In early May students attending Ms. Weeg’s, Mr. Ambrose’s, Ms.
Wright’s and Ms. Chmura’s biology classes engaged in an activity based partly in ecology
and partly in philosophy. They were presented with a lesson detailing the
complex interactions between wolf, moose, and fir trees on Michigan’s Isle
Royale as provided by Michigan Technological Institute's John
Vucetich. Despite the
extraordinary life needs of the organisms involved and the dramatic
scenario of predation between the three, the lesson concluded with two
surprising central questions: “Do we now care?” and “Why do we now care?”
Initial
answers came easily enough. Students felt that they should care because it
concerned balance (or lack thereof) within an ecosystem. They felt that it was
their duty to care about such things because ultimately, any imbalance would
impact them. Before long, the complex nature of the question was highlighted; teachers
pointed out that Isle Royale is completely isolated from any main land, that
its ecosystem is atypical from most others, and that what occurred there had
almost nothing to do with what occurred in Montclair. It was then posed that the answer might be of
a much simpler nature: We suggested that they now care because they now know.
Observing a species with great scrutiny, knowing how it struggles or thrives
throughout its life cycle, instills one with the capacity for empathy. Empathy
might have the power to encourage emotional investment in our students and we
were wholly ready to take advantage of that.
This was
the birth of the multi-phased project “To Know is to Care”, throughout which
students would take a detailed look at Rand Park, note the subtle differences
between its voluminous inhabitants, and investigate the life of one in
particular.
The project
began with the creation of a dichotomous key concerning aquatic and terrestrial
autotrophs and heterotrophs within our sample ecosystem. During this phase
students discovered that the trees they had previously seen as one general
species consisted of multiple species possessing only slight differences in
visible traits. They learned that the wood sorrel they first knew as clover was
drastically different from the luck bearing plant, and that as much was evident
from its sour citrus like flavor and heart shaped leaves. Students overcame their fear of wild water
and delved into the brook to overturn rocks in search of carnivorous leeches,
gentle snails, and wonderfully slimy planaria.
Mr. Ambrose describes the rich ecology present on a single rock found in the brook (photo credit: Susan Eckert) |
The
excitement for choosing the focal organism for phase three of the project was
palpable. Students raced to find their teacher at the completion of
identifying, photographing, and labeling all key species, hoping that they
would be able to select the organism they were most interested in before any of
their classmates could.
Students
next engaged in the last phase of the project. They conducted research
regarding specific criteria on the organism they chose: What was its life like?
What organisms facilitated its existence in the park? Which would it loathe to
encounter? These questions and more served as an avenue towards “knowing” not
only the organism they selected, but also any organism with which it
interacted.
After spending nearly two hours of critical observation on avian,
mammalian, and other species within the park and spending twice as much
investigating one of those species in particular, it was clear that students
had grown to see Rand park, not just
use it. They had come to know the intricacies of its community, and we dare
hope that knowing may have led them
to care.
Hi Owen...what a beautiful post and a cool project.
ReplyDelete