Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T07:15:38.715Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ideas for Creating a Stimulating Undergraduate Paleobiology Course: Emphasis on Student-Directed Learning, Evolution, and the Chronological Succession of Phanerozoic Life

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2017

David Sunderlin
David Sunderlin*
Affiliation:
Department of Geology and Environmental Geosciences, Lafayette College, Easton, PA 18042
Get access

Abstract

It is commonly noted that students with no prior coursework in paleobiology are intrigued with it. Whatever the reason, many students look forward to an undergraduate course in the subject, even if they are not earth or life science majors. We, as instructors, can seize on this interest and build on it with careful course design. Here I describe a deliberate pedagogical approach in my undergraduate paleobiology course using repeated student-directed learning (SDL) activities. I also detail two course design strategies that I have found to be particularly successful: 1) placing uncommonly heavy emphasis on evolutionary processes, and 2) studying fossil groups according to their general chronological succession through the Phanerozoic. Specifically, SDL in this course involves a suite of activities that the students have some role in designing, such as choosing the study organism for an analysis or developing hypotheses for testing with data collected from the field. SDL activities are integrated into each course module, helping to create a learning environment of scientific inquiry that balances prescribed readings and lecture components with individual, interest-driven research investigations into captivating aspects of the discipline. The course design highlights evolutionary processes early in the term, then follows an unorthodox, chronological approach to organismal paleobiology in the course's second half. The strategies described here have met with success over many course iterations, both in terms of student evaluations of their own learning and in assessment of how students reach learning outcomes regarding the acquisition of knowledge and scientific research skill-sets.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Paleontological Society Special Publications , Volume 12: Teaching Paleontology in the 21st Century , 2012 , pp. 11 - 20
Copyright
Copyright © 2012 by The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alters, B. J., and Nelson, C. E. 2002. Teaching evolution in higher education. Evolution, 56:1891–1901.Google ScholarPubMed
Babcock, L. E. 1994. Systematics and phylogenetics of polymeroid trilobites from the Henson Gletscher and Kap Stanton formations (Middle Cambrian), North Greenland. Bulletin Grønlands geologiske Undersøgelse, 169:79–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babcock, L. E. 2009. Visualizing Earth History. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Beichner, R. J., Saul, J. M., Abbott, D. Sx., Morse, J. J., Deardorff, D. L., Allain, R. J., Bonham, S. W., Dancy, M. H., and Risley, J. S. 2007. The student-centered activities for large enrollment undergraduate programs (SCALE-UP) project. Reviews in Physics Education Research, 1:1–42.Google Scholar
Benton, M. J., and Harper, D. A. T. 2009. Introduction to Paleobiology and the Fossil Record. Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Bruton, D. L., and Owen, A. W. 1988. The Norwegian Upper Ordovician illaenid trilobites. Norsk Geologisk Tidsskrift, 68:241–258.Google Scholar
Chung, C. 2004. The species problem and the value of teaching the complexities of species. American Biology Teacher, 66:413–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarkson, E. N. K. 1998. Invertebrate Palaeontology and Evolution (Fourth Edition). Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
Coyne, J. A. 2009. Why Evolution is True. Penguin Group, New York.Google Scholar
Foote, M., and Miller, A. I. 2007. Principles of Paleontology (third edition). W.H. Freeman and Co., New York, 354 p.Google Scholar
Hake, R. R. 1998. Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66:64–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammer, O., and Harper, D. A. T. 2005. Paleontological Data Analysis. Blackwell Publishing, Maiden, Massachusetts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammer, O., Harper, D. A. T., and Ryan, P. D. 2001. PAST: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Paleontologica Electronica, 4(1):9 p.Google Scholar
Katz, M. 1996. Teaching organic chemistry via student-directed learning. Journal of Chemical Education, 73(5):440–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, P. H. 1984. Multivariate analysis of evolutionary patterns of seven Miocene Chesapeake Group molluscs. Journal of Paleontology, 58(5):1235–1250.Google Scholar
Kid Well, S. M. 1988. Reciprocal sedimentation and noncorrelative hiatuses in marine-paralic siliciclastics: Miocene outcrop evidence. Geology, 16(7):609–612.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lockwood, R. 2010. Contemplating course design in undergraduate paleontology: Is it time to move beyond the “March of the Phyla”? Geological Society of America Abstracts w/ Programs, 42(5):128.Google Scholar
McConnell, D. A., Steer, D. N., and Owens, K. D. 2003. Assessment and active learning strategies for introductory geology courses. Journal of Geoscience Education, 51(2):205–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKerrow, W. S. 1978. The Ecology of Fossils: An Illustrated Guide. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 384 p.Google Scholar
Nelson, C. E. 2008. Teaching evolution (and all of biology) more effectively: Strategies for engagement, critical reasoning, and confronting misconceptions. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 48:213–225.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Novacek, M. J., Wyss, A. R., and McKenna, C. 1988. The major groups of eutherian mammals, p 31–71. In Benton, M. J. (ed.), The phylogeny and classification of the tetrapods, Volume 2. Mammals. Systematics Association Special Volume 35B. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Prothero, D. R. 2004. Bringing Fossils to Life: An Introduction to Paleobiology (second edition). McGraw-Hill, New York, 503 p.Google Scholar
Selden, P. A., and Nudds, J. R. 2005. Evolution of Fossil Ecosystems. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 192 p.Google Scholar
Selin, C. and Uhlin, L. 2008. Self-directed learning—a learning issue for students and faculty! Teaching in Higher Education, 13(4):461–475.Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. 1978. A kinetic model of Phanerozoic taxonomic diversity. I. Analysis of marine orders. Paleobiology, 4:223–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. 1981. A factor analytic description of the Phanerozoic marine fossil record. Paleobiology, 7:36–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. 2002. A compendium of fossil marine genera. Bulletins of American Paleontology, 363, 566 p.Google Scholar
Silverman, M. P. 1996. Self-directed learning: Philosophy and implementation. Science & Education, 5:357–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tapanila, L. 2007. FossilPlot, an Excel-based computer application for teaching stratigraphic paleontology using the Sepkoski Compendium of fossil marine genera. Journal of Geoscience Education, 55:133–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yacobucci, M. M. 2010. Using active learning strategies to promote deep learning in the undergraduate paleontology classroom. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, 42(5):67.Google Scholar