You're Great. Take a Hike.

These are the summary comments from recent reviews for a manuscript of mine:

This is an intriguing and important paper. It will be of great interest and should have a great impact.

This is an interesting paper. It got me thinking.

Editor decision: Reject

This is one of those cases in which I feel intense hostility for a day or three. I set the reviews and editor letter aside. I take them out again when I am feeling a bit calmer. I re-read everything. I look closely at the reviewer comments for substantive reasons for the rejection.

I still feel angry. I wait a few more days, and then I write a calm but forceful letter to the editor who will then tell me that there are lots of excellent papers that can't be published and he has to make some hard decisions and this was one of them and I should take a hike (down the journal food-chain).

And that is exactly what I will do because this intriguing, important, interesting, and thought-provoking paper, of which I am very fond, is getting published (eventually.. somewhere).

Read More >>

Making Breakthroughs and Breaking the Color Barriers in the Great Outdoors

The Breakthrough.

I’m busy, busy, busy like a bee. I have been busy writing. Writing is a necessary part of science. I know my dissertation meter has moved in a while. It doesn’t mean I haven’t been writing. It’s just that I am reluctant to count a word until I feel that what I have written is perfect. Perfectly worded and perfectly placed.

But I’ve been feeling like I need to claim my words, all of them – even the imperfectly worded and placed ones. So my word meter reflects those words. I expect that I will lose many of those words – to revisions, and re-drafts. I also think that my final dissertation word count might actually be less than 40,000 words (10,000 words per chapter).
I now claim 28, 981 words!

I feel gravid – productive, full of promise and excitement.


Breaking the Color Barrier in the Great American Outdoors
My spirits have been quite high lately. I’ve made new online friends and discovered new websites and blogs. I feel excited to be apart of a community, a movement of people who care about increasing diversity in outdoor experiences.



Not long ago I learned about a fantastic upcoming conference - Breaking the Color Barrier in the Great Outdoors. It meets next week - September 23-26 in Atlanta, Georgia, and will feature a host of great speakers including some people I am big fan of: Majora Carter
Dudley Edmundson
Dr. Carolyn Finney

It's a conference of educators, environmental activists, outdoor recreationists, and nature enthusiasts that focuses on how members of diverse communities (people of color) participate in these activities and examines reasons/strategies for getting more people of color outdoors enjoying nature. Isn’t that right up my alley? See the CNN interview with conference organizer, Audrey Peterman: Aiming to add more diversity under America's blue skies - CNN.com

I've met some people online who are also involved in this barrier breaking, too.
Wayne Hubbard, host and producer of Urban American Outdoors (Kansas City, Kansas)
Kellen Marshall-Gillespie, fellow Ecology Ph.D. Student at the University of Illinois-Chicago and owner of Roots and Shoots Organic Gardening
Rue Mapp, founder of Outdoor Afro (Albany, California)

Even though I won’t be attending the conference (and I am so tempted to just go anyway), I really need to stay close to home and finish writing. I’ll catch up with all of those great people sooner or later.

In the meantime, I’ll be sporting my swag (thanks Rue, cause I sport the the Afro outdoors all of the time. hahaha) and breaking down color barriers in the great outdoors my own way….By trying to win this contest to Antarctica!!! So, please continue to support me. Please vote and pelase spread the word.

Read More >>

What is it About Faculty Meetings?

There is something extremely annoying about faculty meetings, and I have never fully explored exactly what it is about them that I so dislike.

I do not loathe my colleagues (with very few exceptions). In fact, I like quite a lot of them, and I am quite fond of my department chair. It should not be an unpleasant experience to spend a few hours in a room with these people discussing topics of mutual concern, if not interest.

We have much to discuss that is of great importance to the department and its denizens. The chair has things of importance to tell us about the budget, new policies and procedures, issues he discussed with the Dean at their last meeting. Learning these things in a meeting is a good forum for asking questions and expressing concerns.

Nevertheless, I do loathe these meetings. Here are my top 5 reasons. I am sure that I could come up with 10 reasons, but I am typing this in an airport and the Transportation Security Administration has placed an arbitrary limit on the number of items that can be included in a blog list typed in an airport.

These are in no particular order.

1. Time. I don't have time for these meetings. No one has time for these meetings except the deadwood faculty. Of course we make time (if we are not traveling or otherwise involved in an activity scheduled for the same time as the meeting), but it is hard to lose time that could be spent on other essential activities.

2. Efficiency or lack thereof. Faculty meeting time is typically time that is not well spent. I know that meetings involving any collection of people with disparate views and personalities is unlikely to be efficient, but I wish there were a bloviating quota. Those exceeding this quota will be ejected, preferably forcibly, from the meeting.

3. The Men. Sitting around a conference table with my department colleagues is a vivid reminder of how few women faculty there are in my department. On rare occasions when issues involving underrepresented groups arise, some of the older faculty say that we have no problem with underrepresentation of women because so many of our students are female. Some of the younger faculty agree that we don't have a problem with underrepresentation of women because.. well, I don't know why. The definition of underrepresented is not so difficult to understand, and our department fits this definition. What this means is that they don't think underrepresentation is a problem that needs fixing.

4. The Sports Analogies. In most cases I can figure out from context what is meant, but it kind of annoys me that we are all expected to understand these expressions, which are used extraordinarily often.

5. The insanity factor. Some of my colleagues are really strange. I am really strange, too, so it is hypocritical to list this factor, but thus far my strangeness manifests itself rather quietly. For some of my colleagues, their insanity seems to require them to repeat themselves over and over at every faculty meeting for a decade or more. The effort required for me to keep from rolling my eyes at these repeat tirades is painful and may cause me permanent physical and emotional damage.

No, I don't think we should be more corporate and make faculty meetings efficient in that way. I am willing to put up with some amount of random behavior to preserve our ability to be free-spirited (tenured) professors. And I don't think we should abolish faculty meetings. We faculty would be outraged if the department chair started making decisions without consulting us, even if many of us have nothing useful to say.

Hence faculty meetings..

Because I am a look-for-the-silver-lining kind of person, especially when I am in an airport, I will force myself to list relevant items that make me feel better about having to attend regular faculty meetings:

- faculty retreats are far far more painful
- my spouse hates faculty meetings far far more than I do

It seems to be a short list.

Read More >>

Wordless Wednesday: Urban Waterscapes (Travelog Europe)

The cities I visited in Europe were marked by internal waterways – rivers and canals. Here I share my views of the urban landscape as it meets the urban waterways.

Canals of Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Canals of Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Canals of Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Canals of Groningen, the Netherlands

Vilaine River Rennes, France

Vilaine River Rennes, France

Seine River Paris France

Seine River Paris France

Seine River Paris France

Read More >>

It's a Female Thing (?)

Many of us in certain fields of science teach Science courses in which male students outnumber female students. When we teach large introductory courses for non-majors, however, we see a gender ratio that is more typical of universities today; i.e., in these classes, female students outnumber male students.

I am not the first to mention that in these settings, female students ask the most questions, have the best attendance, send the most e-mail to faculty, and attend office hours more often than their male classmates. I am not qualified to comment on the consequences of this disparate behavior for the academic success of female students vs. male students, but I am wondering what the effects of this are for the classroom environment.

Maybe there isn't any effect, but a colleague recently wondered whether asking questions in class has become a 'female' thing to do, inhibiting the inclination of male students to ask questions. This is most certainly not the case in science major classes, but in the large classes for non-majors, women rule.

A male colleague of mine who is teaching a giga-class recently commented to me about the number of female students who ask questions. I had the same experience last spring, so it clearly does not relate to the gender of the professor.

I am pleased that these (mostly) young women are being assertive and involved in their courses, even large lecture courses that can be quite impersonal, but of course I don't want to teach a class with interactive female students and alienated male students.

The challenge is (always) to help as many students as possible to become engaged in a class, however large. I like to think that projecting a combination of Awesome Scientific Knowledge and Approachability will help all students be interested and involved in a course. This is my goal -- not yet attained -- but other ideas and hypotheses are welcome for different approaches.

My other goal -- also not yet attained -- is that the large numbers of female students who take intro science classes to fill a graduate requirement will find that they actually love science and want to take more science classes.. and then even more.. etc.

Read More >>

Pollinators make the world go round (Travelog Europe)

This is part of my Urban Wildlife Watch:Travelog Europe Series where I introduce wildlife and botanicals I came across while traveling to Europe August 18-31, 2009.

Pollinators are animals that visit flowers and distribute pollen among individual flowers. Most pollinators are invertebrate species like bees, wasps, flies, and butterflies and vertebrate species like hummingbirds. These animals visit flowers for their nutritious, high-calorie nectar. Sometimes they also dine on the pollen.

While consuming from the attractive (visually and olfactory) flowers, the animals get dusted with pollen - the white or yellow dust on the anthers of the flower. When the animal visits another flower and repeats the behavior, pollen from a previous flower gets left behind and the cycle repeats itself.

The old saying "It's all about the birds and the bees" is about this very activity - pollination. The saying is also used to refer to sex. That's because pollen is actually the sperm cells, or male gametes, of a flower. In fact, flowers are the reproductive parts of plants. Next time you step to smell a flower, take a closer look. A complete flower has both the male and female equivalent parts. Flowers come in a variety of sizes, shapes and colors with some plants have only one sex. But for the most part it isn't hard to find a flower that has all of the basic parts, just things maybe bigger or smaller.

The male parts are called the Stamen and the female parts are called the Pistil or Carpel. The stigma is often moist and sticky and when a pollinator visits or if carried by wind and rain, pollen from other flowers land on it and travel down the tube (style) in the ovaries. Seeds develop and new flower life begins anew to be planted for new flowers.

At the tip of this fragrant lavender stalk is an arrangement of dozens of little flowers. Pollinators, like this bumble bee inspects each of these tiny blossoms in search of food. Lavender and bumble bees are also common in North America. I photographed this pair in Rennes, France.

I don't know the name of this flower - looks like a forb - or species of fly visiting this tall wild flower I found in an open-field in Groningen, the Netherlands. Notice the white-spiky parts, these are the reproductive parts of the plant, but I'm not exactly sure if it's the stamen or the pistil, I'm guessing stamen because of the volume.
Despite the strong winds, the flies (there are 2 in this photo) were able to hold on tight and continue foraging. You'll also notice that many of the flower buds have yet to open up on this pink flower.

A tiny little grass flower, very dainty with a small tender fly on the petal. If you look closely, the tiny knobs in a circle are the stamen. Photo taken in Groningen, the Netherlands.

This Echinacea flower has a spiny head referred to as a cone, which is where it gets its common name the purple cone flower.. The stamen and pistil aren't very distinct, but the flower still attracts many kinds of pollinators with its height and colorful petals.

A fly visiting the flower. Not sure of the fly species but there are similar - bee-looking flies in North America that also visit cone flowers, daisies, and sunflowers. I photographed these flowers in Niennord Park in Leek, the Netherlands.

I was surprised to see this large bumble bee climbing along the stalk of the flower. That is not typical behavior at all. I wanted a closer look at this bee because I noticed it had a white rump. I had never seen a white-rumped bumble bee in the States before. When I returned to school, I asked my lab mate and bumble bee expert, Javier Hernandez to identify it for me. It is Psithyrus or cuckoo bumble bee. It gets this name because, like the cuckoo bird, the female lays her eggs in the nest of another species and let's that female take care of her pupae (babies).

Check out this quick video clip of the bee.

The bee was behaving strangely, crawling on the stalk of the flower and flying low to the ground. It's quite possible this bee may be infected with a fungus going around, but I don't know all of the disease ecology details right now.

September Celebrates Biodiversity and Conservation

Read More >>

What to Expect When You're Clueless

Consider the situations of two undergraduate students who will be applying to graduate programs in Science during this academic year, in the hopes of starting grad school the following year. These two students are both smart -- neither is brilliant, but both are hard-working and motivated, have had research experiences as undergraduates, and have done well in their classes. On paper, they will have similar records that look very promising for graduate studies.

Student 1 has been talking to graduate students about their research and their general experiences as grad students and has been reading papers in the major journals. Student 1 seeks out professors for scientific and other academic discussions and has been proactive about doing research experiences (for credit) and science-related jobs (for pay). By talking to people and being generally aware, Student 1 knows what steps to take in applying to grad programs. Student 1 probably needs some advice, but overall is pretty savvy about the process.

Student 2 has had a similar number of research experiences and science jobs, but tends to focus on the immediate task at hand. Student 2 does best when told very specifically what to do and doesn't seem to be able to handle a lot of information at once. If general advice is given to Student 2 in advance of a specific task, it needs to be given again when directly relevant. Imagine that Student 2 (S2) has the following conversation with a Science Professor (SP) who advised one of Student 2's research projects.

S2: I've decided to apply to 6 graduate programs and was wondering if you would write me a letter of reference for my applications.

SP: Yes, of course. What are the 6 places?

S2: Do I have to tell you?

SP: Umm.. Yes, you do because each program is different and most programs require me to send or upload my letter to them directly. Aside from that, it makes a better letter if I can personalize it to address your strengths relative to a specific program or adviser. Is there some reason you don't want to tell me?

S2: No, that's fine. I'll come back later and tell you what they are.

SP: Have you already written to some potential advisers at each place so you know they are taking on new graduate students next year and are interested in seeing your application?

S2: No, am I supposed to do that?

SP: Yes, remember we talked about this a couple of months ago. It's a good idea to make some contact and briefly introduce yourself.

S2. Oh, OK. So should I just send my CV? Do I have to write anything with it or just send it?

SP: I was thinking more of an email in which you briefly introduce yourself; for example, tell them you are doing a senior thesis with Professor X on Project A and that last summer you were a research assistant for Professor Y on Project B and that based on these experiences you have developed a strong interest in Z Science and therefore you are thinking of applying to the graduate program at University K because Professors L and M do interesting work in Z Science. Or something like that. You can be brief but informative. Don't send a form letter to all 6 and don't send your CV without explanation.

S2: Oh. This is going to be more work than I thought. Maybe I will talk to you more about this later.


Faculty colleagues who are aware of this conversation with Student 2 have two different reactions:

Type A reaction: Student 2 needs a lot of help figuring out how to apply to graduate schools, so let's give that help.

Type B reaction: If Student 2 is that clueless, there is no way that student will do well in grad school. Let Student 2 flounder and nature take its course.

Professors are always searching for a foolproof way to figure out in advance whether a potential grad student will succeed or not. We all know that an excellent academic record and even glowing letters of recommendation may have no relevance to whether a student has the ability to do well in a research environment.

Can (should) the difference between Students 1 and 2 described above be used as an indicator of potential success in graduate school? Is Student 1 likely to take initiative, be observant and thoughtful, and get things done? Is Student 2 likely to bumble along not really knowing what to do unless told very specifically?

Or is that too harsh an evaluation of Student 2? Sometimes university professors expect that undergraduates will absorb information about how the university, department, and research groups work, but even students involved in research projects may not really be aware of how things work beyond their immediate experience.

Applicants to graduate school are given detailed information about the application materials, but applying to graduate school also involves a system of unwritten procedures that vary from discipline to discipline, e.g. the details of the admissions process and the expected amount of pre-application communication between students and potential advisers (none? some?). This is the type of information that we as advisers can help our students learn as they navigate the grad school application system.

My own conclusion is that Student 1 is more likely to succeed by being proactive and savvy (and smart) but, although it very likely does have some significance that Student 2 is so clueless, I'd rather not judge too harshly. If Student 2's cluelessness extends to research experiences, then it is relevant.

Read More >>