have never made this mistake again, and I managed to map a huge area with a combination of speed over ground and detail of observations. In fact, I got the highest mark of the year group for my mapping project.

I learned to mapread twice, walk once. I learned to write contact details in my field notebook. I learned to secure my mobile phone. I have a pink zipped case with a belt loop for my phone, so I can spot it if it falls off (not that it should, fitted onto my belt). I suspect students are no longer allowed to map alone, but I don't know what the rules are at universities now (hell, my A2 biologists will not be allowed to work in anything less than a pair in a fenced in, locked nature reserve of extremely limited area!).

Now I am a lecturer responsible for my students' safety and education in the field. I set an example to them, ensuring that I am appropriately attired and shod, with a well-stocked backpack. I spend time with each of them, making sure they know how to find their bearings, and we have a good backup of mobile phone numbers and emergency contact details. Most importantly, I am very forgiving of mistakes they make, because I remember that once upon a time I wasn't quite as shit hot at this fieldwork lark as I thought I was.