Training Tomorrow's Environmental Problem Solvers: An Integrative Approach to Graduate Education

What is conservation paleobiology? Tracking 20 years of research and development

Conservation paleobiology has coalesced over the last two decades since its formal coining, united by the goal of applying geohistorical records to inform the conservation, management, and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Yet, the field is still attempting to form an identity distinct from its academic roots. Here, we ask a deceptively simple question: What is conservation paleobiology? To track its development as a field, we synthesize complementary perspectives from a survey of the scientific community that is familiar with conservation paleobiology and a systematic literature review of publications that use the term. We present an overview of conservation paleobiology’s research scope and compare survey participants’ perceptions of what it is and what it should be as a field. We find that conservation paleobiologists use a variety of geohistorical data in their work, although research is typified by near-time records of marine molluscs and terrestrial mammals collected over local to regional spatial scales. Our results also confirm the field’s broad disciplinary basis: survey participants indicated that conservation paleobiology can incorporate information from a wide range of disciplines spanning conservation biology, ecology, historical ecology, paleontology, and archaeology. Finally, we show that conservation paleobiologists have yet to reach a consensus on how applied the field should be in practice. The survey revealed that many participants thought the field should be more applied but that most do not currently engage with conservation practice. Reflecting on how conservation paleobiology has developed over the last two decades, we discuss opportunities to promote community cohesion, strengthen collaborations within conservation science, and align training priorities with the field’s identity as it continues to crystallize.

Grad school in the rear view: prioritizing career skills, mentorship, and equity in the interdisciplinary environmental PhD

Interdisciplinary Environmental PhD programs show great promise for advancing integrative problem-oriented scholarship, yet graduates of these programs may not always leave with training that best prepares them for the harsh realities of the academic job market or students' unique career goals beyond academia. This study is the first of its kind to anonymously survey 132 recent participants from programs across the USA who exited their program, either with or without completing a degree, within the past 10 years. Respondents candidly reflected on their experiences with interdisciplinarity, coursework, skills building, mentorship, equity and inclusion, teaching, and preparation for diverse career paths. We found substantial opportunities for improving student satisfaction and career preparedness in the training of interdisciplinary environmental scholars who can provide critical solutions for addressing today's socioecological challenges while forging long-term paths to professional fulfilment. In the conclusion, we detail recommendations for career planning, pedagogical and skills-based training, and improved equity which can allow these unique doctoral programs to meet the current moment.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13412-022-00790-w.

Core Competencies for Training Conservation Paleobiology Students in a Wicked World

Despite the promise conservation paleobiology holds for using geohistorical data and insights to solve conservation problems, training in the field typically does not equip students to be competent environmental problem solvers. The intention of this perspective piece is to start a conversation about how we might train conservation paleobiology students better, focusing on the competencies needed to promote deep engagement with “wicked” conservation problems that are difficult to solve. Ongoing conversations regarding design of academic programs in sustainability, a field allied with conservation science, can inform our discussion. The sustainability literature has defined an interrelated set of “core competencies” that go beyond general academic competencies to enable real-world sustainability problem solving: systems thinking, temporal thinking, normative thinking, strategic thinking, and interpersonal competence. Conservation paleobiology is usually taught within geology programs, where students are exposed to systems thinking and temporal thinking. However, the remaining competencies typically are absent or insufficiently developed. To infuse these competencies into conservation paleobiology curricula, we recommend: (1) enhancing connections with sustainability programs and encouraging a more cross-disciplinary approach to training; (2) developing a “menu” of concepts and methodologies for each competence from which to choose; and (3) recognizing that different skills are appropriate at different levels of education and experience. The proposed competency-based framework serves as a shared reference that can be used to develop pedagogies to better prepare conservation paleobiology students to navigate the wicked conservation challenges of our time.

Students’ Perceptions of Interdisciplinary Coursework: An Australian Case Study of the Master of Environment and Sustainability

Over the past decade we have seen a global increase in interdisciplinary sustainability degrees. These degrees are relatively understudied due to their recent emergence. To better understand the challenges and benefits of this type of coursework and learning experience, we must explore students’ perspectives. Rarely explored from the student viewpoint are: (1) highly interdisciplinary instruction that transcends more than four disciplines; (2) the potential effect of students’ incoming disciplinary background. This case study seized an opportunity to gain insights and perceptions from students across very diverse backgrounds within a shared interdisciplinary program. We surveyed 61 students enrolled in a highly interdisciplinary degree (Master of Environment and Sustainability; Monash University, Melbourne, Australia) and compared responses of students from STEMM, non-STEMM and mixed incoming degrees. Students’ specific disciplinary backgrounds were diverse, including physical sciences, engineering, marketing, business, fashion, law and education. We used a mixed methods approach to analyze survey data. The dominant perceived benefits of interdisciplinary training reported were: (1) career relevance; (2) expanded knowledge and perspectives of sustainability issues; (3) confidence in envisioning sustainability solutions. The main perceived challenges reported were potential confusion from rapidly upskilling into new domains and disciplinary jargon. Interestingly, respondents in this case study viewed these challenges as an authentic reflection of professional sustainability practice rather than a pedagogical issue. In line with this, students showed a preference for pedagogical approaches that simulated real world scenarios and developed career skills. Disciplinary background did not generally influence students’ views. All students identified similar challenges, benefits and pedagogical preferences, with one difference. Students from mixed prior degrees and non-STEMM disciplines showed a possible trend towards valuing cross-disciplinary teamwork more than those from STEMM backgrounds. Overall, our findings suggest that the diverse student cohort within the highly interdisciplinary sustainability program of this case study generally viewed this mode of education as beneficial, career-relevant and accessible. This case study may additionally encourage interdisciplinary educators from other fields, such as health professions, to also include more diverse domains and student cohorts in their programs.

Antecedents and near-term consequences for interdisciplinary dissertators

Given the complexity of questions studied by academicians, institutions are increasingly encouraging interdisciplinary research to tackle these problems; however, neither the individual-level pathways leading to the pursuit of interdisciplinary research nor the resulting market outcomes have been closely examined. In this study, we focus attention on the individuals who complete interdisciplinary dissertations to ask "who are they and how do they fare after earning the PhD?" Since interdisciplinary research is known to be relatively risky among academics, we examine demographic variables that are known to be associated in other contexts with risk-taking before considering whether interdisciplinarians' outcomes are different upon graduating. First among our three main findings, students whose fathers earned a college degree demonstrated a 1.3% higher probability of pursuing interdisciplinary research. Second, the probability that non-citizens pursue interdisciplinary dissertation work is 4.6% higher when compared with US citizens. Third, individuals who complete an interdisciplinary dissertation tend to earn approximately 2% less in the year after graduation; however, mediation analyses show that the decision to become a postdoctoral researcher accounts for the apparent salary penalty. Our findings shed light on the antecedents and near-term consequences for individuals who complete interdisciplinary dissertations and contribute to broader policy debates concerning supports for academic career paths.

College and university environmental programs as a policy problem (part 1): integrating knowledge, education, and action for a better world?

The environmental sciences/studies movement, with more than 1000 programs at colleges and universities in the United States and Canada, is unified by a common interest-ameliorating environmental problems through empirical enquiry and analytic judgment. Unfortunately, environmental programs have struggled in their efforts to integrate knowledge across disciplines and educate students to become sound problem solvers and leaders. We examine the environmental program movement as a policy problem, looking at overall goals, mapping trends in relation to those goals, identifying the underlying factors contributing to trends, and projecting the future. We argue that despite its shared common interest, the environmental program movement is disparate and fragmented by goal ambiguity, positivistic disciplinary approaches, and poorly rationalized curricula, pedagogies, and educational philosophies. We discuss these challenges and the nature of the changes that are needed in order to overcome them. In a subsequent article (Part 2) we propose specific strategies for improvement.