Search

A main goal of academic courses is to help students acquire knowledge and skills that they can transfer to multiple contexts. In this article, we (i) examine students' responses to test question templates (TQTs), a framework intended to facilitate transfer, and (ii) determine whether similar transfer-promoting strategies are commonly embedded in published biology lessons. In study 1, in surveys administered over several academic quarters, students consistently reported that TQTs helped them transfer course content to exams and the real world; that multiple (two to five) examples were generally needed to understand a given TQT, leading >40% students to create their own additional examples; and that TQTs would be helpful in other science courses. In study 2, among 100 peer-reviewed lessons published by CourseSource or the National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science (NCCSTS), less than 5% of lessons gave students advice about exams or helped students create additional practice problems. The latter finding is not meant as criticism of these excellent lessons, which are a boon to the biology education community. However, with TQT-like prescriptions generally absent from peer-reviewed lessons, biology instructors may wish to supplement the lessons with TQT-like strategies to explicitly connect the material to subsequent exams.

Anecdotally it is often said that fishers are the best inventors of marine conservation technologies. In this paper I describe case studies of Turtle Excluder Devices (TEDs) and dolphin conservation technology, offering empirical evidence that fishers are successful inventors of marine conservation technology. I describe the Local Inventor Effect, in which adoption of a technology is disproportionately high in the geographic area near the inventor′s home. In one case, the adoption of a local invention was 600% higher than that of the next most popular device. Further, I present the Successful Inventor Profile for inventors of marine conservation technologies. This profile consists of three characteristics (1) a successful conservation technology inventor will have extensive experience relevant to the problem and potential solutions, (2) he or she will have extensive experience in fabrication, and (3) he or she will have the ability and tendency to employ mental and/or physical models, to assemble and refine inventions.

Many undergraduate biology instructors incorporate active learning exercises into their lessons while continuing to assess students with traditional exams. To better align practice and exams, we present an approach to question-asking that emphasizes templates instead of specific questions. Students and instructors can use these Test Question Templates (TQTs) to generate many variations of questions for pre-exam practice and for the exams themselves. TQTs are specific enough to show students which material they should master, yet general enough to keep the exact exam questions a surprise and easy to change from term to term. TQTs generate biology problems analogous to other STEM disciplines' standard problems whose general format is known to students in advance. TQTs thus help instructors ask more exam questions at the higher-order cognitive levels of Bloom's taxonomy, while empowering students to prepare actively and creatively for such questions.

Research has the potential to simultaneouslygenerate new knowledge and contribute meaningful social-ecological benefits; however, research processes and outcomes can also perpetuate extractive patterns that have manifested the climate, biodiversity, and social justice crises. One approach to enhance the societal value of research processes is to strengthen relationships with places of study and the peoples of those places. Deepening relational engagement with the social-ecological context and history of a place can lead to more accurate results and improved public trust in the scientific process and is particularly important for natural scientists who work at the interface of nature and society. We provide three actionable pathways that range from individual to systemic change to enhance place-based relationships within research systems: 1) deepen reflection and communication about relationships with places and peoples; 2) strengthen collaboration among research teams and partners; and 3) transform systems of knowledge creation to foster place-based roots. Action on any of these proposed pathways, but especially action taken across all three, can build empathy and connections to place and people, strengthening the meaningful impact of research both locally and globally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fisheries extension programmes frequently fail to secure mandatory or voluntary adoption of bycatch reduction devices and techniques. Approaches for improving the outcomes of extension programmes are often based on ad hoc assessments and do not consider human behaviour or change theories. This paper offers an in-depth analysis of extension activities that led to various adoption outcomes in two prominent bycatch case studies in the United States: turtle excluder devices in shrimp trawl fisheries and dolphin bycatch in the tuna purse seine fishery. Using a grounded theory approach to text analysis of interviews and documents, I examine five periods of voluntary or mandatory adoption efforts. I explain the outcomes through the lens of diffusion of innovation theory. The most effective extension programme involved informative and persuasive efforts, enforced regulations, and commercially practical bycatch reduction devices. Voluntary adoption occurred under exceptional circumstances of public and political pressure and a device that offered substantial benefits to the adopter. The two periods of successful adoption applied the most core principles of diffusion theory. This paper concludes with recommendations for how change agents can apply diffusion theory to future fisheries extension programmes to improve the adoption of bycatch reduction devices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper identifies, critiques, and offers suggestions for successful fisheries change initiatives to reduce bycatch. Through analysis of interviews and a workshop with fisheries change agents, we identified six themes. The first theme is that definitions of success varied between change initiatives. The other five themes relate to perceptions of best practices for change initiatives. They are the importance of (1) engaging diverse, motivated stakeholders in the initiative, in addition to fishers, (2) identifying and articulating clear benefits to fishers, (3) communicating with fishers early and throughout the initiative, particularly through face-to-face interactions and videos, (4) demonstrating positive change agent qualities, and (5) executing an appropriate and well-timed project. These best practices are widely recognized but have not consistently yielded widespread change. We hypothesize this is partly due to fisheries change agents being financially constrained, not measuring outcomes, and not having the proper training, such as knowledge of change management and human behaviour theories. We highlight one especially promising theory, change readiness, which includes cognitive and affective change readiness. We discuss the need to develop affective change readiness among fishers, given that change management research shows that emotions play an important role in the uptake of new ideas and changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Thirty-six years ago, NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service began research on how to reduce mortality of sea turtles, Chelonioidea, in shrimp trawls. As a result of efforts of NMFS and many stakeholders, including domestic and foreign fishermen, environmentalists, Sea Grant agents, and government agencies, many trawl fisheries around the world use a version of the turtle excluder device (TED). This article chronicles the contributions of NMFS to this effort, much of which occurred at the NMFS Mississippi Laboratories in Pascagoula. Specifically, it summarizes the impetus for and results of major developments and little known events in the TED research and discusses how these influenced the course of subsequent research., Introduction Sea turtle, Chelonioidea, bycatch became a Federal management issue for the U.S. southeast shrimp trawl fishery in the 1970's after the listing of all seven sea turtle species under [...]

Bycatch can harm marine ecosystems, reduce biodiversity, lead to injury or mortality of protected species, and have severe economic implications for fisheries. On 12 January 2007, President George W. Bush signed the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of 2006 (MSRA). The MSRA required the U.S. Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to establish a Bycatch Reduction Engineering Program (BREP) to develop technological devices and other conservation engineering changes designed to minimize bycatch, seabird interactions, bycatch mortality, and post-release mortality in Federally managed fisheries. The MSRA also required the Secretary to identify nations whose vessels are engaged in the bycatch of protected living marine resources (PLMR's) under specified circumstances and to certify that these nations have 1) adopted regulatory programs for PLMR's that are comparable to U.S. programs, taking into account different conditions, and 2) established management plans for PLMR's that assist in the collection of data to support assessments and conservation of these resources. If a nation fails to take sufficient corrective action and does not receive a positive certification, fishing products from that country may be subject to import prohibitions into the United States. The BREP has made significant progress to develop technological devices and other conservation engineering designed to minimize bycatch, including improvements to bycatch reduction devices and turtle excluder devices in Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico trawl fisheries, gillnets in Northeast fisheries, and trawls in Alaska and Pacific Northwest fisheries. In addition, the international provisions of the MSRA have provided an innovative tool through which the United States can address bycatch by foreign nations. However, the inability of the National Marine Fisheries Service to identify nations whose vessels are engaged in the bycatch of PLMR's to date will require the development of additional approaches to meet this mandate., Introduction The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates that in recent years the world's fisheries annually discarded 7.3 million metric tons of marine life (Kelleher, 2005). This statistic [...]

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2007.09.005 Byline: Lekelia D. Jenkins Keywords: Expertise and experience; Bycatch; Tuna-dolphin; Invention; Conservation technology; Interactional expertise Abstract: The burgeoning field of studies in expertise and experience (SEE) is a useful theoretical approach to complex problems. In light of SEE, examination of the controversial and well known case study of dolphin bycatch in the US tuna fishery, reveals that effective problem-solving was hindered by institutional tensions in respect of decision-making authority and difficulties with the integration of different expertises. Comparing the profiles of four individuals, who played distinct roles in the problem-solving process, I show that (1) to address a complex problem, a suite of contributory expertises -- rarely found in one individual -- may be required; (2) formal credentials are not a reliable indicator of who possesses these necessary expertises; (3) interactional expertise and interactive ability are useful tools in combining the contributory expertises of others to yield a desirable collective outcome; and (4) the concepts of contributory expertise and no expertise are useful tools for understanding the actual contribution of various parties to the problem-solving process. Author Affiliation: 1220 East-West Highway, #216, Silver Spring, MD 20910, USA

Abstract In recent months, two major actions have been initiated that may change the landscape of sea turtle conservation and potentially ignite controversy. The first action involves an October 2001 [...]

Sharing good practices and experiences among stakeholders can help develop good practices in fisheries management. Facilitated knowledge exchanges among small-scale fisheries stakeholders can support the implementation of FAO's Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries in the Context of Food Security and Poverty Eradication. Fisheries learning exchanges (FLEs) are one form of knowledge exchange that has become increasingly popular. FLEs are peer-to-peer gatherings in which fisheries stakeholders from different communities freely exchange information and experiences surrounding fisheries challenges and solutions. These are usually organized by fishers, Non-governmental Organizations and governments and are credited as an integral tool for the diffusion and adoption of fisheries management strategies. Despite their numerous perceived benefits, little research has been conducted on FLEs. This paper presents a case study of an FLE between Mozambique and Madagascar to explore how FLEs can aid in the sharing of experiences and good practices among small-scale fisheries stakeholders and the further application of those good practices. Nineteen key informant interviews were conducted with FLE participants as the main source of data. Subsequent analysis found that hands-on or informal activities and a diverse participant group were two factors that promoted knowledge sharing and learning among participants. Key recommendations for FLE organizers include: maximizing hands-on and informal activities, fully understanding the cultural norms at play when inviting participants, dedicating adequate time and personnel to make travel arrangements for participants, and providing financial and logistical support for participants to implement what they have learned after the FLE. The results from this case study should prove useful for other parties seeking to facilitate knowledge sharing through FLEs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The term conservation technology is applied widely and loosely to any technology connected to conservation. This overly broad understanding can lead to confusion around the actual mechanisms of conservation in a technological system, which can result in neglect and underdevelopment of the human dimensions of conservation technology. Ultimately, this hinders its effectiveness as technological fixes for conservation problems. Through a process of concept mapping based on key case studies and literature, I devised precise definitions of marine conservation technology and technological marine conservation system. Concerns about the use of marine conservation technologies included unintended consequences, halfway technologies that address the symptoms but not the causes of problems, and misguided techno-optimism (i.e., technology is a panacea that can solve any problem). Technology and technological systems can have power, politics, and culture, and these characteristics can influence the contextual fit of a technology, requiring that technology be thoughtfully created or adapted to the circumstances in which it will be used. Power, politics, and culture inherent in technology can also influence the distribution of conservation risks and benefits and potentially widen gaps in wealth, privilege, opportunities, and justice. Addressing these concerns can potentially be achieved through the better integration of social sciences in marine conservation technology and technological marine conservation system design and development and the application of the social-ecological-technological systems framework. This framework melds key concepts from the socioecological systems framework and science and technology studies. It recognizes as and elevates technology to be a central actor that can shape societies and the natural world. Such a framework incorporates broader understanding, so that the values and concerns of society are more effectively addressed in the creation and implementation of marine conservation technologies and technological marine conservation systems., (© 2021 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology.)