I’m ensconced in a comfy chair at the Bell Museum, waiting for the MnCSE Science Education Saturday meeting to start. I’ll take notes and be sure to put up a summary later today.
It’s not too late to come on down!
I just got the program for the event at the Bell Museum tomorrow. If you are inspired and want to show up, you can register at the door ($10) and get in.
Science Education Saturday
November 11, 2006
Sponsored by Minnesota Citizens for
Science Education (MnCSE www.mnscience.org), The Bell Museum of Natural
History, and the College of Biological Sciences, UM-TC.A scientifically
literate population is essential to Minnesota’s future. To that end, Minnesota
Citizens for Science Education (MnCSE) will bring together the combined
resources of teachers, scientists, and citizens to assure, defend, and promote
the teaching and learning of evolutionary biology and other sciences in K-12
public school science classrooms, consistent with current scientific knowledge,
theories, and practice.9:00 a.m. Welcome from Jim Curtsinger,
MnCSE and College of Biological Sciences, UM-TC and Scott Lanyon, MnCSE and
Director, Bell Museum9:15 a.m. Mark Borrello, College of
Biological Sciences, UM-TC“Teach the Controversy? A view from the history of science”
Supporters of teaching intelligent design
have used the slogan "Teach the controversy" to describe and promote
their position. In this talk, Dr. Borello will use some episodes from the
history of science to show that while teaching scientific controversies should
be a fundamental part of good science education, the current dispute over ID
doesn’t qualify. The hope is that science teachers may be able to incorporate
some of these examples into their courses and at the same time developed
reasoned historical arguments for excluding intelligent design.
10:15 a.m. Break
10:30 a.m. Randy
Moore,
College of Education and Human Development, UM-TC“Creationism in
Minnesota’s Biology Classrooms? What the courts have said about the teaching of
evolution and creationism”Biology teachers often encounter emotional
responses from students, parents, and administrators who are uncomfortable
with, or threatened by, the teaching of evolution. In many instances, the best
way to handle the situation is to cite what the courts have said about the
topic. What if a student/parent is offended by evolution? Can a teacher give
equal time to creationism? Must a teacher give equal time to creationism? And
what about "intelligent design"? An understanding of the legal issues
associated with the teaching of evolution and creationism can help teachers
ensure that their students learn about one of the most powerful ideas in
science — evolution.11:30 a.m. Lunch
Lunch
courtesy of ADC FoundationScience Education
Saturday12:30 p.m. Panel
Discussion – Teaching Evolution in the ClassroomPanel introduced and moderated by P. Z.
Myers, Division of Science and Math, UM-Morris; Owner of the blog, Pharyngula
www.scienceblogs.com/pharyngulaPanel Members:
Dawn Clawson, St. Paul Central High School, retiredBruce Leventhal, Forest Lake Area High School
Tom Meagher, Owatonna schoolsDawn Norton, Minnetonka High School
Mark Peterson, Dassel-Cokato schoolsThese five Minnesota teachers will talk about
their experiences teaching evolution in the classroom – how they teach
it, how it’s received, how they’ve handled conflict, administrative support and
community response. There will be plenty of time for questions and comments!2:00 p.m. Closing
– Please
exchange your evaluation form for a certificate of attendance2:20 p.m. Optional
tours of UM labs led by researchers – Meet Jim Curtsinger in the lobby of
the Bell MuseumThanks and
acknowledgements to:ADC
Foundation, William Linder-Scholer, Executive DirectorBell Museum
of Natural History, Faculty and Staff membersBoard Members
of MnCSEKaren Oberhauser, Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Conservation Biology,
Director of Monarchs in the Classroom www.monarchlab.orgDon Luce, Curator of Exhibits, Bell Museum of Natural History (MnCSE logo
design)Charlie Curtsinger, UM student (web site design)
John Cairns, Briggs & Morgan, P.A.
The National
Center for Science Education, Oakland, CA www.ncse.org
So stop rubbing it in. Here’s an article about the superiority of the bird visual system: it doesn’t just have better acuity, it can process information faster. We’re adapted to a sedate stroll, they’re adapted to high speed aerobatics…and guess which one of us is crazy enough to pilot multi-ton vehicles at frightening speeds?
This week’s Tangled Bank covers everything from spacewomen to cavemen in The Tangled Bank – The Future, Present, and Past at easternblot.net. The election news is all over, so it’s time to read some science!
Fascinating stuff…read this paper in PNAS, Evidence that the adaptive allele of the brain size gene microcephalin introgressed into Homo sapiens from an archaic Homo lineage, or this short summary, or John Hawks’ excellent explanation of the concepts, it’s all good. It’s strong evidence for selection in human ancestry for a gene, and just to make it especially provocative, it’s all about a gene known to be involved in brain growth, and it’s also showing evidence for interbreeding between Homo sapiens and Neandertal man.
The short short explanation: a population genetics study of a gene called microcephalin shows that a) it arose and spread through human populations starting about 37,000 years ago, b) this particular form of the gene (well, a small cluster of genes in a particular neighborhood) arose approximately 1.1 million years ago in a lineage distinct from that of modern humans, and c) the likeliest explanation for this difference is that that distinct lineage interbred with modern humans 37,000 years ago, passing on this particular gene variant that was then specifically selected for, a process called introgression.
The work looks sound to me, and I’m convinced. The one thing to watch for, though, is that there will be attempts to overreach and couple possession of this gene to some kind of intellectual superiority. We don’t know what this particular variant of the gene does yet! All we can say at this point is that some abstract data shows that a particular allele spread through the human population at a rate greater than chance would predict, that the gene itself has as one of its functions the regulation of brain growth, but that it is highly unlikely that that particular function is affected by the variant. Whatever it does, I expect the role is more along the lines of subtle fine-tuning rather than simply making people smart.
Here’s an annoying case of political correctness run amuck.
…the Human Genome Organisation (HUGO) Gene Nomenclature Committee…is renaming a number of genes that have potentially offensive or embarrassing names.
The shortlist of 10 genes -Â including radical fringe, lunatic fringe and, bizarrely, Indian hedgehog –Â was compiled in response to physicians’ worries about “inappropriate, demeaning and pejorative” names.
The problem arose because most of the genes were initially discovered in fruitflies, and their names were then transferred to the human versions of the genes, which were discovered later…when applied to the human versions of the genes, many of these names become uncomfortable.
While no one wants to curtail the creativity of fruitfly geneticists, it will be important to ensure that, in the future, no joky names are adopted for human genes where they might cause offence. Other quirky names in the fruitfly genome include headcase and mothers against decapentaplegia (MAD).
Darn prissy physicians. They’ve got no sense of humor. Will they try to rename one-eyed pinhead next? How about half baked? The zebrafish geneticists are just as amusing, you know.
I’d like to know what the physicians are concerned about, anyway. It’s not as if they’re going to be informing patients that their illness is caused by a broken frizzled gene, nor is it going to be somehow better or easier if they rename it “Wnt Receptor X-17” or something similarly dry and empty. I hope whoever started this knows a good proctologist who can do a stick-ectomy.
And seriously, there ought to be something like the priority rules of taxonomy to prevent random gomers from running around changing names just because they don’t like them.
A while back, I mentioned this new group that had formed here in Minnesota to sponsor better science teaching, the Minnesota Citizens for Science Education. Our first big public meeting is happening this Saturday at the Bell Museum in Minneapolis, at Science Education Saturday:
Some of the most popular and dynamic professors involved with evolutionary biology at the University of Minnesota – Mark Borrello, Randy Moore, PZ Myers and others – will join a panel of public school K-12 educators to present practical suggestions for the classroom, useful resources for teachers and ideas for working with students and your community.
This event is primarily aimed at educators and education students, with talks about precisely what the Minnesota state science standards require of our teachers, but I don’t think they’d turn away other interested parties. I’m not actually going to be speaking (I’m still going to insist that I be regarded as “popular and dynamic”, however, and I may have to put that on my business cards)—I’m moderating a panel discussion with the real deal, teachers who are actually on the front lines of the struggle against creationism—but Randy Moore and Mark Borello will be giving talks in the morning, and I’m sure they’re going to be excellent.
This odd marine worm, Xenoturbella bocki, is in the news right now, and I had to look it up in Pechenik’s Biology of the Invertebrates(amzn/b&n/abe/pwll) to remind myself of what it was. Here’s the complete entry:
Xenoturbella bocki
This marine worm, first described in 1949 as an acoel flatworm and later claimed as either an early metazoan offshoot or a primitive deuterostome, has recently been affiliated with primitive bivalve molluscs, based upon a study of gamete development (oogenesis) and an analysis of sequence data from both 18S rRNA and mitochondrial genes. Little is known about its reproductive mode, and developmental studies that might help to resolve the phylogenetic issues are just starting to be reported. A second species was described in 1999.
The animals are up to 4 cm long, vermiform (worm-shaped), and covered by locomotory cilia. They have no digestive tract, and indeed no organs at all. Their only conspicuous morphological feature, other than their cilia, is a statocyst for determining orientation. To date, they have been collected only off the coasts of Sweden and Scotland, in sediments at depths of 20 m to 100 m.
That’s it. Part of that is now known to be wrong: the data showing an affinity to the molluscs is an artifact, caused by the fact that it somehow eats bivalves, and partly digested clam material contaminated the samples. Otherwise, not much is known; I’ve found papers describing the presence of oocytes inside the animal, but no one as far as I know has actually observed its development. It’s a strange, mysterious blob of a worm.
On Halloween, I gave a short presentation as our first Cafe Scientifique of the year. The main intent was to introduce our schedule for the year and to give an amusing introduction to the media image of scientists by showing a few movie clips…and to say a few things about how we really ought to be seen.
I’ve put most of the clips on youtube, so you can see what I was talking about below the fold.
This is a gross violation of my expectations: the Halloween edition of The Synapse doesn’t even once crack a zombie joke. I was terribly disappointed.
At least it does serve up a nice platter of brains.
