Search for: All records

Addressing climate change and biodiversity loss will be the defining ecological, political, and humanitarian challenge of our time. Alarmingly, policymakers face a narrowing window of opportunity to prevent the worst impacts, necessitating complex decisions about which land to set aside for biodiversity preservation. Yet, our ability to make these decisions is hindered by our limited capacity to predict how species will respond to synergistic drivers of extinction risk. We argue that a rapid integration of biogeography and behavioral ecology can meet these challenges because of the distinct, yet complementary levels of biological organization they address, scaling from individuals to populations, and from species and communities to continental biotas. This union of disciplines will advance efforts to predict biodiversity’s responses to climate change and habitat loss through a deeper understanding of how biotic interactions and other behaviors modulate extinction risk, and how responses of individuals and populations impact the communities in which they are embedded. Fostering a rapid mobilization of expertise across behavioral ecology and biogeography is a critical step toward slowing biodiversity loss. 

Abstract In the past 30 years, leaders in undergraduate education have called for transformations in science pedagogy to reflect the process of science as well as to develop professional skills, apply new and emerging technologies, and to provide more hands-on experience. These recommendations suggest teaching strategies that incorporate active learning methods that consistently increase learning, conceptual understanding, integration of subject knowledge with skill development, retention of undergraduate students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) majors, and inclusivity. To gain insight into current practices and pedagogy we surveyed members of the American Society of Mammalogists in 2021. The survey consisted of both fixed-response questions (e.g., multiple-choice or Likert-scale) and open-ended questions, each of which asked instructors about the structure and content of a Mammalogy or field Mammalogy course. In these courses, we found that lecturing was still a primary tool for presenting course content or information (x¯= 65% of the time); nonetheless, most instructors reported incorporating other teaching strategies ranging from pausing lectures for students to ask questions to incorporating active learning methods, such as debates or case studies. Most instructors reported incorporating skill development and inclusive teaching practices, and 64% reported that they perceived a need to change or update their Mammalogy courses or their teaching approaches. Overall, our results indicate that Mammalogy instructors have a strong interest in training students to share their appreciation for mammals and are generally engaged in efforts to increase the effectiveness of their teaching through the incorporation of more student-centered approaches to teaching and learning. 

Through interviews with 28 students and 17 mentors from a campus-wide undergraduate research program, common themes in the responses to COVID-19-related impacts were found. Students had to adjust to the type or scope of their research obligations while handling academic responsibilities, and mentors explicitly considered students’ well-being above expectations related to research.