The knowledge base of subject-matter experts in teaching : A case study of a professional scientist as a beginning teacher

One method of addressing the shortage of science and mathematics teachers is to train scientists and other science-related professionals to become teachers. Advocates argue that as discipline experts these career changers can relate the subject matter knowledge to various contexts and applications in teaching. In this paper, through interviews and classroom observations with a former scientist and her students, we examine how one career changer used her expertise in microbiology to teach microscopy. These data provided the basis for a description of the teacher’s instruction which was then analysed for components of domain knowledge for teaching. Consistent with the literature, the findings revealed that this career changer needed to develop her pedagogical knowledge. However, an interesting finding was that the teacher’s subject matter as a science teacher differed substantively from her knowledge as a scientist. This finding challenges the assumption that subject matter is readily transferable across professions and provides insight into how to better prepare and support career changers to transition from scientist to science teacher.

Securing Australia's future: The role of science, research and technology in lifting Australian productivity

A three-year research program funded by the Australian Research Council and conducted by the four Learned Academies through the Australian Council of Learned Academies for PMSEIC, through the Office of the Chief Scientist. Securing Australia’s Future delivers research-based evidence and findings to support policy development in areas of importance to Australia’s future.

Time, place and space – student group collaboration using Google Drive

Virtual working environments are intrinsic to the contemporary workplace and collaborative skills are a vital graduate capability. To develop students’ collaborative skills, first year medical laboratory science students undertake a group poster project, based on a blended learning model. Learning is scaffolded in lectures, workshops in collaborative learning spaces, practitioner mentoring sessions, and online resources. Google Drive provides an online collaborative space for students to realise tangible outcomes from this learning. A Google Drive document is created for each group and shared with members. In this space, students assign tasks and plan workflow, share research, progressively develop poster content, reflect and comment on peer contributions and use the messaging functions to ‘talk’ to group members. This provides a readily accessible, transparent record of group work, crucial in peer assessment, and a communication channel for group members and the lecturer, who can support groups if required. This knowledge creation space also augments productivity and effectiveness of face-to-face collaboration. As members are randomly allocated to groups and are often of diverse backgrounds and unknown to each other, resilience is built as students navigate the uncertainties and complexities of group dynamics, learning to focus on the goal of the team task as they constructively and professionally engage in team dialogue. Students are responsible and accountable for individual and group work. The use of Google Drive was evaluated in a survey including Likert scale and open ended qualitative questions. Statistical analysis was carried out. Results show students (79%) valued the inclusion of online space in collaborative work and highly appreciated (78%) the flexibility provided by Google Drive, while recognising the need for improved notification functionality. Teaching staff recognised the advantages in monitoring and moderating collaborative group work, and the transformational progression in student collaborative as well as technological skill acquisition, including professional dialogue.

Greenwashing the Trans-Pacific Partnership: Fossil fuels, the environment, and climate change

There has been much controversy over the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) – a plurilateral trade agreement involving a dozen nations from throughout the Pacific Rim – and its impact upon the environment, biodiversity, and climate change. The secretive treaty negotiations involve Australia and New Zealand; countries from South East Asia such as Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, and Japan; the South American nations of Peru and Chile; and the members of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Canada, Mexico and the United States. There was an agreement reached between the parties in October 2015. The participants asserted: ‘We expect this historic agreement to promote economic growth, support higher-paying jobs; enhance innovation, productivity and competitiveness; raise living standards; reduce poverty in our countries; and to promote transparency, good governance, and strong labor and environmental protections.’ The final texts of the agreement were published in November 2015. There has been discussion as to whether other countries – such as Indonesia, the Philippines, and South Korea – will join the deal. There has been much debate about the impact of this proposed treaty upon intellectual property, the environment, biodiversity and climate change. There have been similar concerns about the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) – a proposed trade agreement between the United States and the European Union. In 2011, the United States Trade Representative developed a Green Paper on trade, conservation, and the environment in the context of the TPP. In its rhetoric, the United States Trade Representative has maintained that it has been pushing for strong, enforceable environmental standards in the TPP. In a key statement in 2014, the United States Trade Representative Mike Froman insisted: ‘The United States’ position on the environment in the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations is this: environmental stewardship is a core American value, and we will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the TPP or we will not come to agreement.’ The United States Trade Representative maintained: ‘Our proposals in the TPP are centered around the enforcement of environmental laws, including those implementing multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) in TPP partner countries, and also around trailblazing, first-ever conservation proposals that will raise standards across the region’. Moreover, the United States Trade Representative asserted: ‘Furthermore, our proposals would enhance international cooperation and create new opportunities for public participation in environmental governance and enforcement.’ The United States Trade Representative has provided this public outline of the Environment Chapter of the TPP: A meaningful outcome on environment will ensure that the agreement appropriately addresses important trade and environment challenges and enhances the mutual supportiveness of trade and environment. The Trans-Pacific Partnership countries share the view that the environment text should include effective provisions on trade-related issues that would help to reinforce environmental protection and are discussing an effective institutional arrangement to oversee implementation and a specific cooperation framework for addressing capacity building needs. They also are discussing proposals on new issues, such as marine fisheries and other conservation issues, biodiversity, invasive alien species, climate change, and environmental goods and services. Mark Linscott, an assistant Trade Representative testified: ‘An environment chapter in the TPP should strengthen country commitments to enforce their environmental laws and regulations, including in areas related to ocean and fisheries governance, through the effective enforcement obligation subject to dispute settlement.’ Inside US Trade has commented: ‘While not initially expected to be among the most difficult areas, the environment chapter has emerged as a formidable challenge, partly due to disagreement over the United States proposal to make environmental obligations binding under the TPP dispute settlement mechanism’. Joshua Meltzer from the Brookings Institute contended that the trade agreement could be a boon for the protection of the environment in the Pacific Rim: Whether it is depleting fisheries, declining biodiversity or reduced space in the atmosphere for Greenhouse Gas emissions, the underlying issue is resource scarcity. And in a world where an additional 3 billion people are expected to enter the middle class over the next 15 years, countries need to find new and creative ways to cooperate in order to satisfy the legitimate needs of their population for growth and opportunity while using resources in a manner that is sustainable for current and future generations. The TPP parties already represent a diverse range of developed and developing countries. Should the TPP become a free trade agreement of the Asia-Pacific region, it will include the main developed and developing countries and will be a strong basis for building a global consensus on these trade and environmental issues. The TPP has been promoted by its proponents as a boon to the environment. The United States Trade Representative has maintained that the TPP will protect the environment: ‘The United States’ position on the environment in the TPP negotiations is this: environmental stewardship is a core American value, and we will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the TPP or we will not come to agreement.’ The United States Trade Representative discussed ‘Trade for a Greener World’ on World Environment Day. Andrew Robb, at the time the Australian Trade and Investment Minister, vowed that the TPP will contain safeguards for the protection of the environment. In November 2015, after the release of the TPP text, Rohan Patel, the Special Assistant to the President and Deputy Director of Intergovernmental Affairs, sought to defend the environmental credentials of the TPP. He contended that the deal had been supported by the Nature Conservancy, the International Fund for Animal Welfare, the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, the World Wildlife Fund, and World Animal Protection. The United States Congress, though, has been conflicted by the United States Trade Representative’s arguments about the TPP and the environment. In 2012, members of the United States Congress - including Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and John Kerry (D-MA) – wrote a letter, arguing that the trade agreement needs to provide strong protection for the environment: ‘We believe that a '21st century agreement' must have an environment chapter that guarantees ongoing sustainable trade and creates jobs, and this is what American businesses and consumers want and expect also.’ The group stressed that ‘A binding and enforceable TPP environment chapter that stands up for American interests is critical to our support of the TPP’. The Congressional leaders maintained: ‘We believe the 2007 bipartisan congressional consensus on environmental provisions included in recent trade agreements should serve as the framework for the environment chapter of the TPP.’ In 2013, senior members of the Democratic leadership expressed their opposition to granting President Barack Obama a fast-track authority in respect of the TPP House of Representatives Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said: ‘No on fast-track – Camp-Baucus – out of the question.’ Senator Majority leader Harry Reid commented: ‘I’m against Fast-Track: Everyone would be well-advised to push this right now.’ Senator Elizabeth Warren has been particularly critical of the process and the substance of the negotiations in the TPP: From what I hear, Wall Street, pharmaceuticals, telecom, big polluters and outsourcers are all salivating at the chance to rig the deal in the upcoming trade talks. So the question is, Why are the trade talks secret? You’ll love this answer. Boy, the things you learn on Capitol Hill. I actually have had supporters of the deal say to me ‘They have to be secret, because if the American people knew what was actually in them, they would be opposed. Think about that. Real people, people whose jobs are at stake, small-business owners who don’t want to compete with overseas companies that dump their waste in rivers and hire workers for a dollar a day—those people, people without an army of lobbyists—they would be opposed. I believe if people across this country would be opposed to a particular trade agreement, then maybe that trade agreement should not happen. The Finance Committee in the United States Congress deliberated over the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations in 2014. The new chair Ron Wyden has argued that there needs to be greater transparency in trade. Nonetheless, he has mooted the possibility of a ‘smart-track’ to reconcile the competing demands of the Obama Administration, and United States Congress. Wyden insisted: ‘The new breed of trade challenges spawned over the last generation must be addressed in imaginative new policies and locked into enforceable, ambitious, job-generating trade agreements.’ He emphasized that such agreements ‘must reflect the need for a free and open Internet, strong labor rights and environmental protections.’ Elder Democrat Sander Levin warned that the TPP failed to provide proper protection for the environment: The TPP parties are considering a different structure to protect the environment than the one adopted in the May 10 Agreement, which directly incorporated seven multilateral environmental agreements into the text of past trade agreements. While the form is less important than the substance, the TPP must provide an overall level of environmental protection that upholds and builds upon the May 10 standard, including fully enforceable obligations. But many of our trading partners are actively seeking to weaken the text to the point of falling short of that standard, including on key issues like conservation. Nonetheless, 2015, President Barack Obama was able to secure the overall support of the United States Congress for his ‘fast-track’ authority. This was made possible by the Republicans and dissident Democrats. Notably, Oregon Senator Ron Wyden switched sides, and was transformed from a critic of the TPP to an apologist for the TPP. For their part, green political parties and civil society organisations have been concerned about the secretive nature of the negotiations; and the substantive implications of the treaty for the environment. Environmental groups and climate advocates have been sceptical of the environmental claims made by the White House for the TPP. The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand, the Australian Greens and the Green Party of Canada have released a joint declaration on the TPP observing: ‘More than just another trade agreement, the TPP provisions could hinder access to safe, affordable medicines, weaken local content rules for media, stifle high-tech innovation, and even restrict the ability of future governments to legislate for the good of public health and the environment’. In the United States, civil society groups such as the Sierra Club, Public Citizen, WWF, the Friends of the Earth, the Rainforest Action Network and 350.org have raised concerns about the TPP and the environment. Allison Chin, President of the Sierra Club, complained about the lack of transparency, due process, and public participation in the TPP talks: ‘This is a stealth affront to the principles of our democracy.’ Maude Barlow’s The Council of Canadians has also been concerned about the TPP and environmental justice. New Zealand Sustainability Council executive director Simon Terry said the agreement showed ‘minimal real gains for nature’. A number of organisations have joined a grand coalition of civil society organisations, which are opposed to the grant of a fast-track. On the 15th January 2013, WikiLeaks released the draft Environment Chapter of the TPP - along with a report by the Chairs of the Environmental Working Group. Julian Assange, WikiLeaks' publisher, stated: ‘Today's WikiLeaks release shows that the public sweetener in the TPP is just media sugar water.’ He observed: ‘The fabled TPP environmental chapter turns out to be a toothless public relations exercise with no enforcement mechanism.’ This article provides a critical examination of the draft Environment Chapter of the TPP. The overall argument of the article is that the Environment Chapter of the TPP is an exercise in greenwashing – it is a public relations exercise by the United States Trade Representative, rather than a substantive regime for the protection of the environment in the Pacific Rim. Greenwashing has long been a problem in commerce, in which companies making misleading and deceptive claims about the environment. In his 2012 book, Greenwash: Big Brands and Carbon Scams, Guy Pearse considers the rise of green marketing and greenwashing. Government greenwashing is also a significant issue. In his book Storms of My Grandchildren, the climate scientist James Hansen raises his concerns about government greenwashing. Such a problem is apparent with the TPP – in which there was a gap between the assertions of the United States Government, and the reality of the agreement. This article contends that the TPP fails to meet the expectations created by President Barack Obama, the White House, and the United States Trade Representative about the environmental value of the agreement. First, this piece considers the relationship of the TPP to multilateral environmental treaties. Second, it explores whether the provisions in respect of the environment are enforceable. Third, this article examines the treatment of trade and biodiversity in the TPP. Fourth, this study considers the question of marine capture fisheries. Fifth, there is an evaluation of the cursory text in the TPP on conservation. Sixth, the article considers trade in environmental services under the TPP. Seventh, this article highlights the tensions between the TPP and substantive international climate action. It is submitted that the TPP undermines effective and meaningful government action and regulation in respect of climate change. The conclusion also highlights that a number of other chapters of the TPP will impact upon the protection of the environment – including the Investment Chapter, the Intellectual Property Chapter, the Technical Barriers to Trade Chapter, and the text on public procurement.

Narrative, Memory and the Crisis of Mimesis: the Case of Adam Elsheimer and Giordano Bruno

The triangular space between memory, narrative and pictorial representation is the terrain on which this article is developed. Taking the art of memory developed by Giordano Bruno (1548 – 1600) and the art of painting subtly revolutionised by Adam Elsheimer (1578 – 1610) as test-cases, it is shown how both subvert the norms of mimesis and narration prevalent throughout the Renaissance, how disrupted memory creates “incoherent” narratives, and how perspective and the notion of “place” are questioned in a corollary way. Two paintings by Elsheimer are analysed and shown to include, in spite of their supposed “realism”, numerous incoherencies, aporias and strange elements – often overlooked. Thus, they do not conform to two of the basic rules governing both the classical art of memory and the humanist art of painting: well-defined places and the exhaustive translatability of words into images (and vice-versa). In the work of Bruno, both his philosophical claims and the literary devices he uses are analysed as hints for a similar (and contemporaneous) undermining of conventions about the transparency and immediacy of representation.

Workshop on climate change and salmon production, Vancouver, March 26-27, 1998: technical report

The Workshop on Climate Change and Salmon Production was held in Vancouver, Canada, 26-27 March 1998. The Workshop was organized and sponsored by the North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission (NPAFC). Each Party to the Commission designated one scientist to the Workshop Steering Committee. Each member of the Steering Committee chaired one half-day session of the Workshop. All necessary arrangements were made by the NPAFC Secretariat in cooperation with the Steering Committee and the Canadian Party to the Commission. (PDF contains 60 pages) Over 70 scientists, industry representatives and fisheries officials attended the Workshop. There were 20 presentations of scientific papers followed by the discussion sessions. Extended abstracts are included in this Technical Report, which also contains opening address by the Chairman of the Steering Committee and short review of the Workshop by the Coordinator. The material presented in the Technical Report has not been peer reviewed and does not necessarily reflect the views of either the NPAFC or the Parties. The material has been edited by the technical editor for clarity and publication purposes only. Items in this Report should not be cited except as personal communication and with the author's permission.

Global movements, national grievances. Mobilizing for “real democracy” and social justice

In the ashes of political and socio-economic collapse, social movements sometimes rise like a phoenix. Little more than a year has passed since the Tunisian uprisings, the spark that ignited a series of “mobilizations of the indignant” that spread like wildfire around the world. Many observers have reported on these unprecedented global protests. They have portrayed citizens who declare feeling marginalized if not scapegoated, and who reject the increasing inequalities between rich and poor, the declining mobility of most, and the “disclassment” of many. They have shown, as well, massive protests against governments and politicians that are perceived as indifferent at best, duplicitous at worst, and in any event as blatantly closed to popular concerns. Many journalists have indeed asked what took so long for people to protest given this fatal combination. For the social scientist, however, the questions of who, why and how mobilizes are not so simple. There are specific problematics of mediation between structure, culture and individual or collective agency that need to be addressed.

Letter and Recollections of Alexander Agassiz: The 1891 Albatross Expedition

Presented here is another in the list of historic accounts of iconic research cruises of the USFC Steamer Albatross, this a reminiscence of the renowned scientist Alexander Agassiz edited by his son G. R. Agassiz, a chapter from the volume “Letters and Recollections of Alexander Agassiz,” published in 1913. Agassiz made three major cruises in the Albatross in 1891, 1899–1900, and 1904–05, adding greatly to the world’s store of specimens and knowledge of thalasography, his favored term for oceangraphy, and specifically of the Pacific Ocean. Having made important cruises and studies with the Blake in the Caribbean, he sought to do comparable research in the Pacific. His opportunity came in 1890, and with the consent of President Benjamin Harrison, he took charge of this Albatross research cruise, paying much of the expense himself. In contrast with the other ships he had been on, he found the laboratories, equipment, and furnishings to be comparatively luxurious and extremely well appointed for his work. Further, the Albatross was then captained by Lieutenant Commander Zera Luther Tanner who seemed to take as much interest in the oceanographic research as did the scientists, and Agassiz appreciated working with him, too. Little of the original text has been altered, and readers are cautioned that some of the views expressed may reflect unfortunate prejudices of that era toward individuals, nationalities, etc.

William Francis Thompson (1888–1965): a Preeminent Fishery Biologist of the Early and Mid Twentieth Century

William Francis Thompson (1888–1965) was a preeminent fishery scientist of the early to mid twentieth century. Educated at Stanford University in California (B.A. 1911, Ph.D. 1930), Thompson conducted pioneering research on the Pacific halibut, Hippoglossus stenolepis, from 1914 to 1917 for the British Columbia Provincial Fisheries Department. He then directed marine fisheries research for the State of California from 1917 to 1924, was Director of Investigations for the International Fisheries Commission from 1924 to 1939, and Director of the International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission from 1937 to 1942. He was also Director of the School of Fisheries, University of Washing-ton, Seattle, from 1930 to 1947. Thompson was the founding director in 1947 of the Fisheries Research Institute at the University of Washington and served in that capacity until his retirement in 1958. He was a dominant figure in fisheries research of the Pacific Northwest and influenced a succession of fishery scientists with his yield-based analysis of fishery stocks, as opposed to studying the fishes’environment. Will Thompson was also a major figure in education, and many of his former students attained leadership positions in fisheries research and administration.

Farmer-scientist research partnerships for integrated agriculture-aquaculture

A realistic alternative to traditional technology development and transfer has been utilized by the International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management (ICLARM) to integrate pond fish culture into low-input farming systems in Malawi. Resource mapping was used to assess farm resources and constraints and introduce the concept of integrated resource management (IRM), the synergistic movement of resources between and among farm and household enterprises. Farmer-led IRM research projects are conducted on-farm and monitored by researchers through direct observation and on-station simulation of constraints and management practices. Technology-adoption rates by farmers involved in a pilot activity was 65% compared to 0% by farmers exposed only to top-down extension approaches. Within two years of adoption, every participating farmer had transferred the technology to an average of four other farmers without the involvement of the extension services.

Scientific statistics and graphics on the Macintosh

The personal computer has become commonplace on the desk of most scientists. As hardware costs have plummeted, software capabilities have expanded enormously, permitting the scientist to examine extremely large datasets in novel ways. Advances in networking now permit rapid transfer of large datasets, which can often be used unchanged from one machine to the next. In spite of these significant advances, many scientists still use their personal computers only for word processing or e-mail, or as "dumb terminals". Many are simply unaware of the richness of software now available to statistically analyze and display scientific data in highly innovative ways. This paper presents several examples drawn from actual climate data analysis that illustrate some novel and practical features of several widely-used software packages for Macintosh computers.

An ontology for a Robot Scientist

Soldatova, L., Clare, A., Sparkes, A. and King, R. D. (2006) An ontology for a robot scientist. Bioinformatics 2006 22: 464-471